Minnesota and the Dakotas. At the time of the hearing the rate to Fargo, 639 miles, was 53.5 cents, and to Moorhead, Minn., 638 miles, and Huron, S.Dak., 646 miles, 50 cents. That to International Falls, Minn., applicable on cast-iron or wrought-iron pipe, was 48 cents, made of 21 cents, minimum 46,000 pounds, to Minnesota Transfer, Minn., and 27 cents, minimum 24,000 pounds beyond. Iron and steel pipe were included in the iron and steel list dealt with in the Class Case. Pursuant to the findings therein the carriers undertook to cancel commodity rates on pipe and to establish rates on the basis of 32.5 percent of first class. These rates were suspended, and the rates on pipe from the Chicago area as a rule remained unchanged. By order dated February 18, 1932, we vacated the order suspending the rates on the basis of 32.5 percent of first class, but continued in effect the suspension of the tariffs by which the existing commodity rates would have been canceled. The result of that order was to make effective rates on the 32.5-percent basis in instances where the then existing rates were higher but to continue in effect rates which were lower than 32.5 percent of first class. In Iron or Steel Pipe in Western Trunk-Line Territory, 192 I.C.C. 745, decided since the hearing in the instant case, we approved rates on the basis of 32.5 percent of first class on wrought-iron or steel pipe and iron or steel conduit pipe from the Chicago district to western trunk-line territory. Complainants compare the rates assailed with lower rates from Chicago to Fargo on other commodities of varying transportation characteristics. The average loadings thereof vary from 24,000 to 52,500 pounds. The values are not stated. Those comparisons include a rate of 38.5 cents on prepared roofing and related articles from Chicago to Fargo. In Certain-teed Products Corp. v. A., T. & S. F. Ry Co., 63 I.C.C. 65, 73 I.C.C. 82, we prescribed that rate on prepared roofing and related articles from Marseilles, Ill., to Fargo, 679 miles. In the case last cited we used 52,500 pounds as the average loading. It will be observed from the table herein that the iron-and-steel rate from Chicago to the Twin Cities effective on October 26, 1932, was 28 cents, and that the fifth-class rates effective after December 2, 1931, to the Twin Cities and Fargo were 47 and 66 cents respectively. Complainants contend that the rate on iron and steel from Chicago to Fargo should not for the future exceed, and since October 25, 1932, should not have exceeded, 47 cents, made by adding the fifth-class spread of 19 cents, Fargo over Twin Cities, to the rate of 28 cents from Chicago to the Twin Cities. The spread in the fifth-class rates, Fargo over the Twin Cities from Chicago, from September 10, 1925, to December 3, 1931, was 24.5 cents, which spread, added to the rate of 28 cents from Chicago to the Twin Cities, would produce 52 cents, which complainants urge would have been a reasonable maximum rate from Chicago to Fargo during that period. In support of these contentions complainants submitted data to show that their proposed rates would not be less than reasonable for the past periods mentioned and for the future. Whether or not the rate spreads as proposed by complainants for the movement beyond the Twin Cities to Fargo were and are reasonable for that movement, we are not convinced that the 27.5-cent and 28-cent factors would be reasonable maxima for use in constructing rates to Fargo. Complainants assert that the former rate of 27.5 cents to the Twin Cities was prescribed in Western Trunk Lines Iron and Steel, supra. It is true that, as affected by the general rate changes, that rate is equivalent to 90 percent of the Chicago-Twin Cities fifth-class rate in effect in 1917. These factors are on much lower bases than that prescribed generally in the Class Case. When the carriers proposed to reduce the Chicago-Twin Cities rate from 41 to 28 cents their schedules were suspended, but upon investigation they were found justified in view of nonrail competition. Iron and Steel from Illinois Territory, 188 I.C.C. 359. The Chicago-Fargo rate assailed is a combination of a former commodity rate made of 14 cents from Chicago to Twin Cities plus a former fifth-class rate of 23.5 cents beyond, as affected by the general increases and reduction, and, except as so affected, it has been in effect for many years. In Western Trunk Lines Iron and Steel, supra, we recognized that the rate of 14 cents mentioned above was depressed. As above indicated, the rates assailed were, prior to September 11, 1925, 32 percent of first class and 89 percent of fifth class. Since December 2, 1931, they have been 32.5 percent of first class and less than 90 percent of fifth class. During the period intervening between those dates they were 34.5 and 96.5 percent of first and fifth classes, but the increases in the percentage relationships as of September 11, 1925, resulted from changes in the fifth-class rates, and were not brought about by increases in the rates assailed. In Iron and Steel from Illinois Territory, supra, it is stated that the carriers established the 32.5 percent basis throughout western trunk-line territory on December 3, 1931. Defendants exhibit a number of rates on iron and steel from Chicago to points in western trunk-line territory said to be representative, before and after that date. Those in effect prior thereto, distances considered, appear in some instances to be higher and in other instances lower than the rates assailed. Among them were rates of 43 cents to Pipestone, Minn., 510 miles, and 78 cents to Mobridge, S.Dak., 765 miles, which became 48 and 65 cents, respectively, under the new adjustment. We find that the evidence does not warrant a conclusion that the rates assailed were or are unreasonable. This conclusion is without prejudice to any finding which may be made in the Class Case. An order dismissing the complaints will be entered. LEE, Commissioner, concurring: Prior to our decision in the Class Case, the commodity rate on these articles from Chicago to Fargo was 57 cents, while the commodity rate to the Twin Cities was 27.5 cents. At that time Fargo's rate was a higher percentage of first class than the rate to the Twin Cities. In our decision in the Class Case we prescribed 32.5 percent of first class as a proper maximum basis to apply from Chicago to the Twin Cities and Fargo, which resulted in the same rate of 57 cents to Fargo and a rate of 41 cents to the Twin Cities. Later we permitted the carriers to reduce the 41-cent rate to the Twin Cities to 28 cents. These changes did not affect the actual rate to Fargo but resulted in an increase over the 27.5-cent rate to the Twin Cities of 0.5 cent, which is the present situation. However, the relationship between Fargo and the Twin Cities, established subsequent to the decision in the Class Case, has been done away with. Under these circumstances, we cannot say, on the precedents, and on this record that the rate of 57 cents to Fargo, based on 32.5 percent of first class, was, is, or will be unreasonable. The injury to Fargo resulted, not from any unreasonableness in its rate, but in the reduction in the rate to the Twin Cities, which, without doubt, subjected complainants to severe disadvantage in their competition with dealers at the Twin Cities. However, I see no way in which we can accord relief under the section 1 allegation. 198 I.C.C. No. 26027 NEELY OIL COMPANY ET AL. v. ALTON RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL. Submitted December 11, 1933. Decided December 29, 1933 Rates on petroleum products, in carloads, from southwestern origins to Leon, E. F. Cody and A. B. Zimmerman for complainants. Complaint G. A. Gladson, F. H. Towner, J. N. Davis, L. H. Strasser, H. H. Larimore, M. G. Roberts, C. S. Burg, E. A. Boyd, A. B. Enoch, Walter McFarland, Eldon M. Martin, Russell B. James, and C. M. Spence for defendants. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION DIVISION 4, COMMISSIONERS MEYER, BRAINERD, PORTER, AND MAHAFFIE PORTER, Commissioner: Exceptions to the proposed report of the examiner were filed by complainants, to which defendants replied. Complainants are receivers of petroleum products at Leon, Iowa, and numerous points in Missouri. By complaint filed May 24, 1933, they allege that the rates on petroleum products, in carloads, from points in Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Missouri over interstate routes to the destinations at which they receive such products were and are inapplicable, unreasonable, and unduly prejudicial. The Shell Petroleum Corporation intervened in opposition to the complaint. At the hearing the issues of inapplicability and undue prejudice were withdrawn. Reasonable rates for the future and reparation are sought. Rates will be stated in cents. per 100 pounds. Inasmuch as the rates assailed to Leon and destinations in northern Missouri are grouped both as to origins and destinations, while a somewhat different destination basis is in effect to destinations in southern Missouri, the two sections will be considered separately. The following table, taken from complainants' exhibits, shows the present rates assailed from Oklahoma group 3 to Leon and destinations in northern Missouri, and the earnings thereunder: The abbreviated designations used in this report refer to the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company, Rock Port, Langdon & Northern Railway, Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company, Alton Railroad Company, Quincy, Omaha & Kansas City Railroad Company, Wabash Railway Company, Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company, Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, Missouri Southern Railroad Company and St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company. In Midcontinent Oil Rates, 1925, 112 I.C.C. 421, 132 I.C.C. 103, referred to as the Midcontinent case, reasonable and nonprejudicial rates were prescribed from southwestern origins to important destinations in this territory, such as Kansas City and St. Louis, Mo., Omaha, Nebr., and Des Moines, Iowa, and the carriers were directed to establish rates to other destinations in relation to the key rates prescribed. In Refined Petroleum Products in the Southwest, 171 I.C.C. 381, 174 I.C.C. 745, a general basis of rates on petroleum products was prescribed between points in the Southwest, including southern Missouri. In a number of complaint cases consolidated with that proceeding, reasonable maximum rates from southwestern origins to points in northern Missouri were determined. To five destination groups, in the western part of northern Missouri, described as groups A to E, inclusive, we prescribed reasonable maximum rates for the future and to groups B, D, and E found the rates not unreasonable in the past. To destinations in northeastern Missouri the rates were found not unreasonable. All of the rates assailed herein to northern Missouri destinations fall within the territory to which we found in those cases that the rates were not unreasonable in the past. Following that decision defendants proposed changes, mainly increases, in rates to points in northeastern Missouri so as to align them with the rates prescribed to destinations in northwestern Missouri. The operation of the rates thus proposed was suspended but they were later approved by us, with minor exceptions, in Petroleum Products from the Southwest, 186 I.C.C. 329. The rates assailed appear to conform to the findings in the foregoing cases. Complainants contend, nevertheless, that under present conditions the rates are too high. They compare the earnings |