
    Borough of Edgewood, Appellant, v. Wilkinsburg & East Pittsburgh St. Ry. Co. et al.
    
      Public Service Commission — Jurisdiction—Street railway rates —Act of July 26,19IS, P. L. 187If.
    
    Under the Act of July 28, 1913, P. L. 1371, the Public Service Commission has jurisdiction in the first place to adjudge the reasonableness of rates charged by public service corporations. Until it has acted the courts have no jurisdiction.
    Argued April 26, 1920.
    Appeal, No. 10, Oct. T., 1920, by plaintiff, from judgment of Superior Court, April T., 1919, No. 58, affirming decree of C. P. Allegheny Co., April T., 1918, No. 234, dismissing bill in equity in case of Borough of Edgewood v. Wilkinsburg & East Pittsburgh Street Railway Co., Monongahela St. Ry. Co. and
    
      June 26, 1920:
    Pittsburgh Railways Co.
    Before Brown, C. J., Moschzisker, Frazer, Walling and Simpson, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    Appeal from Superior Court.
    Bill for injunction in the common pleas to restrain increase of rates in excess of what was fixed by conditional consent in and by a duly enacted ordinance, pursuant to which defendant railway was constructed. Before Shafer, P. J.
    A demurrer was filed on the ground that the court was without jurisdiction in the absence of prior action by the Public Service Commission. The court dismissed the bill for want of jurisdiction. Plaintiff appealed to the Superior Court.
    The Superior Court affirmed the decree of the common pleas dismissing the bill, in an opinion by Trexler, J. See 72 Pa. Superior Ct. 423. Plaintiff appealed.
    
      Errors assigned were judgment of Superior Court, and action of Superior Court in not sustaining assignments of error to the common pleas, quoting them.
    
      M. W. Aeheson, Jr., with him John D. Meyer, Brown, Stewart é Bostwick and Sterrett <& Aeheson, for appellant.
    
      Geo. E. Alter, with him Reed, Smith, Shaw '& Beal, George G. Bradshaw and A. W. Robertson, for appellees.
   Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Brown,

The bill of the appellant was dismissed by the court on the demurrer to its jurisdiction of the matter complained of; and this was correct: St. Clair Borough v. Tamaqua & Pottsville Electric Railway Company, 259 Pa. 462. This appeal from the decree of the Superior Court, affirming that of the court below, is therefore dismissed, at appellant’s costs.  