Evening star., 1923-01-25
COURT HA[TS FIGHT
ON ELECTRIC RATES
Case Against D. C. Power
Company Delayed on ju-
riSdiction Issue.

The United States Supreme Court
Yesterday passed the case of the Public
Utilities Commission against the Po-
tomac Electric Power Company until
hearing can be held February 19 on
questions of jurisdiction and procedure.
The official order entered by the court
follows
This case is passed for the purpose
Of having presented and argued to the
court three question: First, wnetner
Congress can vest in this court under
the restrictions upon its appellate 1urls-
diction under the Constitution the char
acter of the review of the proceedings OF
the Public Utilities Commission con-
templated by the act creating 1t, and,
second, whether an appeal can be taken
to this court until a final judgment has
been pronounced in the District Court
of Appeals. and, third, whether such
Judgment is final.
Argument February 10.
These questions will be set for argu-
mont on February 10 next, after the
cases especially set for that day, and
will be considered and decided by this
court before proceeding to hear the
case on its merits in the event the
court finds it has jurisdiction to do SO.
Legal Point Involved.
What will happen to the Potomac
Electric Power valuation case, IN
volving the disposal Of more than
s3.ooO,0 900, If the United States su-
preme Court decides that it has no
Jurisdiction to review the matter?
This question is being turned over
today in the minds of the legal rep
resentatives of the Public Utilities
Commission, who have been directed
to file briefs with the Supreme Court
on the jurisdiction of that tribunal.
One high official of the power COM
pany voiced the belief that if the
Supreme Court concludes that 1t is
without jurisdicton the verdict of
the District Court of Appeals in favor
of the company would stand.
Corporation Counsel Francis H.
Stephens said that the future pro-
oedure in case the United States Su
preme Court decides it has no juris-
diotion will depend largely on what
the Supreme Court may say in reach
ing that conclusion.
Gould Decision Reversed
1t was intimated in one quarter to-
day that if the United States Supreme
Court determines it has no jurisdic-
ticn the Utilities Commission might
advance the argument that the Dis
trict Court of Appeals also was with
out jurisdiction.
The late Justice Gould of the Dis
trict Supreme Court upheld the valua-
ton of the power plant as made by
the commission, but the appellate tri-
bunal reversed that decision and the
commission then appealed to the
highest court in the land.
Since the litigation began in 1917
the company has been required 70 set
aside the difference between the 10
cent and the Scent light rate, and
this fund now amounts to more than
100000, which will go either to the
company or the consumers, according
10 the final decision in the case.
Here is the text of the questions
which counsel for commission will
have to answer in the brief to be
filed next month.
This case is passed for the purpose
of having presented and argued to
the court three questions: First,
whether Congress can vest in this court
under the restrictions upon it's ap
pellate jurisdiction under the Con-
stitution the character of review of
the proceedings of the Public Utilities
Commission contemplated by the act
creating 1t, and, second. whether an
appeal can be taken to this court
until a final Judgment has been pro-
nounced in the District Court of APP
peals, and, third. whether such
Judgment is final.
These questions will be set for
argument on February 19 next, af-
ter the cases specially set for that
day, and will be considered and de-
oided by this court before proceeding
TO hear the case on it's merits in the
event that the court finds 1t has juriS-
diction to do so.