307. Argument for the radical view.

This at least may be regarded as conceded, that a public service company if engaged in private business for itself dependent upon the service it conducts ought not to prefer itself to its competitors in business among the general public who have already made application for service. But a position has already been taken far beyond this proposition; it is now urged that those who are undertaking a public service ought not to be allowed to engage in private business in competition with those whom they are professing to serve unless matters may be so arranged that the competition shall be upon equal terms. And it may very probably turn out that it will be found necessary for the maintenance of the highest type of public service to forbid those who undertake such callings from engaging at all in business of their own where their interests might come in conflict with the interests of those whom they are serving.

The case bears some analogy to that of the trustee whose duty forbids him from entering, for his own benefit, into transactions inconsistent with his duty to his cestui. Surely if the railroads should engage in manufacturing, in agriculture, in dealing in groceries, or in selling meats, there would be a great public outcry that the individual could not compete against them with any hope of success. Even if in the face of the temptation to prefer themselves an upright railroad management should treat its business department upon the same basis as its competitors, the fact would remain that all in all the railroad could afford to conduct its own transportation of its own. goods at a lower margin of profit than it could handle others. If a railroad could not get two profits, one from trading and one from transporting, it would inevitably turn out that it would content itself with one from the whole transaction.

was prohibited in this decision, unconstitutional because against the clauses declaring warehouses public. In re Transportation of Fruit, 10 I. C. C. Rep. p. 377 (1905), hostility was shown against the practice of the refrigerator car lines in dealing in the commodities which they transport.

The present tendency therefore places the public service companies definitely in the position of conditions of commerce, free to all to use in their competition with one another. But from that competition the public service companies themselves ought to stand aloof, lest their entrance into the field disturb that equality which all may demand as of right. It would be too much to assert that this is established law as yet. However, it is not impossible to demonstrate that this ultimate rule is the logical consequence of the law establishing that public duty which requires of all who undertake any public employment the utmost public service.

BOOK II.

REGULATION OF RAILROAD RATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH COMMON LAW PRINCIPLES.

PART I.

LIMITATION OF CHARGES.

CHAPTER XI.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES GOVERNING COMPENSATION.

§ 311. General principles governing reasonableness of rates.

TOPIC A- THE SCHEDULE TAKEN AS A WHOLE.

§ 312. Reasonableness of the schedule as a whole.

313. Tests of the reasonableness of a schedule. 314. Many elements to be taken into account. 315. Interests of the companies to be considered. 316. Interests of the public to be considered.

317. Accommodation of the interests of both sought.

318. When fair net earnings left notwithstanding reduction of particular

rates.

TOPIC B-THE PARTICULAR RATES CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.

§ 319. Reasonableness of the separate rate.

320. Value of the service to the person served.

321. The complexities of the general problem.

322. Application of both tests necessary.

323. Relation of a particular rate to a whole schedule.

324. Possibility of increase of business if rates are lowered.

325. Inherent difficulties in accommodating all tests.

326. Governmental regulation for the best intrests of all concerned. 327. State of the authority upon the general subject.

§ 311. General principles governing reasonableness of rates. The question of the reasonableness of rates is a complex one. As there are two parties having an interest in the rates, the carrier and the shipper, and their interests are diverse and, to