Statement showing proportion of grain as compared with other freight received at Mobile and the Aberdeen Group, during the months of January, February and March, 1902.

STATEMENT OF FREIGHT TRAFFIC, SHOWING TONS AND REVENUE ON ALL CLASSES RECEIVED AT MOBILE, MERIDIAN AND THE ABERDEEN GROUP, FOR THE YEARS OF 1900 AND 1901, AND THE FIRST FOUR MONTHS OF 1902.

Mobile.
Meridian

Tons Revenue Tons Revenue Tons Revenue 131,330 $206,821.69 387,556 $682,619.43 385,939 $752,638.15 64,797 125,194.73 193,549

370,550.35 175,835 355,613.76 25,119.64 9,397 22,813.32

STATEMENT OF FREIGHT TRAFFIC, SHOWING TONS AND REVENUE ON ALL CLASSES FORWARDED FROM MOBILE, MERIDIAN AND THE ABERDEEN GROUP FOR THE YEARS OF 1900 AND 1901, AND THE FIRST FOUR MONTHS OF 1902.

The Report on Statistics of Railroads compiled by the Commission for the year ending June 30, 1902, shows the following figures for the revenue per ton per mile received. Average of all the roads in the United States..

The M. & O. lines south of Cairo, which include all of the roads in Group V...

From annual reports of the Mobile & Ohio for the years named.

Year ending June 30.

1896.

1897

.

Gross earnings

from operation and other income.

Less operating
expenses and
deductions
from income.

.757

.816

.597

.633

Surplus from operations of

year. $90,591.77

3,872,758.00

3,853,439.25

19,318.75

The report of the Southern Ry., year ending June 30, 1902,

shows,

Ownership of $4,932,600 (or 64 per cent)

Out of

7,680,000 outstanding of

Mobile & Ohio Capital Stock,

Out of

and

Shows ownership of $7,949,500 (or 37 per cent)
21,469,545 outstanding of
Mobile & Ohio Mortgage Bonds.

Beside the latter amount there is outstanding of funded debt of the M. & O.

The stocks and bonds of the M. & O. owned by the Southern Ry. appear in the report of the latter company in sections covered by the following explanation: "Pledged under Southern Railway Co. Consolidated Mortgage, pledged under other Mortgages or agreements, or held in Treasury for control of subsidiary properties in Southern Railway System, or held as muniments of title."

The following statement is taken from page 15 of the annual report of the Mobile & Ohio for the year ending June 30, 1902: "The Southern Railway Company does not appear upon the books of the Mobile & Ohio Railroad Company as a stockholder of record, and therefore the Mobile & Ohio Railroad Company, as such, has no knowledge of the subject. "The holding of record of a large majority of the Mobile & Ohio Railroad Company's stock is lodged with the Farmer's Loan and Trust Company, of New York, under a debenture deed of trust dated first of May, 1879, and this stock stands upon the books of the Company in the name of the Farmer's Loan and Trust Company.

"It is a matter of public knowledge, however, that a large majority of the holders of the stock certificates of the Mobile & Ohio Railroad Company did sell their certificates prior to June 30, 1901, to the Southern Railway Company, and it is understood that the Southern Railway Company has issued against such certificates its Mobile & Ohio Stock Trust certificates secured by a pledge of the Mobile & Ohio Railroad Stock Certificates to the Guaranty Trust Co., of New York, and that the position of the Mobile & Ohio Stock Certificates was reported to the Interstate Commerce Commission in the Southern Railway Company's report to the Commission for the year ended June 30th, 1901, on page 37. The transaction is also set forth on pages 6 and 14 of annual report of the Southern Railway to its stockholders for the year ended June 30, 1901."

CONCLUSIONS.

There are two questions presented for determination in this case: First, the alleged unlawful discriminations in favor of Mobile and Meridian and against Tupelo, Aberdeen, Columbus, West Point and Starkville, herein designated as the "Aberdeen Group," by the higher scale of rates to the five cities last named than to Mobile and Meridian on traffic from St. Louis, East St. Louis and Cairo.

Both at Meridian and Mobile defendant is confronted by competition of transportation that is actual, substantial and controlling. The circumstances and conditions existing at towns in the Aberdeen Group and Meridian and Mobile are substantially dissimilar.

We must be guided by the established interpretation of the law by the courts in which the validity of all contested orders of the Commission must be determined. In view of this judicial interpretation of the provisions of the third and fourth sections of the Act to regulate commerce relating to discrimina