Harris v. City of Philadelphia

McDevitt, P. J.,

— This cause came on to be heard on argument sur exceptions of defendants and intervening defendant.

Counsel for the plaintiff has advanced two theories to support his complaint. First, that the Ordinance of June 14, 1929, is illegal. Second, that the Director of City Transit abused his discretion. The learned Chancellor decided the first in favor of the plaintiff and omitted to decide the second question either way.

We will discuss these two theories in the order stated.

I. The Ordinance of June H, 1929.

Section 6 of the Act of May 23, 1874, P. L. 230, provides: “All stationery,…