Our rates between East Saint Louis and Chester are higher than the river rates which are about 10, 12, 15, and 20 cents per hundred pounds. Yours, truly, C. E. KINGSBURY, C. C. MCCAIN, Esq., Auditor Interstate Commerce Commission, Washington, D. C. WESTERN AND ATLANTIC RAILROAD COMPANY. DEAR SIR: Your circular letter of October 20, which was addressed to the president of this company, has been referred by him to me for reply. I will state to you that there are no points upon this road to and from which interstate rates for passengers or freight are made by our road which are greater than the rates to and from a more distant point in the same direction over the same line. Some months ago we issued a circular to all our connections notifying them that we would not participate in the protection of contract rates which they made to our local points. The company operating this road does not control any other road by lease, purchase, or otherwise. Concerning rates which are made by other railroad companies, I will state that we have only consented to be parties to through rates on south-bound business which is destined to Dalton and Atlanta upon this line, and that the rates thus made by combination to Dalton are no higher than they are to Atlanta, and that north-bound we have only authorized the issuing of joint rates to Dalton and Chattanooga, and that the through rates from southern and eastern points to Chattanooga are no less than they are to Dalton. We only consented to continue to participate in joint rates to Dalton and Atlanta, south-bound, and to Dalton and Chattanooga, north-bound, which points are, respectively, on our line, because they are also points reached by other lines, which, had we refused to work joint rates, would have received the business, and we would have been forced out of the market; and as we did not and do not now consider that the Interstate Commission was established for the purpose of preventing competition, but, on the contrary, of fostering it, we have agreed to work rates to the points I have named in combination with other lines. DEAR SIR: Your circular of October 20, asking if this company make rates which are greater than rates from more distant points in same direction over same line. The inclosed map shows the line of our railroad, and the coloring and figures indicate the basis upon which rates are computed to Eastern cities. You will observe that points from Wellington east are less than points west. Bellevue is our junction with the New York, Chicago and Saint Louis Railroad, and ́ takes 78 per cent. of the Chicago to New York rate. Now we accept business from our stations in the 76 and 71 per cent. territory and send via Bellevue (which point takes 78 per cent. basis) going to Eastern cities. We also accept business from our 71 and 74 per cent. territory and send via Wellington (which point takes 76 per cent. basis) to Eastern cities. We understand this to be within the meaning and intent of the interstate law. To illustrate: The rate on grain from our 78 per cent. points to New York is 19 cents per cwt.; from our 71 per cent. points., 18 cents, and the points which take 19 and 18 cents to New York are sending property via Bellevue, which takes 19 cents per cwt. We have two fast freight lines working business from our stations, one via Bellevue and New York, Chicago and Saint Louis Railroad, and one via Creston and the New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio, and New York, Lake Erie and Western Railroads, Bellevue taking 78 per cent. basis and Creston 71 per cent. basis. We permit the fast freight lines to work upon precisely equal terms and rates from the originating points. The tariff rates published and in your possession hold good for either line. You will observe that the line working via the 78 per cent. point would be shut out of more than one-half our road, while the line working via the 71 per cent. could retain the entire road, should the restriction be enforced that the property must not pass through any point which takes a higher basis than the originating point. In other words, it would work to the disadvantage of the shippers from our 76, 74, and 71 per cent. points, because it would restrict their facilities for doing business and deprive them of the needed deliveries of the Eastern cities. You will please understand that the basis used for computing rates from our junction points were established by the older roads, and before our road was built, and hence we had no voice in making them. The 74 per cent. territory was controlled by the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and Saint Louis Railroad before our road was built, and hence we adopted the basis we found in force. Such points of information as I thought would interest you I have given. If, after reading my statement, you find it desirable to have further information, I shall be glad to furnish what I can. Yours, etc., C. C. MCCAIN, Esq., A. G. BLAIR. Auditor, Washington, D. C. WISCONSIN CENTRAL ASSOCIATED LINES. DEAR SIR: Answering to your communication in behalf of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and under date of October 20, will say, in reply to your query if there are any points upon the railway, or upon any railroad operated by this company, etc., to or from which interstate rates for passengers or freights are made by this road alone, etc., which are greater than the rates to or from more distant points in the same direction over the same line, will refer you to my letter of May 24, addressed to Hon. Thomas M. Cooley, Chairman Interstate Commerce Commission, and the first and second cases which are cited in my letter, as follows: (1) The Wisconsin Central Railroad operates an interstate line between Ashland, Wis., a Lake Superior port, and Saint Paul and Minneapolis; the St. Paul and Duluth Railroad Company operates a line between Saint Paul and Duluth, a Lake Superior port, competing with Ashland for Saint Paul and Minneapolis business, and the St. Paul and Duluth Railroad is entirely within the State of Minnesota and not affected by the interstate-commerce act. There is a certain amount of through business between Saint Paul and Minneapolis and Ashland that we could do at lower rates at a small profit, but could not place our entire line upon the basis of revenue obtained from this through business without loss, therefore we are out of the business, or, in other words, one competitor on through business between a Lake Superior port and Saint Paul and Minneapolis is removed. (2) The Wisconsin Central Railroad Company operates a line of road from Chicago, Ill., through Menasha, Wis., and Stevens' Point, Wis., to Portage, Wis., on Wisconsin River; its distance from Chicago to Portage is 321 miles. The Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway also operates a line from Chicago, Ill., to Portage, Wis., their distance being 177 miles. Now, as a practical matter of fact, the Wisconsin Central Railroad is compelled to run a train every day over its Portage division to accommodate the local business, and the fixed expenses of that train, such as the salary of the conductor, engineer, firemen, and brakemen, terminal expenses, etc., can not be decreased by abandoning the Portage and Chicago business, and we would be glad to be in the field as a competitor of the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway Company at Portage for business to and from Chicago, even at their rates for the shorter distance, but we can not afford to reduce all our intermediate local business to the basis of the Portage rates from Portage around on the main line to a point where we would meet the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul distance from Portage to Chicago. Therefore, as a matter of fact, we have been retired from business between Chicago and Portage, and the shippers at Portage are compelled to patronize the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway. It seems to me a proper solution of this second proposition would be some provision that where two or more lines of transportation, whether railway or combination of railway and steam-boat, do business between interstate points, the longer line have the privilege of making the shorter line rates without prejudice to its intermediate business, otherwise section 4 of the interstate-commerce act is accomplishing what I do not believe it was intended to accomplish the annihilation of the longer lines for competing roads as competitors with the shorter lines. The fact is that while heretofore Portage has had two routes between it and Chicago, it now has but one. On June 15 the Commission published its ruling on the fourth section, and this company, believing fully that said ruling was a full and complete answer to the first and second cases cited in my letter of May 24, put in effect tariffs between Portage and Chicago, and between Saint Paul and Minneapolis and Ashland, which were lower than the intermediate rates, and such tariffs have not yet been withdrawn. In regard to the rates between Ashland and Saint Paul and Minneapolis the close of navigation on Lake Superior has some bearing, but as a matter of fact the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis and Omaha Railway, which is not mentioned in the first section of my letter, also has a line between Ashland and Saint Paul and Minneapolis much shorter than ours, and that company bases its rates between the rates between Duluth and Saint Paul and Minneapolis; but its line being so much shorter than ours, it would undoubtedly, without the Duluth competition, make a lower rate than what would be a fair distance rate to us. We therefore feel compelled to retain our present tariffs even after the close of navigation, under clause 3 of the ruling of the Commission, i. e.: "In rare and peculiar cases in competition between railroads which are subject to the statute, when a strict application of the general rule of the statute would be destructive of competition." In the case of the rates between Portage and Chicago we also published tariffs the same as those in effect by the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway Company, the short line, believing that we were in a thoroughly defensible position under the law and the ruling of the Commission in so doing, and it is matter of absolute fact that in neither case that I have explained has the action of this Commission resulted in any discrimination against interior points. In both cases the rates were in existence and already created by other railway lines, and the same discrimination would have existed in that territory as now exists had our line not extended to the terminal points named. In each case we have only met the rates already in existence by other lines who could make them without violating the interstate-commerce act, and I trust that we shall be fully sustained by the Commission in our action. Please understand that this company intends to be law-abiding in every way, and we believe that we are acting strictly within the law. Yours, truly, C. C. MCCAIN, Esq., W. S. MELLEN, Auditor Interstate Commerce Commission. IV.-List of carriers from which formal answers to the circular have not yet been filed. Letters excusing the delay have been received in most instances. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fé Rwy Co. Denver and Rio Grande Western Rwy. Missouri Pacific Rwy. Mobile and Ohio R. R. Nashville, Chattanooga and St. Louis R. R. St. Louis, Arkansas and Texas Rwy. APPENDIX A. Relief under sec. 4. B. Complaints under sec. 13. C. Correspondence D. Rules and letters relating to practice E. Report from carriers on observance of sec. 4 APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF UNDER 4TH SEC.. memorials and petitions in support of.. protests and remonstrances against. ASSOCIATIONS OF COMMON CARRIERS committee of, may file joint tariffs. extra allowance of BRIEFS AND ARGUMENTS filed in support of applications for relief under sec. 4 filed in opposition to applications for relief under sec. 4 on carrier to justify greater charge on shorter haul. BURTON STOCK CARS mileage on.. CARS burden of proof on, to justify greater charge on shorter haul... circular letter to, asking if more is charged for shorter than for longer haul, etc., etc... dividends to stockholders.. free carriage to employés of interest on funded debt of.. list of carriers who do not charge more for shorter than for longer haul, etc., etc.... 233 CARRIERS-Continued. must decide on privileges in first instance... must provide passengers paying same fare equal accommodations.. not replying to circular letter as to long and short haul subject to the act. rage. 93 138 1-11, 126-136 statements, by, claiming exceptional circumstances and conditions under who petitioned for relief under section 4 of the act.. CHARGES reply to request urging Commission to grant order of relief. COLORED PEOPLE may be assigned separate cars on equal terms. allowance of extra baggage to.... 91-100 89,90 130 .86-88, 89 125 131 128-131 128-131 COMMERCIAL TRAVELLERS not to be favored in sale of mileage tickets may make out dissimilar circumstances and conditions in railway traffic. ...... |