Evening star., 1932-03-29
Holds Present Zone System
Discriminatory and Rates
UnreasonabIy Low.
JURIST DOUBTS INCOME
WILL BE DECREASED
Decision Cites Drivers Long Hours
and Danger to Public From
Impaired Efficiency.

District Supreme Court Justice Jesse
G. Adkins at noon today rendered his
opinion sustaining the action of the
Public Utilities Commission in requiring
al taxicabS to install meters. The order
becomes operative in 60 days unless
superseded by the City Cab Corporation
or the Bell Cab Co., which instituted the
suit and whose counsel have announced
Intention to appeal to the District Court
of Appeals.
After lengthy review of the evidence
Justice Adkins reached the decision that
the order requiring meters and the fix
ing of rates thereby is reasonable and
in accordance with the evidence and
should be affirmed. The questions in
volved were so well studied by the COM
mission, the court said, that he could
not improve on the order.
Six Grounds Set Forth.
The principal grounds for sustaining
the order as set out in the opinion are:
/. The present zone system is dis
criminatory and it is not possible to
devise a non-discriminatory zone sys-
TEN in the District of Columbia.
2. The zone rates are unreasonably
low. In many instances they are below
cost. The earnings of the entire indus
try are inadequate if fair wages are to
be paid the drivers.
8. The zone rate is possible only
through the exploitation of rental
drivers The rental is paid first and the
driver compelled to work unreasonably
long hours and his earnings are insult
jficient. The only rental driver who re-
ceived a bonus of his car was COM
PEELED to work 13 hours a day for nine
months without day of.
Serious Accidents Held Likely.
4. The owner drivers are compelled
tenn and to work the same long hours.
In many cases they are losing money.
5. The long hours will seriously i'm
pair the efficiency of the drivers and
endanger the public. Serious accidents
are likely to occur-
6. The system ~increases cruising in
congested areas; causes drivers to re-
fuse Improbable hauis, and causes
frauds and disputes.
The court points out that the use
of the meter is compulsory in most OF
been required in this District for many
years. The rates fixed by the order
are lower than In any city of compare
BILE size, the court states.
Justice Adkins holds the taxicab
companies are common carriers and
public utilities within the jurisdiction
of the commission, which has the power
to fix the exact rates and is not limited
to fixing minimum rates. The COM
L - hxyo Iar
in the statute to make a valuation OF
the property of the companies as a
condition precedent to fixing rates. The
notice given by the commission for the
hearing was held sufficient. Taxi
meters for use upon vehicles have long
been known, the court points out, and
with the advent of the motor cab the
practice became usual to fix the charge
by meter except where the vehicle was
hired on an hourly basis The practice
was so common that the ordinary name
of the cab is now a taxicab, which
Webster's dictionary defines as "one
fitted with a tax1meter, the court
points out.
The claim that the order is discrim-
inatory because meters are not required
on street cars and buSses is not tenable,
the court said The requirement that
meters be installed on all cabs not
operating on an hourly basis is reason
able, the court asserts. To the con-
tention of the cab companies that the
meter order will reduce the number Of
riders and thereby decrease their in
come the court expresses the view that
1t is largely exaggerated.
This Is a prophecy" Justice Adkins
said, land. difficult to prove. However,
am convinced the order will reduce
the number of riders but doubt if it
will reduce plaintiffs income. The real
falling off will come in the longer hauls,
especially in the first zone. The navy
yard employe living near Fourteenth
and Decatur streets may now ride for
20 cents to and from work, but may
hesitate to pay 80 cents or more for
the same ride If the principal effect
of the use of the meter is to eliminate
those hauls now made for less than
cost it is difficult to see the unreason-
ableness Of the meter. I am unable to
find that the income Of plaintiffs will
be reduced. Plaintiffs let their cars at
81 q day do not see why they can
not continue in existence and collect
the same rental, even though the total
amount spent by the public may be less
than at present"
On the contention that enforcement
of the order will put out Of work a
large number of drivers, Justice Adkins
said: IT sincerely hope counsel are mis-
taken in this prophecy and that en-
forcement will not put single driver
out of business. But I think am not
justified in giving weight to this argu-
ment. II upon all the evidence I find
the order appealed from is reasonable,