Page images
PDF
EPUB

An express agreement for a through rate is not necessary to make a through route. The successive receipt and forwarding by two or more carriers, under through bills or any arrangement for a continuous carriage, constitutes assent to such common arrangement and makes the carrier a party to the contract, within the meaning of the Interstate Commerce Act.— U. S. v. Wood, 145 Fed. 405.

A through bill of lading is, as to the carriers recognizing it, conclusive evidence of this existence of such through route.- In the Matter of Through Routes and Through Rates, 12 Inters. Com. R. 190.

Where through billing is given by the originating carrier and is recognized by all connecting carriers to the destination, there is in existence a through route over which a through rate applies, which through rate is ascertainable from the tariffs of the participating carriers at the date of shipment, and any increase or decrease in the through rate so made up after the date of shipment, is not applicable to such shipments.- In the Matter of Through Routes and Through Rates, 12 Inters. Com. R. 190.

The receipt, forwarding and delivering of traffic by connecting carriers clearly establishes the existence of a common arrangement between the carriers for a continuous carriage or shipment.-Phelps v. Tex. & P. R. Co., 6 Inters. Com. R. 36.

Through rates depend on the agreement between the carriers who transport the freight. In re Application of F. W. Clark, 2 Inters. Com. R. 797, 3 I. C. C. R. 649.

[5] Joint tariff must show carriers uniting in making it. Publication of joint tariffs,-see ante, § 28, notes [26]-[29].

A joint tariff of rates and charges must show on its face what carriers unite in making it, and if the joint tariff does not make that showing, no joint route or rate is established thereby.- Lehman Co. v. Tex. & P. R. Co., 2 Inters. Com. R. 548, 3 Inters. Com. R. 706, 5 I. C. C. R.

44.

[6] Joint arrangements not within the statute.

The Interstate Commerce Act does not apply to arrangements or joint tariffs entered into by a railroad and a transportation company, for wagon conveyance of freight or property by the latter.- Cary v. Eureka Springs R. Co.. 7 Inters. Com. R. 286.

[7] What rates applicable to a through shipment.

Limit of a proper through rate,- see post, § 31, note [70].

Where a through route has been formed, the rate charged must be a through rate, and the shipments will move upon the rate existing at the time it is billed. If, however, no through route has been formed, ship

ments will move, not upon one through journey, but upon a succession of journeys, and will be subject to any changes in rates made by any carrier, into whose possession the shipment has not been received. In the Matter of Through Routes and Through Rates, 12 Inters. Com. R. 190.

[8] What is proper rate in absence of agreement for joint rates. What rates a carrier may publish in absence of agreement for through route,― see ante, § 28, note [29].

Where the total distance of a shipment is not one for which a through or joint rate is made, but is one covered by combining two joint rates for portions of such distance, the lawful rate for such shipment is the sum of two such rates.-U. S. v. Wood, 145 Fed. 405.

Without an agreement neither of two connecting carriers may name or allow a lower through rate than the combination of their local rates.— New York, N. H. & H. R. Co. v. Platt, 7 Inters. Com. R. 323.

Where no joint tariff of rates has been established for transportation over a continuous line, the proper charge is the sum of the established local rates of the several carriers forming such continuous line.— Lehman Co. v. Tex. & P. R. Co., 2 Inters. Com. R. 548, 3 Inters. Com. R. 706, 5 I. C. C. R. 44.

[9] Filing of statement showing concurrence in joint tariffs. Forfeitures and penalties for failure to file evidences of concurrence in joint tariffs and traffic agreements,-see post § 56.

Where a joint tariff is published under the Interstate Commerce Act, all carriers subject to the Act which are named as parties to the said tariff must forthwith, upon publication thereof, file with the Interstate Commerce Commission a statement or certificate showing their acceptance of and concurrence in the tariff, and making them parties thereto.Form and Contents of Rate Schedules, 6 Inters. Com. R. 267.

§ 31. Unjust discrimination.- No common carrier shall, directly or indirectly, by any special rate, rebate, drawback, or other device or method, charge, demand, collect or receive from any persons or corporation a greater or less compensation for any service rendered or to be rendered in the transportation of passengers, freight or property, except as authorized in this act, than it charges, demands, collects or receives from any other person or

corporation for doing a like and contemporaneous service in the transportation of a like kind of traffic under the same or substantially similar circumstances and conditions.

Penalties for unjust discriminations in rates on interstate shipments,— see Elkin's Act, § 1, post, Appendix B.

Substantially similar provisions of Interstate Commerce Act,- see Inters. Com. Act, § 2, post, Appendix B.

Provisions of Interstate Commerce Act relative to discriminations between shipper, localities or kinds or traffic,- see Inters. Com. Act, §3, post, Appendix B.

Penalties for exaction of excessive fare,- see N. Y. R. R. L., § 39. Maximum fares on street surface railroads,— see N. Y. R. R. L., § 101. Provisions as to giving of transfers by street surface railroads,— see N. Y. R. R. L., § 104.

Compensation allowed under Rapid Transit Act, see N. Y. Rap. Tr. Act, § 24, subdiv. 4.

Regulations of rates and fares by former Board of Rapid Transit Railroad Commissioners,- see N. Y. Rap. Tr. Act, § 34d.

Rates shall be reasonable in themselves,- see ante, § 26.

The published rate shall be charged,- see ante, § 26, post, § 33. Persons localities and traffic shall not be subjected to undue prejudice or disadvantage,- see post, § 32.

Transportation shall not be permitted at less than the scheduled rates, by means of false billing, false classification, false weight, or any other device or means,- see post, § 34.

A carrier shall not discriminate between connecting carriers, see post, & 35.

A carrier shall not make a greater charge for a shorter than a longer distance unless especially authorized by the proper Commission,see post, § 36.

A carrier shall not discriminate between shippers in the furnishing and distribution of cars,- see post, § 37.

Power of Commission to correct discriminatory rates,- see post, § 49. Forfeitures and penalties for unjust discriminations in rates,- see post, § 56.

General power to regulate property devoted to public use,- see ante, § 1, notes [1]-[22].

General power of the state to regulate rates and charges,- see ante, § 1, note [2].

Exemptions from public control,- see ante, § 1, notes [16]-[21]. Who are common carriers,—see ante, § 2, notes [2]-[7].

What constitutes a railroad or street railroad,—see ante, § 2, note [8]. Effect of receivership on power to regulate,— see ante, § 2, note [15].

Regulations by Commission to prevent unjust discrimination presumptively reasonable,— see ante, § 23, note [1].

Extent of state and federal power to regulate rates,- see ante, § 25, note [10].

Provisions of Act applicable to through routes as well as single lines, see ante, § 26, note [25].

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

[ocr errors]

Power to prohibit rates unreasonably low,- see ante, § 26, note [46]. Duty of carrier to file and publish tariff schedules,- see ante, § 28, note [2].

Discriminations between localities in general,- see post, § 32, note [12].

Duty of carriers to charge the published rate,- see post, § 33, note [1].

[1] Rule of equality.

Duty not to discriminate through classification,- see post, note [77]. Actions to recover for discriminations in rates,- see post, notes

[81]-[88].

Duty to charge rates reasonable in themselves,- see ante, § 26, note [29].

Long existence of rates gives no right to shipper or carrier to have same continued,- see ante, § 26, note [43].

Duty of carrier to make carload and less than carload rates,- see ante, § 26, note [45].

Tariff schedules as means of securing uniformity in rates and services, see ante, § 28, note [4].

General duty of carriers not to discriminate as to facilities and service,- see post, § 32, note [1].

Duty to extend equal rates and facilities to connecting carriers,see post, § 35, notes[1]-[7].

Duty of carrier not to charge more for short than for long haul,— see post, § 36, notes [4]-[5].

A state may enforce an equality of local rates as between all parties shipping for the same distance over the same road.- Alabama & V. R. Co. v. Miss. R. R. Commission, 203 U. S. 496, 27 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 163.

The state may insist upon an equality of rates under equivalent conditions. Seaboard Air Line Co. v. Florida, 203 U. S. 261, 27 Sup Ct. R. (U. S.) 109, affg. s. c. 48 Fla. 129, 37 So. 314, 48 Fla. 150, 37 So. 658.

Interst. Com. Act, § 2, not only makes it unlawful for a carrier to charge differently for equal services, but also to render greater services to one shipper than to another, for the same charge.- Wight v. U. S., 167 U. S. 512, 17 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 822.

It is no proper business of a common carrier to foster particular enterprises or to build up new industries, but it is bound to deal fairly with all the public, to extend them reasonable facilities for the transportation of their persons and property, and to put all its patrons on an absolute equality.- Union Pac. R. C. v. Goodridge, 149 U. S. 680, affg. s. c. 37 Fed. 182.

Where the carrier fixes identical rates for two places some distance apart, on the same line, there must be equality in fact, as well as in form; but equality in form will be presumed to be equality in fact, until the contrary is shown.- Detroit, G. H. & M. R. Co. v. Interst. Com. Commission, 74 Fed. 803, revg. s. c. 57 Fed. 1005; affd. 167 U. S. 633, 17 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 986.

Impartiality in serving their patrons is an imperative obligation. of all railroad companies; equality of accommodations in the use of railroads is the legal right of everybody.-Coe v. L. & N. R. Co., 3 Fed. 775.

The law does not require that the rates shall be the same over all lines between two points.- Marley v. Norfolk & W. R. Co., 11 Inters. Com. R. 616.

Even though a proportional rate is a concession from the local rate, the carrier may not impose arbitrary conditions of enjoying that rate.Kehoe v. Evansville & T. H. R. Co., 11 Inters. Com. R. 172.

Rates on various commodities must bear just relation to each other as well as be reasonable per se.-. - Page v. D. L. & W. R. Co., 6 Inters. Com. R. 548.

A carrier must charge all passengers equally for the same service, unless within one of the excepted classes, regardless of their relative social, political or business standing in the community. In re Boston

& M. R. Co., 3 Inters. Com. R. 717, 5 I. C. C. R. 69. In passenger transportation there should be absolute equality of payment from all persons enjoying the same accommodations.- Smith v. No. Pac. R. Co., 1 Inters. Com. R. 611, 1 I. C. C. R. 208.

A short road wholly within one state, owning no rolling stock but used by coal companies, must be accessible to all shippers on equal and reasonable conditions.- Heck v. E. Tenn. V. & G. R. Co., 1 Inters. Com. R. 498, 775, 1 I. C. C. R. 495.

Equality in charges being required under circumstances substantially similar, relative equality must be maintained in the ratio of similarity. -Manufacturer's Union v. M. & St. L. R. Co., 1 Inters. Com. R. 483, 630, 2 Inters. Com. R. 228, 302, 3 Inters. Com. R. 115, 4 I. C. C. R. 79. A carrier cannot unreasonably or unjustly discriminate in favor of one or against another where the circumstances and conditions are the same.- Lough v. Outerbridge, 143 N. Y. 271, 38 N. E. 292, 25 L. R. A. 674, affg. s. c. 68 Hun (N. Y.), 486, 22 N. Y. Supp. 972.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »