Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

prior and subsequently to the shipments. No evidence was offered to show that the rates charged were unreasonable to the extent that they exceeded the joint rates through other junctions. We find, however, on the basis of the 25-cent rate prescribed in Commercial Club of Omaha v. A. & S. R. Ry. Co., supra, for like shipments from producing points in Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas to Lincoln and Omaha that the rates charged on shipments moved through Lincoln or Omaha were unreasonable to the extent that they exceeded rates composed of a rate of 25 cents to Lincoln or Omaha and the rates concurrently in effect beyond, on interstate traffic. Defendants urge that complainants had a proprietary interest in tap lines which participated in the rates condemned, which disentitles them to reparation, but the decision of the Supreme Court in the Tap Line cases, 234 U. S., 1, vitiates this contention.

Upon all the facts of record we find that complainants, Louisiana Central Lumber Company, Louisiana Long Leaf Lumber Company, Longville Lumber Company, Rapides Lumber Company, Globe Lumber Company, Bowman-Hicks Lumber Company, and Pickering Lumber Company, are entitled to reparation as definitely set forth in our original report, and on all shipments which moved to eastern and interior Nebraska points through Lincoln or Omaha on the basis set forth in this report. Reparation is denied to the other complainants of record not specifically named above. We further find that complainants named made shipments as described and paid charges thereon, but as the record does not enable us to determine the exact amount of reparation due no order for reparation can be entered at this time. These complainants therefore should prepare a statement showing as to each of the shipments on which reparation is claimed the date of movement, point of origin, point of destination, route, weight, car number and initials, rate applied, charges collected, and the amount of reparation due under our findings herein, which statement should be submitted to defendants for verification. Upon receipt of a statement so prepared by complainants and verified by defendants, we will consider further issuing an order awarding reparation.

35 L. C. C.

No. 6830.

COLUMBIA GOLD MINING COMPANY

v.

OREGON-WASHINGTON RAILROAD & NAVIGATION COMPANY ET AL.

Submitted February 1, 1915. Decided July 3, 1915.

Cancellation by Oregon-Washington Railroad & Navigation Company of a joint rate on ore and concentrates in carloads from Baker, Oreg., through Portland, Oreg., to Tacoma, Northern Pacific Railway from Portland, leaving applicable a combination rate based on Portland higher than the rate canceled and also higher than the rate applicable on the Oregon-Washington Railroad & Navigation Company's through line found to have been justified. Complaint dismissed. F. H. McCune for complainant.

A. C. Spencer, H. A. Scandrett, and A. W. Hawkins for OregonWashington Railroad & Navigation Company.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION.

BY THE COMMISSION:

Complainant is a corporation engaged in the mining business at Sumpter, Oreg. By complaint, filed April 18, 1914, it alleges that defendants' rate for the transportation of ore and concentrates in carloads from Baker, Oreg., to Tacoma, Wash., is unreasonable.

Complainant's ore and concentrates are transported from its mine to Sumpter by wagon and thence by the Sumpter Valley Railroad, a narrow-gauge line, 28 miles to Baker, on the Oregon-Washington Railroad & Navigation Company's line, where the shipments are reloaded into broad-gauge cars and reshipped over the OregonWashington Railroad & Navigation Company's line to Tacoma As the rate to Baker is not involved, the shipments in controversy may be considered to originate at Baker.

Prior to 1910 the Oregon Railroad & Navigation Company, the predecessor of the Oregon-Washington Railroad & Navigation Company, hereinafter called the Oregon-Washington Company, did not operate between Portland, Oreg., and Tacoma, and for a period of 13 or 14 years previous to 1910 maintained a joint rate of $5.50 per net ton on carload shipments of ore and concentrates from Baker to Tacoma in connection with the Northern Pacific Railway beyond

Portland. Prior to July 6, 1909, this rate applied on ore and concentrates worth not more than $100 per ton. In 1910 the OregonWashington Company extended its operations by trackage arrangements with the Northern Pacific from Portland to Tacoma and established the same rate from Baker to Tacoma over its own line as applied in connection with the Northern Pacific. The plant of complainant's consignee at Tacoma is located on the tracks of the Northern Pacific, but under a proper tariff provision the OregonWashington Company absorbed the switching charges so that the cost of transportation paid by complainant was exactly the same over either route. On April 4, 1914, the Oregon-Washington Company canceled the joint rate described with provision for the application of the combination rate based on Portland, $9 per ton, value not exceeding $200 per ton. The $5.50 rate over its own line and the provision described for the absorption of switching charges at Tacoma were continued and are still in effect. The cancellation of the joint rate represents an increase in the rate involved subsequently to January 1, 1910. The principal issue is whether the joint rate should be restored.

Complainant admits that the service of the Oregon-Washington Company over its direct line has been entirely satisfactory, and it appears that during the time that the same rate applied over both routes involved few cars moved over the Northern Pacific route. No shipments have been made over the Northern Pacific route under the combination rate involved. So far as the record discloses the present arrangement has not resulted in any hardship or detriment to complainant and will not. There is no general demand for a through route in addition to the Oregon-Washington Company's route. Complainant argues earnestly that it has been deprived of its right to select the route over which its shipments shall move, but unconvincingly. The Northern Pacific route is still available to complainant upon payment of the higher rate applicable over it. The OregonWashington Company has merely endeavored to secure for itself the longest haul possible. Originating lines generally are entitled to the longest haul they can perform where the transportation can be performed upon equal terms, with reasonable dispatch, and without undue discrimination. Salt Rates from Wisconsin to Iowa, etc., 27 I. C. C., 526, 529; Suffern Grain Co. v. I. C. R. R. Co., 27 I. C. C., 192, 194.

Complainant apprehends that some future change may require it to pay the terminal switching charge at Tacoma in addition to the present through rate, contending that the absorption of switching charges, although plainly provided for by tariff, is in direct contra

vention of law. Section 6 of the act to regulate commerce provides that carriers' tariffs shall

*

* *

* * state separately all terminal charges * and all other charges which the Commission may require, all privileges or facilities granted or allowed, and any rules or regulations which in any wise change, affect, or determine any part or the aggregate of such aforesaid rates, fares, and charges, or the value of the service rendered to the passenger, shipper, or consignee. *

The Commission may determine and prescribe the form in which the schedules required by this section to be kept open to public inspection shall be prepared and arranged and may change the form from time to time as shall be found expedient.

Pursuant to the authority conferred by this section we have provided by rule 10 E of Tariff Circular 18-A that

If part or all of the charges of a terminal or switching road are to be absorbed by a connecting road, the tariff of such connecting road must specify that its rate includes originating or delivery services by the terminal or switching road, and that the connecting road will absorb the charges of such terminal or switching road in a specified sum, or as per the current tariffs of the terminal or switching road (naming it) as on file with the Interstate Commerce Commission.

This rule has been followed by defendants in publishing the tariff under which the Northern Pacific's switching charges at Tacoma are absorbed by the Oregon-Washington Company.

Upon all of the facts of record we find that it was not unlawful for the Oregon-Washington Company to cancel the joint rate involved and that defendants have justified the increased rate assailed. An order dismissing the complaint will be entered.

35 I. C. C.

No. 7610.

PICHER LEAD COMPANY

v.

ST. LOUIS & SAN FRANCISCO RAILROAD COMPANY.

Submitted June 5, 1915. Decided July 9, 1915.

Upon complaint alleging that the accrual of 615 days' debits in excess of credits, under an average demurrage agreement, during a certain period resulted from defendant's failure to construct a 60-foot extension to complainant's unloading track; Held, That the demurrage charges were properly assessed. Complaint dismissed.

A. E. Spencer for complainant.

Carl Giessow for defendant.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION.

CLEMENTS, Commissioner:

The complainant is a corporation engaged in the production and sale of lead and its products, with principal office at Joplin, Mo. By complaint, filed December 22, 1914, it alleges that demurrage charges in the sum of $615 on certain carloads of coke were unlawfully assessed, and reparation is asked in that sum. The claim was informally presented to the Commission August 10, 1914, and is not contested by the defendant.

In December, 1912, the complainant, finding that the tracks connecting its plant with the defendant's main line were inadequate for the proper receipt and unloading of coke, which commodity the complainant uses in large quantities, made application to the defendant for the construction of a 60-foot extension to one of complainant's unloading tracks. The defendant agreed, rather informally, to promptly make the extension, but although the physical work involved could have been completed in three or four days, the track was not actually completed for more than a year. The complainant operates under an average demurrage agreement with the defendant, and states that the excess of debits over credits which accrued during the period in question would not have resulted had the extension been promptly built.

There are five spur tracks running into complainant's plant, averaging from 100 to 150 yards in length. Parts of four of these spurs can be used in placing cars for unloading. On one of them there was room for two cars, on another six, on another four, and

« AnteriorContinuar »