APPENDIX II.

REPORT AND OPINION OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION IN THE CASE OF THE MILK PRODUCERS' PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION, COMPLAINANT, v. THE DELAWARE, LACKAWANNA

AND WESTERN AND OTHER RAILWAY COMPA

NIES, DEFENDANTS.-MARCH 13, 1897.

MILK PRODUCERS' PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION, COMPLAINANT, v. THE DELAWARE, LACKAWANNA AND WESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY; NEW YORK, ONTARIO AND WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY; NEW YORK, LAKE ERIE AND WESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY, AND J. G. M'CULLOUGH AND E. B. THOMAS, THE RECEIVERS THEREOF; NEW YORK, SUSQUEHANNA AND WESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY; PENNSYLVANIA, POUGHKEEPSIE AND BOSTON RAILROAD COMPANY, AND HENRY H. KINGSTON, THE RECEIVER THEREOF; LEHIGH VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY; NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN AND HARTFORD RAILROAD COMPÁNY; LEHIGH AND HUDSON RIVER RAILWAY COMPANY; THE PRESIDENT, MANAGERS, AND COMPANY OF THE DELAWARE AND HUDSON CANAL COMPANY; ALBANY AND SUSQUEHANNA RAILROAD COMPANY; PHILADELPHIA, READING AND NEW ENGLAND RAILROAD COMPANY, AND J. K. O. SHERWOOD, RECEIVER THEREOF; NEW YORK CENTRAL AND HUDSON RIVER RAILROAD COMPANY; WEST SHORE RAILROAD COMPANY; WALLKILL VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY; ULSTER AND DELAWARE RAILROAD COMPANY; ELMIRA, CORTLAND AND NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY; LEHIGH AND NEW ENGLAND RAILROAD COMPANY, AND THE ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY, DEFENDANTS.

Decided March 13, 1897.

1. The complaining Milk Producers' Association, whether representing its own members, or specially authorized to represent other shippers, or assuming in addition to represent shippers engaged in the same industry on some of the defendant lines, was entitled to bring and maintain this proceeding, affecting rates on milk supplied for a common market, against all the defendants engaged in carrying for that market. A defendant carrier is not entitled to have a complaint dismissed as to it "because of the absence of direct damage to the complainant," and it is the duty of the Commission, under express direction in the act, to "execute and enforce" the provisions of the statute.

2. The defendant, The New York, Susquehanna and Western Railroad Company, engaged in the transportation of milk and cream from points in the State of New York through the State of New Jersey to the city of New York, is subject to regulation under the act to regulate commerce in respect of such transportation.

3. Charging the same aggregate rates on like traffic for longer and shorter distances over the same line, in the same direction, does not contravene the provisions of section 4 of the act to regulate commerce.

4. The free transportation of shippers or dealers between State or interstate points on account of interstate freight traffic furnished to the carrier is unlawful.

5. Whether an agreement entered into by a carrier mainly for the purpose of developing its milk traffic, and under which compensation is afforded to the other contracting party equal to a considerable share of the gross receipts from such traffic, involves extravagant expenditure of revenue and is disadvantageous to the carrier, is matter for it to determine; but extraordinary or unnecessary cost of operation or management can not be permitted to excuse unreasonable or unjust rates, discriminations, preferences, or prejudices.

6. Charging the same rate per quart on milk in 40-quart cans and in bottles, usually of 1-quart capacity, and packed in cases, found to constitute discrimination in favor of the bottle method of shipment, but for reasons stated, Held, that the proper relation of rates as between can and bottle milk from all points of shipment need not now be determined.