Copyright
Thomas Johnson Michie.

A treatise on the law of carriers (Volume 4) online

. (page 97 of 214)
Online LibraryThomas Johnson MichieA treatise on the law of carriers (Volume 4) → online text (page 97 of 214)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


Humboldt Steamship Co., 224 U. S. 474, Humboldt Steamship Co., 224 U. S. 474,

56 L. Ed. 849, 32 S. Ct. 556. 56 L. Ed. 849. 32 S. Ct. 556.

86. Alaska is a territory of the United 89. Corporation organized under state
States within the meaning of the Act of law. — Intei state Commerce Comm. v.
June 29, 1906 (34 Stat, at L. 584, chap. Goodrich Trans. Co., 224 U. S. 194, 56 L.
3591, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1909, p. Ed. 729, 32 S. Ct. 436.

1150), extending the provisions of the 90. Omaha, etc., R. Co. v. Interstate

Interstate Commerce Act to carriers en- Commerce Comm.. 191 Fed. 40.

gaged in the transportation of passengers 91. When actually engaged in transpor-

or property from one state or territory tation. — Attorney General v. Union Stock

of the United States to any other state Yard, etc., Co., 192 Fed. 330.



3613 INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT. §§ 3990-3991

rates established and charged by such common carrier to all points in the United
States beyond the foreign country to which it accepts freight for shipment ; and
any freight shipped from the United States through a foreign country into the
United States the through rate on which shall not have been made public, as
required by this act, shall, before it is admitted into the United States from said
foreign country, be subject to customs duties as if said freight were of foreign
production.'^-

Shipment to Foreign Port. — Shipments under a through bill of lading from
an interior point in the United States to a foreign port are embraced in the pro-
visions of the act of February 19, 1903, making it an ofifense against the United
States to obtain the transportation of property in interstate or foreign commerce
at less than the carrier's published rates. '^^

The hauling of empty cars from one state to another is interstate commerce
within the meaning of the act. Such is the view that has obtained with respect
to empty cars in actions based upon the Safety Appliance Act. And the Hke
reason applies to actions founded upon the Employers' Liability Act, which, in-
deed, is in pari materia with the other. ^^

§ 3991. Particular Carriers. — Railroads in General. — The fact that a
railroad lies wholly within one state does not exempt it from the obligations im-
posed by the interstate commerce act, if the transportation over it is part of a
shipment from one state to another, or to or from a foreign country. ^^

Lessor Railroad. — The owner of a railroad, which is leased and operated by
the lessee as a common carrier engaged in interstate commerce, may be required
by the interstate commerce commission to make annual reports, under the Inter-
state Commerce Act, § 20.^*^ A stockyard company operating a railway system
for cars to and from trunk lines in their transportation from and beyond the
state does not cease to be an interstate carrier within the Interstate Commerce
Act, and as such is obliged to file its tariffs under § 6 of the act by leasing its
railway to another corporation for a division of profits.^" Where a railroad
company owning a part of the through route over which oil was transported under
an alleged discriminating rate leased its line to another company, and the lessee,
by virtue of the lease or otherwise, was not a partner, agent, or representative
of the lessor company during the time the former was operating such portion
of the through route, the lessor was not personally liable for violation of the
interstate commerce act by the lessee's participation in such discriminating rate
during the continuance of the lease. ''^

Lessee Railroad. — A railway company operating as lessee for division of
profits a railroad system owned by a stockyard company for the transportation
of cars to and from trunk lines is an interstate carrier within the Interstate Com-
merce Act, and obliged to file its tariffs with the interstate commerce commission
as required by § 6."'* A railroad company chartered by a state owned a short

92. Transportation through foreign A lessor of a railroad to an independent
country. — Act Fel). 4, 1887, § 6. operating company held not a common

93. Shipment to foreign port.— Armour carrier engaged in interstate commerce.
Packing Co. v. United vStates. 209 U. S. within the meanmg of Interstate Com-
5G, 52 L. Ed. 681, 28 S. Ct. 428, affirming merce Act Feb. 4, 1887, § 1, as amended
judgment, 153 Fed. 1, 82 C. C. A., 135, 14 L. '^y -^^^ J""^ 29. 1906, § 1. Attorney Gen-
R. A., N. vS., 400; Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. eral v. Union Stock Yard, etc., Co., 192
United States, 209 U. S. 90, 52 L. Ed. 698, Fed. 330.

28 S. Ct. 439, affirming judgment 157 Fed. 97. United States v. Union Stockyard,

830. ttc. Co.. 226 U. S. 286, 33 S. Ct. 83.

a.A ^- ^\ n r tj r-« -7 i 98. Western New York, etc., R. Co. v.

94- Aorth Carolina R. Co. v. Zachary, y, „ ^ ^ ~n /^ /^ a no -.o-, -c^ j

o-io T^ Q oia •>. c r% ort- Penn Refin. Co., 70 C. C. A. 23, 137 Fed.

iii v.. > .4S, .,4 ^. Lt. .300 3^3^ affirmed in 208 U. S. 208, 52 L. Ed.

95. Railroads m general. — Augusta, etc., 45(5 08 S. Ct. 268.

R. Co. V. Wrightsville, etc., R. Co., 74 99" Lessee ' railroad.— United States v.

l<ed. 522. ^ Union Stock Yard, etc., Co., 226 U. S. 286,

96. Lessor railroad. — Attorney General 33 S. Ct. S3, modifying judgment Attor-
V. Union Stock Yard, etc., Co., 192 Fed. ney General r. Union Stock Yard, etc.,
330. Co., 102 Fed. 330.



carrie:rs.



3614



road wholly in the state, but did not own any rolling stock nor operate the road.
The road was used and operated as a means of conducting interstate traffic in
coal, by companies owning connecting interstate roads. Such road was one of
the facilities and instrumentalities of interstate commerce, and hence the carriers
using it were subject to the provisions of the act to regulate commerce. ^

Sleeping- Car Companies. — The act provides that the term "common carrier"
shall include sleeping car companies. -

Express Companies. — The act now provides that the term "common car-
rier" shall mclude express companies also. The amendment to the Interstate
Commerce Act by the Act of June 29, 1906, brought express companies within
the terms of the act.=^ The express companies are therefore obliged to file and
publish their rates for the transportation of property under the act thus as
amended.'* Express companies, independently organized as corporations for the
transaction of the express business on their own account, are not subject to the
provisions of the Interstate Commerce Act.'^

Electric Railway Companies. — It seems an electric street railway doing an
interstate business in the carriage of passengers, although incorporated under the
street railroad statutes of a state, and not authorized to carry freight, nor vested
with the right of eminent domain, is not a railroad within the Interstate Com-
merce Act.*'

Carriers by Water. — When engaged in carrying on traffic under joint rates
with railroads, filed with the commission, carriers by water are bound to deal
upon like terms with all shippers who seek to avail themselves of such joint rates,.



1. Heck V. East Tennessee, etc., R. Co.,
1 Interst. Com. R. 495.

2. Sleeping car companies. — Act June
18, 1910, ch. 309, Fed. St. Anno. Supp.
1912, p. 11.3.

3. Express companies. — Act June 18,
1910, ch. 309, Fed. St. Anno. Supp. 1912,
p. 113.

A joint-stock company doing a general
express business, having filed its sched-
ule of rates with the Interstate Commerce
Commission, held a quasi corporation, and
subject to indictment as _ a legal entity
for discrimination and violation of the
Interstate Commerce Act, as amended by
the Hepburn Act. United States v.
American Exp. Co., 199 Fed. 321.

By the provision of Hepburn Act June
29, 1906, c. 3591, § 1, 34 Stat. 584 (U. S.
Comp. St. Supp. 1907. p. 892), amendatory
of Interstate Commerce Act Feb. 4, 1887,
c. 104, § 1, 24 Stat. 379 (U. S. Comp. St.
1901, p. 3154), that "the term 'common
carrier' as used in this act shall include
express companies," such companies are
made subject to all provisions of said In-
terstate Commerce Act and its amend-
ments, so far as the same may be appli-
cable, to the same extent as though they
had been named in the original act, in-
cluding the provisions of §§ 2 and 3 (24
Stat. 379, 380 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p.
3155]) against unjust and unreasonable
discriminations, of § 6 (24 Stat. 380 [U. S.
Comp. St. 1901, p. 3156]) as amended by
the Hepburn Act (34 Stat. 586 [U. S.
Comp. St. Supp. 1907, p. 897]), prohibiting
the taking of any greater or less sum for
transportation of property than that
named in the tariffs filed, and § 1 of the
Elkins Act (Act Feb. 19, 1903, c. 708. 32



Stat. 847 [U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907, p.
880]), as so amended, making it unlaw-
ful to offer or accept any rebate from the
published rate, or other discrimination in
respect of the transportation of any prop-
erty whereby any advantage is given.
United States v. Wells, Fargo Exp. Co.,
161 Fed. 606.

4. Act June 29, 1906, c. 3591, 34 Stat.
584, Fed. Stat. Anno. Sup. 1912, p. 225;
American Exp. Co. v. United States, 212
U. S. 522, 53 L. Ed. 635, 29 S. Ct. 315.

5. United States v. Morsman, 42 Fed.
448.

The Interstate Commerce Act does not
apply to independent express companies
not operating railway lines. Decree, 88
Fed. 659, affirmed in Southern Indiana
Exp. Co. V. United States Exp. Co., 92
Fed. 1022, 35 C. C. A. 172.

6. Electric railway companies. — Act
Cong. Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104, 24 Stat. 379 (U.
S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3154), or its amend-
ments (Act June 29, 1906, c. 3591, 34 Stat.
584 [U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1909, p. 1149]),
being acts to regulate commerce, do not
apply to street railway companies en-
gaged in the transportation of passengers
between cities in different states. Omaha,
etc., St. R. Co. V. Interstate Commerce
Comm.. 179 Fed. 243.

Street railroads carrying passengers
across a state line are not governed by
the Interstate Commerce Act of Feb. 4,
1887, which applies to carriers engaged in
transportation of passengers or property
by railroad. Omaha, etc., St. R. Co. v.
Interstate Commerce Comm., 33 S. Ct.
890, 230 U. S. 324, 57 L. Ed. 1501, 46 L.
R. A., N. S., 385, reversing decree 191
Fed. 40.



3615



INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT.



§ 3991



and are subject to the general requiren:ents of the act preventing and punishing
the giving of rebates, the making of unjust discriminations, the showing of fa-
voritism, and other practices denounced in the various sections of the act. They
are undoubtedly subject to the provisions of the act, which permits the commis-
sion to inquire into the management of business of all common carriers subject
to the act, and to keep itself informed as to the manner and method in which the
same is conducted, with the right to obtain from such common carriers the full
and complete information necessary to enable the commission to carry out the
objects for which it was created.^ But it is not the purpose of the Interstate
Commerce Act to subject independent carriers by water to its provisions, and it
does not vest the interstate commerce commission with any control over the
business of such carriers, except such interstate traffic as is carried on under a
joint arrangement with rail carriers. -

Pipe Lines. — The provisions of the act apply to any corporation, person or
persons engaged in the transportation of oil or other commodity, except water
and except natural or artificial gas, by means of pipe lines or partly by pipe lines
and partly by railroad, or partly by pipe lines and partly by water.*^ Oil companies
controlling interstate pipe lines carrying oil ofifered between oil fields east of
California and the Atlantic seaboard on condition that the offerer shall first
sell the oil to them on their own terms, are embraced within the Act of June 29,
1906, extending the operation of the Interstate Commerce Act to pipe lines,
which shall be considered to be common carriers wdthin the act.^*^ But an oil
company using a pipe line solely to conduct its own oil from its own wells in one
state to its own refinery in another state is not within the act.^^

Bridges and Ferries. — The act provides that the term "railroads" shall in-
clude all bridges and ferries used or operated in connection with any rail-
road.i2



7. Carriers by water. — Interstate Com-
merce Comm. V. Goodrich Trans. Co., 234
U. S. 194, 56 L. Ed. 729, 32 S. Ct. 436.

"The terms of the act of congress, as
amended June 29, 1906, 34 Stat. 584, c.
3591, and in force at the time when these
orders were made, are plain and simple,
and, we think, not difficult to comprehend.
They are: 'The provisions of this act [to
regulate commerce] shall apply to * * *
any common carrier or carriers engaged
in the transportation of passengers or
property wholly by railroad (or partly by
railroad and partly by water when both
are used under a common control, man-
agement, or arrangement for a continuous
carriage or shipment), from one state or
territory of the United States, or the Dis-
trict of Columbia, to any other state or
territory of the United States, etc. The
proviso, at the end of the section, that its
terms shall not apply to the transportation
of passengers or property wholly within
one vState was inserted for the purpose of
showing the congressional purpose not to
undertake to regulate a commerce wholly
domestic. Tlie first section makes the act
apply alike to common carriers engaged
in the transportation of passengers or
property wholly by railroad or partly by
railroad and partly by water under an ar-
rangement for a continuous carriage or
shipment. It is conceded that the car-
riers filing the bills in these cases were
common carriers engaged in the transpor-
tation of passengers and property partly



by railroad and partly by water under a
joint arrangement for a continuous car-
riage or shipment. Such common carriers
are declared to be subject to the provisions
of the act in precisely the same term as those
which comprehend the other companies
named in the act. Carriers partly by railroad
and partly by water under a common ar-
rangement for a continuous carriage or
shipment are as specifically within the
terms of the act as any other carrier
named therein." Interstate Commerce
Comm. V. Goodrich Trans. Co., 224 U.
S. 194, 56 L. Ed. 729, 32 S. Ct. 436.

8. Goodrich Trans. Co. v. Interstate
Commerce Comm., 190 Fed. 943.

9. Pipe lines.— Act June 18, 1910, ch.
309. Fed. St. Anno. Supp. 1912, p. 112.

10. United States v. Ohio Oil Co., 234
U. S. 548, 34 S. Ct. 956.

The amendment of § 1 of the Interstate
Commerce Act by Act June 29, 1906, §
1, providing that the act shall apply to
owners of oil pipe lines, who shall be
considered common carriers, held not am-
biguous, and intended to apply to all
owners of interstate oil pipe lines, re-
gardless of their previous status as com-
mon carriers, or as conducting a purely
])rivate business. Prairie Oil, etc., Co. v.
United States, 204 Fed. 79K.

11. United States v. Ohio Oil Co., 234
U. S. 548, 34 S. Ct. 956.

12. Bridges and ferries. — .^ct June 18,
1910, ch, :!()'.), Vq(\. St. Anno. Supp. 1912,
p. 113.



§§ 3991-3992 carriers. 3616

Telephone, Telegraph and Cable Companies. — The act applies to tele-
graph, telephone and cable companies, whether wire or wireless, engaged in
sending messages from one state, territory or district of the United States, to
any other state, territory or district of the United States, or to any foreign coun-
try.i^'

Terminal Companies. — A corporation maintaining a stockyard which oper-
ates a railroad system for cars to and from trunk lines in the course of their
transportation from beyond the state is an interstate railway carrier within the
Interstate Commerce Act and obliged to file its tariffs with the Interstate Com-
merce Commission under § 6 of the act.^'* Railroad service known as "switch-
ing'' is local, and the charge made for it is not a part of the through rate fixed be-
forehand, and has no reference to interstate shipment, but may be regulated by
a commission appointed under a state act by virtue of the police power of the
state.^^ A terminal company which received cars of coal coming from another
state, and delivered them within its yards to the engines of a railroad company,
was engaged in moving interstate traffic, within the Safety Appliance Act.^*^

Truckmen and Draymen. — Under the Interstate Commerce Act, providing
that the act applies to any common carrier or carriers engaged in the transporta-
tion of passengers or property wdiolly by railroad, or party by railroad and partly
by water, when both are used under a common control, etc., for a continuous
carriage or interstate shipment, the act does not apply to a truckman in a city,
so as to make him responsible for the loss of goods shipped from one state to
another on the theory that he was the initial carrier, when his engagement was
only to haul the goods from the store to the dock or depot as an independent em-
ployment.^"

Holding- Companies. — A holding company is not a common carrier, within
the meaning of the Interstate Commerce Act, because of the fact that it owns all
of the stock of a corporation which is such a common carrier.^ ^

Where Carrier Is Also Manufacturer. — The act makes it unlawful for any
railroad company to engage in the interstate or foreign transportation of any ar-
ticle or commodity, other than timber and the manufacture of products thereof,
manufactured, mined or produced by the carrier, or under its authority, or which
it may own in whole or in part, or in which it may have any interest, direct or
indirect, except such articles or commodities as may be necessary and intended
for its use in the conduct of its business as a common carrier.^^ The provision of
the act applies to a railroad having termini in different states and transporting
coal thereon from mines, the capital stock of which is owned by the railroad com-
pany, though all the coal mined by said railroad company is sold at the mine and
title is passed before the coal is transported to another state.-"

§§ 3992-4015. Duties Imposed upon Carrier— § 3992. Transporta-
tion. — Section 1 of the act, makes it the plain duty of a carrier to furnish trans-
portation upon reasonable request. This duty is imposed upon the carrier, and
it is clearly the intent of the framers of the act that the carrier should, upon rea-
sonable request for the same, furnish vehicles for transportation. This duty in
no sense of the word rests upon the shipper, but relates solely to the carrier. In

13. Telephone, telegraph and cable Fed. 861.

companies. — Act June 18, 1910, ch. 309, 17. Truckmen and draymen. — Hirsch v.

Fed. St. Anno. Supp. 1912. p. 112. New England Nav. Co., 113 N. Y. S. 395,

14. Terminal companies. — United States 129 App. Div. 178.

V. Union Stockyard, etc., Co.. 226 U. 18. Holding companies. — Attorney Gen-

S. 286, 33 S. Ct. 83. See Grand Trunk R. era! v. Union Stockyard, etc., Co., 192

Co. V. Michigan R. Comm., 231 U. S. Fed. 330.

457, 34 S. Ct. 152. 19. Where carrier is also manufacturer.

15. Chicago, etc.. R. Co. v. Becker. 32 —Act June 18, 1910, ch. 309, Fed. St.
Fed. 849. Anno. Supp. 1912, p. 114.

16. Act March 2, 1893, c. 196, 27 Stat. 20. Central Trust Co. v. Pittsburg, etc.,
531 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3174]; United R. Co., 101 N. Y. S. 837, 52 Misc. Rep.
States V. Northern Pac. Terminal Co., 144 195.



3617 INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT. §§ 3992-3996

this instance, as is the case in the enactment of ahiiost every statute, there must
have been strong reasons for the passage of this act.-^

Receipts for Goods Accepted for Transportation. — The requirement of
the Carmack Amendment, that a raihvay company receiving property for trans-
portation in interstate commerce shall issue a receipt or bill of lading therefor,
does not require other receipts than baggage checks. -

§ 3993. To Establish Through Routes.— See elsewhere.^s

§ 3994. Continuous Carriage. — See elsewhere.-^

§§ 3995-3997. Facilities — § 3995. In General. — The third section of
the Interstate Commerce Act provides that every common carrier subject to the
provisions of the act shall, according to their respective powers, afford all rea-
sonable, proper, and equal facilities for the interchange of traffic between their
respective lines, and for the receiving, forwarding, and delivering of passengers
and property to and from their several lines and those connecting therewith, and
shall not discriminate in their rates and charges between such connecting lines,
but this shall not be construed as requiring any such common carrier to give the
use of its tracks or terminal facilities to another carrier engaged in like busi-
ness.-^ The duty of furnishing equal facilities relates to and involves purely the
question of transportation, and when the court is called upon to determine as to
whether in any particular instance there has been an undue and unreasonable dis-
crimination or preference as contemplated by the statute, the sole question is as
to whether the entire equipment operated over the lines of the carrier has been
fairly and equally distributed among all the shippers along its lines who are simi-
larly situated. -'^

§ 3996. Switches. — Any common carrier subject to the provisions of the
act, upon application of any lateral, branch line of railroad, or of any shipper
tendering interstate traffic for transportation, shall construct, maintain, and oper-
ate upon reasonable terms a switch connection with any such lateral, branch
line of railroad, or private side track which may be constructed to connect with
its railroad, where such connection is reasonably practicable and can be put in
with safety and will furnish sufficient business to justify the construction and
maintenance of the same ; and shall furnish cars for the movement of such traffic
to the best of its ability without discrimination in favor of or against any such
shipper. If any common carrier shall fail to install and operate any such switch
or connection as aforesaid, on application therefor in writing by any shipper, such
shipper may make complaint to the commission, as provided in § 13 of the act, and
the commission shall hear and investigate the same and shall determine as to the
safety and practicability thereof and justification and reasonable compensation

21. Duties imposed upon carrier. — Pit- 25. Facilities. — Interstate Commerce
cairn Coal Co. v. Baltimore, etc., R. Co., Comm. v. Brimson, 154 U. S. 447, 38 L.
165 Fed. 113. Ed. 1047, 12 S. Ct. 1125; Texas, etc., R.

22. Receipts for goods accepted for Co. v. Interstate Commerce Comm., 162
transportation. — "Such checks are re- U. S. 197, 40 L. Ed. 940, 16 S. Ct. 666;
ceipts, and there is no special requirement United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight
in the statute as to their form. It is Ass'n, 166 U. S. 290, 41 L. Ed. 1007, 17
doubtless in the power of the interstate S. Ct. 540; In re Lennon, 166 U. S. 548,
commerce commission to make require- 41 L. Ed. 1110, 17 S. Ct. 658; Central
ments as to the checks or receipts to be Stockyards Co. v. Louisville, etc., R.
given for baggage if that subject needs Co., 192 U. S. 568, 48 L. Ed. 565, 24 S.
regulation. Act of June 18, 1910, §§ 1 Ct. 339.

and 15, c. 309. 36 Stat. 539." Boston, etc., "The statute casts upon the carrier the

Railroad v. Hooker, 233 U. S. 97, 34 S. plain duty of furnishing a fair and equal

Ct. .'526. distribution of facilities to the shipper."

2a. To establish through routes.— See Pitcairn Coal Co. v. Baltimore, etc., R.

post, "Joint Throu.t,'li Routes," § 4053. Co., 165 Fed. 113.

24. Continuous carriage. — See post, 26. Pitcairn Coal Co. v. Baltimore,

"Connecting Carriers," §§ 4050-4057. etc., R. Co., 165 Fed. 113.



§§ 3996-4001



CARRIERS.



3618



therefor and the commission may make an order, as provided in § 15 of the act,
directing the common carrier to comply with the provisions of this section in ac-
cordance with such order, and such order shall be enforced as hereinafter pro-
vided for the enforcement of all other orders by the commission, other than or-
ders for the payment of money.^'^ Under this section, it is held that the remedy
given by the act on complaint by the shipper to the commission, when an inter-
state carrier refuses to establish a switch connection with a lateral, branch line, is
exclusive, and that the general powers given by other sections of the statute can
not be deemed to authorize a complaint to the commission by the lateral branch



Online LibraryThomas Johnson MichieA treatise on the law of carriers (Volume 4) → online text (page 97 of 214)