Page images
PDF
EPUB

ADDITIONAL SERVICE-Continued.

that where perishable freight moves regularly and in sufficient volume to justify it, the special service should be furnished. Protection of Potato Shipments in Winter, 681 (684).

"ADJUDICATED BASIC RATE."

It is argued that the 38-cent rate from Chattanooga to New York is an adjudicated basic rate" and as high as it reasonably might be. Union Tanning Co. v. S. Ry. Co. 159 (162).

ADJUSTMENT OF RATES. See also DISTURBANCE OF ADJUSTMENT; PREFERENCES AND PREJUDICES.

Carriers admitted misalignment of rates and expressed intention of adjusting same, which was acceptable to complainants. Echols & Co. v. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co. 110 (111).

Advance for the purpose of bringing about an adjustment of rates held not to be justified. Coal Rates to Davenport, Iowa, 140 (141). Advisability of bringing about an adjustment of coal rates by a division of the so-called Springfield district into two districts not passed upon. Coal Rates to Davenport, Iowa, 140 (143).

If freight rates are adjusted equitably and reasonably the competition in prices as between markets is, as it should be, left free. Omaha Grain Exchange v. C. B. & Q. R. R. Co. 553 (556).

Due weight must be given to differences in value of commodities, and that difference is not limited by measure of difference in risk. Union Tanning Co. v. S. Ry. Co. 159 (163).

Carrier can not adjust its rates to discourage movement of low-grade commodity. Lumber from Louisiana to North Atlantic Points, 186 (192). It is not the duty of this Commission to equalize the profit and loss results of competing operations in different localities by overcoming natural and commercial conditions with rate adjustments. Louisville Cotton Seed Products Co. v. L. & N. R. R. Co. 607 (609).

To realign rates from Chicago and St. Louis with rates from Duluth and Minneapolis, justified advance. Class Rates to Watertown, S. Dak. 635 (636).

An adjustment of freight rates which takes from St. Paul the natural advantage of its location would be unjust and discriminatory. Furniture

Rates in the Northwest, 655 (666).

ADMINISTRATIVE RULING.

Rule 10-(g) of Tariff Circular. 18-A, considered. Highland Park Mfg. Co. v. S. Ry. Co. 67 (68).

Rule 4, Tariff Circular 18-A, affirmed. Pole Stock Lumber Co. v. G. & S. L. R. R. Co. 451 (454).

Rule 76, Tariff Circular 18-A, withdrawn. Transit Case, 204 (210). Conference Rulings 181 and 203, withdrawn. Transit Case, 204 (210). Conference Ruling 225, followed. American Brake Shoe & Foundry Co. t. A. G. S. R. R. Co. 446 (448).

ADMISSION.

Carriers admitted that considering nature of commodities, the application of less-than-carload rate on cotton drills when mixed with carloads of cotton duck was unreasonable, and damages were awarded. West Point Mfg. Co. v. C. V. Ry. Co. 79 (81).

Carriers admitted misalignment of rates and expressed intention of adjusting same, which was acceptable to complainants. Echols & Co. t.

ADMISSION-Continued.

Record indicated that complainants action in withdrawing its protest to
advanced rates was prompted by a lack of interest rather than by an
admission that increased rates are reasonable. Soft Coal Rates from
Southern Illinois to Arkansas, 135 (137).

ADVANCE IN RATES.

IN GENERAL.

Proposed advances not justified and joint rates on porch work should be
established which are not more than 3 cents in excess of current rate on
lumber. Rates on Porch Work, 1 (3).

Order of suspension against proposed advances vacated with understanding
that certain readjustments of through rates, now higher than interme-
diate locals, will be made. Rates on Cement, Paving, and Roofing, 11.
Increased rate on raw material argues for higher rate on finished product.
Rates on Linseed Oil, 265 (270).

It is unequivocal duty of carriers to justify proposed advances. Rates on
Linseed Oil, 265 (271).

Respondents have justified proposed rules and regulations to the extent
approved in this report but suspended rules must be canceled, and new
rules in harmony with these findings established. Regulations Restrict-
ing the Dimensions of Baggage, 292 (306).

The long existence of a rate prejudices an advance. Memphis Freight
Bureau v. L. & N. R. R. Co. 402 (404).

Section four provides that when water competition causes a carrier to
reduce rates to or from competitive points, such rates shall not be
increased unless such proposed increase rests upon changed conditions
other than the elimination of water competition. American Insulated
Wire & Cable Co. v. C. & N. W. Ry. Co. 415 (416).

Advance which will make higher rate from St. Louis to Portland than in
reverse direction, held not justified. Transcontinental Commodity Rates.
West Bound, 456 (464).

Carriers have shown propriety of some advance, and a moderate advance
in commodity rates may be justifiable. Proposed tariff must be canceled,
and new tariffs filed in conformity with view expressed in report. Fur-
niture Rates in the Northwest, 655 (667).

The fact that one of the interested carriers is to receive the benefit of the
proposed increase is of course not conclusive of the reasonableness of the
advanced rate. Rail-and-Lake Rates from Central Freight Asso. Ter-
ritory, 671 (673).

WHAT CONSTITUTES AN ADVANCE.

Cancellation of joint rates, thereby leaving higher combination rates in
effect. Rates on Porch Work, 1; Soft Coal Rates from Southern Illinois
to Arkansas, 135 (136); Advances in Rates on Cottonseed from Okla-
homa to Little Rock, Ark. 211; Wichita Falls System Joint Coal Rate
Cases, 215 (218).

Joint rates continued but increased by arbitrarles. Rates from Western
Points to Stations on Line of Rhode Island Company, 51 (52).

Respondent sought to cancel mileage rates, and restore former specific
rates, which were higher. Rates on Fresh Meats and Packing-House
Products, 154 (155).

Through routes and joint rates were to be canceled, thereby relieving the
L. & N. of the obligation to furnish cars. and making higher rates
effective. Coal Rates on the Stony Fork Branch, 168.

ADVANCE IN RATES-Continued.

WHAT CONSTITUTES AN ADVANCE-Continued.

Through rates were sought to be canceled, thereby putting in effect rates which were higher. Joint Coal Rates to Clinton, Iowa, 179.

Carriers proposed to cancel joint rail-water-rail rates leaving in effect combination of locals. Lumber from Louisiana to North Atlantic Points, 186 (187).

Tariffs proposed substituted a flat minimum weight on ear corn, snapped corn, and corn in the shuck in place of present minimum weight rule. Minimum Weights on Corn in Southwest, 197 (198).

Canceling commodity rate and putting in class rates. Rates on Edible Nuts from Louisiana, 213 (214).

Advance in rating on bicycles from second to first class. Davis Sewing Machine Co. v. P. C. C. & St. L. Ry. Co., 282.

Carriers increased rate in bags, but rate in bulk remains at old figure. Rates on Phosphate Rock from Tennessee Points, 377 (378).

Increase in minimum weights; cancellation of commodity rate; and advance on certain commodities. Transcontinental Commodity Rates, West Bound. 456 (460).

Tariff put certain towns outside of Texas common point territory into differential territory, thereby increasing rates. Texas Common Point Case, 528 (529).

Withdrawal of rule providing for absorption of icing charges. Refrigera tion charges on the K. C. S. Ry. 617.

Withdrawal of joint rates thus placing Minneapolis at a disadvantage. Withdrawal of Joint Rates on Grain via Minnesota Transfer, 595. Canceling rate in effect and restoring prior rates. Rates on Asphalt and Asphaltum, 614 (615).

Withdrawing present rates and grouping territory of origin, putting same on general rate basis that is applied to the territory of destination from Baltimore. Lake-and-Rail Class Rates from Pennsylvania Points, 669. Withdrawal of commodity rates leaving in effect higher class rates. Advances on Ground Iron Ore, 675.

JUSTIFICATION.

Advances proposed in new tariff to bring about proper relation of rates. justified. Rates on Clay Products from Brickland. N. Mex. 8 (9).

Cost of movement on one division of a system held not to justify advances. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Coal and Coke Rates. 20 (24).

The reasonableness of increased joint rates can not be proved by showing that the revenue accruing to the initial line under its divisions of the o'd rates was insufficient to cover the cost of handling the traffic. Id 20 (21).

Intent or motive actuating advances by carriers has no weight upon issue as to reasonableness of increased rates. Id. 20 (24).

If carrier does not see proper to make improvements that will reduce cost of operation, it can not claim that it may raise rates because cost approaches or overtakes revenue. Id. 20 (29).

Earnings under advanced rates held to justify advance. Proportional Rates on Excelsior and Excelsior Wrappers, 44 (45, 46).

Comparison of proposed rates with other live-stock rates, justifies advance. Rates on Horses and Mules from Kansas, 47 (48).

Traffic is expensive to handle, requiring refrigerator cars and expedited service, and damage claims are frequent. Rates on Cantaloupes and

ADVANCE IN RATES-Continued.
JUSTIFICATION--Continued.

If a particular system of accounting does not assign to the originating
branch of a line a sufficient amount to offset its expenses, the fact that
the branch then shows a loss is no justification for increasing the joint
through rate. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Coal and Coke Rates,
20 (21).

Contention that a rate on sash, doors, and blinds should be higher than
on lumber held not to justify an advance, as it presupposes the reason-
ableness of lumber rate, which is not shown. Rates on Sash, Doors, and
Blinds into Texas, 116 (118).

Contention of carriers that same rate must be applied alike to all kinds of
brick held not to justify the advance in rates on common brick as there
were no varying rates to equalize. Rates on Common Brick to Canada,
129 (130).

Withdrawal of joint rate which resulted in advance held not justified by
decision of Commission in Tap Line Case. Soft Coal Rates from South-
ern Illinois to Arkansas, 135 (136).

An advance for the purpose of bringing about an adjustment of rates held
not to be justified. Coal Rates to Davenport, Iowa, 140 (141).

A mere presentation of comparative ton-mile ratings held not to justify the
proposed advances. Id. 140 (143).

The fact that rates were advanced to preserve the relationship of rates,
and not with the purpose of securing more revenue, held not to justify the
advance. Rates on Coal from Iowa to the Dakotas, 144 (145).
Respondent contended that it is impracticable to operate the scale pre-
scribed in the Oklahoma case without jeopardizing its entire plane of
rates into New Mexico. Advances not justified. Rates on Fresh Meats
and Packing-House Products, 154 (156).

The fact that by canceling the joint rates, the respondent will be relieved
of the responsibility of furnishing cars, constitutes no justification for the
proposed change. Coal Rates on the Stony Fork Branch, 168 (174).
Carriers desired to secure a higher rate because of two-line haul. Ad-
vances not justified. Joint Coal Rates to Clinton, Iowa, 179 (180).
Present rates claimed unremunerative. Advances not justified. Lumber
from Louisiana to North Atlantic Points, 186 (188).

Other commodities produce higher revenue, and lumber can be carried at
higher local rates. Advances not justified. Id. 186 (191).

Evidence offered to show that present divisions are too low. Advance not
justified. Id. 186 (191).

Present rule providing for stated minimum "except when cars are loaded
to full visible capacity'" permits shippers to load light and thus tie up
equipment. Advance not justified. Minimum Weights on Corn in
Southwest. 197 (198).

Nothing moved under tariff and it was therefore a paper rate. Advances
not justified. Advance in Rates on Cottonseed from Oklahoma to Little
Rock, Ark. 211.

Lack of necessity for commodity rate and to place New Orleans on parity
with Natchez. Advance justified. Rates on Edible Nuts from Louisiana,
213 (214).

Extermination of western coal traffic and force consumers of Wichita Falls
system to use Oklahoma coal. Advances not justified. Wichita Falls

ADVANCE IN RATES-Continued.

JUSTIFICATION-Continued.

To place suburban stations on equality with the switching district in
keeping with precedent of general parity of rates for all points in
vicinity of Chicago. Advances not justified. Rates on Fuel Wood.
Sawdust, and Shavings, 254 (256).

Heavy empty-car movement, and meager inbound traffic. Advances not
justified. Davis Bros. Lumber Co., Ltd., v. C. R. I. & P. Ry. Co.
257 (263).

Present rates were established as war measure, and are unduly low
Rates on Linseed Oil, 265 (266).

Commercial conditions have changed; bicycles are not bearing due pro-
portion of transportation expenses; higher prices now prevail in the
trade. Advances justified. Davis Sewing Machine Co. v. P. C. C. &
St. L. Ry. Co. 282 (283).

To restore rate conditions existing prior to September 16, 1904. Advances
not justified. Michigan Upper Peninsula Pig-iron Rates, 284 (287).
Ground phosphate rock in bags comes into competition with commercial
fertilizer. Advances justified. Rates on Phosphate Rock from Ten-
nessee Points, 377 (378).

That operating costs have increased is not alone a justification for increase
in rates, Memphis Freight Bureau v. L. & N. R. R. Co. 402 (405).
Rates established by state commission are higher than rates in question
for similar hauls. Advances not justified. Robinson Land & Lumber Co.

r. M. & O. R. R. Co. 427 (428).
To realign intermediate rates in substantial accordance with findings of
Commission under amended fourth section by increasing terminal rates
to same or higher basis than applies to the interior on articles which
do not move by water. Advances justified in part, and not justified as
to other rates. Transcontinental Commodity Rates, West Bound.
456 (460).

Advance in minimum weights because of increased carrying capacity of
modern equipment. Id. 456 (460).

Cost of service not held to justify an increase in switching charges. Switch
ing Charges at Sheffield, Minn. 475 (477).

Cost of production considered as justification of higher rate. National
Refrigerator & Butchers' Supply Co. v. St. L. I. M. & S. Ry Co. 524 (525)
The fact that unless the rates to several communities are increased, another
and competing community will be entitled to lower rates than it now
enjoys, is no justification for the increase. Texas Common Point Case.
528 (532).

Increase made solely for purpose of obtaining more revenue held not to be
justified. Collingwood Brick Co. v. P. M. R. R. Co. 572 (573).
Advance in rates by withdrawal of joint rates via certain route held to be
justified by facts in case. Withdrawal of Joint Rates on Grain via Mi
nesota Transfer, 595 (598).

Canceled rate not shown to be unreasonably low as compared with other
rates. Rates on Asphalt and Asphaltum, 614 (616).

Revenue insufficient on short hauls to warrant absorption of icing charges
Advances justified. Refrigeration charges on the K. C. S. Ry. 617.

To realign rates from Chicago and St. Louis with rates from Duluth and
Minneapolis, justified advance. Class Rates to Watertown, S. Dak. 635

« PreviousContinue »