defendants reached eastern destinations
through gateways at Spokane, Wash.,
and Silver Bow and Billings, Mont.
From the points of origin in question a
rate of 50c upon lumber was in effect
over the N. P. Ry. and the Great North-
ern Ry. to all Missouri River points and
to many points east and west of that
river. With respect to shipments from
the points of origin in question to desti-
nations east of Colorado common points
the distances were less through said
gateways than through Portland, and
the transportation operations were fully
as easy. In 1906 complainants had been
unable to move their products over the
routes in effect on account of congestion
of traffic. For this congestion defend-
ants N. P. Ry. and G. N. Ry. were partly
to blame, but since that date had made
great efforts to relieve the situation
and prevent its recurrence. The N. P.
Ry. and G. N. Ry. at a great expense



extended their lines into complainants'
territory for the purpose of developing
same, and their enterprise in so doing
would not be profitable unless they
obtained the benefit of the long haul to
points eastward. To compel them to
deliver the traffic to the Union Pacific
lines at Portland would deprive them
of the large portion of the compensation
of traffic developed and originated by
them. With respect to Colorado com-
mon points, the distance via the Billings
gateway was some 1,728 miles; via the
Portland gateway, some 1,535 miles. The
service by the former gateway was as
satisfactory as by the latter. With re-
spect to Utah points traffic moving by
the Spokane, Silver Bow or Portland
gateway all passed through Pocatello.
The distance from a typical point of
origin to Pocatello via Portland is 875
miles; via Spokane, 1,328 miles; via Sil-
ver Bow, 1,209 miles. The service by
the Spokane and Silver Bow gateway
was unsatisfactory. HELD, that with
respect to Colorado common points and
destinations east thereof, the through
routes already in effect via Spokane,
Silver Bow and Billings were satisfac-
tory, and the Commission had no juris-
diction to establish a new route through
Spokane; but that as to Utah points a
through route through Portland should
be opened, and that the rates to Utah
points from the Washington territory in
question should not exceed the rate
from Portland by more than 2 1 /c. Pa-
cific Coast Lumber Mfrs.' Ass'n v. N. P.
Ry. Co., 14 I. C. C. 51, 58.

(q) The lumber interests in western
Washington were served by the N. P.
Ry. and the Great Northern Ry., the in-
dustries having been developed by those
carriers. The Oregon lumber interests
were served by the Oregon Railway &
Navigation Co. in connection with the
Union Pacific lines, these carriers hav-
ing developed the industries in that
state. In 1906, on account of congestion
of traffic, the Washington lumber inter-
ests were unable to move their products
over the N. P. Ry. and the G. N. Ry.
through the gateways of Spokane, Silver
Bow and Billings, and demanded the
establishment of a through route via
Portland, where the traffic would be
taken from the N. P. Ry. and the G. N. Ry.
and delivered to the U. P. R. R. and its
connections, for the long haul to eastern
destinations. At that date the Oregon
lumber interests were meeting with a



THROUGH ROUTES AND JOINT RATES, 11 (2) (r) (v)



857



like difficulty of congested traffic. HELD,
the requests for the establishment tem-
porarily of a through route through
Portland for the purpose of relieving
these Washington interests should be
denied. Pacific Coast Lumber Mfrs.'
Ass'n v. N. P. Ry. Co., 14 I. C. C. 51, 60.

(r) Defendant carrier tapped the
long-leaf pine lumber section in the
southern part of that district, and
reached much more of such lumber than
it did of the short-leaf pine. It canceled
its joint rates with carriers reaching
the principal short-leaf supply; claimed
to be able to supply all of both kinds
of pine, and sought to compel retail
dealers located at Oklahoma, Missouri,
Kansas and Colorado points to obtain
from the districts reached by it all their
lumber supplies. HELD, the opportunity
to buy in a widely extended market be-
ing a valuable one to merchants in
that it presented a larger field of com-
petition, defendant should be ordered to
restore its joint rates. Star, Grain &
Lumber Co. et al. v. A. T. & S. F. Ry.
Co., 14 I. C. C. 364, 367.

(s) The A. T. & S. F. Ry. and the
K. C. S. Ry. meet at DeRidder, La.,
an important mill point for yellow pine.
To restore through rates from DeRidder
over the latter road would give to it a
very long haul, and to the former a
very short one, from the junctions of the
two roads at Pittsburgh and Kansas
City. The two lines were in general
physical proximity. HELD, such joint
rates would not be restored except upon
a very full and convincing complaint
and record. Star Grain & Lumber Co.
v. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 14 I. C. C. 364,
373.

(t) Complainant manufacturer of cot-
tonseed products at Memphis attacked
the rates on cottonseed from points on
the defendant Ft. Smith & Western R.
R. to Memphis, the rates ranging from
47c to 58c on distances from 324 to 514
miles, and demanded that the rates
should not exceed those on corn from
the same points of origin to Memphis,
ranging from 17c to 20c, and should not
exceed the rates on cottonseed from
points of origin on the Rock Island, a
similar distance from Memphis. The
rates attacked were higher *than the
combination of locals based on Fort
Smith. The F. S. & W. R. R. was a
new road, 217 miles long, extending from
Fort Smith to Guthrie. It ran through



a sparsely settled and little cultivated
country, and was being operated at a
loss. Its equipment was barely suffi-
cient to deliver the local traffic on its
line. Corn moves during the greater
part of the year, while cottonseed moves
only a short portion thereof. The Rock
Island was an old road running through
developed territory and operating at a
profit. HELD, complainant's demand
that the defendant F. S. & W. R. R.
establish the same joint through rates
on cottonseed as on corn, and that said
rates should not exceed those in effect
on the Rock Island, should be denied;
but that joint through rates should be
published by it not in excess of the com-
bination of locals based on Fort Smith.
Memphis Freight Bureau v. F. S. & W.
R. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 1, 9.

(u) Complainant electric railroad
paralleled the C. & N. W. Ry. from
Milwaukee, Wis., to Chicago, the aver-
age distance between said lines not ex-
ceeding 4 1 /& miles. Piper's Siding and
Handle's Siding were constructed by
complainant on the cabbage farms of
two shippers in southern Wisconsin.
The former point is about one mile from
the siding of the C. & N. W. Ry. and
the latter from iy 2 to 2 miles from said
siding. Complainant demanded the es-
tablishment of through routes and joint
rates from these points via the Elgin,
Joliet & Eastern Ry., a belt line, and
the I. C. R. R. to points on the line
of the latter carrier and its connections.
Complainant was equipped to handle
traffic except that it had no refrigerator
cars, and would have been obliged to
obtain same from the I. C. R. R. For
many years the C. & N. W. Ry. had de-
livered the cabbage traffic from this ter-
ritory in an apparently satisfactory man-
ner, and the industries had greatly pros-
pered before the construction of com-
plainant's line. HELD, the demand
should be denied since satisfactory
routes and joint rates via the C. & N.
W. Ry. were already in effect from the
points in question, and it was not neces-
sary in order to prove that a satisfac-
tory joint route under section 15 of the
Act was already in effect to show that
the C. & N. W. Ry. reached the very
door of the farmers whom it served. C.
& M. Electric R. R. Co. v. I. C. R. -R.
Co., 13 I. C. C. 20, 26.

(v) On carloads of potatoes from
Wautoma, Wis., to Springfield, Mo.,



858



THROUGH ROUTES AND JOINT RATES, 11 (2) (w) (x)



routed by complainant via Chicago and
St. Louis, a charge of 38%c was as-
sessed. The shipments might have
moved upon a 25c rate over several
other routes. By mistake of defendants
the cars were shipped to East St. Louis
instead of St. Louis, and were subjected
for that reason to an unnecessary l^c
bridge toll, making the charge * 38^c
instead of 37c. The charge exacted was
made up of a joint through rate from
Wautoma via Chicago to East St. Louis
of 20c, and a local rate from East St.
Louis to Springfield of 18 y 2 c. The dis-
tance from Wautoma to East St. Louis
is 489 miles. Excluding the bridge toll
of lV 2 c, the 17c local rate exacted from
East St. Louis to Springfield was estab-
lished by the Missouri commission.
HELD, complainant was not entitled to
recover on the basis of the 25c rate
over other routes since it routed the
shipments itself; that satisfactory
through routes being already in exist-
ence the Commission could not estab-
lish through routes and joint rates be-
tween Wautoma and Springfield, and
could not therefore award reparation
on the basis of the unreasonableness of
the charge exacted; but that complain-
ant should be awarded reparation for
the iy 2 c bridge toll unnecessarily in-
curred. Stedman v. C. & N. W. Ry.
Co., 13 I. C. C. 167, 169, 170.

(w) Complainant manufacturers at
Little Rock, Ark., asked for the estab-
lishment of through routes and joint
rates on cottonseed in carloads from
points on the Midland Valley R. R., in
Oklahoma, to Little Rock, via the M. V.
and the C. R. I. & P. Rys. Under the
arrangement attacked, cottonseed was
carried over the M. V. R. R. to Hart-
ford at the local rate. Complainants
were there compelled to unload, trans-
fer and reload same, and pay the local
rate over the C. R. I. & P. Ry. to Little
Rock. Defendant M. V. R. R. opposed
the establishment of through routes and
joint rates on the ground that manu-
facturers of cottonseed products were
located upon its line at Fort Smith,
Ark., and Muskogee, Okla., and that by
carrying the products to those cities it
also obtained the outbound shipments
of the manufactured products. Defend-
ant M. V. R. R.'s course, while beneficial
to the manufacturers at Muskogee and
Fort Smith, was detrimental to tiie pro-
ducers of cottonseed who would be bene-
fited by the competition of manufac-



turers at Little Rock. HELD, joint
through rates and routes should be es-
tablished between the points in ques-
tion at a rate not to exceed the sum
of the locals, since a carrier owed
duties to any persons offering goods for
shipment, whether living on or off its
lines. Merchants' Freight Bureau of
Little Rock, Ark., v. Midland Valley R.
R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 243, 245.

(x) The excess output of coal from
Illinois fields was largely limited to
western and southern Wisconsin, south-
ern Minnesota, eastern Nebraska, Souin
Dakota and northern Iowa. The Wil-
mington field lies about 50 miles south-
west of Chicago. The other fields in
the northern Illinois group of mines
are the Third Vein and Peoria fields,
the former lying about 50 miles west
of the Wilmington field, and the latter
about 60 miles southwest of the Third
Vein. In the Wilmington and Third
Vein fields coal was mined under sub-
stantially similar conditions and at
about the same cost. The cost of min-
ing in the Peoria field was about 25c
per ton less than in either of the other
two fields. Cardiff, at which point com-
plainant conducted its mining opera-
tions, was at the extreme south end of
the Wilmington field and was rea:hei
by the Wabash and the Chicago, Indi-
ana & Southern R. Rs. Six or eight
miles north of Cardiff was the town of
Wilmington, served by the Elgin, Joliet
& Eastern Ry. The mines of Wilming-
ton enjoyed the benefit of through
routes and joint rates via the E. J. &
E. Ry. to all points on the line of the
C. M. & St. P. Ry. Neither of the two
last mentioned roads reached complain-
ant's mine at Cardiff. But a reasonably
direct outlet to points on the line of
the St. Paul could be had over the C.
I. & S. R. R., connecting with the St.
Paul at McNab and Seatonville. Like
routes could be had over the Wabash
R. R. through Chicago. Formerly
through routes and joint rates were in
effect through Seatonville to points on
the line of the C. M. & St. P. Ry. During
that period complainant was able to mar-
ket its coal to points on the C. M. & St. P.
Ry. Such routes and rates were can-
celed, and thereafter complainant was
unable To market its coal at these
points, and asked that they be re-estab-
lished over both the C. I. & S. R. R.
and the Wabash R. R. The C. M. & St.
P. Ry. opposed such course on the



THROUGH ROUTES AND JOINT RATES, 11 (2) (y) 13



859



ground that it was able to supply such
points on its line from mines located
at Seatonville on shipments from which
it received the entire revenue of the
haul, whereas if the routes and rates
requested were established it would be
obliged to divide the revenue with the
C.. I. & S. R. R. Every mine in the
Wilmington field, if not every mine in
the Third Vein field, enjoyed the routes
and rates to the points on the C. M. & St.
P. Ry. which complainant desired to reach.
HELD, through routes and joint rates
should be established over one of the
two routes as demanded. An interstate
carrier may not, in order to build up
enterprises on its own line and prevent
the trade of its local industries from
being displaced by the competition of
commodities on connecting lines, deny
to industries on connecting lines the
benefit of through routes and joint rates
nor may it deny such routes and rates
in order to prevent a division of rev-
enue with the connecting carrier. The
granting of the routes and rates prayed
for is not in violation of section 3 of
the Act providing that no carrier shall
be required to give the use of its
equipment to another carrier engaged in
like business. Cardiff Coal Co. v. C.
M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 13 P. C. C. 460,
465, 470.

(y) Following the decision in Cardiff
Coal Co. v. C. M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 13
I. C. C. 460, the C. & N. W. Ry. is or-
dered to join with the C. I. & S Ry. in
establishing through routes from coal
mines at Cardiff, 111., to all strictly local
points on the line of the C. & N. W. Ry.
in the states of Michigan, Wisconsin,
Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota and Ne-
braska, no order being entered with re-
spect to competitive points on said line.
Cardiff Coal Co. v. C. & N. W. Ry. Co.,
13 I. C. C. 471, 472.

(z) Complainant, a steamship com-
pany plying between Benton Harbor,
Mich., and Chicago, received fruit at
Benton Harbor from defendant railway
and carried the same on a through
route and joint rate from the fruit
growers' farms in the neighborhood of
Benton Harbor to Chicago. Defendant
canceled said route and rate with com-
plainant, refused to renew same, and
made an exclusive arrangement for such
a route and rate with complainant's
competitor plying between such points.
Complainant and its competitor had di-



vided the fruit traffic to Chicago almost
equally between them. The boats of
the competitor on reaching Chicago
came up at right angles to the end of
competitor's wharf, and the packages
had to be carried the full length of the
wharf, some 310 ft., to the wagons of
the fruit dealers at Chicago. This situ-
ation had resulted in congestion, delay-
ing the delivery of fruit to the dealers
and occasioning losses. Complainant's
wharf was further off from the whole-
sale houses of the dealers, but was situ-
ated more conveniently for unloading
into the dealers' wagons. Complainant
demanded the re-establishment of a
joint rate and through route. To deny
same would have destroyed complain-
ant and resulted in throwing its traffic
entirely to its competitor, which would
have been unable to deliver the same
expeditiously to the Chicago dealers.
HELD, the rate and route demanded
should be established. Benton Transit
Co. v. Benton Harbor, St. Joe Ry. &
Light Co., 13 I. C. C. 542, 548.

III. BILLS OF LADING.

See Bills of Lading, II, 3 (a); Ex-
port Rates and Facilities, II; Rout-
ing and Misrouting, 3.

12. Issuance in General.

(a) No legal obligation rests on a
rail carrier to give a through bill of
lading covering movement by water be-
yond its line, but the practice of with-
holding through bills of lading, except
as to certain preferred water lines, is
illegal discrimination. Mobile Chamber
of Commerce v. M. & O. R. R. Co., 23
I. C. C. 417, 424.

(b) A bill of lading issued by a rail
carrier, covering the inland rail and also
the ocean haul, is not strictly a through
bill of lading. Mobile Chamber of Com-
merce v. M. & O. R. R. Co., 23 I. C. C.
417, 425.



IV. REASONABLENESS
THROUGH RATES.



OF



13. In General.

See Advanced Rates, 3 (a), (c), 5
(2) (f)- Any-Quantity Rate, I (c) ;
Blanket Rates, 7 (i), 10 (a), 11
(a); Branch Lines, 1 (h); Classi-
fication, 18 (5) (a); Commutation
Fares (a); Evidence, 13 (6) (m),
64 (t) ; Proportional Rates, IV
(i), (k); Reasonableness of Rates,
7 (a), 10 (b), 28 (ff), (q), 56
(a).



860



THROUGH ROUTES AND JOINT RATES, 13 (a) (e)



(a) While southern carriers may
properly meet from both Oklahoma and
Fort Worth via Memphis and Vicksburg
the rates on packing-house products and
fresh meats established via St. Louis
to New York and other eastern terri-
tory, the Commission cannot recognize
the force of the contention that the
rate itself should be established through
these gateways. In Re Advances on
Meats and Packing-House Products, 23
I. C. C. 656, 669.

(aa) Defendants' tariffs named a pro-
portional rate of 18c per 100 pounds from
Omaha, Neb., to Little Rock, Ark., on
grain and grain products destined to
Conway and Morrilton, points lying be-
tween Little Rock and Memphis, Tenn.,
with a milling-in-transit privilege at Lit-
tle Rock. The tariffs provided for an
additional charge for out-of-line hauls of
lc per 100 pounds for 40 and over 5
miles; l^c for 60 and over 40 miles.
The distance from Little Rock to Con-
way is 30 miles, and to Morrilton, 50
miles. Defendants under this tariff ex-
acted extra charges of iy 2 c to Conway
and 2 l / 2 c to Morriltoa, under a provi-
sion in the tariffs that in assessing these
extra charges the difference between the
mileage a shipment actually traveled via
a transit point and the mileage via the
shortest route from point of origin to
destination should be considered the
mileage of the out-of-line haul. The
short-line distance from Omaha to Con-
way is 695 miles via Coffeyville, Kan.,
while the distance via Little Rock is 738
miles, a difference of 43 miles, for which
the out-of-line charge was l%c, according
to the tariff. By a similar test the out-
of-line haul from Omaha to Morrilton is
83 miles, for which the out-of-line charge,
acocrdance with the tariff and were not
HELD, that the charges exacted were in
acordance with the tariff and were not
shown to be unreasonable. Brook-Rauch
Mill & Elevator Co. v. St. L., I M. & S.
Ry. Co., 22 I. C. C. 249.

(b) Complainant alleged that there
was undue discrimination against Reno,
in that the rates charged from Reno
to the several points on defendant's
lines were higher than the division of
the joint rate from San Francisco and
from Sacramento received by defendant
for the same hauls. The bulk of the
northbound traffic of the defendant is
through traffic originating in San Fran-
cisco and destined to a competitive ter-



ritory served by the Southern Pacific
and Western Pacific R. Rs. as well as
defendant. The greater part of defend-
ant's business was traffic given it by
the Southern Pacific R. R., and it was,
therefore, compelled to receive from the
Southern Pacific R. R. whatever pro-
portional rates that road would give it, as
otherwise the Southern Pacific R. R.
could deprive it of the haul. The West-
ern Pacific R. R., recently built, was
also a very serious competitor to de-
fendant. HELD, that good reasons ex-
ist why the through rate may be less
than the combination rate via Reno,
and that the proportional rate therefore
affords no criterion as to the reason-
ableness of the local rate, and, there-
fore, no discrimination was shown to
exist. On account of the severe compe-
tition of the Western Pacific, recently
completed, and the fact that defendant
has from time to time appeared to
reduce its rates to suit new conditions,
any further reduction by the Commis-
sion at present seems unwarranted,
especially as local rates in Nevada and
other small roads were on an excep-
tionally high scale. Therefore, the rates
cannot be held to be unreasonable. Rail-
road Commission of Nevada v. N. C. O.
Ry. and S. V. Ry. Co., 22 I. C. C. 205.

(c) Complainant shipped lumber, C.
L., Woolam, Miss., to Owensburg, Ind..
under a combination rate of 27c per 100
Ibs. At the time of shipment a joint
rate of 24c applied between these
points, but via another gateway. Via
the route shipment moved the carriers
had not agreed on any division. HELD,
as the joint tariff established a 24c
rate via all junctions of the carriers
parties thereto, the shipper could not
be assumed to know via which gateway
divisions had been agreed upon, and on
that account could not be assessed a
higher rate. Reparation awarded. Hett-
ler Lumber Co. v. G. & S. I. R. R. Co.,
21 I. C. C., 14.

(d) Where the cancelation of joint
through rates will result in higher
charges from origin to destination, the
burden is on the carrier to prove the
reasonableness of the increased rate.
In Re Investigation and Suspension
Docket 28, 21 I. C. C. 455, 456.

(e) The L. & N. R. R. Co. published
a rate of 93c per 100 Ibs. on carloads
of mixed furniture from Evansville, Ind.,



THROUGH ROUTES AND JOINT RATES, 13 (f) (m)



861



to El Paso, Tex. The connecting car-
riers had not consented. Connecting
carriers had participated in the tariff
of southwestern lines that carried the
93c rate between the points mentioned,
but the L. & N. had not concurred in
that tariff. The L. & N. R. R. admitted
the reasonableness of the 93c rate.
Charges were collected on a combina-
tion aggregating $1 per 100 Ibs. Sub-
sequent to date of shipment defendants
filed a specific joint commodity rate of
89c per 100 Ibs. HELD, the combina-
tion of rates exacted to have been un-
reasonable and reparation awarded, as
prayed, for the amount collected in ex-
cess of 93c per 100 Ibs. Texico Trans-
fer Co. v. L. & N. R. R. Co., 20 I. C. C.
17.

(f) A carrier may not lawfully make
rates to a given point on its line on
traffic going beyond by wagon or other
similar conveyance which are lower
than its established rates to that point
as a final destination. Bayou City Rice
Mills v. T. & N. O. R. R. Co., 18 I. C.
C. 490, 493.

(g) On the question of the reason-
ableness of through lumber rates from
the yellow pice district in the South to
Omaha, to sustain which the local fac-
tors at the St. Louis combination were
advanced so as to make the combination
as high as the through rate in question,
it is immaterial that there has been a
reduction in the Nebraska state rates
by the state commission and that to
any Nebraska points the rates make
the combination on Omaha, since the
rate dealt with is the rate from the
points of origin in question to Omaha
and not the combination rates to Ne-
braska points. Commercial Club of
Omaha v. Anderson & Saline River Ry.
Co., 18 I. C. C. 532, 536.

(h) On a carload of buckwheat
shipped from Gobies, Mich., to Janes-
ville, Wis., complainant was assessed
2iy 2 c. The combination of locals
through Chicago was 14c. Shortly after
the shipment moved defendants estab-
lished a through rate of 14c. Defend-
ants admitted the rate charged to be
unreasonable and that 14c was a rea-
sonable rate. HELD, the 21 %c rate was
unreasonable. Reparation awarded on
the basis of 14c. Blodgett Milling Co.
v. C. M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 17 I. C. C.
587.



(i) On through shipments differences
in distance are not important in con-
sidering rates. Avery Manufacturing
Co. v. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 16 I. C. C.
20, 22.

(j) On shipments of sundry groceries
in less-than-carload packages from St.
Paul, Minn., to Lemmon, S. D., and from
St. Paul to Hettinger, N. D., complain-
ant was charged the combination of
local rates based on the Missouri River,
and amounting, from St. Paul to Lem-