Discrimination-long and short haul.-It shall be unlawful for any such common carrier to charge or receive any greater compensation in the aggregate for the transportation of like kinds of property under similar circumstances and conditions for a shorter than for a longer distance over the same line in the same direction: Provided, however, that nothing contained in this section shall apply to the carriage, storage or handling of property, either free or at reduced rates, for the United States, for the State of Missouri, or for any fair, exposition, religious, scientific, benevolent or charitable purpose. [Ibid, section 1134.]

The ruling case in the construction of these sections seems to be Cohn v. St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry., 181 Mo. 30, 79 S. W. 961 (1904). There it was held that in an action against a railroad company for the violation of Rev. St. 1899, § 1133, prohibiting railroads from giving any unreasonable advantage to any locality, or subjecting any locality to unreasonable disadvantage, and section 1134, prohibiting them from charging higher rates for a shorter than for a longer haul, a petition alleging that the defendant has charged the plaintiffs a higher rate for shipping freight from a certain point to their station than its published tariffs from the same point in the same direction to stations at a greater distance-specifying the difference in the charges, and the amount on which the excessive freight was paid, and alleging that merchants doing business at the other points were given an undue advantage over plaintiff's-sufficiently states in what way they were injured by defendant's 'acts.

And where a railroad company charges higher rates for carrying freight a less distance than its published rates for carrying it a greater distacce in the same direction over the same road, it violates these sections, though it does not actually carry any freight the greater distance. See to this affect Seawell v. Kansas City, F. S. & M. Ry., 119 Mo. 222, 24 S. W. 1002 (1893). Compare McGrew v. Missouri P. Ry., 177 Mo. 533, 76 S. W. 995 (1903).

§ 1226. Nebraska.

That it shall be unlawful for any common carrier subject to the provisions of this Act to charge or receive any greater compensation in the aggregate for the transportation of passengers or of like kind of property, under substantially similar circumstances and conditions for a shorter than for a longer distance over

the same line, in the same direction, the shorter being included within the longer distance; but this shall not be construed as authorizing any common carrier within the terms of this Act to charge and receive as great compensation for a shorter as for a longer distance: Provided, however, that upon application to the board appointed under the provisions of this act, such common carrier may, in special cases after investigation by the board, be authorized to charge less for longer than for shorter distances for the transportation of passengers or property; and the board may from time to time prescribe the extent to which such designated common carrier may be relieved from the operation of this section of this Act. [Compiled Statutes (1899), section 4048, ch. 72, art. viii, section 4.]

1227. Nevada.

It shall be unlawful for any person or persons engaged in the transportation of property, as provided in section one of this Act, to charge or receive any greater compensation per carload, or part thereof, of similar property, for carrying, receiving, storing, forwarding, or handling the same for a shorter than for a longer distance in one continuous carriage. [General Statutes (1885), section 897.]

1228. New Hampshire.

No railroad corporation shall charge or receive for the transportation of freight to any station on its road in this State a greater sum, including terminal charges, than is at the same time charged or received for the transportation of the like class and quantity of freight from the same original point of departure to a station in this State at a greater distance in the same direction on its road. This provision shall apply to corporations operating two or more connecting railroads in this State as if the railroads belonged to or were operated by a single corporation. [Public Statutes, ch. 160, section 19.]

The principal case upon this section is Osgood v. Concord R., 63 N. H. 255 (1884), where it was held that a railroad which charges and receives for the transportation of a carload of merchandise to a station on its road where the merchandise is delivered and is accepted by the consignees, more than it charges for such transportation of similar goods for a greater distance, it liable to the penalty imposed by statute for such disproportionate charge, although by the original contract for transportation the merchandise was to have been transported to a more distant station.

1229. New Jersey.

No company shall charge or receive any greater rate of compensation for transportation of property between way stations. or between a terminal station and a way station than for transportation of such property between terminal stations. [Laws of 1903, ch. 257, section 44.]

1230. North Carolina.

That it shall be unlawful for any common carrier subject to the provisions of this Act to charge or receive any greater compensation in the aggregate for the transportation of passengers or of like kind of property under substantially similar circumstances and conditions for a shorter than for a longer distance over the same line in the same direction, the shorter being included within the longer distance, but this shall not be construed as authorizing any common carrier within the terms of this Act. to charge and receive as great compensation for a shorter as for a longer distance: Provided, however, that upon application to the commission appointed under the provisions of this Act such common carrier may, in special cases, after investigation by the commissioner be authorized to charge less for longer than for shorter distances for the transportation of passengers or property; and the Commission may from time to time prescribe the extent to which such designated common carrier may be relieved from the operation of this section of this Act: Provided, that nothing in this Act contained shall be taken as in any manner abridging or controlling the rates of freights charged by any

railroad in this State for conveying freight which comes from or goes beyond the boundaries of the State and on which freight. less than local rates on any railroad carrying the same are charged by such railroads. But said railroad company shall possess the same power and right to charge such rates for carrying such freight as they possessed before the passage of this Act. [Laws of 1899, ch. 164, section 14.]

See No. Carolina Corp. Com. v. Atlantic C. L. Ry., 137 N. C. I. 49 S. E. 191 (1904).

§ 1231. North Dakota.

It shall be unlawful for any railroad, railroad corporation or common carrier, subject to the provisions of this Act, to charge or receive any greater compensation in the aggregate for the transportation of passengers or of a like kind of property for a shorter than for a longer distance over its railroad, all or any portion of the shorter haul being included within the longer. And said railroad, railroad corporation, or common carrier shall charge no more for transporting passengers or freight to or from any point on its railroad than a fair and just rate as compared with the price it charges for the same kind of transportation to and from any other point. [Laws of 1897, ch. 115, section 17.]

1232. Ohio.

No company or person owning, controlling, or operating a railroad, in whole or in part, within this State, shall charge or receive for transportation of freight for any distance within this State a larger sum than is charged by the same company or person for the transportation in the same direction, of freight of the same class or kind, for an equal or greater distance over the same railroad and connecting lines of railroad; and every such company or person who violates, or permits to be violated, the provisions of this section, shall forfeit and pay to the party aggrieved a sum equal to double the amount of the overcharge,

but in no case less than twenty-five dollars, and shall also for every such unlawful act, forfeit and pay to the State a penalty of not less than one hundred nor more than one thousand dollars, to be recovered in a civil action, brought in the name of the State, by the prosecuting attorney of the county wherein such offense was committed, as a part of his official duties, whenever compliant is made to him, and he is satisfied that the provisions of this section have been violated. [Annotated Revised Statutes (1906), section 3373.]

$1233. Pennsylvania.

All individuals, associations and corporations shall have equal right to have persons and property transported over railroads and canals, and no undue or unreasonable discrimination shall be made, in charges for, or in facilities for transportation of freight or passengers, within the State, or coming from or going to any other State. Persons and property transported over any railroad shall be delivered at any station, at charges not exceeding charges for transportation of persons and property of the same class in the same direction to any more distant station; but excursion and commutation tickets may be issued at special rates. [Constitution (1874), art. 17, section 3.]

This provision was held efficient in itself without ancilliary legislation in Central Iron Works v. Pennsylvania R. R., 2 Dauph. Co. 308, 17 Pa. Co. Ct. 651, 5 Pa. Dist. 247 (1895). In that case plaintiff averred in its bill that defendant allowed favored individuals, associations and corporations upon their semi-bituminous coal, carried and transported to P. and G. piers, from their mines situated in the several coal regions, a secret rate not exceeding $1.10 per gross ton, and from the W. region a rate not exceeding $1.35 per gross ton, while for the same class and quality of coal, transported from the same regions, in the same direction, to a less distant point, the plaintiff had been, and was still, compelled to pay a rate of $1.47 and $1.76, respectively, per gross ton, contrary to the provisions of section 3, article 17, of the Constitution, and asked for an injunction to restrain the defendants from making such charges. Defendants demurred, but decision was given for plaintiffs.