Evening star., 1923-05-14

pounding by the Potomac Electric
Power Company Of the difference
between the IO-cent rate for eIec-
trio current collected from con-
sumers and the rate fixed by the
commission.
Hearing was begun today before
Chief Justice Mccoy of the District
Supreme Court on the application of
the Public Utilities Commission for
the continued impounding by the
Potomac Electric Power Company Of
the difference between the l0-cent
rate for electric current collected
from the consumers and the rate fixed
by the commission. The company is
opposing any further impounding of
it's money, but has not yet asked the
fund Of nearly four millions. which
has accumulated since Justice Gould.
in 1917. enjoined the commission from
enforcing its new rate on condition
that the company set aside the differ
ence. then . cents, to await the final
determination of the case involving
the valuation of the property of the
company on which valuation the new
rate was predicated.
Stephens Opens Argument.
The argument before the chief JUS
tice was opened by Corporation Coun-
sell Stephens with a brief outline of
the litigation since 1917 The COM
missions valuation, he stated, had
been sustained by Justice Gould after
reading the testimony, comprising
5000 pages, and after a lengthy ar
gument Of several days. The Court
Of Appeals reversed the decision Of
the lower court. because the commits
sion did not give the company the
! benefit OF the high prices obtaining
between 1914 and 1916. when con-
sidering reproduction costs.
The commission noted an appeal to
the United States Supreme Court,
which declined to entertain the case,
holding that Congress could not i'm
pose on that tribunal a non-judicial
function.
The court held, however. that the
local tribunal did have Jurisdiction,
and thus affirmed the decision of the
Court of Appeals, remanding the case
for further consideration by the Dis
trict Supreme Court.
Mr.. Stephens pointed out to the
court why, in his opinion. the differ
ence in prices allowed and collected
should continue to be impounded.
The argument will be taken up by
Attorneys Samuel H. Bowen and John
S. Barbour for the company, and con-
cluded by Conrad H. Syme, special
counsel to the commission. William
F. Ham. president of the Potomac
! Electric Company, was present at the
hearing.
Defends Courts Right.
Attorney John S. Barbour, for the
company, urged that rate order No.
223 has no legal evidence to support
| 1t and is without legal foundation, as
1t was based on valuation order No.
20S, which has been annuled by the
decision of the Court Of Appeals. 1t
Is necessary to find proper valuation.
he claimed. before making a rate
order, so as to give the rate order
legal existence; and as valuation or
der No. 20S has been declared erro.
neous. the rate order Is without legal
foundation, and the rate fixed by Con-
gress continues the only valid rate
until a legal rate order Is found by
the Public Utilities Commission in
p Special Counsel Syme concluded the
argument on behalf of the commits
sion. This court has the right to
make a valuation. he contended. by
giving additional rates to reproduc-
ton costs which may not weigh much
in arriving at fair valuation of the
companys property, as of December
81, 1916, or affect materially the rates
as fixed by the commission in 1917.
He made a complete analysis Of the
public utility act and of the decision
and asserted that 1t is well within
the power of the District Supreme
, Court to consider what additional
rates should be, given reproduction
costs as only 'one and by no means q
controlling means Of arriving at a
just valuation and a consequent fair
rate.