COTTON COMPRESS-Continued.
Where a railroad company declares a policy which allows compression of
cotton in transit at the nearest point it can not vary that rule so as to give
certain shippers the opportuniy to avoid it and thereby receive an advantage
which is not given to shippers generally. Id.
A rule for compression of cotton in transit, which allows uncompressed
cotton, on demand of shippers, to be taken out of Muskogee, Ind. T., and points
north, including the Tulsa division, for compression at South McAlester, Ind. T.,
but does not allow uncompressed cotton to be taken out of or through South
McAlester for compression at Muskogee, which practice involves the hauling
of a large portion of the cotton grain in the territory tributary to Muskogee to
South McAlester, where it is compressed, reloaded and hauled back through
Muskogee to its eastern terminus, involving an extra service of 124 miles for
which the carrier receives no compensation,-held to result in undue prejudice
against Muskogee. Id.
That a compress company at South McAlester has another compress at Fort
Smith and threatens, unless the foregoing preference is given to its compress
at South McAlester, to divert its cotton traffic to another railroad, does not
justify discrimination in the rules or practices of defendant, as the competition
described is not the character of competition that relieves from the operation of
the statute. Id.
Where the practice of considering compression of cotton in transit an inci-
dent of transportation, and therefore a matter wholly within the discretion and
control of the carrier as to the instruments employed, neither the grower nor
the consumer being directly interested, will not be decided without a general
investigation covering the whole field of production and markets, and can not
be determined on an insufficient inquiry at a single point. Commercial & In-
dustrial Asso. of Union Springs v. Central of Ga. Ry. Co. 375.
Rates on. China & Japan Trading Co. v. Ga. R. Co. 236.
Johnston-Larimer Dry Goods Co. v. Wabash R. Co. 51.
Johnston-Larimer Dry Goods Co. v. A., T. & S. F. Ry. Co. 188.
Johnston-Larimer Dry Goods Co. v. A., T. & S. F. Ry. Co. 47.
Enterprise Manufacturing Co. v. Ga. R. Co. 130.
Riverside Mills v. Southern Ry. Co. 388.
Warren Manufacturing Co. v. So. Ry. Co. 381.
Enterprise Manufacturing Co. v. Ga. R. Co. 451.
Growth. Enterprise Manufacturing Co. v. Ga. R. Co. 130.
Enterprise Manufacturing Co. v. Ga. R. Co. 130.
Johnston-Larimer Dry Goods Co. v. A., T. & S. F. Ry. Co. 47.
Warren Manufacturing Co. v. So. Ry. Co. 381.
Rate on, from points north of Shreveport, La., via Texarkana to Hope, Ark.,
held unreasonable Hope Cotton Oil Co. v. T. & P. Ry. Co. 265.
Reparation for unreasonable charges on, ordered. Pressley v. G., C. & S. F.
Ry. Co. 518.
As indication of through route. Re Through Routes and Through Rates, 163.
Construction by, binds Commission. Commercial & Industrial Asso. of Union
Springs v. L. & N. R. Co. 372.
No original jurisdiction over interstate rates voluntarily established by car-
riers. Poor Grain Co. v. C., B. & Q. Ry. Co. 418.
Decree of, dismissing a bill brought to enforce an order of the Commission
made previous to the amendment of June 29, 1906, no bar to right of Commission
to examine the same rate with respect to a date subsequent to that of such
amendment. Cattle Raisers' Asso. of Texas v. C., B. & Q. R. Co. 507.
Rates on. Holcomb-Hayes Co. v. I. C. R. Co. 128.
Express rates on. Society American Florists v. U. S. Express Co. 120.
DAMAGES. See also REPARATION.
Compensatory, not sustained by testimony. Muskogee Commercial Club v. M.,
K. & T. Ry. Co. 312.
Resulting from removal of station to new point, carrier not liable for. Jones
v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co. 144.
Measure of, for disregard by carrier of obligation to forward shipment by
route over which, in the absence of routing instructions, the lowest charge for
the transportation applies. Hennepin Paper Co. v. No. Pac. Ry. Co. 535.
Necessary parties. Johnston-Larimer Dry Goods Co. v. N. Y. & T. S. S. Co. 58.
American National Live Stock Asso. v. T. & P. Ry. Co. 32.
Cattle Raisers' Asso. of Tex. v. G. H. & S. A. Ry. Co. 20.
At Chicago stockyards. Cattle Raisers' Asso. of Tex. v. C., B. & Q. R. Co. 507.
On rails of carrier. Leonard v. C., M. & St. P. Ry. Co. 492.
Laning-Harris Coal & Grain Co. v. A., T. & S. F. Ry. Co. 479.
In general. Wiemer & Rich v. C. & N. W. Ry. Co. 462.
Omaha Grain Exchange v. Un. Pac. R. Co. 65.
Waxelbaum & Co. v. A. C. L. R. Co. 178.
Board of Trade of Kansas City v. C., B. & Q. Ry. Co. 173.
Right to exact demurrage charges on cars used in transporting complainant's
traffic while the cars are standing on a siding owned and operated by defend-
ant, which was constructed by it for the sole use of complainant, is not affected
by the fact that the cars are owned by the latter. Cudahy Packing Co. v. C.
& N. W. Ry. Co. 446.
The Commission is without authority to fix rules or regulations for reciprocal
demurrage. Mason v. C., R. I. & P. Ry. Co. 61.
Traffic and rates on. Railroad Commission of Oregon v. C. & A. R. Co. 541.
Cotton factory products. Warren Mfg. Co. v. So. R. Co. 381.
Grain. There is no inflexible requirement that rates upon grain and the
products of the grain should be, under all circumstances, the same, but rather
that carriers may, in just regard for their own interest or to meet special con-
ditions, vary those rates within narrow limits. When once the relation has
been established, business developed, and money expended upon the strength
of it, then the carrier can not, in the absence of some sufficient reason, change
that relation; nor would this Commission direct a change. Howard Mills Co.
v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co. 258.
Grain. Farmers, Merchants & Shippers' Club v. A., T. & S. F. Ry. Co. 351.
Rail and water. Quimby v. Clyde S. S. Co. 392.
Carrier to locate switch. Weleetka Light & Water Co. v. Ft. S. & W. R.
Co. 503.
Commission to establish through routes and joint rates. Loup Creek Colliery
Co. v. Virginian Ry. Co. 471.
In according transportation facilities, within jurisdiction of Commission to
forbid and to award reparation. Rogers & Co. v. P. & R. Ry. Co. 308.
Differences in rates on fire, building, and paving brick which are made of
the same material, come out of the same kiln, are nearly alike in color and are
of the same size and weight, held based upon no justifiable distinction. Stowe-
Fuller Co. v. Pa. Co. 215.
A carrier may not charge a higher through rate upon one shipment and a
lower combination rate upon another shipment of the same kind between the
same points at the same time. Morgan v. M., K. & T. Ry. Co. 525.
Unlawful only when unreasonable. Rates not unduly discriminatory can
only be reduced by the Commission when, in its opinion, shown to be unreason-
able in themselves. Commercial & Industrial Asso. of Union Springs v. L. & N.
R. Co. 372.
Preston & Davis v. D. L. & W. R. Co. 114.
Rogers & Co. v. P. & R. Ry. Co., 308.
New York Team Owners' Asso. v. So. Pac. Co. 204.
Walker v. B. & O. R. Co. 196.
City Council of Atchison, Kans., v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co. 111.
RATES AND FACILITIES.
Durham v. I. C. R. Co. 37.
Texas Cement Plaster Co. v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co. 68.
Omaha Grain Exchange v. No. Pac. Ry. Co. 65.
Howard Mills Co. v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co. 258.
Desel-Boettcher Co. v. K. C. S. Ry. Co. 220.
Commercial & Industrial Asso. of Union Springs v. L. & N. R. Co. 372.
Quimby v. Clyde S. S. Co. 392.
Cattle Raisers' Asso. of Texas v. C., B. & Q. R. Co. 507.
Caretakers of newspapers. In the Matter of the Transportation of News-
paper Employees, 15.
Delivery. Carrier's regulation discontinuing delivery at its Brooklyn ter-
minal of petroleum oil in tank cars shipped to complainants, practically depriv
DISCRIMINATION-Continued.
PERSONS-Continued.
ing complainants of opportunity to continue their business in competition with
the Standard Oil Company, and subjecting them to unlawful prejudice and dis-
advantage, required to be rescinded, and such delivery for complainants to be
allowed under reasonable rules and conditions as to the time and manner of
unloading the cars. Preston & Davis v. D., L. & W. R. Co. 114.
Embargo against one commodity and individual. A special embargo of
complainant's shipments of hay and straw destined to defendant's Third and
Arch streets station in Philadelphia, held to constitute an unlawful discrimina-
tion. Whatever may be said of an embargo against one commodity only in a
time of congestion, nothing can be said for an embargo which refuses transpor-
tation facilities to some establishments while according such facilities to their
competitors. Rogers & Co. v. P. & R. Ry. Co. 308.
Land agents. In the Matter of Transportation of Land and Immigration
Agents, 7.
Parcels express. The denial to an occasional but not a regular patron of
the road, apparently upon the ground that he was not a patron, of the privilege,
accorded to the public generally and without question at most places, of sending
baggage by a parcels express operated by the railroad and an express company
for the convenience of suburbanites from Philadelphia, Pa., to certain points
upon the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad by affixing stamp-is clearly unjust dis-
crimination. Walker v. B. & O. R. Co. 196.
Shipers. Rates on empty bags to Virginia points compared with rates on
complainant's competitor's shipments from Newark, N. J., to Virginia points
over other roads under different freight classification. Rau v. Pa. R. Co. 199.
Shippers. Rates on denatured alcohol from Chicago and Missouri River
common points to North Pacific Coast terminals, and to certain points in Ore-
gon, held not unduly discriminatory in favor of California manufacturers. Rail-
road Commission of Oregon v. B., C. & A. R. Co. 541.
Telegraph operators and other employees, laborers and officials of telegraph
companies. In the Matter of Railroad Telegraph Contracts, 10.
Trucking firm. Preference given at carrier's pier, the inadequacy of which
for the business results in congestion and delay, to the through traffic trans-
ferred by a trucking firm employed by the carrier to transport through ship-
ments via its line from New York City railroad depots to such pier, over traffic
originating in New York and vicinity and brought to the pier by other trucking
firms, it appearing that the pier is not closed at night until all waiting trucks
are unloaded, and is soon to be considerably enlarged, no instance of injury
resulting to shippers or their traffic, and no discrimination amounting to ex-
clusion from the pier, being shown-held not to operate unduly or unreasonably
against other truck owners. New York Team Owners Asso. v. So. Pac. Co. 204.
White and colored passengers. Carriers may not discriminate between
white and colored passengers paying the same fare, in the accommodations
which they furnish to each. Edwards v. N. C. & St. L. Ry. Co. 247.
Segregation of white and colored passengers on interstate journeys is a
reasonable regulation of interstate traffic and permissible under the act to regu-
late commerce. Id.
A carrier providing facilities for personal cleanliness and a separate
smoking compartment in first-class coaches devoted to the use of white passen-
gers, should provide similar accommodations for colored passengers paying first-
DISCRIMINATION-Continued.
A railroad company can not arbitrarily determine that a particular mill
shall compete in a certain market with other localities and that other mills on
its lines shall not so compete, particularly where the discrimination is not jus-
tified by operating conditions. Texas Cement Plaster Co. v. St. L. & S. F. R.
Co. 68.
In favor of mills on own line by imposition of arbitrary on flour from other
lines. Blackwell Milling & Elevator Co. v. M., K. & T. Ry. Co. 23.
Ponca City Milling Co. v. M., K. & T. Ry. Co. 26.
Albany, Mo., compared with St. Joseph, Mo., on coal from Centerville District,
Iowa. Albany Produce Co. v. C., B. & Q. Ry. Co. 434.
Amarillo, Tex., compared with Texas common points. Nobles Bros. Grocery
Co. v. Ft. W. & D. C. Ry Co. 242.
Atchison, Kans., in elevator allowance and free services in transferring, mix-
ing, cleaning and other handling of grain, as compared with Kansas City, Mo.,
Argentine, Leavenworth and Kansas City, Kans. City Council of Atchison v.
Mo. Pac. Ry. Co. 111.
Augusta, Ga., and suburban mill points. Quimby v. Clyde S. S. Co. 392.
Cedar Rapids, Iowa, compared with St. Paul and Minneapolis, Minn., to Chi-
cago and East St. Louis, Ill., and St. Louis, Mo., on scrap-iron, carloads. Ohsman
& Effron v. C., R. I. & P. Ry. Co. 63.
Columbus, Ohio, rates on horses from New York and to Kansas City and St.
Paul, compared with similar rates to and from St. Louis and Chicago. Mc-
Laughlin Bros. v. Adams Express Co. 489.
Coolidge, Lakin, Garden City, Cimarron and Dodge City, Kans., as compared
with other points on the Santa Fe road between and including Hutchinson,
Kans., and Ardmore, Okla., as to rates on coal from Rockville and Trinidad dis-
tricts in Colorado. Southwestern Kansas Farmers & Business Men's League v.
A., T. & S. F. Ry. Co. 530.
Cordele, Ga., compared with Macon, as to rates on coal and pig iron from
Birmingham, Ala. Tomlin-Harris Mach. Co. v. L. & N. R. Co. 133.
Crowder City, Ind. T. Specific through rates from points beyond as com-
pared with lower combination rate to Kansas City. Morgan v. M., K. & T. Ry.
Co. 525.
Dallas, Tex., compared with other points from St. Louis. Dallas Freight
Bureau v. M., K. & T. Ry. Co. 427.
Erie, Kans. Rate on refined oil from, to Springfield, Mo., as compared with
rate to St. Louis, Mo., and from Neodesha, Kans., to Springfield. Wilhoit v. M.,
K. & T. Ry. Co. 158.
Erie, Kans. Rates on oil from, to Joplin and St. Louis. Wilhoit v. M., K. &
T. Ry. Co. 138.
Freeman, Mo., compared with Harrisonville, Mo., on coal from Mineral, Kans.
Hope Lumber Co. v. M., K. & T. Ry. Co. 191.
: Georgia and South Carolina points compared with New York and Boston on
cotton goods and cotton waste to San Francisco and other Pacific coast terminal
points. Enterprise Mfg. Co. v. Ga. R. Co. 130.
Granite Falls, Minn., 41 miles nearer Chicago, but on a different branch, com-
pared with Whitestone, Minn., on butter and eggs to Chicago, Ill. Morse Pro-
duce Co. v. C., M. & St. P. Ry. Co. 485.
Hope, Ark., on cotton seed from points north of Shreveport, La., via Tex-
arkana, joint through rate compared with local rates in and out of Texarkana.
|