The coal fields in Alabama are in the north-central portion of the State. Practically all of the mines in these fields are grouped under the present rates on bunker coal therefrom to the Gulf ports over one or more routes. The present rates are $1.56 to Mobile and Pensacola and $1.91 to Gulfport, Port Chalmette, and New Orleans, and the proposed rates are $1.25 to Mobile and Pensacola and $1.60 to the other ports. The rate of $1.25 to Mobile is proposed only from mines on lines of the Southern Railway Company and Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company for application over their respective lines, and from mines on lines of the St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company for application over the line of that respondent through Mississippi to Aliceville, Ala., and the line of the Alabama, Tennessee & Northern Railroad Corporation beyond. The rate of $1.25 to Pensacola is proposed only from mines on the Louisville & Nashville and the St. Louis-San Francisco, for application over their respective lines. The suspended rate of $1.60 to Port Chalmette and New Orleans is published only from mines on the Louisville & Nashville and on the Southern and its system lines for application over their respective lines. There are no facilities for the transshipment of coal to vessels at Gulfport and, so far as appears, there has been and is no movement of bunker coal to that port. The proposed rate to that port, therefore, will not be further considered.

Prior to the hearing, the St. Louis-San Francisco obtained the concurrence of the Southern and the Gulf, Mobile & Northern Railroad Company, respectively, in a rate of $1.60 on coal from mines on the St. Louis-San Francisco to Port Chalmette and New Orleans, for bunkerage purposes, over routes composed of its line and the lines of the Gulf, Mobile & Northern and of the Southern through New Albany, Miss., and Birmingham, Ala., respectively. These carriers are prepared to publish this rate in the event the suspended schedules are found justified. Upon hearing the Southern offered to join in the publication of the same rate from mines on the Central of Georgia Railway and the Seaboard Air Line Railway to Port Chalmette and New Orleans.

From mines in Alabama served by the Central of Georgia and Seaboard to Mobile and Pensacola and from Brilliant, Ala., which is served by a short detached line of the Illinois Central Railroad Company, to all of these ports, it is proposed to continue the present rates.

Most of the bunker coal which moves from Alabama to Mobile, Pensacola, and New Orleans is produced at the mines of seven operators. The mines of six of these operators are dependent entirely upon respondent railroads for the transportation of this commodity.

The mines of one of these operators are served by railroad and also are accessible to transportation provided by the Federal Barge Lines on the Warrior River. There is intense competition between these producers in the sale of this commodity. Shipments of bunker coal by railroad from Alabama mines in 1937 amounted to 107,000 tons to Mobile, 105,000 tons to New Orleans, and 35,000 tons to Pensacola. The key rate in this proposed revision is the rate of the Southern and Louisville & Nashville from mines on their lines to Mobile. The stated purpose of this rate is to enable producers at mines on the lines of these carriers to compete in the sale of bunker coal with a producer having mines at Empire and Hull, Ala., on the line of the St. Louis-San Francisco, who ships this commodity by rail and barge to Mobile. This rate is shown to be substantially equivalent to the total average cost of transporting bunker coal from these latter mines by switch movement over the St. Louis-San Francisco to Coyle, Ala., on the Warrior River, and thence by barge operated by the Federal Barge Lines, together with the cost of unloading and of tipple service at Mobile. The proposed rates to the other ports are designed to continue existing relations between those ports and the port of Mobile, and their measure is dependent upon the measure of the rate of the Southern and Louisville & Nashville to Mobile.

Transportation from mines in Alabama on the Southern and Louisville & Nashville to Mobile, over the lines of these respondents, is entirely within that State. The proposed rates are restricted in their application to coal delivered to tipples for seagoing vessels for destinations on and by way of the Gulf of Mexico or by way of the Gulf. The rates to this port and to the other Gulf ports apparently were so restricted after the issuance of the Commission's report in Rates on Bunker Coal, 73 I. C. C. 62, decided July 24, 1922. In that proceeding, an investigation on the Commission's own motion, the question presented was the propriety of rates on bunker coal which were lower than the rates from the same points of origin to the same ports on the same kinds of coal for local delivery at those ports but not into vessels. As there stated, that investigation was instituted because many of the carriers serving Atlantic ports made lower rates to such ports on coal which was delivered to vessels, either as cargo or for bunker purposes, than they made on coal which was delivered locally to the ports but not into vessels, whereas carriers serving certain Gulf ports had not felt free to adopt this practice in the case of coal for bunker purposes in view of decisions indicating that it was unlawful. There were also heard in connection with that investigation certain fourth-section

applications by which carriers sought authority to charge rates on coal for bunker purposes which were lower than the rates contemporaneously maintained on like traffic to intermediate points. The Commission found that it was not unlawful for carriers there respondents to apply on coal delivered at ports to vessels, whether as cargo or for bunker purposes, rates which were lower than rates from the same points of origin to the same ports on similar kinds of coal for local delivery at those ports, not into vessels; and, further, that the maintenance by carriers there respondents of rates on coal delivered at ports to vessels, whether as cargo or for bunker purposes, which were lower than the local rates from the same points of origin to intermediate points did not contravene the fourth section of the act. In that connection the Commission said that, from the facts there disclosed, it appeared that "bunker coal as a practical matter is so closely associated with cargo coal and, by reason of this association, so impressed with the character of the latter that a distinction in rates between the two is impractical"; and that it followed "that a rate on coal delivered to a vessel and thereafter used for bunker purposes may fairly be regarded and treated as a proportional or transshipment rate”.

The question as to the Commission's jurisdiction over the transportation of bunker coal from and to points entirely within a State, however, was not there considered or passed upon. So far as appears, coal which moves from mines in Alabama to Mobile for bunkerage purposes is dumped into the bunkers of vessels for which intended, and is for use and is used as fuel on such vessels. In every instance it thus becomes the property of the vessel at the Mobile dock and ceases to be an article of commerce, as would ordinary ship supplies or a piece of machinery installed on a vessel as part of its equipment. Upon these facts we are of the opinion and find that the Commission has no jurisdiction over the transportation of this bunker coal from mines in Alabama to Mobile over the lines of respondents Southern and Louisville & Nashville, respectively. Compare New Pittsburgh Coal Co. v. Hocking Valley Ry. Co., 24 I. C. C. 214; Basin Supply Co. v. Texarkana & F. S. Ry. Co., 33 I. C. C. 157; Corona Coal Co. v. Secretary of War, 69 I. C. C. 389; and Swan & Finch Co. v. United States, 190 U. S. 143.

The record indicates that under the laws of Alabama common carriers by railroad are required to obtain permission from the regulatory authority of that State to publish intrastate rates such as that proposed by the Southern and Louisville & Nashville to Mobile. As the measure of the intrastate rate so authorized, as before indicated, will determine the measure of the interstate rates on like traffic, the

suspended and proposed interstate rates are in a sense hypothetical rates. Ordinarily we would not consider such rates, but the showing made by respondents and numerous shippers of bunker coal concerning their inability to compete with the shipper whose mines are accessible to transportation provided by the Federal Barge Lines and of the threatened loss of a very substantial amount of this traffic that will follow any delay in consideration of the lawfulness of the interstate rates impels us to depart from our usual practice with respect to these rates. Our consideration of these rates, however, is not to be understood as anticipating the action that may be taken by the regulatory authority of Alabama concerning the intrastate rates to Mobile.

In the following table, compiled from exhibits of record, are shown the short tariff distances and the present and suspended rates from mines on the lines of respondents to Pensacola and New Orleans and over the interstate route to Mobile, the present rates and the rates which certain of respondents have agreed or are willing to establish from mines on the St. Louis-San Francisco, Central of Georgia, and Seaboard to New Orleans, and the present rates from Brilliant to Mobile and Pensacola and from mines on the Central of Georgia and Seaboard to Pensacola, together with the ton-mile and car-mile revenues under the proposed rates:

No change proposed.

Average distance over Frisco and Southern Railway system lines via Birmingham.
Rate which certain of respondents have agreed or are willing to establish.
Average distance over Frisco and G., M. & N. via New Albany.

The rate to Mobile includes a charge of $4.68 a car, or approximately 9 cents a ton, for switching by the Alabama State Docks Commission at that port, and a charge of 15 cents a ton for tipple service. After deducting these charges, the proposed rate for the joint-line haul to Mobile would yield revenues of only 2.806 mills per ton-mile and

14.03 cents per car-mile. The proposed single-line rate of the Louisville & Nashville to Pensacola includes the expense of tipple service at that port of 15 cents. After deducting that expense, the proposed rate of that respondent to that port would yield 3.94 mills per tonmile and 19.71 cents per car-mile. The proposed rate of the St. LouisSan Francisco to Pensacola includes tipple service at that port. Assuming that the expense of such service corresponds with the charge of the State Docks at Mobile for tipple service, or 15 cents, the proposed rate of the St. Louis-San Francisco to Pensacola would yield only 2.77 mills per ton-mile and 13.85 cents per car-mile. There is practically 100-percent empty-return haul of the cars in which this coal moves.

Respondent Louisville & Nashville submitted evidence of a general character that the proposed rate to Pensacola over its single-line route would produce something over and above out-of-pocket expenses; but that, if made applicable to comparable joint-line hauls, this rate probably would not pay out-of-pocket expenses.

The rate of $1.60 proposed to Port Chalmette and New Orleans from mines on the Southern and Louisville & Nashville, and which certain of respondents are willing to establish from mines on the St. LouisSan Francisco, Central of Georgia, and Seaboard is relatively higher, distance considered, except from mines on the St. Louis-San Francisco over the route of that respondent and the Gulf, Mobile and Northern, than the proposed rate to Mobile and Pensacola. This rate likewise includes a charge of 15 cents for tipple service at Port Chalmette and New Orleans, and, where switching at New Orleans is performed by the Public Belt Railroad, also a switching charge of $6.93 a car, or about 13.9 cents a ton. Respondent Southern reaches the coal tipple at Port Chalmette over its own rails.

After deducting the charge for tipple service and the switching charge of the Public Belt at New Orleans, the proposed rate over the single-line route of the Louisville-Nashville would yield revenues of 3.01 mills per ton-mile and 15.06 cents per car-mile. The earnings under the proposed rate to Port Chalmette and New Orleans for application over the Southern and its system lines and from mines on the lines of the other carriers in connection with which the Southern is willing to establish a rate of $1.60 would be relatively higher than those shown for respondent Louisville & Nashville. With respect to the suspended rate to Port Chalmette and New Orleans, there is also testimony of a general character that it would yield something over and above actual out-of-pocket expenses and would not impose a burden on other traffic.