Evening star., 1949-10-21
Capital Transit Reply
In Joint Fare Case
To Be Made Today

were Ieduy Ill tIle supreme court I
today to reply to arguments that
the Interstate Commerce Com
mission legally may fix joint fares
for passengers using vehicles of
that company and Of Virginia bus
lines between their homes here
and Government installations in
nearby Virginia.
Hearings began late yesterday
on two important cases, testing
whether the ICC or the District
Public Utilities Commission has
jurisdiction over fare arrange
ments for Capital Transit Co.
passengers whose ultimate desti-
nation is nearby points in Arling-
ton County.
A special panel consisting of
Circuit Judge Wilbur Miller and
District Court Judges Alexander
Hotlzoff and Edward A. Tamm
last spring enjoined the ICC from
fixing joint fares for the transit
company and the Washington,
Virginia g. Maryland Coach Co.
In carrying passengers from vari-
Gus parts of the District to the
Pentagon. Airport, Navy Annex
and Air Force buildings across the
river.
Points to 1945 Ruling.
The Justice Department, in be-
hall OF the ICC and the Virginia
busline, appealed to the Supreme
Court. Philip Elman, a special
assistant to the Attorney General,
opened arguments yesterday by
contending that the Supreme
Court in 1945 held the ICC had
proper jurisdiction in such a fare
arrangement.
The problem. he explained,
deals primarily with District resi-
dents who work at the nearby
Virginia establishments and ride
Capital Transit vehicles to down.
town Washington where they
change to Virginia buses. They
now pay one-way cash fare Of
10 cents to the transit company
and l3 cents to the Virginia line,
or they can buy book of tickets
for a total of % cents for a one
way trip. If the ICC wins its case.
and If they keep fare receipts
the passengers, will get six cents
refund, and the joint fare would
be l6 cents it was explained.
Mr.. Elman told the court more
than $4,000 passengers used the
joint bus service daily during the
war and that a substantial num-
ber" still travel that way every
day. He explained that the ICC
decided several years ago such
travel was a single interstate
journey, even though part of the
trip was made on a private car
rier entirely within the District.
Is Cent Fare in 1948.
The ICC set a, 131a-cent joint
fare in 1945 and authorized a
fare of 16 cents in 1948. Capital
Transit concurred in the 1945 ar
rangement but requested a revo-
cation later and carried the mat
ter to District Court, where it won
an injunction last spring.
Members of the PUG were in
terested spectators at the opening
Arguments, punctuated by fire.
quent questions from Justices
Reed. Black, Frankfurter and
Minton.
Mr.. Elman contended that the
ICC jurisdiction was justified in
the first place by national defense
requirements and that such au-
thority is in line with past court
decisions. present conditions and
possible future developments.
If the Atomic Energy Commits
sion. for instance. established a
plant at Hyattsville, Md, "he re-
marked. "the ICC could order a
joint fare arrangement for District
residents who might have to use
Capital Transit and Maryland
buses. -
He informed the court that the
Joint fare ruling of 1948 has been
imperative since the three judge
ruling here. He urged favorable
ruling for the ICC to clear up the
jurisdictional question. There was
mo weight he asserted, to the
Capital Transit Co.'S contentious
that the transportation situation
has changed materially since 1945
and that the company has no con-
nection, business or otherwise,
with the Virginia lines to justify
control over 1t by the ICC on any
Joint fare plan.
Besides hearing transit COM
.pany attorneys today, the Su-
preme Court also will listen to
lawyers for the Virginia bus line
that seeks to have the lower court
decision overturned.
DR.. Common to Speak