State to another, or from one place in the United States to Canada, an adjacent foreign country; and it was within its power when it prescribed the systen of accounts and the uniform method of keeping accounts for such interstate business; and so far as the orders call for information confined to such traffic, or directly related thereto, and so far as the orders prescribe uniform systems of bookkeeping and accounting for such traffic and such as is directly related thereto, they must be sustained. But, in so far as the reports called for and the accounting rules prescribed extend beyond such interstate business of the carriers, or include matters of intrastate traffic accounts and affairs and concerns exclusively, they become invasions of the rights of the carriers, and to the extent of such invasions are unlawful.

What we have said makes the conclusion of the case comparatively simple.

Petitioners are amenable to the law with respect to all interstate business done by them in connection with railroads under arrangements such as have been discussed, and the commission acted within its authority when it made orders for reports with respect to such business and prescribed forms of accounting for such business; but it went beyond its authority in calling for reports of transactions relating exclusively to "port to port" interstate business, or to intrastate traffic or affairs, and in propounding

48250-S. Doc. 789,, 62-2-22

questions and prescribing bookkeeping and accounting methods in respect thereto.

A recast of the forms of reports should be made by the commission, acting in conformity with the views herein expressed. We think it advisable that the commission, rather than the court, should proceed to make the recast.

The demurrers are overruled and the motions to dismiss are denied; and the prayers of the petitioners for orders of injunction are granted. The orders issued by the commission are hereby set aside, and the matter is referred to the commission to be proceeded with as may be proper under the law as herein indicated. So ordered.

United States Commerce Court.

No. 25.-MAY SESSION, 1911.

OMAHA & COUNCIL BLUFFS STREET RAILWAY COMpany and Omaha & Council Bluffs Railway & Bridge Company, petitioners,

V.

INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION, RESPONDENT. The United States, intervening respondent.

ON BILL AND DEMURRER.

For opinion and order of the Interstate Commerce Commission, see 17 I. C. C. Rep., 239.

For opinion of Circuit Court granting preliminary injunction, see 179 Fed., 243.

Mr. John Lee Webster, for petitioners.

Mr. Blackburn Esterline, special assistant to the Attorney General, for the United States.

Dr. Charles W. Needham, for Interstate Commerce Commission.

Before ARCHBALD, HUNT, CARLAND, and MACK, Judges.

MACK, Judge:

[October 5, 1911.]

The Omaha & Council Bluffs Railway & Bridge Co., hereinafter referred to as the bridge company, an Iowa corporation constructed, under authority of an act of Congress (act Mar. 3, 1887, 24 Stat., c. 356, p. 501), and now owns a joint railroad, wagon, and foot toll bridge over the Missouri River at Omaha, Nebr., and Council Bluffs, Iowa, and also owns a railway, which begins at the west end of the bridge in Omaha, Nebr., and extends eastward across the bridge to Council Bluffs, Iowa. The bridge company also owns the stock and bonds of the Omaha, Council Bluffs & Suburban Railway Co., a street railway line in Council Bluffs. The Omaha & Council Bluffs Street Railway Co., hereinafter referred to as the street railway company, owns and operates all of the street railway lines in Omaha, Nebr., in addition to which, in January, 1903, it leased all of the properties of the bridge company for a period of years, so that it now operates all of the lines of both systems.

Foot passengers pay 5 cents bridge toll; local street car fare in either city is 5 cents; interstate street railway passengers pay no direct bridge toll but a single fare of 10 cents, or $1.50 for 30 commutation tickets, for a ride to or from any point on the line in Council Bluffs, except Courtland Beach, over the bridge from or to any point on the line of the street railway company within the socalled loop in Omaha. Interstate passengers to or

from a point in Omaha beyond the loop receive no transfers, but according to the practice sought to be corrected are required to pay an additional local fare of 5 cents. The loop district in Omaha extends westward on Douglas to Fourteenth Street, south upon that street to Howard, east to Eleventh, north to Douglas, and eastward back to the bridge.

On complaint the Interstate Commerce Commission refused to reduce the 10-cent fare to 5 cents, but abolished the loop limitation in Omaha, ordering the bridge and street railway companies not to charge more than 10 cents to or from any point on the line in Omaha from or to Council Bluffs, except Courtland Beach. The report of the commission will be found in 17 Interstate Commerce Commission Reports, 239. A bill was thereupon filed in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Nebraska, and a preliminary injunction was granted against the enforcement of this order. (Omaha & C. B. St. Ry. Co. v. I. C. C., 179 Fed., 243.) The case was subsequently transferred to this court and is now up for disposition on a demurrer to the bill, except as to one paragraph, which is answered by adding to the order of the commission its report, thus making the latter a part of the record.

On the oral argument, though not in the briefs, it was suggested, in accordance with the charges of the bill, that the order of the commission, in practically compelling the street railway company to give transfers in Omaha, went both beyond the issues in the case before the commission and beyond its constitu