Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

and conditions, for a shorter than for a longer distance over the same line, in the same direction, the shorter being included within the longer distance; but this shall not be construed as authorizing any common carrier within the terms of this Act to charge and receive as great compensation for a shorter as for a longer distance: Provided, however, That upon application to the Commission appointed under the provisions of this Act, such common carrier may, in special cases, after investigation by the Commission, be authorized to charge less for longer than for shorter distances for the transportation of passengers or property; and the Commission may from time to time prescribe the extent to which such designated common carrier may be relieved from the operation of this section of this Act.

Notes to old section.

The English Railway and Traffic Act of 1888, Section 27, gave the commissioners power to direct that no greater charge should be made for a shorter than a longer haul when the circumstances demanded such direction.-Halsbury's Laws of England, vol. 4, p. 81.

"Under substantially similar circumstances" defined and circumstances that relieve from the section discussed.-Re Southern Ry. & Steamship Co. and Petition of L. & N. R. Co., 1 I. C. C. 15, 17, 31, 76, 278, 1 I. C. R. 31. Section not to be construed without a formal petition.-Re So. Pac. R. Co., 1 I. C. R. 16. Where several roads join in a tariff for the longer, and a less number in that for the shorter, haul, the Act applies.-Boston & A. R. Co. v. Boston & L. R. Co., 1 I. C. C. 158, 1 I. C. R. 400, 408, 500, 571. Carrier competition may be met even though the longer through haul is less than the charge over the shorter haul.-Allen v. Louisville, New Albany, etc., R. Co., 1 I. C. C. 199, 1 I. C. R. 621. Must be actual competition of controlling force.-Harwell v. Columbus & W. R. Co., 1 I. C. C. 236, 1 I. C. R. 631; San Bernardino Board of Trade v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 4 I. C. C. 104, 3 I. C. R. 138; order not enforced, Int. Com. Com. v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 50 Fed. 295. May violate section by a different classification for shorter haul.-Martin v. So. Pac. Co., 2 I. C. C. 1, 2 I. C. R. 1. Burden on carrier to show different circumstances.-Spartanburg Board of Trade v.

Richmond & D. R. Co., 2 I. C. C. 304, 2 I. C. R. 193. Validity of the charge determined not by proportions but by the rate as an entirety.-Imperial Coal Co. v. Pittsburg & L. E. R. Co., 2 I. C. C. 618, 2 I. C. R. 436. Principles given showing application of section to tariffs and classification in southern states. Re Atlanta & W. P. R. Co., 3 I. C. C. 19, 46, 2 I. C. R. 461. Free cartage at the longer and not at the shorter may constitute a violation of section.-Stone v. Detroit, etc., R. Co., 3 I. C. C. 613, 3 I. C. R. 60. Blanket rate legal when forced by competition.-Rice v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 4 I. C. C. 228, 3 I. C. R. 263. Rate legal because of competition.King v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co., 4 I. C. C. 251, 3 I. C. R. 272. Basing-point rate plus the local not approved.Hamilton & Brown v. Chattanooga, R. & C. R. Co., 4 I. C. C. 686, 3 I. C. R. 482. Local carrier participating in interstate haul cannot escape the provisions of this section.-James & Mayer Buggy Co. v. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co., 4 I. C. C. 774, 3 I. C. C. 682; order not enforced by circuit court, Int. Com. Com. v. C. N. O. & T. P. R. Co., 56 Fed. 925; circuit court reversed, 162 U. S. 184, 40 L. Ed. 935, 16 Sup. Ct. 700. No reason for greater charge for shorter haul.— Perry v. Florida Cent. & P. R. Co., 5 I. C. C. 97, 3 I. C. R. 740. Section intended to maintain, not destroy, advantages of location.-Raworth v. N. Pac. R. Co., 5 I. C. C. 234, 3 I. C. R. 857. Carriers may not determine for themselves whether or not the circumstances justify a greater charge for a short haul, except on their own line; where there is a joint line, must before making the charge obtain order of Commission.Trammell, etc., R. R. Com'rs of Ga. v. Clyde Steamship Co., 5 I. C. C. 324, 4 I. C. R. 120; order not enforced, Int. Com. Com. v. W. & A. A. Co., 88 Fed. 166, 63 Fed. 63, 35 C. C. A. 226, 181 U. S. 29, 45 L. Ed. 729, 21 Sup. Ct. 512. Rates to Pacific Coast Terminals may be lower than to Spokane.Merch. Union of Spokane Falls v. N. P. R. Co., 5 I. C. C. 478, 4 I. C. R. 183; order not enforced, Farmers L. & T. Co., v. N. Pac. R. Co., 83 Fed. 249. Greater charge to Chattanooga than through Chattanooga to Nashville illegal.-Board of Trade of Chattanooga v. E. T., V. & G. R. Co., 5 I. C. C. 546, 4 I. C. R. 213; order enforced, 85 Fed. 107, 99 Fed. 52, 39 C. C. A. 413; reversed in Supreme Court, East Tenn., Va. & Ga. R. Co. v. Int. Com. Com., 181 U. S. 1, 45 L. Ed. 719,

21 Sup. Ct. 516. When difference justifies, it must be reasonable; competition for the longer haul between carrier subject to the Act not dissimilar circumstance.-Gerke Brewing Co. v. L. & N. R. Co., 5 I. C. C. 596, 4 I. C. R. 267. The fact that one city is larger than another, no such dissimilar condition as the statute requires.-Board of Trade of Troy v. Ala. Midland R. Co., 6 I. C. C. 1; order not enforced, Int. Com. Com. v. Ala. M. R. Co., 69 Fed. 227, 74 Fed. 715, 21 C. C. A. 51, 168 U. S. 144, 42 L. Ed. 414, 18 Sup. Ct. 45. Competition of markets and carriers not justify carriers in first instance to charge more for a longer than a shorter haul, but the carrier must obtain permission of the Interstate Com. Com.-Bellmer v. Memphis & C. R. Co., 6 I. C. C. 257, 4 I. C. R. 520; order not enforced, 71 Fed. 835; circuit court reversed, 83 Fed. 898; circuit court of appeals reversed, L. & N. R. Co. v. Behlmer, 175 U. S. 648, 44 L. Ed. 309, 20 Sup. Ct. 209. Shortage of grain crop sufficient to justify temporary order to charge less for a longer than for a shorter haul.-Re Application of Fremont, Elkhorn & Mo. Valley R. Co. et al., 6 I. C. C. 293. Each case must be determined on its special facts.-Re Petition of Cincinnati, H. & D. R. Co., for Relief Under Section 4, 6 I. C. C. 323. World's Fair sufficient reason for relief under proviso.-Re Petition of Cincinnati, H. & D. R. Co., for Relief Under Section 4, 6 I. C. C. 323; Re Application of Rome, Watertown, etc., R. Co., 6 I. C. C. 328. That there is a shorter line to the same point does not justify relief.— Hill & Bro. v. Nashville, C. & St. L. R. Co., 6 I. C. C. 343. "Line" means a physical line, not a mere business arrangement. Daniels v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co., 6 I. C. C. 458, 476. To Kansas City, the longer distance, a less rate should not be given than to Wichita, the shorter.-Johnston-Larimer Dry Goods Co. v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 6 I. C. C. 568, 12 I. C. C. 47, 188. Violation of section a form of unjust discrimination. McClelen v. So. Ry. Co., 6 I. C. C. 588; order not enforced, Int. Com. Com. v. So. Ry. Co., 105 Fed. 703. Dissimilarity of the carrier's own making not justify deviation from rule.-Jerome Hill Cotton v. M. K. & T. Ry. Co., 6 I. C. C. 601. Competition at the longer distance point by carriers subject to Act not justify less rate for longer haul unless by permission of Commission.-Board of Trade

[ocr errors]

of Lynchburg v. Old Dominion Steamship Co., 6 I. C. C. 632; Re Alleged Violation of Fourth Section, 7 I. C. C. 61. Section not violated by charging the same rate for the shorter as for the longer distance.-Milk Producers' Protective Asso. v. Delaware, L. & W. R. Co., 7 I. C. C. 93, 163. Carrier may meet but not extinguish water competition.-Brewer v. L. & N. R. Co., 7 I. C. C. 224, 235; Railroad Com'rs of Ky. v. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co., 7 I. C. C. 380; order not enforced, Brewer v. Central of Ga. R. Co., 84 Fed. 258. Competition. of markets not sufficient to relieve from statute.-Fewell v. Richmond & D. R. Co., 7 I. C. C. 354. Higher rates from New Orleans to La Grange, the shorter distance, than to Atlanta illegal.-Callaway v. L. & N. R. Co., 7 I. C. C. 431; order enforced, 102 Fed. 709; circuit court reversed, Int. Com. Com. v. L. & N. R. Co., 190 U. S. 273, 47 L. Ed. 1047, 23 Sup. Ct. 687. Water competition justifies a less charge for the longer haul.-Savannah Bureau of Freight & Transportation v. Charleston & S. R. Co., 7 I. C. C. 458; Dallas Freight Bureau v. Tex. & Pac. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 33. Competition with a foreign carrier not subject to the law justifies an order of the Commission relieving from section.-Re Application of A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 7 I. C. C. 593; Re Alleged Disturbance of Passenger Rates by Canadian Pacific R. Co., 8 I. C. C. 71. Mere fact of competition does not of itself justify relief from section.-Philips, Bailey & Co. v. L. & N. R. Co., 8 I. C. C. 93, citing decisions of Supreme Court. May make lower rate on goods exported than on those consumed at the port.-Kemble v. Boston & A. R. Co., 8 I. C. C. 110. Section violated. Re Alleged Violation of Act by St. L. & S. F. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 290; Railroad Com'rs of Kansas v. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 304; Chicago Fire Proof, etc., Co. v. Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 316; Kindel v. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 608, 9 I. C. C. 606. Rail competition may be considered, the effect of such competition being a question of fact in each case.-Tileston Milling Co. v. N. Pac. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 346, citing and following Int. Com. Com. v. Alabama M. R. Co., 168 U. S. 144, 42 L. Ed. 414, 18 Sup. Ct. 45. Dissimilar conditions.-Gustin v. Burlington & M. R. R. Co., 8 I. C. C. 481; Marten v. L. & N. R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 581. Facts not authorizing the difference existing between the long and short haul rates.-Board of

Trade of Hampton v. N. C. & St. L. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 503; order not enforced.-Int. Com. Com. v. N. C. & St. L. Ry. Co., 120 Fed. 934. Demurrage charges not within section.-Penn. Millers' State Asso. v. Philadelphia & R. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 531. All forms of competition must be considered, but in each case it is a question of fact as to the effect to be given such competition.-Holdzkom v. Mich. Cent. Ry. Co., 9 I. C. C. 42; Dallas Freight Bureau v. Austin & N. W. R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 68. Carrier may meet competition of shorter line.Ulrick v. Lake Shore, etc., Ry. Co., 9 I. C. C. 495. Competitive conditions at Kansas City entitle her to a lower rate to Texas ports than Wichita.-Mayor, etc., of Wichita v. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 9 I. C. C. 534, 558, citing Supreme Court decisions since the case of Johnston, etc., Dry Goods Co. v. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 6 I. C. C. 568; see also same plaintiff v. New York & Tex. S. S. Co., 12 I. C. C. 58. Higher rate to Chattanooga than to Nashville the longer distance not illegal under the circumstances.-Chamber of Commerce of Chattanooga v. So. Ry. Co., 10 I. C. C. 111, citing and following previous holding of Supreme Court in same case, 181 U. S. 29, 45 L. Ed. 729, 21 Sup. Ct. 512. Same holding as to cities in Alabama and Mississippi.-Aberdeen Group Commercial Asso. v. M. & O. R. Co., 10 I. C. C. 289. As to cities in Florida. -Rock Hill Buggy Co. v. So. Ry. Co., 11 I. C. C. 229. Difference greater than section justified.-Gardner & Clark v. So. Ry. Co., 10 I. C. C. 342; Lehman-Higginson Grocery Co. v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 10 I. C. C. 460. Burden on carrier to show circumstances justifying greater charge for shorter haul.Geo. M. Speigle Co. v. Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co., 11 I. C. C. 367. Section not violated.-Dewey Bros. Co. v. B. & O. R. Co., 11 I. C. C. 475; Griffin Grocery Co. v. So. Ry. Co., 11 I. C. C. 522; Farrar v. So. Ry. Co., 11 I. C. C. 632; Hastings Malting Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 11 I. C. C. 675; Village of Goodhue v. Chicago G. W. Ry. Co., 11 I. C. C. 683; Durham v. Ill. Cent. R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 37; Pecos Mercantile Co. v. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 13 I. C. C. 173; R. R. Com. of Ky. v. L. & N. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 300; Topeka Banana Dealers' Asso. v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 620; Phillips-Trawick-James Co. v. So. Pac. Co., 13 I. C. C. 644. A mere theoretical or paper rate not sufficient to show violation.-Mo. & Kan. Shippers Asso. v. M. K. & T. Ry. Co., 12 I. C. C. 483. The dif

« ПредишнаНапред »