Evening star., 1944-07-10
Arguments Opened
On Setting Aside ice
Bus Fare Decision
Three-Judee Tribunal
Told Rote Reduction
Order Is Discriminatory

A three-judge tribunal heard ar
guments in District Court today on
the contention of four transporta-
ton companies serving Government
facilities in nearby Virginia. that an
earlier court decision nullifying an
Interstate Commerce Commission
order be reafnrmed. The ICC had
ordered fares reduced, and after its
action was set aside it later re-
issued the order.
Sitting on the bench are Justice
Thurman Arnold of the United
States Court of Appeals, and JUS
tices F. Dickinson Let's and Jen-
nings Bailey Of the District Court.
The latter justices sat in the case
during the first hearings held in
May. Justice Arnold was desiR-
mated to take the place of Justice
Justin Miller Of the Appellate Court,
who is out of the city.
Attorneys in the case are E. Bar
rett Prettyman, representing the
Capital Transit Co.; Hugh Obear for
the Arlington a. Fairfax Motor
Transportation Co.: Robert E. Quirk
for the Alexandria, Barefoot L.
Washington Transportation Co..
and j. Ninian Beall for the WASH
ington. Maryland e. Virginia Coach
Co., Inc.
Hearings Renewed.
Attorney Daniel Knowlton is rep
resenting the ICC and Robert Pierce
the Government. The Virginia State
Corporation Commission is also con-
testing the 1CC order. -
Mr.. Obear opened the proceedings
with a review Of the hearings before
the 1CC last fall and the subse-
quent court proceedings which set
aside the ICC order. He asserted
that the commissions second order,
issued June II, was merely q reaf-
flrnation Of the original order
handed down in January. He also
stated that the commission would
be unable to show the court any
new findings which would justify a
change in their original decision.
He told the court that the trans
portation companies came within
provisions Of the ICC Act which
provides exemption under certain
circumstances. He said the COM
mission was without authority to
require joint fares among separate
companies.
Order Held Discriminatory.
In addition, he claimed that the
ICC order was discriminatory, mas
much as it applied only to persons
from the District going to Virginia
installations. but did not reduce the
rates Of Virginia residents who were
going to the same installations. He
said all Of the routes included were
within the Washington commercial
zone established in 1897 and added
that before the ICC Act could be
invoked the commercial zone would
have to be re-established.
The ICC order. which is scheduled
to go into effect August 81, would
reduce fares for many commuters
from one and one-third to five
cents for the trip from the District
to the Virginia Federal establish
ments and would provide tokens and
transfers between companies, which
are not now available.
There was no indication how long
the hearings would continue.
Mr.. Pierce contended that at the
second hearing held by the ICC
enough new findings were made
against the three Virginia bus COM
panies to justify the commission in
exercising its jurisdiction. At the
same time 1t was indicated that no
new evidence had been found con-
corning the Capital Transit Co. Mr..
Knowlton concurred in Mr.. Pierce S
opinion.