[PRCo] Re: Pittsburgh Railways "nickel" poster

[John Swindler]

>Jim Holland commented:
>
> > mrb190 wrote:
>
> > [Pittsburgh Railways Fare Poster]
>
>http://www.rapidtransit.com/net/thirdrail/0007/fares1.htm
>
>	The  "Tolls Over Free Bridges"  is a real kicker, YES?!?!
>		They really stuck it to the Railway industry!
>			Did the same to trucking!!
>				Why not beeses?!?!
>



Concerning the nickel fare as it might have applied in Pennsylvania, have 
been going through decisions of the Public Service Commission, circa 1917, 
(only 1297 pages!!!), and several of the cases involved the Public Service 
Commission "having the authority, under the Public Service Company Law, to 
regulate fares, notwithstanding a pre-existing municipal ordinance."

For instance, in Borough of Wilkinsburg vs. Pittsburgh Railways Company:

-Pittsburgh Railways filed a tariff schedule proposing a fare increase

-The Borough of Wilkinsburg protested because "it is a violation of the 
terms of certain ordinances of that municipality, fixing rates of fare, 
under which the Pittsburgh Railways Company was granted consent to contruct 
its tracks with the borough limits."
(The Wilkinsburg ordinance prescribed a fare not to exceed three cents (17 
tickets for 50 cents) within the borough limits.)

-The commission found that, "there is thus presented to the Commission the 
initial question whether, under the constitution and law, the Commission has 
authority to inquire into and determine the reasonableness of street railway 
rates in a case where the municipality in which the tracks were constructed 
has coupled with its consent a provision fixing the rate of fare." (the 
local ordinance to permit street railway construction also fixes the fare 
rate to be changed)

-Also: "These conditions (Wilkinsburg ordinance) are unlimited as to time 
and are typical of a large number of complaints involving the same issues 
and which will be controlled by the decision in this case."

-Also:  "There can be no reasonable doubt," said Justice Elkins in York 
Water Company vs. York, 250 Pa 115, "that the legislative intention was to 
make the Public Service Act the supreme law of the state in the regulation 
and supervision of public service corporations; and this being so, it 
followed as a necessary sequence that all laws inconsistent with the powers 
thus conferred must be held to be repealed or supplied thereby."

-"It was conceded at the argument, and is settled by judicial authority , 
that municipalities have not been invested either by the constitution or by 
the legislature with rate regulating authority." (PA Constitution Art. XVII, 
SEC. 9 and Allegheny City vs. Millville, Etna, and Sharpsburg Street Railway 
Co., 159 PA 411.)

-It also mentions: "In the case of Quinby vs. Public Service Commission, 223 
NY, 244, PUR 1918D, 30, the Court of Appeals of New York declined to place 
its decision upon constitutional grounds, but based it on the conclusion 
that there was no express provision in the Public Service Commission Act 
(for New York) empowering the Commission to raise rates prescribed in a 
franchise, a provision the more important in New York than in Pennsulvnaia 
for there the municipalities had certain powers to regulate rates, which 
here (PA) they have not."

The majority decision concluded: "We find that the Public Service Commission 
under its organic act is charged with the duty and responsibliity of 
determining whether the rates under attack are unjust, unreasonable or 
unjustly discriminatory or unduly or unreasonable preferential, and that 
there are no consitittional or statutory inhibitions to our so doing, 
therefore the complaint (Wilkinsburg) will be set down for further hearing 
in accordance with these findings and consclusions."

The decision was appealed to the Superior Court of Pennsyulvania, and during 
the April Term, 1919, the court approved the order of the Public Service 
Commission: that the police power to set rates of fare within Pennsylvania 
is reserved to the State, notwithstanding any prior contract or agreement 
between a street railway company and a municipality.

And that's why Pennsylvania systems were not strictly held to the nickel 
fares that hobbled street railway companies in other states.

John

(if anyone wants the full text, can forward a copy to Derrick with request 
for scaning and posting)
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com