Worcester Democrat and the ledger-enterprise. (Pocomoke City, Md.) 1921-1953, 1940-07-05
INJUNCTION ALLOWED IN
FERRY RATE CHARGES


Company obtained a temporary in
junction against enforcement of a
Public Service Commission order re-
ducing passenger rates on the ferry
boats beginning July 1. The pro-
ceedings were filed in Circuit Court
No. 2.
Judge Joseph N. Ulman granted the
injunction pending the outcome of the
case, on condition that all passengers
be given coupons insuring them re-
fund of the amount over the rate set
by the commissions order if the COM
pany loses the suit.
It was contended by the company
that the reduction was unreasonable
and unlawful" and that a second or
der, ratifying valuation of the COM
pany's property, should be declared
null and void because "it is not fair
return upon the fair value of it's prop
erty."
The suit set forth that a valuation
of the property was not made at the
proper time in view of the fact that
two agencies were considering the
purchasing of the company.
1t was held that the commission
was told of "the manifest unfairness,
under such circumstances, for one
agency of the State to value. the COM
plainant's property with the full
knowledge that it's findings would be
availed of for the benefit or prejud-
ices of the parties to purchase"
1t was asserted that in 1885, the
State Roads Commission was given
authority to purchase the ferry COM
pany and that the recent General AS
sembly empowered the Governor to
appoint a committee to consider pur-
chase of the company.
The complainant asserted it's request
that the valuation be postponed until
after the Governors committee has
made it's report on July l was denied
twice.
The valuation of the property was
described as arbitrary, unreasonable
and unlawful and contrary to the
weight of the testimony given before
the P. S. c.; that there is no testi-
mony and no facts in the record to
support any proper or lawful deter
mination of a valuation of this COM
plainant's property ut any figure as
low as $1,03S,310."
It was contended that in arriving
at the valuation, the commission gave
no consideration to numerous items,
including the cost of reproducing ter
minal property, the testimony as to
the present fair value, the cost of re-
producing the ferry vessels, organi-
cation expenses, legal fees, working
capital and many others.
AS result of the unfair" estimate
of the worth of the property, the re-
duced rates are unreasonable and I'M
lawful" it was asserted.
The suit held that the reduction
in fares would, on any proper basis
of calculation, leave this complainant
without prospect of compensatory
earnings on the proper fair value of
the compliments property, and even
on the confiscatory valuation attempt
ed to be determined by the p. S. c."
It is impossible for the company to
earn $69,s27 annually on the new
rates as the commission figured, il
was contended. In fixing the rate the
commission failed to take into account
"the value of the service and its
worth to the public" it was added.
The reduction will Impair this
compliments services and will de.
crease the existing standards of ade.
quacy, safety and convenience to the
general public" was concluding con
tention.