R. Co., 7 I. C. C. 555-a; order not enforced, 98 Fed. 173, 103 Fed. 249, 43 C. C. A. 209, 186 U. S. 320, 46 L. Ed. 1182, 22 Sup. Ct. 824. Differentials to Baltimore and Philadelphia under New York legal.-New York Produce Ex. v. B. & O. R. Co., 7 I. C. C. 612, 658, 661, 667. Whether or not competition is such as to relieve carriers from restraints of section a question of fact.-Phillips, Bailey & Co. v. L. & N. R. Co., 8 I. C. C. 93. Discrimination held to violate section.-Re Alleged Violations by St. L. & S. F. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 290. May be a differential between corn and wheat and their products, but must be reasonable.-Board of R. R. Com's. of Kansas v. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 304; Mayor, etc., of Wichita v. Mo. Pac. R. Co., 10 I. C. C. 35, and cases therein cited. A station in Chicago, a shorter distance point should not have a higher rate than the union depot in Chicago.-Chicago Fire Proof, etc., Co. v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co., 8 I. C. C. 316. Carriers have no right to create new markets at expense of old ones. Savannah Bureau, etc. v. L. & N. R. Co., 8 I. C. C. 377; order enforced, Int. Com. Com. v. L. & N. R. Co., 118 Fed. 613. Relative rates between Danville and Lynchburg illegal.—Danville v. So. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 409; order not enforced, Int. Com. Com. v. So. Ry. Co., 117 Fed. 741, 122 Fed. 800, 60 C. C. A. 540. Rates must not destroy competition between cities.-Board of Trade of Hampton v. N. C. & St. L. R. Co., 8 I. C. C. 503; order not enforced, Int. Com. Com. v. N. C. & St. L. R. Co., 120 Fed. 934. Unjust discrimination illegal although no direct injury.-Kindel v. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 8 I. C. C. 608, 9 I. C. C. 606. Remedy for unlawful rates inadequate.-McGrew v. M. P. R. Co., 8 I. C. . C. 630. Rates violative of section.-Hilton Lumber Co. v. Wilmington, etc., R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 17. Carriers may recognize natural, but ordinarily must not create artificial advantages. -Holdzkom v. Mich. Cent. Ry. Co., 9 I. C. C. 42, 54. Preference to be illegal must be the result of action of carriers.-Wilmington Tariff Asso. v. Cincinnati, Portsmouth, etc., R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 118, 157; order not enforced, 124 Fed. 624. Illegal discrimination in failure to publish through rates.-Johnson v. Chicago, Saint Paul, etc., R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 221. Milling in transit a privilege that the carriers cannot be forced to give.-Diamond Mills Co. v. Boston & M. R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 311. Differentials between C. L. and L. C. L. must be reason

able.-Business Men's League of St. Louis v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 318, 359. Facts constituting discrimination. -Mayor, etc., of Wichita v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 534; Same v. Chicago & R. I. R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 569. Rates unduly discriminatory.-Marten v. L. & N. R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 581; Kindel v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 606. Higher charge on coal because of method of loading illegal.-Glade Coal Co. v. B. & O. R. Co., 10 I. C. C. 226. Circumstances justifying different charges.-Aberdeen Group Commercial Asso. v. M. & O. R. Co., 10 I. C. C. 289. Should not make a different rate per hundred on cattle in car lots and in ten car lots.-New Orleans Live Stock Ex. v. T. & P. Ry. Co., 10 I. C. C. 327. Difference in rate greater than competitive conditions justified-Gardner v. So. Ry. Co., 10 I. C. C. 342. No reasons to charge more on live stock than on live-stock products.-Chicago Live Stock Ex. v. Chicago Great W. R. Co., 10 I. C. C. 428. Circuit court contra.-Int. Com. Com. v. Chicago Great W. R. Co., 141 Fed. 1003, 209 U. S. 108, 52 L. Ed. 705, 28 Sup. Ct. 493. Differentials between two cities should not be affected by point of origin.-Mershon v. Cent. R. R. of N. J., 10 I. C. C. 456. Higher rate to Wichita than the longer distance to Kansas City justified, but differentials too great.Lehman-Higginson Grocery Co. v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 10 I. C. C. 460. Should be no higher rates on shingles than lumber. -Duluth Shingle Co. v. Duluth, etc., R. Co., 10 I. C. C. 489. Refusal to grant divisions to "tap lines" east of the Mississippi River not illegal because granted by other carriers west of the river.-Central Yellow Pine Asso. v. Ill. Cent. R. Co., 10 I. C. C. 505. Order enforced.-Ill. Cent. R. Co. v. Int. Com. Com., 206 U. S. 441, 51 L. Ed. 1128, 27 Sup. Ct. 700. Combination rate should not be less than the straight rate.-Cannon Falls, etc., Elevator Co. v. Chicago Great W. R. Co., 10 I. C. C. 650. Reasonable differentials between Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York.-Re Differential Freight Rates to and from North Atlantic Ports, 11 I. C. C. 13. Carrier not liable for discrimination caused by state commission. -Re Freight Rates. Between Memphis and Points in Arkansas, 11 I. C. C. 180. Differentials between corn and corn products fixed.-Re Rates on Corn and Corn Products, 11 I. C. C. 212, 220, 227. Unjust discrimination.-City Gas Co. of

Norfolk v. B. & O. R. Co., 11 I. C. C. 371. Rates not unduly prejudicial.-Griffin Grocery Co. v. So. Ry. Co., 11 I. C. C. 522. Flour in barrels and in sacks should have a uniformly just rate relation.-Cannon v. M. & O. R. Co., 11 I. C. C. 537. Junk should not be rated as high as machinery.-National Machinery & Wrecking Co. v. Pittsburg, etc., R. Co., 11 I. C. C. 581. Different rates in reverse directions not necessarily unreasonable. Weil v. Penn. R. Co., 11 I. C. C. 627; Duncan v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 6 I. C. C. 85, 4 I. C. R. 385; MacLoon v. Boston & M. R. Co., 9 I. C. C. 642; Hewins v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co., 10 I. C. C. 221; Phillips v. Grand Trunk W. R. Co., 11 I. C. C. 659; see also decision by Judge Speer, Int. Com. Com. v. L. & N. R. Co., 118 Fed. 613, 623. Adjustment of rates held unreasonable.-Davenport v. So. Ry. Co., 11 I. C. C. 650. Difference in cost of manufacture no ground in itself for adjustment of rates.-Phillips v. Grand Trunk W. Ry. Co., 11 I. C. C. 659. Not undue discrimination.-Village of Goodhue v. Chicago Great W. Ry. Co., 11 I. C. C. 683, 687. A different charge by a carrier for transporting freight originating on its own line than for that received from connecting lines illegal.-Blackwell Milling & Elevator Co. v. M. K. & T. R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 23; Ponca City Milling Co. v. M. K. & T. R. Co., id. 26. Differential between Wichita and Kansas City from Galveston too great-Johnston-Larimer Dry Goods Co. v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 47, 188; see similar cases, id. 51, 58. Carriers cannot arbitrarily fix market competition. -Texas Cement Plaster Co. v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 68. May make cheaper rates to Pacific Coast from New England mills than from southeastern mills.-Enterprise Mfg. Co. v. Ga. R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 130, 451; China & Japan Trading Co. v. Georgia R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 236. Rate discrimination.Tomlin-Harris Machine Co. v. L. & N. R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 133; Southern Grocery Co. v. Ga. N. R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 229. Different minimum carload on same commodity illegal.-Waxelbaum v. Atlantic C. L. R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 178. Adjustment illegal. Nobles Bros. Grocery Co. v. F. W. & D. C. R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 242. Relation in rates between grain and its products long established should not be changed without good reason. Howard Mills Co. v. Mo. Pac. R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 258; see also Traffic Bureau v. Mo. Pac. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 11.

Augusta, Ga., suburbs entitled to same rate as Augusta.Quimby v. Clyde S. S. Co., 12 I. C. C. 392. Discrimination.— Banner Milling Co. v. New York Cent., etc., R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 31. Must be no unjust discrimination in distributing cars.Powhatan Coal & Coke Co. v. Norfolk & W. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 69; Royal C. & C. Co. v. So. Ry. Co., 13 I. C. C. 440; Traer v. Chicago & A. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 451. Right to use private cars not prohibited, but such use must not cause discrimination.-Ruttle v. Pere Marquette R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 179. Must not discriminate in through routes and joint rates.-Merchants Freight Bureau of Little Rock v. Midland Valley, etc., R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 243. Freight tariffs should not be obscure. Hydraulic Press Brick Co. v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 342. Little reference can be given to the value of property in fixing express rates.-Kindel v. Adams Exp. Co., 13 I. C. C. 475. Party rates must be open to all.-Koch Secret Service v. L. & N. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 523. Reasonable and just rates may be fixed regardless of contracts between express and railroad companies.-Reynolds v. So. Ex. Co., 13 I. C. C. 536. Rate not violation of section.-Randolph Lumber Co. v. Seaboard A. L. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 601. Rates may be different on hard and soft wood timber.-Burgess v. Transcontinental Freight Bureau, 13 I. C. C. 668. Terminal companies may not discriminate in facilities granted shippers.-Eichenberg v. So. Pac. Co., 14 I. C. C. 250; order not enjoined, Southern Pac. Ter. Co. v. Int. Com. Com., 166 Fed. 134. Not unjust discrimination to refuse to transport liquors C. O. D.-Royal Brewing Co. v. Adams Exp. Co., 15 I. C. C. 255, 258. Shippers have a right to reach a common market without discrimination.-Black Mountain Coal Land Co. v. So. Ry. Co., 15 I. C. C. 286. Competition by water may justify different carload minimum.-City of Spokane v. N. Pac. R. Co., 15 I. C. C. 376. Furnishing two cars at the minimum of one when one large one cannot be furnished, known as the "two-for-one" rule, must be be without discrimination.-Indianapolis Freight Bureau v. Cleveland, C. C. & St. L. Ry. Co., 15 I. C. C. 504, 516. Carrier cannot discriminate in favor of products on its own line. Standard Lime & Stone Co. v. Cumberland Val. R. Co., 15 I. C. C. 620, 624. At common law discrimination by common carriers was illegal.-Hays v. Penn. Co., 12 Fed. 309; Kinsley v. Buffalo, N. Y. & P. R. Co., 37 Fed. 181; Western

Union Tel. Co. v. Call Pub. Co., 181 U. S. 92, 45 L. Ed. 765, 21 Sup. Ct. 561. Section 2 relates to unjust discrimination in rates; Section 3 is broader and prohibits discrimination "in any respect whatever."-United States v. Delaware, L. & W. R. Co., 40 Fed. 101, 103. Our section taken from English Traffic Acts and English cases cited showing the construction placed upon the statutes from which this section is taken.-Int. Com. Com. v. B. & O. R. Co., 43 Fed. 37, 3 I. C. R. 192; affirmed, 145 U. S. 263, 36 L. Ed. 699, 12 Sup. Ct. 844. Federal courts have jurisdiction under this section regardless of diversity of citizenship.-Little Rock & M. R. Co. v. East Tenn., Va. & Ga. R. Co., 47 Fed. 771; appeal dismissed, 159 U. S. 698, 40 L. Ed. 311, 16 Sup. Ct. 189. Does not require one road to receive cars of another when it has cars of its own in which the freight may be transported.Oregon Short Line and U. N. Ry. Co. v. N. Pac. R. Co., 51 Fed. 465; affirmed, 61 Fed. 158, 9 C. C. A. 409. Only unjust discrimination prohibited.—Int. Com. Com. v. Tex. & Pac. Ry. Co., 52 Fed. 187, citing Nicholson v. Great Western Ry. Co., 5 C. B. (N. S.) 366; affirmed, 57 Fed. 948, 6 C. C. A. 653, 20 U. S. App. 1, 4 I. C. R. 408; reversed on other grounds, 162 U. S. 197, 40 L. Ed. 940, 16 Sup. Ct. 666. Clause indefinite and uncertain and as to whether or not undue preference exists must be left to a jury; a violation not punishable as a crime. Tozer v. United States, 52 Fed. 917; see opinion and charge of lower court in United States v. Tozer, 37 Fed. 635, 2 L. R. A. 444, 39 Fed. 369, 39 Fed. 904. Not illegal to guarantee that an opera troupe shall arrive at its destination at a given time.-Foster v. Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co., 56 Fed. 434. Carrier not required to permit a competitor to land at its wharf.-Ilwaco Ry. & Nav. Co. v. Ore. Short L. and U. N. Ry. Co., 57 Fed. 673, 6 C. C. A. 495; Weems Steamboat Company v. People's Steamboat Co., 214 U. S. 345, 53 L. Ed. 1024, 29 Sup. Ct. 661. Carrier may permit use of its track to one to the exclusion of other carriers.-Little Rock & M. R. Co. v. St. L. I. M. & S. Ry. Co., 59 Fed. 400; affirmed, 63 Fed. 775, 11 C. C. A. 417, 26 L. R. A. 192. Cannot make a different charge because of origin of commodity.-Bigbee, etc., Packet Co. v. Mobile & O. R. Co., 60 Fed. 545. Joint through tariff not basis for local tariff.-Parsons v. Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co., 63 Fed. 903, 11 C. C. A. 489; affirmed, 167 U. S. 447, 42 L. Ed. 231,