dealers, amounted in our judgment, as we understand the record, to a denial to the complainants of an equal enjoyment of the facilities of the defendant and therefore was an unlawful discrimination. The hay traffic of the thumb district originates at the loading points and is no proper part of the commerce of Port Huron, which is a mere gateway for the traffic to the eastern markets. Both the independent dealers and the private car owners are conducting their hay shipping business at the shipping points; it is one and the same traffic, whether done by one class of shippers or by another. And manifestly all the cars, whether those belonging to the defendant or those in its control and belonging to connecting lines, that are used in transporting the hay produced in and shipped out of the district, ought to be distributed upon some plan that will give to all the individual shippers a fair distributive share. We shall make no order at this time governing the distribution of cars for the future in moving the hay traffic from this district. It would be well, however, for the defendant at once to arrange a conference with a representative committee of hay shippers along its Port Austin division, embracing those who lease and own the socalled private cars, and those who do not, including the complainants, with the view to arriving at some further understanding with respect to the distribution of cars for the coming hay shipping season on a more equitable basis. In this connection the fact that the defendant specially assigns a large number of cars for moving the potato crop while assigning none at all to the special service of moving the hay crop must not be overlooked. Unless some plan can be agreed upon and reported to the Commission by April 20, 1908, the Commission will take the matter up for further consideration and will enter whatever order may be required to secure a more equitable distribution of equipment for this traffic. It is understoood that the road and other property of the defendant company while not actually are nevertheless technically still in the possession of a receiver. He is a party defendant in this proceeding and will be included as such in any order that may be hereafter entered herein. 13 I. C. C. Rep. No. 1259. CHICKASAW COMPRESS COMPANY v. GULF, COLORADO & SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY AND ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY. No. 1260. PAULS VALLEY COMPRESS & STORAGE COMPANY v. GULF, COLORADO & SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY AND ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY. Submitted January 7, 1908. Decided March 10, 1908. 1. Complainants, owning cotton compresses at Ardmore and Pauls Valley, Okla., respectively, allege that the practice of defendants whereby cotton originating at points north of Ardmore and Pauls Valley is carried by those points to Gainesville, Tex., for compression, while cotton originating at points south of Gainesville is not permitted to be carried north through Gainesville to Ardmore and Pauls Valley for compression, results in unjust discrimination against complainants; and ask that this Commission establish a rule requiring defendants to have all cotton compressed by the compress nearest the point of origin. 2. Carriers are permitted to adjust their rates, regulations, and practices with due regard to the circumstances and conditions confronting them and the natural currents and laws of trade and commerce. 3. The movement of cotton from points in Texas northwardly for compression at Ardmore and Pauls Valley from as far south of Gainesville as cotton may be moved to Gainesville from points north of Ardmore and Pauls Valley would not be affected unless the rates from such points of origin should be protected, irrespective of whether or not a higher rate is in effect from the compress point, and to require this would be to entirely disregard the back haul and the added expense incident thereto. The movement of cotton is almost entirely southward from all points located on defendants' lines, and cotton originating at points north of Ardmore and Pauls Valley naturally moves through Gainesville when transported by defendants. To require the defendants to haul cotton northwardly through Gainesville for compression at Ardmore and Pauls Valley, and to protect on such shipments rates not higher than those in effect from points of origin to ultimate destination, where such cotton must be ultimately hauled back through Gainesville to southern ports, would not be justified upon the record. Held, under the circumstances and conditions shown to exist in these cases, that the discrimination complained of is not undue. Complaints dismissed. Ledbetter & Moore for complainants. A. A. Hurd, Robert Dunlap and J. L. Coleman for defendants. Stuart & Bell for North Texas Compress & Warehouse Company, Intervener. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION. CLEMENTS, Commissioner: The only cause of complaint as stated in the original petition of the Chickasaw Compress Company, located at Ardmore, is briefly comprehended as follows: That under these rules and regulations the defendant railway companies have permitted shippers interested in compresses at Gainesville and Fort Worth, Tex., to ship a large amount of cotton each year through Ardmore, where the complainant's compress is located, to Texas points, thus discriminating against Ardmore and the complainant's compress located there, and under this practice from 15,000 to 25,000 bales of cotton have been shipped through Ardmore to Texas compresses, most of which could have been compressed at Ardmore, or at the compress located at Pauls Valley. The prayer of the original petition was that the practice of permitting shippers to concentrate cotton at Gainesville and other Texas points from the vicinity of Ardmore and from points north of Ardmore, be prevented. The petition and prayer of the Pauls Valley Compress & Storage Company is identical with that of the Chickasaw Company except the name of complainant and the location of the compress. The purpose of the complaints is further illustrated by the following statement of Mr. L. H. Love, president of the Chickasaw Company and director of the Pauls Valley Company, while testifying: The main contention is that the presses in each locality should be entitled to the cotton in that section. In other words, the original complaint was neither more nor less, in substance, than that the Commission should require the defendant carriers to have all cotton compressed by the compress nearest the point of origin. Clearly, the Commission has not been vested with authority to prescribe such a rule. It is probable the object sought by complainants would in great measure be accomplished by a requirement that different rates on compressed and uncompressed cotton should be applied if it should be determined upon full investigation that the present practice of charging the same rate on both with the right of compression in transit reserved to the carrier is unjust to the shipper who offers for shipment cotton already compressed. That question, however, is not presented in this case. The only other question involved is that presented by the amended petition to the effect that the practice of defendants under their rules permitting cotton originating at points north of Ardmore and Pauls Valley to be carried by those places to Gainesville for compression, while not permitting cotton originating south of Gainesville to be carried north to Ardmore and Pauls Valley for compression is an undue discrimination against complainants. As affects the business here involved, the present tariff rules of defendants relating to the compressing of cotton result as follows: First. All cotton originating at Pauls Valley, Ardmore, or Gainesville, all located on the same division of the road, the latter being at the southern terminus thereof, must be compressed at each of these points, respectively. Second. Cotton moving south, originating at points, other than compress points, in Oklahoma between Guthrie and Gainesville may be compressed at Oklahoma City, Purcell, Pauls Valley, Ardmore, or Gainesville, these being all the compress points between Guthrie and Gainesville, including the latter. Third. Cotton moving north, originating at any point between Gainesville and Purcell, other than compress points, may be compressed at either Gainesville, Ardmore, or Pauls Valley. Fourth. Cotton moving north, originating south of Gainesville, must be compressed at the first compress point. In view of the facts disclosed, the so-called discrimination is more apparent than real. While the general rule of the defendants is to the effect that cotton must be compressed at the nearest compress to the point of origin in the direction of its movement, which rule has many exceptions, the division between Gainesville on the south and Purcell on the north of about 100 miles, upon which both Ardmore and Pauls Valley are located, is by another rule placed on a different basis, as above stated, and this appears not to be to the disadvantage of complainants when considered as an independent matter from the rates, in that it permits the hauling of cotton from points on this division in either direction to these places, regardless of the direction of final destination. While it is contended by complainants that they should be favored with the privilege of movement of cotton from points in Texas northwardly for compression at their plants from as far south of Gainesville as cotton may be moved to Gainesville from points north of Ardmore and Pauls Valley, it is conceded by them that a mere order or rule permitting, or requiring, this to be done would be of no value and would produce no such movement, unless the rate from the point of origin should be protected when finally shipped from Ardmore and Pauls Valley, thus abrogating the almost invariable rule of the carriers that when there is a back haul to the compress point from which there is a higher rate to final destination than from point of origin, the higher rate shall apply. The through rate to Boston and other eastern points from all points on defendants' lines south of the Kansas-Oklahoma line to Davis, a small station a few miles north of Ardmore, is $1.05, whether all rail or part rail and part water through the Gulf ports, while from Ardmore it is 97 cents. The rates to Galveston vary somewhat according to the distance, being higher from Guthrie and other points in the northern part of Oklahoma and growing less from the stations or groups of stations south. The rate from Guthrie and all points south as far as Winnwood, a few miles north of Ardmore, is 70 cents; from the latter place it is 57 cents; and 55 cents from Marietta and points south to and including Fort Worth. The through all-rail rates referred to are controlled by water transportation from the Gulf ports. Practically no cotton being manufactured in this section and there being grown a large surplus of the staple in the Southern States east of Texas and Oklahoma in excess of that consumed there, which surplus must find its sale in foreign countries, it naturally follows that most of the cotton produced in Texas and Oklahoma goes to the Gulf ports for export on account of cheaper transportation by water and the nearness of this source of supply to the ports, and it is plain that it is more advantageous to the producers of cotton in this section to export it than pay the all-rail rates to Eastern markets in competition with cotton grown in the southeastern States, so much nearer to the places of consumption. Under these conditions and in view of the rates above stated, the movement of cotton is almost entirely southward from all points along defendants' lines. It also appears that a very small quantity of cotton is produced at points between Fort Worth and Gainesville, probably not more than 5,000 bales in a favorable season and much less than that on an average. It is plain, therefore, that a requirement to the effect that so long as cotton is permitted to be hauled from points north of Ardmore and Pauls Valley to Gainesville for compression, the same privilege should |