Evening star., 1928-09-11

commission in application, of the Capt.
tai Traction Co. in which the other COM
panies did not join, Dunlop declared the
commission had plainly stated its
grounds for maintaining unified rate.
In these" cases the commission had
pointed out it would be disastrous to
the public interests and possibly involve
bankruptcy for a weaker company un-
less all competing companies are given
the same fare. Furthermore, Dunlop
contended that the public utility law
provides against discrimination.
Former Policy Asked.
THE Washington Railway and Elec-
trio Co., not being a party in this case,
we are in no position to compel the
commission to pursue its former policy.
he said, "but the commission can do so
and has done so In the past
Fleharty replied that he had no fault
to find with the uniform fare, but CON-
tended solely that the commission lack
ed authority and jurisdiction in this
case to apply an increase in rates to the
Washington Company without having
given public notice to that effect What
the commission is now undertaking to
do, he claimed, Is futile thing
Reasons for Exhibit.
Explaining the reasons for the exhibit
over which the controversy arose, coun-
sci declared that before the commission
can determine on any order for the
hearing it must have knowledge of the
effect an increase in rate would have
on other competing lines.
Fleharty replied If that was the sole
purpose he would have no objection
to the figures going in, but insisted
that he would not withdraw his mo-
ton to dismiss the proceedings on the
grounds stated.
It was during this controversy that
Curtain, declaring the Washington COM
pany has no place In the consideration
Of this case, charged the Capital Trac-
ton officials were making an under
cover effort to get them in.
John H. Hanna, president Of the
Capital Traction Co., and Mr.. Hamilton
both scored Clayton for this charge.
Hanna declared the Capital Traction
Co. was justified in assuming that the
commission would follow the precedent
of years by making the Washington
Railway e. Electric Co. a party to the
proceedings.
Il wish to refute the statement that
this company is trying to deceive the
public" Hanna said.
On the other hand Mr.. Hamilton de-
manded that the issue be joined i'm
mediately in urging the peoples counsel
to make his motion to dismiss at this
time rather than at the conclusion of
the hearing.
Position Defined.
The position of the washington Rail-
nkrin ~ dnf3vloI krxy praci-
dent Ham. The interests of the two
companies, he pointed out, are so af-
fected that the question of rates cannot
be considered separately.
II think we are entitled to feel that
precedence will be followed here" he
said. There has been no intimation
I'D to now that the application of rates
to other companies would be illegal"
Mr.. Ham stated that the Capital
Traction officials had applied to the
commission without consulting him or
his directors and that his company had
no knowledge of the application when
it was made.
But we do ask If the Capital Trac-
ton gets a higher fare that we get 1t
also," he added.
I'm no other way can We serve the
public properly. We are entitled to the
same IdCc do tIie NdPACdA 4AdCoLOA w.
without filing an application for It,"
Ham said.
Mr.. Ham drew picture of conditions
which dual rate of fare woult\!mpose
in Washington. With the alreaoy over
crowded condition of cars on his line
during rush hours, he declared that the
higher rate of fare for the rival line
would superimpose load on cars which
would be disastrous to efficient manage
ment.