The complainant in the pending case, the Chamber of Commerce of Chattanooga, is the successor of the Board of Trade of Chattanooga, complainant in the former case, and is an asso ciation of merchants and business men of Chattanooga incorporated under the laws of Tennessee for the purpose "of promoting and fostering the commercial, manufacturing and other material interests of that city." The complaint relates to the rates of the defendants on the six numbered classes of traffic and on a large number of commodities from Boston, Providence, New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore to Chattanooga and Nashville, respectively, both by the direct lines to Chattanooga and via Chattanooga to Nashville, and by the lines via Cincinnati to Chattanooga and via Cincinnati to Nashville, and it charges: First, That the rates to Chattanooga are unjust and unreasonable in themselves, in violation of section 1 of the Act to regulate commerce, which requires all rate charges for any service rendered in the transportation of property or in connection therewith to be reasonable and just and prohibits and declares unlawful every unjust and unreasonable charge. Second, That the rates to Chattanooga are higher than for the longer haul through Chattanooga and 151 miles on to Nashville, and are in violation of the provision of section 4 of the Act to regulate commerce which declares it to be unlawful for any common carrier subject to the provisions of the Act "to charge or receive any greater compensation in the aggregate for the transportation of a 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." Third, That "the merchants and other business men of Chattanooga and Nashville, respectively, compete for business largely in the same territory; that the excesses of the Chattanooga rates over the Nashville rates amount in most, if not all, instances to a reasonable profit on the traffic and subject Chattanooga merchants to an undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage in such competition and give Nashville an undue or unreasonable preference or advantage over Chattanooga in such competition, and that the rates in question to Chattanooga and Nashville are, therefore, in violation of section 3 of the Act to regulate commerce, which declares unlawful such undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage and such undue preference or advantage." It is alleged in the complaint that if there should be any difference in rates as between Chattanooga and Nashville, such difference should be made by making the Chattanooga rates lower than the Nashville rates, because, (1) of Chattanooga's greater proximity to the points of shipment, Boston, Providence, New York, Philadelphia and Baltimore; (2) of transportation by the Tennessee River to Chattanooga; and (3) of the greater number of rail lines which enter Chattanooga and compete for business from those cities to Chattanooga than enter Nashville and compete for such business to Nashville. The complaint sets forth the rates in question to Chattanooga and to Nashville on the six numbered classes, and also on a large number of commodities. All the defendants, except the Merchants & Miners Transportation Company and the Clyde Steamship Company, have filed answers to the complaint. In these answers (except that of the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company) the defendants admit that the rates in question are higher for the shorter haul to Chattanooga than for the longer haul by 151 miles through Chattanooga to Nashville; that the rates are correctly set forth in the complaint and that they participate in those rates either as members of the lines to Chattanooga and through Chattanooga to Nashville, or as members of the lines through Cincinnati to Chattanooga and to Nashville, but they deny that those rates are in violation of either section 1, 3 or 4 of the law as charged in the complaint. In justification of the lower rates from New York and other eastern seaboard cities to Nashville than to Chattanooga, it is alleged (answers of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company and Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway Company) that those rates were primarily made by the Trunk Line roads through the Ohio River crossings, Cincinnati, Louisville and Evansville, "and are controlled by the following competitive circumstances and conditions:" First, Water competition by the Hudson River, the St. Lawrence River, the Erie Canal and the lakes, which fixes the rail rates from New York to Chicago and to which latter rates, it is alleged, the rates from New York and other eastern seaboard cities to Cincinnati, Louisville and Evansville "are made to bear certain fixed relations." Second, Water competition between Paducah and Evansville on the Ohio River, on the one hand, and Nashville on the Cumberland River, on the other, by means of boats on the Cumberland River which connect with boats on the Ohio River. Third, Water competition from New York and the other eastern seaboard cities to Cincinnati, Louisville and Evansville by way of the ocean, the gulf and the Mississippi and Ohio rivers. Fourth, Competition by ocean from New York and other eastern seaboard cities to Norfolk and Newport News, Virginia, and thence by the rail lines, the Norfolk & Western and the Chesapeake & Ohio railways, from those cities to Louisville, Cincinnati and Evansville. It is alleged that the rates from said eastern seaboard cities to Cincinnati and Louisville having been fixed by these competitive circumstances and conditions, the rates from said eastern seaboard cities to Nashville cannot greatly exceed the rates to Cincinnati or Louisville added to the rates which can be obtained by steamboats from Cincinnati or Louisville over the Ohio and Cumberland rivers to Nashville, but that there is no effective open water route from the eastern seaboard cities to Chattanooga, nor from Cincinnati or Louisville to Chattanooga and the water competition which forces down the through rail rates from Cincinnati and Louisville, respectively, to Nashville, does not extend to Chattanooga. It is further alleged that Nashville enjoys a position geographically which is not enjoyed by Chattanooga, being practically the center of a circle, of which Cincinnati, Louisville, Evansville, Cairo and Memphis may be regarded as points on the circumference, and that there is a large territory tributary to Cincinnati, Louisville, Evansville, Cairo and Memphis, south of the Ohio River, which is also tributary to Nashville, and the rate adjustment to Nashville relatively to the points specified above has been, is, and should be such as to enable it to do business in comparison with those cities. The Southern Railway Company alleges in its answer that all rates from eastern seaboard cities to Chattanooga are fixed by the eastern lines and are made relative to the rates from those cities to Atlanta, Rome, Birmingham and Anniston, which cities compete directly with Chattanooga in territory common to those cities and to Chattanooga, and that this is the basis upon which the Chattanooga rates are made. The Louisville & Nashville road denies that it is engaged in the transportation of traffic through Chattanooga to Nashville. The New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company denies that it is a party to any of the rates in question in this case and the testimony is silent on that point. It is also alleged in behalf of the defendants that the Chattanooga and Nashville rates are governed by different classifications; the Chattanooga rates by the Southern Classification and the Nashville rates by the Official Classification. FACTS. 1. The defendants, the Southern Railway Company, the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, the Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway Company, the Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Railway Company, the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, the Georgia Railroad, the Central of Georgia Railway Company, the Norfolk & Western Railway Company, the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, the Merchants & Miners Transportation Company, the Clyde Steamship Company and the Ocean Steamship Company of Savannah, are common carriers engaged as parts of through lines and under joint tariffs of rates in transporting traffic from New York and other eastern seaboard cities to Chattanooga and to Nashville. 2. The following table gives the rates in question from Boston, Providence and New York to Chattanooga and Nashville, respectively, on the six numbered classes in cents per hundred pounds, and also shows the excesses in cents per hundred pounds and per carloads of 30,000 pounds of the Chattanooga rates over the Nashville rates. The same excesses of the rates to Chattanooga over those to Nashville as are shown in the above table in rates from Boston, Providence and New York, exist under the rates from Philadelphia and Baltimore. The following table gives the rates in cents per hundred pounds from Boston, Providence and New York to Chattanooga and Nashville, respectively, and the excesses of the Chattanooga rates over the Nashville rates on carloads of 30,000 pounds on a few commodities. Those rates are given as illustrating the differences in rates in favor of Nashville on the entire list of commodities. COMMODITY RATES. Canned goods Boston and New York to Chattanooga, C/L.. Difference on a carload of 30,000 pounds in favor of Nashville. Difference on a carload of 30,000 pounds in favor of Nashville... Difference on a carload of 30,000 pounds in favor of Nashville.... |