Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-01-15
TRACTION APPEAL
DEFENDED INCOURT
Dismissal Motion of Commits
sion, Claiming Fare Rule
Plea Still Open, Opposed.

!. The year-and-a-half fight of Wash
fnetcn streets railway companies for an
increase In fare was renewed today be-
fore Justice Wheat in the District Su-
preme Court. with the companies bat
ting to prevent dismissal Of their APP
peal to the court from an order OF the
Public Utilities Commission denying
them higher fare.
Justice Wheat took the case under
advtsement after hearing opposing
counsel. A decision Is expected IN sew
srAl days.
Declare Redress Possible.
The arguments today were upon .
motion Of the commission for dismissal
OF the suit OF the companies for q fare
OF 10 cents cash OK four tokens for 30
cents.
The commission contends the order
denying the fare increase was not q
nnal one and that the companies stu
nave an opportunity to seek redress by
adding to their case before the COM
mission. The arguments are prelimi-
nary to a hearing on the request Of the
companies for a temporary fare In
crease order which has been set for
Wheat.
Principal Assistant Corporation Coun-
sci Vernon 4. West, who represented
the commission, questioned the right Of
the companies to appeal from anything
except final order of the commission
and pointed out that the proper pro-
cedure would have been for the COM
panies to reappear before the commits
sion and ask that its order be made
nnal before filing an appeal.
He also said the evidence submitted
In the rate case before the commission
last Summer did not afford q basis for
ANAL determination of the application
for higher fares and that the commits
sion has held the case open to permit
the companies to submit additional EVIL
dence Of the need of relief.
Counsel for the companies, George r.
Dunlop of the Capital Traction Co. and
s. r. Bowen Of the Washington Rail-
way q Electric Co., contended that the
order Of the commission was final be-
cause IL had denied the application for
o higher fare.
Dunlop also explained that the APP
peal Of the Capital Traction Co. was
double barreled," in that 1t not only
was statutory appeal from the COM
q bill IN equity to grant relief to the
company on the ground that the pres
ent rates Of fare are confiscatory.
Companies Would be Helpless.
eff the order Of the commission isn't
Anal then the companies are helpless"
Dunlop declared. I'm such O case the
plication of the companies for various
reasons and the companies could never
get into court. This court has juris-
diction to set aside an order OF the
commission regardless Of how often the
commission may choose to deny its ap-
plication."
Dunlop also claimed that the court
has statutory powers to fX rates and
to review any order Of the commission,
whether It Is final or not. The real in
tent Of the commission In denying the
fare increase. he said. was to forestall
any change in the rates Of fare. pending
q merger Of the railway companies.
IF the Public Utilities Commission
wants to stand on the ground that the
appeal we are making from Its decision
in that case Is improper" he declared,
Their we are willing to 60 ahead and
argue the case from the standpoint Of
confiscation Of property"
Bowen, likewise, cited the power of
the court to modify or amend the or
ders Of the commission and denied al
legations in the commissions formal
order in the car fare case that the
companies had not exhausted remedies
for financial relief and had failed to
prove the present values Of their re-
spective properties. He declared there
was "uncontradictable" evidence that
the valuation of the Washington Rail-
way a. Electric Co. amounts TO $ls,-
2l0,099. and explained that o revalua-
ten at this time undoubtedly would
result In O substantial increase above
that figure.
Maj. Gen. Mason NJ Patrick. chair
man OF the Utilities Commission, and
Harleigh II. Hartman, vice chairman,
listened TO the arguments.
HEARING ON MERGER.