Indiana. Shipping Interests.

Answer of the shipping interests of Indiana and the Indianapolis Freight Bureau to the remarks of Mr. G. J. Grammer at conference held on November 19th, 1906, between the Indiana Railroad Commission and special committees representing the raliroads and commercial bodies of larger cities of the state online

. (page 6 of 8)
Online LibraryIndiana. Shipping InterestsAnswer of the shipping interests of Indiana and the Indianapolis Freight Bureau to the remarks of Mr. G. J. Grammer at conference held on November 19th, 1906, between the Indiana Railroad Commission and special committees representing the raliroads and commercial bodies of larger cities of the state → online text (page 6 of 8)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


59%



57



Sheet 36.

COMPARATIVE RATES SHOWING INEQUALITIES OPERATING

AGAINST INDIANAPOLIS INTERESTS.

Special Commodity Rates to Points in Indian Territory.

Iron and Steel Articles. C. L.

♦Rate from Indianapolis
Rate from Rate from Cincinnati should take

Chgo. rates.



48
48



To—


Chicago.


St


. Paul.


Territory.


C. R. I. & P. Ry.












Caston to












McAlester,


48




49




57


Midland Valley Ry












Muskogee,


48




49




57


M. K. & T. Ry.












Vinita to












McAlester,


48




49




57


Mo. Pacific Ry.












Polston to












Ft. Gibson,


4S




49




57


M. 0. & G. Ry.












Wagoner to












Muskogee,


48




49




57


St. L. & S. F. Ry.












Vinita to












Claremore, )












Ft. Gibson, )


48




49




57


Muskogee, )












* Applies from


Indianapolis


as


intermediate.




I. & 0. C. Committee Tariff 1-H, Suppl


emei


it 4, Ite



4S



48



4S



48



614.

Sheet 37.

COMPARATIVE RATES SHOWING INEQUALITIES OPERATING

AGAINST INDIANAPOLIS INTERESTS.

Special Commodity Rates to Points in Indian Territory.

Stoves. C. L.

♦Rate from Indianapolis
Rate from Rate from Cincinnati should take



To—
C. R. I.

Caston



Chicago.



& P. Ry.
to

McAlester, 55

M. K. & T. Ry.
Rentiesville to

McAlester, 55

Midland Valley Ry.

Muskogee, 48

M. K. & T. Ry.
Vinita to

Muskogee, 48

Mo. Pacific Ry.
Polston to

Ft. Gibson, 48

M. O. & G. Ry.
Wagoner to

Muskogee, 48

St. L. & S. F. Ry.
Vinita to

Muskogee, 48

♦Applies from Indianapolis as

I. & O. C. Committee Tariff 1



St. Paul.



56



Territory. Chgo. rates.



56
49



49



49



49



67



67



67



67



67



67



67



55



55

48



48



4S



4S



49

intermediate.
H, Supplement 4,



4S



Item 616.



58



Sheet 38.

COMPARATIVE RATES SHOWING INEQUALITIES OPERATING

AGAINST INDIANAPOLIS INTERESTS.

Special Commodity Rates to Points in Indian Territory.

Woodenware. C. L.



Rate from
To — Chicago.

A. T. & S. F. Ry.

Tulsa. 64

Midland Valley Ry.
Tulsa to

Muskogee, 64

M. K. & T. Ry.
Vlnita to

Muskogi 64

Mo. Pacific Ry.
Polston to

Ft. Gibson, 64

M. 0. & G. Ry.

Mllcl' to

Muskogee, 64

SI . 9 F. Ry.
Vlnita to

Muskogee, 64

C. R. I. & P. Ry.
Caston to

McA1.-sI.m-, 69

M. K. & T. Ry.
Oak-ta-ha to

McAlester, 69



Rate from
St. Paul.

6b



•;r,



66



66



66



66



♦Rate from
Cincinnati
Territory.

80



SO



71



SO



so



Ml



80



SO



Ml



Indianapolis

should take

Chgo. rates.

64



64



64



64



64



64



69



69



•Applies from Indianapolis as intermediate.

I. A C. Committee Tariff 1-H, Supplement 4, Item 617.



59



2


3


4


5


A


83


73


55


43


45


20


10


5


5


7%


103


83


60


48


52%


4


3


2


1


2


107


86


62


49


54%



Sheet 39.

COMPARATIVE RATES SHOWING INEQUALITIES OPERATING

AGAINST INDIANAPOLIS INTERESTS.

Class Rates to Indian Territory and Oklahoma.

To Vinita, I. T. 1

From St. Louis 105

Chicago Differentials over St. Louis 20

Through Rate from Chicago 125

St. Paul Differentials over Chicago 5

Through Rate from St. Paul 130

Rate from Indianapolis:

(Cincinnati Territory Rate) 148 124 102 85 67 74

To Muskogee I. T.

Ft. Gibson, " "

Wagoner, " "

Claremore, " "

From St. Louis 115

Chicago Differentials over St. Louis 20

Through Rate from Chicago 135

St. Paul Differentials over Chicago 5

Through Rate from St. Paul 138

Rate from Indianapolis:

(Cincinnati Territory Rate) 148

To McAlester, I. T —

From St. Louis 120

Chicago Differentials over St. Louis 20

Through Rate from Chicago 140

St. Paul Differentials over Chicago 5

Through Rate from St. Paul 145

Rate from Indianapolis:

(Cincinnati Territory Rate) ..... 148 124 102 85 67 74



100


80


64


48


51


20


10


5


5


7%


120


90


69


53


58 y 2


4


3


2


1


2


124


93


71


54


60%


124


102


85


67


74


100


85


69


55


57


20


10


5


5


7%


120


95


74


60


64%


4


3


2


1


2


124


98


76


61


66%



60



Sheet 40.

COMPARATIVE RATES SHOWING INEQUALITIES OPERATING

AGAINST INDIANAPOLIS INTERESTS.

Class Rates to Indian Territory and Oklahoma.

To Newkirk. O. T — 1 2 3 4 5 A

From St. Louis 126 104 88 72 60 60

Chicago Differentials over St. Louis 20 20 10 5 5 7%

Through Rate from Chicago 146 124 98 77 65 67%

St. Paul Differentials over Chicago 5 4 3 2 12

Through Rate from St. Paul 151 12S 101 79 66 69y 3

Rate from Indianapolis:

(Cincinnati Territory Rate) 150 129 109 94 74 7 1

To Pawnee, O. T. —

Prom St. Louis 128 106 93 78 64 63

Chicago Differentials over St. Louis 20 20 10 5 5 7%

Through Rate from Chicago..^..... 148 126 103 83 69 70%

St. Paul Differentials over Chicago .14 3 2 12

Through Rate from St. Paul 153 130 106 85 70 .i M _.

Rate from [ndianapolis:

(Cincinnati Territory Rate) 150 129 109 94 74 74

To Chandler, O. T.

Guthrie, " "

Oklahoma City, " "

Prom St. Louis 130 109 97 84 67 65

Chicago Differentials over St. Louis 20 20 10 5 5 7%

Through Hate from Chicago 150 129 107 89 7U 72%

St. Paul Differentials over Chicago 5 4 3 2 12

Through Rate from St Paul 155 133 110 91 73 74%

Rate from Indianapolis:

(Cincinnati Territory Rate) 150 129 109 94 74 74



61



Sheet 45.

COMPARATIVE RATES SHOWING INEQUALITIES OPERATING
AGAINST INDIANAPOLIS INTERESTS.

Commodity Rates to Indian Territory and Oklahoma.
Commodity, C. L.



fi



Bagging, clayed,

Beer,

Canned Goods,

Cotton Piece Goods, (anyqnty.)

Electric Machinery,

Beds, iron and brass,

Springs Beds,

Metallic Couch Frames,

Metallic Mattresses,
Metallic Cots and Cribs,

Iron Beds,



I



Iron and Steel Articles,

Structural Iron,

Jelly,

Preserves,

Fruit Butter,

Mince Meat,

Packing House Products,

Paints,

Paper, (mixed C.

Paper, wrapping,

Roofing and Buildin

Roofing Cement,

Stoves, (Air-tight

Stoves and Stove

Tin Articles,

Vehicles,

Woodenware,

♦Applies from Indpls. as

xTo Group 5 points.

I & O. Conference Committee Tariff 1-H.











Indpls.








*Rate


should


Rate


Rate


Rate


from


have


■om St.


from


from St.


Cincti.


Chgo.


Louis.


Chgo.


Paul.


Ter'ty.


Rate.


70


75


76


77


75


48


53


54


55


53


48


53


54


55


53


113


128


133


133


128


79


.86%


88%


88


86%


53


58


59


65


58


x58


x63


x64


65


63


49


54


55


61


54


x54


x59


x60


61


59


50


55


56


57


55


oO


55


56


57


55



L.)

Paper )
)
heaters)
Furniture,



49

x60
55
75
55

54

96
60
75

74
70



54

x65
60
80
60
59

101
65

80

81%

75



55

x66
61
81
61
61

103
66

82

83%

77



56

x67
62
82
62
61

106
67
85
83
80



54

xG">
60
80
60
59

101
65

80

81%

75



intermediate.



62



Sheet 46.

COMPARATIVE RATES SHOWING INEQUALITIES OPERATING
AGAINST INDIANAPOLIS INTERESTS.
Special Commodity Rates to Indian Territory.
Machinery, I



for usr of coal mines.



Indianapolis
Rate from sh'ld have







Rate from


Rate from


Cincinnati


Chicago


To—




St.


Louis.


Chicago.


Territory.


Rate.


C. R. I. & P. Ry.—














Alderson,








49%c


74c


&c


Baker,






>.


14


11




Coalgi








'*


83


• .


Craig,








*'


■•


if


Donman,










74




Edwards,










83


ft


1 [aileyville,






(1




71


ff


Hartshorne,






II




'*


(t


Hughes,






..




11


■ 1


Lutie,






if




71




Shaft No. 3,










**


ft


McAlester,






ft






tt


Milhurton,






ft




.-


it


Ft. S. & W. Ry -














Bokoshe,






((




II




Feather ston,






• 4




ft


II


Mci Jurtain,






f f






tt


Midland Valley Ry.—














Bokoshe,






(f




> .


ff


Maney,






If




11


41


Stig






4f




. I


ft


M. K. & T. Ry —














Carbon,






1 f




t(


I*


Chambers,






ft




83


ft


Coal gate,






11




ft


t.


Drumo,






If




71


tt


Savana,






11




83


If


.loll ns villc






ff




f f


t t


Krebs,






f<




74


If


Lehigh,






f<




83


..


McAlestei-,






f '




74


ft


Midway,






f •




83


t .


No. McAlester,






f '




74


(1


Wilburton,






(1




74


II


M. 0. .v- G. Ry.—














Henryetta,






ft




II


f f


St. L. & S. F. Ry —














meron,














ton,






"


..


71


..


toosa,










f f




\ anal,





















..




tt


If


Claremore,






f f




f f


If


Dawson.






If




If


II


noyall.






(1




71


11


Tulsa.






"




ft


11


Tulsa, (A. T. & S.


F


Ry


) "




.74




* Applies for


[ndpl


s. as in


termediate.






I. & (). Com. Tan


ff


1-H


, items


384 and 385.







63

Chairman Indianapolis Freight Committee,

Indianapolis, Incl.

Dear Sir: — Please refer to Arkansas Freight Com-
mittee Tariff Xo. 1-H and Territorial Directory ID, nam-
ing rates to Arkansas common points, under the differen-
tial basis applied from Chicago-Cincinnati territory. We
call your attention to the fact that on certain commodities
the differentials are not applicable on shipments originat-
ing east of the Indiana-Illinois state line, which traffic
must pay local rates to East St. Louis; these include ve-
hicles, furniture, woodenware and chairs, all being impor-
tant factors in Indianapolis traffic; however, this restric-
tion on the commodities named is waived in so far as
Cincinnati, Louisville, New Albany, Evansville, also Chi-
cago are concerned, and the traffic from those points is
moved on the basis of differentials to East St. Louis. In
other words, Indianapolis interests are ignored and our
traffic shut out from the territory in question. The en-
closed exhibit, our Sheets 41 and 42, illustrate how severe-
ly this hardship works out in its application to our manu-
facturing and shipping interests.

Noticing the exhibit on vehicles, Chicago and Cincin-
nati get to East St. Louis for 9c per cwt., Louisville for 4c
while Indianapolis pays 16c.

On woodenware Louisville is charged 5c, Cincinnati
and Chicago 10c, while Indianapolis pays 16c. Bay City,
Detroit and Toledo pay but 20c and Grand Rapids 19c.

On furniture Louisville pays 4c, Chicago and Cincinnati
9c, while Indianapolis pays 32c. Detroit gels there for
32i/ 2 c and Grand Rapids for 30i/ 2 c.

On chairs Louisville is charged 5c, Chicago and Cin-
cinnati 8c, while Indianapolis pays 55' oc. Detroit pays
but 42c and Grand Rapids 37c.

Such an arrangement of rates is so utterly unreason-
able and unjust and discriminat ion so palpable in enforc-
ing arbitrary restrictions of this kind that we deem it un-



64



necessary to go into any argument, and merely make
known to you thai we shall expecl the initial carriers at
Indianapolis to sec to ii thai immediate action is taken
to remove these disabilities and give [ndianapolis traffic
the same favorable and free conditions to work under as
enjoyed by our competitive manufacturing and shipping
centers.

Please gel this before your Committee for early con-
sideration and recommendation for our relief by author-
izing the use of differentials on all commodities from In-
dianapolis, advising what action is taken and oblige,

Very truly yours,



< 'ominissioner.



Oct. 27, 1906.



Sheet 41.



COMPARATIVE RATES SHOWING INEQUALITIES OPERATING

AGAINST INDIANAPOLIS INTERESTS.

To Arkansas Common Points.

Furniture, C. L.

Grand Rapids to Chicago,

Chicago to E. St. Louis,

Grand Rapids to E. St. Louis,

Detroit to Chicago,

Chicago to E. St. Louis,

Detroit to E. St. Louis,

Chicago i<> E. St. Louis,

Cincinnati to E. St. Louis,

Louisville to E. St. Louis,

Indianapolis to E. St. Louis,
Tariff Authorities —

Arkansas Freight Committee
L. S. & M. S. A-Hi!»s.
Chairs, Cane, Wood or Veneer Seat, C

Grand Rapids to Chicago,

Chicago to E. St. Louis.

Grand Rapids to E. St. Louis,

Detroit to Chicai

Chicago to E. St. Louis.

Detroit to E. St. Louis,

Chicago to 1-:. St. Louis,

Cincinnati to E. St. Louis.

Louisville to E. St. Louis,

[ndianapolis to B. St. Louis,

Tariff Authorities—

Arkansas Freight Committee Tariff
L. S. & M. S. A-1698.



Rate.
2iy 2 c
9

30 y 2

23y 2 c

9
32 %

9c

9


Basis.
Commodity 3rd-class
Class A Differential.

Commodity 3rd-class
Class A Differential.

Class A Differential.

• > ii II


4
32


it a t .

2nd-class.


Tariff


1-H.


. L.

27c

8

35

:\-2c

8
40

8

8


Commodity 2nd-class.
Class B Differential.

Commodity 2nd-class.
Class B Differential.

Class B Differential.

. . ii • •


3
55%


II II ii

No carload rating.



lVa any quantity.



1-H.



65

Sheet 42.

COMPARATIVE RATES SHOWING INEQUALITIES OPERATING
AGAINST INDIANAPOLIS INTERESTS.

To Arkansas Common Points.
Woodenware. C. L. Rate. Basis.

Chicago to E. St. Louis, 10c 4th-class Differential.

Cincinnati to E. St. Louis, 10

Louisville to E. St. Louis, 5 " "

Indianapolis to E. St. Louis, 16 4th-class local rate.

Tariff Authorities —

Arkansas Freight Committee Tariff 1-H.
Vehicles, C. L.

Chicago to E. St. Louis, 9c Class A Differential.

Cincinnati to E. St. Louis, 9

Louisville to E. St. Louis, 4 " "

Indianapolis to E. St. Louis, 16 4th-class.

Tariff Authorities —

Arkansas Freight Committee Tariff 1-H.
C. C. C. & St. L. 447-A 212.
Vandalia, 2340 1905.

Chairman Indianapolis Freight Committee,

Indianapolis, hid.

Dear Sir: — Please note enclosed exhibit, our Sheet
43, showing rating on chairs, carloads, to St. Louis prop-
er, from Grand Rapids at 50c, Detroit 55c, Louisville 35c,
while Indianapolis pays r>si..c.

The rates from (hand Rapids and Detroit under C. F.
A. authority are on the basis of 2nd-class rate to Chicago,
and we are entitled to the same consideration and ask that
carload rating. on chairs, Indianapolis To St. Louis, be
authorized on the basis of 2d-class, 34c per cwt., and urge
that this be done without delay. Our interests are suf-
fering under the present unjust arrangement of rates, and
should have immediate relief.

Please have this subject considered by your Commit-
tee at the earliest dale possible, and recommending the ad-
justment asked for, advising your action and oblige,

Very truly yours,



< Jommissioner.

Oct, 29. 190(5.



66



Sheet 43.



COMPARATIVE RATES SHOWING INEQUALITIES OPERATING
AGAINST INDIANAPOLIS INTERESTS.

To St. Louis. Missouri.
Chairs. Cane, Wood or
Veneer Seat, C. L
Grand Rapids to Chicago,
Chicago to St. Louis,

Through,
Detroil to Chicago,
Chicago to St. Louis.

Through,
Louisville i Ky. i to St. Louis,
Indiana ] olis to St. Louis.



Rate.


Basis


27c


Commodity 2nd-class


23


Ith


50






Commodity 2nd-c


-


ith ••


55






Kansas City rate.




No carload rating.



•Southern Ry. Tariff C-802
Kansas City rate as maximum.



iy 2 any quantity.



Chairman Indianapolis Freight Committee,

Indianapolis, Ind.

Dear Sir: — We call your attention to enclosed ex-
hibit, our Sheet No. 14, showing discrepancy in current
rates on furniture as specified, C. L., when destined to in-
terior Kentucky and Tennessee points.

Note thai od shipments from St. Louis the 4th-class
17c per cwt., applies as proportional rate, E. St. Louis to
Ohio River Crossings, while Indianapolis pays classifica-
tion rate, 2nd-class, 22c per cwt. On the minimum weight
prescribed, viz.: 18000 lhs.. our shippers have to pay $9.00
per car more freight, am! on a 20000-lb load $10.00 more
per car than the same traffic from St. Louis. Thedistam -
are: E. St. Louis to Louisville, l'71 miles, and to Cincin-
nati ."'..'Hi, while from Indianapolis is 11(> miles to either
point. We ask for the same basis as in effect from St.
Louis, viz.: tth-class, as proportional rate to thje Ohio
River Crossings, which would be 1_'-e from Indianapolis.

Please have ihis considered by your Committee, trust-
ing there will he do opposition to recommending favorably
to the Central Freight Association at the November meet-
ings for the relief asked, advising the action of your
< /ommittee,

Very trulv yours,



Commissioner.



67

Sheet 44.

COMPARATIVE RATES SHOWING INEQUALITIES OPERATING
AGAINST INDIANAPOLIS INTERESTS.

To Interior Kentucky and Tennessee Points.

Furniture, C. L. as specified:
Beds, iron ;

Spring Beds, compressed;
Metallic Mattresses, Cots and Cribs.

From From

E. St. Louis Indianapolis

To

Cincinnati, Louisville, Jefferson-

ville and New Albany.







Difference


Minimum Rate


Rate


in favor


any length 4th-class


2nd-class


of East


car. Basis. Charge.


Weight. Basis. Charge.


St. Louis.


18000 lbs. 17c $30.60


18000 22c $39.60


$ 9.00


20000 lbs. 17 34.00


20000 22 44.00


10.00


Tariff Authorities.


Distance.


Miles.


St. Louis, Cincinnati, Louisville


E. St. Louis to Cincinnati, 336


Freight Committee B-50, Amend-


" " " " Louisville, 271


ment No. 1.


Indianapolis to Cincinnati, 110


C. & O. R. 48.


" Louisville, 110



chairman Indianapolis Freight Committee,

Indianapolis, Ind.

Dear Sir :- — We present herewith exhibit, our Sheets
47 and 48, showing the hardship imposed upon Indianap-
olis traffic destined to Texas and Arkansas common points,
on certain commodities where part car lots in excess of
full carloads are charged at L. C. L. rates, while similar
shipments of same commodities from Chicago, Milwaukee,
Cincinnati, Louisville and other competitive cities are
taken applying the carload rating on such part lots.

The through carload rates within the minimum
weights prescribed are the same on Texas traffic from In-
dianapolis, Cincinnati, Chicago and Milwaukee, and on
all traffic to Arkansas points excepting the restricted com-
modities as to differentials, the basis is the same. Note
the exhibit, on vehicles to Texas, shipments with part lots
weighing 3000 lbs., 4000 lbs. and 5000 lbs., respectively.



68

[ndianapolis pays $44.25, |59.00 and $73.75 more freighl
than exactly similar shipments made from Chicago, Mil-
waukee and Cincinnati via routes passing through [ndi-
anapolis, and still greater differences in favor of Louis-
ville. Again, note the exhibil for Arkansas points on ship-
ments of vehicles from [ndianapolis with pari lots weigh-
ing 3000 Lbs, moo lbs and 5000 lbs. respectively, our ship-
pers pay |56.50, $57.70 and $59.00 more freighl than the
same traffic would be charged from Cincinnati, Chicago or
Milwaukee; and Louisville, with a lower through ran-. 1ms
still greater advantage against [ndianapolis. Note partic-
ularly that from [ndianapolis to Arkansas points a part
lot weighing 5000 lbs. is charged as much as a full carload,
and the total freighl on the shipment equals two full car-
loads.

Other light and bulky commodities are affected in
like manner ami while the restriction complained of is nor
enforced againsl same traffic from tin- other points it
means an advantage deliberately given to the trade of
favored cities and districts over [ndianapolis expressed in
dollars and cents, as shown in exhibit, and is clearly a
mounced discrimination againsl our intereg

Competitive traffic cannol bear such unequal and un-
just conditions imposed arbitrarily by the railroads upon
some localities and not upon others, and our people insist
thar the disability he removed and permit [ndianapolis
shipments to move under the same conditions as d<
traflic from the- other competitive cities mentioned. We
look to the initial carriers at this point to protect our in-
terests and urge immediate action in affording the relief
asked for in this connection, and authorizing the applica-
tion of carload rating on part car lots on all commodities
reated from other points.

Please have this subject considered without delay and
referred to Central Freight Association with recommen-
dation for action by that body at its November meetings,
advising us the action of your Committee, obliging,

Very truly vours,



< 'ommissioner.
Oct. 27, L906.



69



IS b£



h
co

UJ

or

UJ

H

z

co



c



ooi



S^£



LO
CO



CS

to



LO

co
t-





O








D-








<








Z








<
















Q








Z








«a








h


GO
73






co


re






z


o








''Z.






<


re






o


o






<









o

z


3
«♦-






H


O






<






.


DC


(A






UJ


00

<L>






Q.


o






O


X




x:


co






co


UJ


c






P


to








+j






-i


o






<


c






D


re






a


o






UJ


S-






z


re






■"■


Cl






a








z


m

co














£


u






o


V






I


>






co








co








UJ








h








<








DC




■»-




UJ




c




>




o




1-








<




o




0C




E




<

Q.




E

o




2




O




O


o






O


E-


(X



X

I-



I to




-f









-*


■*


10


OS


©


-1-


lO OS




M




*—




Cl


OS


CO


I


Ol





L -_ o




CO




LO




CO


OS


©


~


— J





l> c^


0-ft. Car
Rte. Cl
88




o i




CO




■^


OS


t- t-


3!


T.


r-l T-l




co




: i




CO


r-




01




- 1


— CO
















10




LO




LO














0C 10




L0




10


■*


■*


"


"


"


"


co


co




- -




CT
















CO




1




CO


u ?+^ooooooo


© ©




©




©


,=5 <N





CO


©


a i


~


CO


CO


c




-




©


I bJD">-





t- © t- O t—


t-


c




©




©


[> co


CO


LO


■<*l


CO


10


t-


co


70









LO




CO




: i




C0


CO
















01




01




CO


CO


10


t- ©


01


LO t-


1 g




co




©




co


CO


CO


"*


CM


©


t - LO




to




■*




CO


si


=5


— '





CO


t> CO


So




-




rH




CO


t-


1 -





os


1 -


— CV




:i




CO




CM


rH




1




01


T— CO


o .
















10




10




LO


.5 X














X


I




10




10


?Ci z














CO


77
0]




CO
Cl




c-
co


lO


























•* +J o


~


O


c


o c


©


©




©




©


Xi OO


C


- i


o


ICO


c


CO


CO


3




s




©


1 *,«

p 01


O


CO


O CO O CO


CO







or




©


70


CO


■*


<*


us


LO


©


CO




■<S"




i




: i




01




CO


CO
















s




O




©


OS


CC


10




or


CO LO


q3




|H




-




c-


CO


CC


CO


- 1


— .


t- -*


1 2




•*




01




t^


t— '


©


od


-f'


l-i


t-' LO




OC









©


LO


l-


CO


OS


1-


rH t-


= -'




H




T-




CO


rH




01




co


r- CO


O •
















LO




LO




LO


.5 °°

I 5 "














00


LO




LO'




LO














CO


CO




77




70
















01




eo




CO


,-* +$ o o


S


c


©





©


©


©




©







i r- CO


c


01





01


~


CO


CO


-




00




©


1 J/:£


c


OS


=





~


OS


OS


©




ro




©


CO


s


-t-


T-H


L0


<C0


t-


CO




-r




LO



©

CO

CO



©
c-



©

CO



I fcrj

dS" :

Ji^jo©©©©©©

f ? "P © © © © © © ©

to.©©©©©©©

I 5' CC f " O ■* O LO r-

g T-l T^ Cl CO



© LO LO © © L0 LO
CC © TT Ol © L^ L0

© ©' i-i ■* LO t^ 00

■* t" h os « t- l:

r- CO CO tH CO



LO

X 10

S- - .

CO

© ©
© ©
© ©

© CO



LO



LO



©
©



c af in co
cr r/: _T to „« cc ^_"

•" 0; CI CP rt 0) ct;


1 2 3 4 6 8

Online LibraryIndiana. Shipping InterestsAnswer of the shipping interests of Indiana and the Indianapolis Freight Bureau to the remarks of Mr. G. J. Grammer at conference held on November 19th, 1906, between the Indiana Railroad Commission and special committees representing the raliroads and commercial bodies of larger cities of the state → online text (page 6 of 8)