Page images
PDF
EPUB

General power to regulate property devoted to public use,- see ante,

§ 1, notes [1]-[22].

Power of the state to regulate the mode of operation of railroads,— see ante, § 1, note [2].

Exemptions from public control,- see ante, § 1, notes [16]-[21]. General rules of statutory construction,- see ante, § 1, notes [23][40].

Purpose of acts regulating railroads,- see ante, § 1, note [32].
Who are common carriers,— see ante, § 2, notes [2]-[7].

Effect of receivership on power to regulate,- see ante, § 2, note [15]. Fixing a classification does not amount to fixing a rate,- see post, § 49, note [27].

[1] Power of state to require posting of schedules.

Legislative control over joint tariffs,- see post, note [26].

Power of Commission over tariff schedules,- see post, § 49, note [23]. A state may require the posting of tariff schedules, the same to be subject to the approval of its state railroad commission.- Stone v. Yazoo & M. V. R. Co., 62 Miss. 607.

[2] Duty to file and publish.

Meaning of term "rate," see ante, § 26, note [26].

Duty to publish joint rates,- see post, note [27].

Effect of failure to properly post tariff schedules,- see post, § 33, note [7].

Filing and publication of passenger excursion rates,- see post, § 33, note [21].

Each railroad should print, post and file a tariff showing its own rates.-Pitts v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co., 10 Inters. Com. 684.

When rates established to apply between points within a single state are applied as part of combination rates on transportation through different states, they, as well as the interstate rates, with which they are combined, must be published at stations and filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission.- Export Rates from Points E. & W. of Miss. River, 8 Inters. Com. R. 185.

A railroad must file, publish, and charge the published schedule of its rates for transportation from the United States into Canada.— In re Investigation of Grand Trunk R. Co., 2 Inters. Com. R. 496, 3 I. C. C. R. 89.

Schedules of rates on freight for export must be posted in the same manner as on that which is not for export.- New Orleans Cotton Exch. v. L. N. O. & T. R. Co., 2 Inters. Com. R. 461, 3 Inters. Com. R. 523, 4 I. C. C. R. 694.

[3] Schedule-making power not legislative.

Authorizing common carriers to establish rates which, when published and filed, shall be binding on the shipper, does not confer legislative power on the carrier.-U. S. v. Standard Oil Co., 155 Fed. 305.

[4] Purpose of requirements as to posting and publishing schedules.

The posting of schedules in the carrier's depot is not a condition precedent to the establishment of rates, but a provision for assisting the public in ascertaining the rates in force.- Texas & P. R. Co. v. Cisco Oil Mill Co., 204 U. S. 449, 27 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 358; U. S. v. Howell, 56 Fed. 21.

The requirement of publication is imposed in order that the man having freight to ship may ascertain by an inspection of the schedules exactly what will be the cost to him of the transportation of his property; and not only that, but the law also gives him another and very valuable right, namely, the right to know, by an inspection of the same schedule exactly what will be the cost to his competitor of the transportation of his competitor's property.-U. S. v. Ch. & A. R. Co., 148 Fed. 646.

The object of the provisions of the Interstate Commerce Act relating to the construction and publicity of tariff schedules is not merely to acquaint shippers and passengers with the scale of charges which may be lawfully imposed, but also to inform the officers intrusted with the duty of administering the law, to the end that complaints of injustice and exaction may be more intelligently considered, and relative reasonableness in transportation charges more effectually secured.- Freight Bureau v. C. N. O. & T. P. R. Co., 6 Inters. Com. R. 195.

[5] Power of commission to excuse non-compliance with statute. The Interstate Commerce Commission has no power, were it so disposed, to vary or excuse non-compliance with the requirements of the Interstate Commerce Commission Act as to filing, posting etc., of schedules. Rea v. Mobile & O. R. Co., 7 Inters. Com. R. 43.

[ocr errors]

[6] Method of making schedules and classifications.

The correct method of making up a tariff sheet is undoubtedly "a straight rate to every point on the line, and duly shown on the tariff sheets."-Johnson v. Ch. M. & St. P. R. Co., 9 Inters. Com. R. 221.

The carriers should devise the methods of bringing their schedules into conformity with the law, without detailed suggestions from the Interstate Commerce Commission.- In re Tariffs of Columbus & W. R. Co., 1 I. C. C. R. 626.

The Interstate Commerce Commission prefers to let the carriers work out the details of their schedules and classifications.- Martin v. So. Pac. R. Co., 1 Inters. Com. R. 596, 2 Inters. Com. R. 1, 2 I. C. C. R. 1.

[7] Form of schedules.

Form of classification sheet,—see post, note [36].

Tariffs should be so simplified that persons of ordinary comprehension can understand them.- Pitts v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co., 10 Inters. Com. R. 684.

Discussion as to form and contents of tariff schedules.- Matter of the Form and Contents of Rate Schedules, 6 Inters. Com. R. 267.

Unless the law or an order of the commission fixes what sizes of type tariff schedules shall be printed in, the court cannot by mandamus require use of a particular size. State v. Pensacola & A. R. Co., 27 Fla. 403, 9 So. 89.

66

[8] What constitutes separate statement."

"State separately" does not authorize the issuance of separate circulars, but means that the transportation charges and any rules, regulations, etc., shall be separately stated on the schedules.- Suffern, H. & Co. v. Ind. D. & W. R. Co., 7 Inters. Com. R. 255.

Rules or regulations, promulgated by the carrier in circulars separate from its rate sheets, are not lawfully in force.-Suffern, H. & Co. v. Ind. D. & W. R. Co., 7 Inters. Com. R. 255.

[9] Classification and tariff together constitute schedule.

an

Connecting carriers filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission "Official Classification " and a "Joint East-Bound Interstate Tariff." The former provided a certain rate for goods shipped subject to the "Uniform Bill of Lading" conditions and provided for a higher rate when not shipped subject to those conditions.- Held, that the classification and tariff were to be read together, and together constituted the schedule of rates.--- Mannheim Ins. Co. v. Erie & W. Transp. Co., 72 Minn. 357, 75 N. W. 602.

[10] Publication of export tariffs.

The through rates on export traffic cannot usually be determined and published pursuant to the Interstate Commerce Act, § 6, owing to the fluctuation in ocean rates. Under the circumstances, if the inland carrier publishes and maintains its division of the through rates, apparently it has done all it can be required to do under the Act If the inland rail carriers, instead of receiving a fixed inland division, make through rates in fact, of which their division fluctuates, a ques

tion arises as to the publication of such rates, not here passed upon.— Kemble v. Boston & A. R. Co., 8 Inters. Com. R. 110, distinguishing N. Y. N. H. & H. R. Co. v. Platt, 7 Inters. Com. R. 323, overruling N. Y. Board of T. & T. v. Pa. R. Co., 3 Inters. Com. R. 417, 4 I. C. C. R. 447, to conform to Texas & P. R. Co. v. Inters. Com. Commission, 162 U. S. 197, 16 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 666, revg. 57 Fed. 948, affg. 52 Fed. 187, 5 Inters. Com. R. 405.

Inland joint tariffs for foreign merchandise should be posted in the offices of the carrier at the port of entry and at the place of destination.- New York Board of Trade v. Pa. R. Co., 2 Inters. Com. R. 660, 734, 755, 800, 4 I. C. C. R. 447.

In making and publishing export tariffs, the rate to the seaboard should be specified, and should not ordinarily be less than the inland tariff rate.-N. Y. Prod. Exch. v. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. Co., 2 Inters. Com. R. 13, 28, 553, 3 I. C. C. R. 137.

[11] What constitutes sufficient posting and publication.

A notation in the tariff of one carrier making reference to the tariff of some competing carrier, a tariff which may not be accessible to prospective shippers, does not meet the requirements of the Interstate Commerce Act that the rate charged shall be published and posted. Pitts v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co., 10 Inters. Com. R. 684.

The provisions of Interstate Commerce Act, § 6, relative to publication of tariffs, are not complied with by posting a notice stating that tariffs may be inspected upon application to the carrier's agent.— Paxton Tie Co. v. Detroit S. R. Co., 10 Inters. Com. R. 422.

The posting of a notice on the wall of a station stating where tariff sheets may be found, is not a sufficient compliance with the terms of the Interstate Commerce Act.-Johnson v. Ch. M. & St. P. R. Co., 9 Inters. Com. R. 221.

Publication in a printed circular but not on the rate sheets, of rules or practices which affect the aggregate charges, is not a sufficient compliance with the Interstate Commerce Act.- Spillers v. L. & N. R. Co., 8 Inters. Com. R. 364.

Putting up notices in the station that schedules are on file with the agent and may be examined on application, is not a sufficient compliance with the Interstate Commerce Act, even though done in good faith and with intent to comply with the statute, and even though no injury nor inconvenience appears to have resulted to the complainant, or the public.- Rea v. Mobile & O. R. Co., 7 Inters. Com. R. 43.

Nailing up by one corner in a conspicuous place in the station, of an eleven page pamphlet containing the tariffs, rules, classifications,

etc., is not a sufficient "posting and keeping posted," nor is the binding of the pamphlets and schedules together and placing them on a conspicuous shelf on the agent's desk.- State v. Pensacola & A. R. Co., 27 Fla. 403, 9 So. 89.

Furnishing schedules to agents, with instructions to post, does not fulfill the duty of the company, which is to "post and keep posted" such schedules.- State v. Pensacola & A. R. Co., 27 Fla. 403, 9 So. 89.

The requirement of the Interstate Commerce Act as to posting, etc., of schedules is not met by placing the schedules in the possession of the station agent and posting a notice that he has them and that they can be inspected on application.- Wabash R. Co. v. Sloop, 200 Mo. 198, 98 S. W. 607.

[12] Excuses for failure to keep schedules posted.

That tariff sheets are defaced and torn from the walls does not excuse failure to keep them posted.-Johnson v. Ch. M. & St. P. R. Co., 9 Inters. Com. R. 221.

That after posting, schedules in defendant's station were torn down, is no excuse.- -Griffin v. Wabash R. Co., 115 Mo. App. 549, 91 S. W. 1015.

[13] Published rates the standard of reasonableness.

Schedules established, filed and kept posted by the carrier, pursuant to the Interstate Commerce Act, are the sole standard by which courts and juries may judge of the reasonableness of a rate complained of, in an action under the act for damages by unreasonable rates.— Van Patten v. Ch. M. & St. P. R. Co., 81 Fed. 545.

[14] Presumption of legality of rates filed and posted.

That circulars containing regulations, etc., separate from the rate sheets, have been filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission and not objected to, creates no presumption of the lawfulness of the regulations or the mode of publishing them.- Suffern, H. & Co. v. Ind. D. & W. R. Co., 7 Inters. Com. R. 255.

Filing and posting schedules creates no presumption of their legality, even through the rates set forth therein are not challenged at the time. - San Bernardino Bd. of Trade v. A. T. & S. F. R. Co., 2 Inters. Com. R. 522, 3 Inters. Com. R. 138, 4 I. C. C. R. 104.

The legal rates on a railroad are those posted in its depots.-Locke v. Concord R. Co., 60 N. H. 552.

[15] Effect of tariffs.

Published rates must be charged,- see post, § 33, notes [1]-[3].

Tariffs can be given no retroactive effect.-Through Routes and Through Rates, 12 Inters. Com. R. 190.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »