Evening star., 1949-10-22
Supreme Court
Weighs Pleas in
Joint FareCase
Order of ICC Fixino
Pentogon Bus Price
Waits Final RuIino

The Supreme Court, after hear
ing concluding arguments yester-
day, has taken under advise
ment a case testing whether the
Interstate Commerce Commits
sion has authority to fix joint
fares for passengers using lines
Of the Capital Transit Co. and
two Virginia bus companies be-
tween Washington and nearby
Virginia.
| The case was appealed from q
special panel lower court, which
had set aside an ICC order fix
ing fares. The ICC had author
lied Joint fares for passengers
between Washington and points
like the Pentagon. Airport, Navy
Annex and Air Force buildings
in Arlington County.
The appeal from the lower
courts injunction against the
ICC order was made by the Wash
ington, Virginia and Maryland
Coach Co., Inc, and the Alex
andria. Bancroft and Washington
Transit Co.. which were joined
by the Justice Department and
the ICC.
The Capital Transit Co. and
the District Public Utilities Com
mission opposed any Supreme
Court action, defending the lower
court decision.
Argument of PUG.
Attorneys for the PUG and
Capital Transit argued that the
1CC no longer has authority to fix
the joint fares.
Lloyd B. Harrison, for the PUG
told the court the ICC had failed
to show what national defense
needs would be met now by a Joint
fare order. Such fares we're
established during the war, when
the Capital Transit Co. operated
buses serving the Pentagon. Mr..
Harrison said the company no
longer operates into Virginia and
therefore is not subject to the
ICC.
Samuel P. Clark, counsel for
Capital Transit, argued that the
lCC is without jurisdiction. since
the company stopped its bus
operation to the Pentagon.
Henry E. Ketner, attorney for
the Virginia State Corporation
Commission, which had entered
the case as friend of the court,
declared the ICC had exceeded
its jurisdiction" in ordering the
Joint fares. Such an order he con-
tended was IAN encroachment on
State Jurisdiction"
Appealed by Bus Line.
Manuel j. Davis, counsel for the
has been appealing the case, said
the 1CC does have. authority to
order joint fares, for through
routes involved.
Capital Transit's contention
that a through route does not
exist" he said, wholly ignores
the earlier decision of this court, !"
Passengers continue to originate
in the District destined to their
Virginia employment centers. he
said.
There is a clear, certain un-
denlable intent to travel over a
direct route from point within
the District to a Virginia installa-
tion." he told the court.
Assistant Attorney General
Philip Elman said the Govern
ment does not think there is any
question Of conf1scation in the
present case. Capital Transit
spokesmen had termed the joint
fare rate of 16 cents conf1scatory
The ICC had fixed a 13h-cent
joint fare in 1945 and authorized
fare of 16 cents in 1948.
The 1945 arrangement was
agreed to by Capital Transit, but
later this company requested a
revocation and carried the matter
to District Court, where it won an
injunction last spring from
special panel of jurists. The court
order enjoined the ICC from fix
ing joint fares for Capital Transit
and the Washington, Virginia and
Maryland Coach Co.