Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-02-09
Company With Capital Trac-
ton Asks Court to Fix
Rate at Once.
INVENTORY WILL TAKE
FROM z TO 5 YEARS
Cites Opinions of Commission and
Court Decisions to Sub
stantiate Position.

Denying the necessity of a new valu-
alton and asserting that it would take
from two to five years to complete it,
the Washington Railway and Electric
Co. has filed with Justice Alfred A.
White a reply brief to the one recently
presented to the justice by the Public
Utilities Commission. The company
with the Capital Traction Co. is asking
immediate relief of the court pending
determination q their appeals from the
order of the Public Utilities Commits
sion denying their application for To-
cent fare. The companies want the
court to fix the new rates at once.
Project Would Require Five Years.
The brief fled by Attorneys S. r.
Bowen and John S. Barbour points out
that the defendants in their memo
randum appear to assume that a new
inventory and new valuation Is neces-
sary to determine accurately the pres
ent fair value Of the property of the
plaintiff, and that only "a short time
would be required therefor and that the
plaintiff is not entitled by reason there
of to any immediate relief, until such
a new inventory is taken and q new
valuation is found. Such an aSSump-
ton Is prepoSterous In view of the time
heretofore taken in the taking of an
inventory and the making of q valua-
ton of the PLAINTIFFS property and that
of other local utilities. Furthermore, 1t
is matter Of common knowledge that
the taking of q new inventory and the
making of new valuation, such as the
commission suggests, would require from
two to flve years. or possibly longer"
The brief points out that IN 1914 the
commission started valuation proceed
ings which were not completed until
September, 1919. The values announced
then. the brief reciteS, were as of July
l, 1914. The company states that at
that time 1t "filed certain bills" In the
court alleging the valuation so estab-
lished to be inadequate, unlawful and
confiscatory.
The brief also sets out that the COM
mission "has always held, until now,
that its previous valuations were of
fixed character. and that they were
binding on every one until modified
or set aside by action of the courts,
or until determination of any appeal
therefrom, and that they should be
built up or brought down to date in
the manner followed by the plaintiff in
the bill Of complaint" ~
Company Cites Decisions.
The company cites many opinions of
the Utilities Commission and several
court decisions in substantiation Of its
position
The company declares 1t Is entitled
TO emergency relief and asserts: ut
clearly appears that the conclusions of
the commission that they cannot with
mathematical precision find the pres
ent-day value of the plaintiffs prop
erty, and the fault found with the
PLAINTIFF Is not asking the full return
which it is entitled to. comes now with
poor grace.
Moreover, It is dificuit to under
stand how the defendants could ask
q court of equity to uphold its position
when it is considered that the identical
methods now condemned by the com"
mission for arriving at rate base
were used and considered logical and
proper for reduction in rates in 1922
but not now proper when it comes to
raising the rates reduced in Order No.
462-and now complained Of"