100 C. Cls. Reporter's Statement of the Case SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION Tennessee Valley Authority (Exhibit No. 8 to the Petition) 12. Between July 24, 1934, and February 17, 1938, on behalf of the Tennessee Valley Authority, a duly authorized agency of the United States, there were shipped over plaintiff's lines and its connections 227 shipments of various kinds of Government property from and to the points listed in Exhibit No. 8 to the petition. All of these shipments were transported on Government bills of lading and were delivered by plaintiff in accordance therewith. 13. For the transportation service so rendered plaintiff submitted its bills on which it claimed freight charges totaling $8,984.69, of which amount defendant paid plaintiff $7,467.48, leaving a balance of $1,517.21 unpaid, as set forth in Exhibit No. 8 to the petition. Plaintiff now limits its claims to the following items of the exhibit, in the amounts indicated, and abandons claim as to all other items of the exhibit: On the basis of settlement employed by defendant in payment, plaintiff has been underpaid by defendant, as shown on defendant's exhibit E, the net sum of $41.91, distributed in items of Exhibit No. 8 to the petition as follows: There were other routes via land-aided roads which could have been used as a basis for calculation of net freight charges, with resulting calculations of net charges less than herein claimed by plaintiff and more than herein claimed by defendant. Full particulars with regard to such routes and resulting charges are not in evidence. There is no satisfactory evidence of record with respect to item No. 188 in the amount of $16.33, and no further finding with respect thereto is made herein. Reporter's Statement of the Case 100 C. Cls. 14. The shipments listed as items 12, 14, 15, 20, 21, 26, 29, 30, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 46, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 64, 65, 66, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 113, 114, 115, 118, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 140, 144, 145, 146, 147, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 159, 172, 173, 179, 182, 185, 190, 191, 195, 196, 197, 198, 204, 205, 206, 209, 212, moved from Sheffield, Alabama, to Corinth, Mississippi, over plaintiff's line, a distance of 54.3 miles, being a route not aided by land grants. The total claim on these items is $241.19. Plaintiff billed its charges against defendant at full commercial rates, and now claims such rates. The defendant in payment deducted from plaintiff's bills $241.19. In arriving at this deduction defendant used the following route for purpose of land-grant deduction: Sheffield to Parrish, Ala., via Northern Alabama Ry.; thence to Birmingham, Ala., via plaintiff's line; thence to Meridian, Miss., via Alabama Great Southern R. R.; thence via Mobile & Ohio R. R. to destination, a distance of 484.82 miles. The land-grant lines on the route used by defendant for equalization purposes were from Birmingham to the Alabama-Mississippi State Line and from Meridian to Corinth. Commercial shipments do not move from Sheffield to Corinth by way of the route used by defendant. There are certain alternative land-grant routes from Shef-field to Corinth used neither by plaintiff nor by defendant in their calculations, which would result in higher net charges than paid by defendant and lower net charges than those contended for by plaintiff. These alternative routes are illustrated by the map in evidence as plaintiff's Exhibit No. 42, made a part hereof by reference, the lines depicted in red being the land-aided roads. The alternative routes are not used by commercial traffic. 15. The shipments covered by items Nos. 166, 167, 170, 171, 184, 199, and 200 of Exhibit No. 8 to the petition, moved from Corinth to Sheffield over plaintiff's line, 54.3 miles. The differences thereon, claimed herein, total $44.70. Plaintiff billed for the full commercial rate. Defendant deducted therefrom $44.70 in settlement, using a land-grant equalization route as in the case of shipments in the reverse direction,. 175 Reporter's Statement of the Case Sheffield to Corinth, supra, Finding No. 14, and the findings therein made apply in both directions. 16. The shipments listed as items 164, 168, 169, 217, 218, 219, 226 of Exhibit No. 8 to the petition, on which a total of $58.24 is claimed, moved from Sheffield to Decatur, Ala., entirely by way of the Southern Railway, a distance of 44.1 miles, non-land-grant; and plaintiff billed without land-grant deduction, and now claims full commercial charges are proper. The defendant, in paying for the transportation and making the deduction of $58.24, used a route as follows: Sheffield to Parrish via Northern Alabama Railway; Parrish to Birmingham via Southern Ry.; Louisville & Nashville R. R. beyond to destination. The Louisville & Nashville R. R. portion is land-aided. The through distance over the route so used is 222.4 miles, and this route is not used by commercial traffic. 17. The shipments covered by items Nos. 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 227, a total difference in dispute of $154.91, moved via the Southern Ry. from Decatur to Sheffield, Ala. The circumstances here are the same as set forth in Finding No. 16, with directions reversed. 18. The shipments on items 86, 87, and 88 were from Chicago, Illinois, to Coal Creek, Tennessee. The aggregate claimed thereon is $87.98. The shipments actually moved by way of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. R. to Paducah, Ky.; Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Ry. to Nashville; Tennessee Central Ry. to Harriman; thence via Southern Railway to Coal Creek, a total distance of 875.2 miles. In billing defendant the plaintiff offered net freight charges calculated by way of Cairo, Hopkinsville, Nashville, Lebanon, Harriman, the land-aided portion of which extended only from Chicago to Cairo on the Illinois Central R. R., a total distance from Chicago to Coal Creek of 760.7 miles. The defendant's deduction of $87.98 from plaintiff's bill was calculated by using the Cairo gateway, as had the plaintiff. The route used beyond Cairo was different. Defendant used the Mobile & Ohio R. R., Cairo to Meridian, the Alabama Great Southern R. R. to Chattanooga, and the Southern Ry. thence to destination. The land-grant portion of the route so used extended from Chicago to Cairo, the Tennessee-Mississippi State Line to Meridian, and the Alabama-Mississippi State 574432-44-vol. 100- 14 Reporter's Statement of the Case 100 C. Cls. Line to the Alabama-Georgia State Line, a through distance from Chicago to Coal Creek of 1,172.05 miles. The route made use of by defendant in its calculation is not employed in commercial traffic. There were alternative routes beyond Cairo, not employed by either party, which would result in higher charges than contended for by defendant, and lower than claimed by plaintiff. Commercial shipments do not use the alternative routes. They are illustrated by plaintiff's Exhibit No. 44, which is made part hereof by reference, and not further particularized. 19. The shipment covered by item 177 of Exhibit No. 8 to the petition moved from Iuka, Miss., to Chattanooga, over plaintiff's line. There is claimed on this item $44.32. The distance is 200.5 miles, without land-grant mileage, and the gross commercial charge was billed against defendant. In making payment defendant deducted $44.32, using therefor a land-grant route as follows: Southern Ry. to Corinth (nonland-grant) 22.3 miles; Mobile & Ohio R. R. to Meridian (land-grant) 194.12 miles; Alabama Great Southern R. R. to Chattanooga (land-grant Alabama-Mississippi State Line to Alabama-Georgia State line) 298.9 miles, a total distance of 513.32 miles. The land-grant route, so constructed, is not used by commercial traffic. There are alternative routes from Iuka to Chattanooga involving land grants that would if used in the calculation result in lower charges than asserted by plaintiff and in higher charges than here computed by defendant. These alternative routes are indicated in plaintiff's Exhibit No. 40, which is made part hereof by reference. They are not routes used by commercial traffic, and are not further evidenced by particulars. 20. The shipments covered by items Nos. 175, 178, 187, 201, 202, 203, 213, and 214 in Exhibit No. 8 to the petition, moved from Corinth, Miss., to Paint Rock, Ala., over plaintiff's line, a non-land-grant route, a distance of 143.4 miles. The difference deducted and claimed aggregates $71.61. Plaintiff billed at full commercial rates. Defendant applied a land-grant route for equalization purposes as follows: Corinth to Meridian via Mobile & Ohio R. R. (land-grant) 194.12 miles; Meridian to Chattanooga via Alabama Great South |