from the mine to the side-track, but it is always much greater than the expense of loading from tipples and is seldom resorted to unless the price of coal in market is abnormally high. Under normal conditions, team-track loaders cannot compete successfully with those who load from tipples. Mines from which the coal is thus hauled on wagons or sleds are called farm banks, to distinguish them from mines where the loading is done from tipples.

Previous to the winter of 1902-1903 some team-track-loading had been done, but it was insignificant in amount when compared with the loading from tipples. In consequence of the high price of coal during that winter, brought about largely by the strike of employees herein before referred to, owners of farm banks opened them up, began to take coal therefrom, and re quested defendant to furnish them cars in which to ship it to market. For a short time, apparently, defendant complied with such requests, regardless of where the loading was to be done, but it did not have at its disposal a sufficient number of cars to meet all requirements of shippers, and those who loaded from tipples, being anxious to make all the shipments they could, and noticing that new conditions brought about by the opening of farm banks caused cars to be more scarce than they otherwise would be, insisted that the supply to team-track loaders should be shut off. The former argued that they had built tipples and invested much more money than the latter and were therefore entitled to greater consideration. Defendant apparently sympathized with the position taken by those who loaded from tipples, and being willing to assist them in the matter as much as it lawfully could made an investigation of the new conditions. It ascertained that previous to the change caused by the advance in the price of coal its side-track facilities, in some instances, were only sufficient to accommodate the loading of freight articles other than coal, and that permitting coal to be loaded from wag

or sleds under such circumstances interfered with the loading of other traffic. It also discovered that the wider distribution of cars made necessary a greater amount of switching, and came to the conclusion that more service could be gotten out of its coal cars if the number of points where coal could be load

ed from wagons or sleds were made less. Accordingly, it de cided to and did issue an order, dated on or about January 23, 1903, prohibiting such loading at certain points, including Meyersdale and Keystone Junction, and designating Sand Patch, Rockwood and Boynton as the only places in the vicinity of complainants' mines where team-track loading of coal would be permitted. This order applied indiscriminately to all shippers.

Of the shipping points last above mentioned Sand Patch is the nearest to complainants' mines. Distances thereto are, from the Glade City mine about 3 miles, and from the Mosgrave mine about 5 miles.

Complainants claim, and we find, that they could have loaded their coal more rapidly at Meyersdale or Keystone Junction than at Sand Patch. Therefore more service could have been gotten out of the cars in the former than in the latter instance.

No shipments of coal from Sand Patch were shown, and from what the record discloses we think it probable that no coal was loaded at that point. Consequently, supplying cars at Meyersdale or Keystone Junction would have required no wider distribution than would have been necessary had they been supplied at Sand Patch.

Complainants did not ask permission to load coal on any of defendant's side-tracks, and the loading they wished to do would not have been detrimental to defendant's interests on account of interfering with the loading of other traffic. The only way of transferring cars from the Deal side-track at Meyersdale to defendant's main line is over another side-track upon which lumber and perhaps some other freight articles are loaded, but at that point defendant's team track, properly so-called, is situated on the south side, while the Deal side-track is located on the north side, of defendant's main line.

Another matter advanced by defendant in justification of the discrimination referred to is the danger connected with the transfer of cars between the Deal side-track and defendant's main line, which, at and near the point where they intersect each other, are constructed on a grade. On account of this grade, such danger is greater than it otherwise would be, but no greater than that connected with the transfer of cars between the main

line and the side-track where lumber is loaded as heinbefore stated. Also, the record shows that a side-track where a tipple is used is generally constructed in this manner, to facilitate the movement of cars thereon for loading purposes. When defendant supplies empty cars in such a case it moves them up the grade to a point beyond the tipple, and they can be moved afterwards in the opposite direction without difficulty, as occasion requires, by those who load them.

Defendant also claims that the enforcement of said order was a benefit to the general public and therefore justifiable. It contends that during the period of time in question, because of the great scarcity of coal at consuming points, the interests of the public demanded that defendant should get the greatest service possible out of its coal cars. But, as hereinbefore shown, the amount of such service would not have been increased by compelling complainants to load at Sand Patch, Rockwood or Boynton, instead of permitting them to load at Meyersdale or Keystone Junction.

The amount of coal loaded from wagons and sleds at Boynton and Rockwood was not definitely shown, but defendant's superintendent stated that eight different parties applied for permission to do such loading at Boynton.

On January 26, 1903, defendant amended its schedules of rates and charges by publishing a supplement thereto, providing that on and after that date coal loaded into a car from a sidetrack where a tipple was not used would be subject to an additional charge of 50 cents per ton; that is to say, if coal were loaded from wagons or sleds the charge for transporting it would be 50 cents per ton more than if it were loaded from a tipple.

The purpose of this was to further discourage team-track loading of coal and provide additional compensation for services connected with the transportation of coal so loaded. Defendant insists that the discrimination thus made is justified by the difference in cost of service, that is, the cost of services connected with the transportation of coal when it is loaded from a tipple as compared with such cost when the coal is loaded from wagons or sleds. On the other hand, complainants contend that

said amendment is unreasonable to the full extent of the addi

tional charge and results in undue discrimination against them. and against all other shippers of coal except those who load from tipples.

The examination thus rendered necessary is somewhat differ ent from that herein before made. While the issue connected with the charge of discrimination in the matter of furnishing cars was between loading from tipples and certain team-track loading on the one hand, and such loading as complainants asked permission to do on the other, the amendment now under consideration places loading by tipple in one class and all other loading in another, and therefore makes it necessary to compare the circumstances connected with the transportation of coal loaded from tipples, first, with those connected with the transportation of such shipments as complainants wished to make, and, second, with the circumstances connected with the transportation of coal loaded on defendant's team tracks when a tipple is not used. Some of the facts pertaining to the former issue are also applicable to the latter, but the application is so obvious that we deem repetition unnecessary.

Previous to January 26, when coal was shipped in carloads and in bulk, the charges exacted by defendant for its transportation were the same whether it was loaded from tipples or not, and defendant does not make any distinction in its carload rates now, except when the traffic transported is coal.

What is known as the Connellsville division of defendant's road runs from Cumberland, Md., in a northwesterly direction through the Meyersdale district, and from the main line, which passes through Sand Patch, Keystone Junction, Meyersdale, Salisbury Junction and Garrett, all in the State of Pennsylvania, to Connellsville, Pa., several branches extend in different directions. Of these one, having a mileage of 13 or 14 miles and called the Salisbury branch, runs from Salisbury Junction to Salisbury and other points, and another, called the Berlin branch, runs from Garrett to Berlin, a distance of 8 miles. Distances in miles from Cumberland to said main-line points are as follows: Sand Patch 33, Keystone Junction 35, Meyersdale 37, Salisbury Junction 39, Garrett 42 and Connellsville 93.

Rockwood is also on the main line 12 miles westerly of Meyersdale.

Freight traffic on this division is accommodated by both through and local trains, but the number of each kind operated daily is not disclosed by the record. Through trains are so designated because they handle generally only carload freight and make comparatively few stops en route. On the other hand, the word local is applied to trains that are supposed to stop at any point on the line and perform such services as may be necessary in connection with the transportation of either carload or less than carload traffic. The former, therefore, are run between Connellsville and Cumberland in less time than the latter and, compared with the amount of traffic hauled, are operated at less expense to defendant. Owing to the location of the farm-bank mines most of the coal shipped therefrom, though not all of it, was taken to Cumberland in local trains.

There is a large number of coal mines on the Salisbury and Berlin branches and the loading of coal there is almost entirely by tipple. These mines, some of which are quite large while others are comparatively small, produce more than one-half of the coal shipped from the Meyersdale district.

Where tipples are used, some of the mines produce, severally, 15 or 20 carloads a day, while the individual output of others is not more than one or two carloads daily. In this connection, de fendant's superintendent of transportation stated that in some cases only 1 car a day would be loaded from a tipple, while in other cases the mines would each furnish a full train load.

Defendant employs switching engines to distribute empty cars and collect loaded cars between points on these two branches and Salisbury Junction and Garrett, and the loaded cars are hauled from the latter two points to Cumberland in both through and local trains. Of course where a mine furnishes a train load a day the cost per car to defendant is less than when only a carload a day is furnished, but defendant's charge is the same in either case.

The Deal side-track at Meyersdale has already been described and what has been said concerning the side-track at Keystone Junction is about all the information of the kind that the record