Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific R'y Co. v. Chicago and Alton R. R. Co., 450. Thurber et al. v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 473. Leggett & Co. v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 473. Greene v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 473. New Orleans Cotton Exchange v. Illinois Central R. R. Co. et al., 534. New Orleans Cotton Exchange v. Cincinnati, New Orleans and Texas Pacific R'y Co. et al., 534. Elvey v. Illinois Central R. R. Co., 652. Pankey v. Richmond and Danville R. R. Co. et al., 658. CONSTRUCTION OF SECOND SECTION.-Unjust discrimination. In re Tariffs and Classifications of Atlanta and West Point R. R. Co. et al., 19. In re Acts and Doings of the Grand Trunk R'y Co. of Canada, 89. New York Produce Exchange v. New York Central and Hudson River McMorran et al. v. Grand Trunk R'y Co. of Canada et al., 252. Report of Interstate Commerce Commission, 297, 302, 317, 374. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and St. Louis R'y Co. v. Baltimore and Ohio Thurber et al. v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 473. Leggett & Co. v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 473. Greene v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 473. Sidman v. Richmond and Danville R. R. Co., 512. Alford v. Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific R'y Co., 519. New Orleans Cotton Exchange v. Illinois Central R. R. Co. et al., 534. New Orleans Cotton Exchange v. Cincinnati, New Orleans and Texas Pacific R'y Co. et al., 534. Worcester Excursion Car Co. v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 577. Stone & Carten v. Detroit, Grand Haven and Milwaukee R'y Co., 613. Elvey v. Illinois Central R. R. Co., 652. CONSTRUCTION OF THIRD SECTION.-Preference or advantage. In re Tariffs and Classifications of Atlanta and West Point R. R. Co., et al., 19. Heard v. Georgia R. R. Co., 111. New York Produce Exchange v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 137. James & Abbott v. East Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia R'y Co. et al., 225. McMorran et al. v. Grand Trunk R'y Co. of Canada et al., 252. Report of Interstate Commerce Commission, 294. Bates v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co. et al., 435. Thurber et al. v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 473. Greene v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 473. Leggett & Co. v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 473. Alford v. Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific R'y Co., 519. New Orleans Cotton Exchange v. Cincinnati, New Orleans and Texas Worcester Excursion Car Co. v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 577. CONSTRUCTION OF THIRD SECTION.-Facilities for interchange of traffic. Little Rock and Memphis R. R. Co. v. East Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia R'y Co. et al., 1. Report of Interstate Commerce Commission, 316, 395, 432. In re Application of F. W. Clark, 649. CONSTRUCTION OF FOURTH SECTION.-Long and short haul clause. In re Tariffs and Classifications of Atlanta and West Point R. R. Co. James & Abbott v. East Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia R'y Co., 225. Stone & Carten v. Detroit, Grand Haven and Milwaukee R'y Co., 613. CONSTRUCTION OF SIXTH SECTION.-Filing and publication of schedules. In re Tariffs and Classifications of Atlanta and West Point R. R. Co. In re Acts and Doings of the Grand Trunk R'y Co. of Canada, 89. Report of Interstate Commerce Commission, 295, 319, 374. Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific R'y Co. v. Chicago and Alton R. R. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and St. Louis R'y Co. v. Baltimore and Ohio Mattingly v. Pennsylvania Co., 592. Stone & Carten v. Detroit, Grand Haven and Milwaukee R'y Co., 613. CONSTRUCTION of Seventh SECTION.-Continuous carriage of freights. CONSTRUCTION OF NINTH SECTION. -Election of tribunal. Bishop v. Duval, receiver, 128. Harris v. Duval, receiver, 128. CONSTRUCTION OF TWELFTH, THIRTEENTH, FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEENTH SEC- TIONS. Investigations. Complaints. evidence. Witnesses and depositions. Reparation. In re Tariffs and Classifications of Atlanta and West Point R. R. Co. In re Acts and Doings of the Grand Trunk Railway Co. of Canada Sanger v. Southern Pacific Co., 134. Rice v. Circinnati, Washington and Baltimore R. R. Co. et al., 186. Rawson v. Newport News and Mississippi Valley Co. et al., 266. White v. Michigan Central R. R. Co. et al., 281. Report of Interstate Commerce Commission, 292, 432. CONSTRUCTION OF TWENTY-SECOND SECTION.-Mileage, excursion and commu- Report of Interstate Commerce Commission, 302, 433. Rawson v. Newport News and Mississippi Valley Co. et al., 266. SAFETY OF PASSENGERS.-The law-making power in enacting the Act to reg- Worcester Excursion Car Co. v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 577. SCOPE OF. The provisions of the Act to regulate commerce construed in the light of the principles that apply to interstate commerce as enunciated by the courts of the United States, must be understood as intended to regulate all the commerce subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress, including the agents and instrumentalities employed and the commodities carried, with only the limitation found in the Act itself. Mattingly v. Pennsylvania Co., 592. THROUGH ROUTES AND THROUGH RATES.-The Act does not provide for ordering through routes and through rates. Little Rock and Memphis R. R. Co. v. East Tennessee, Virginia and Mattingly v. Pennsylvania Co., 592. WHEN CONTRACTS FOR USE OF RAILWAY TRACK ARE NOT AFFECTED BY. See PREFERENCE AND ADVANTAGE; UNJUST DISCRIMINATION. REASONABLE RATES. ADVANCES AND REDUCTIONS IN RATES. See RATES; TARIFFS. CONTRACTS. AGENTS. DUTIES IN ROUTING FREIGHT. Pankey v. Richmond and Danville R. R. Co., 658. AGREEMENT. FOR THROUGH Rates. In re Application of F. W. Clark. FOR TRACKAGE RIGHTS. Alford v. Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific R'y Co., 450. ANSWER. REPLICATION NOT ALLOWED. Oregon Short Line v. Northern Pacific R'y Co., 264. AUTOMATIC FREIGHT CAR COUPLERS. BILLING OF FREIGHT. DUTIES OF CARRIERS IN REGARD TO. Pankey v. Richmond and Danville R. R. Co. et al., 658. BOOKS, PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS. COMPULSORY PRODUCTION OF.-There are several modes of procedure by which the inconvenience to the defendant carriers of producing books, and the delay and labor of going over their entries, might be avoided by petitioner. For example: If one or more witnesses should be subpoenaed from the different companies proceeded against, and a notice should be served with the subpoena requiring the witnesses to furnish the published rates and tariffs of such company, for a specified period, and also requiring them to furnish statements of the actual charges made and car facilities furnished during such period, to the Standard Oil Trust and the others named in the application, if different from the published tariffs and schedules, it would probably be sufficient for all the See PRACTICE; EVIDENCE; CARRIERS. BRIDGE CHARGES. McMorran et al, v. Grand Trunk R'y Co. of Canada et al., 252. BULK OF FREIGHTS. James & Abbott v. East Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia R'y Co. et al., 225. See CLASSIFICATION. BURDEN OF PROOF. IS ON CARRIER WHEN RATES ARE APPARENTLY DISPROPORTIONATE OR UNEQUAL. IS ON CARRIER when Different RateS ARE CHARGED ON ARTICLES CLASSIFIED CANADIAN COMPETITION. Report of Interstate Commerce Commission, 364. See COMPETITION. CAR-LOADS. MINIMUM WEIGHTS. Leonard v. Chicago and Alton R. R. Co., 241. SOLID, TO MORE than one Consignee or from MORE THAN ONE CONSIGNOR. Leggett & Co. v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. Greene v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 473. CAR-LOADS AND LESS THAN CAR-LOADS. Thurber et al. v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. Leggett & Co. v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. Greene v. New York Central and Hudson River R. R. Co. et al., 473. INVESTIGATION CONCERN.NG. CAR MILEAGE. Report of Interstate Commerce Commission, 305. ON DIFFERENT CLASSES OF CARS.-Ib. 305. WHEN BURDENSOME.-Ib. 309. WHEN PAID TO SHIPPERS.-Only such allowance for the use of cars should be made to shippers as to permit no advantage to the private owner of cars who is also a shipper, nor afford a margin for paying rebates to other shippers.-Ib. 309. ON CARS PRIVATELY OWNED.-Legislation regulating the payment of, recommended.-Ib. 433. CARRIERS. APPLICATIONS OF, FOR THROUGH ROUTES AND THROUGH RATES. Little Rock and Memphis R. R. Co. v. East Tennessee, Virginia and FOREIGN.-Engaged in the transportation of passengers or property for a continuous carriage or shipment from a place in the United States to a place in an adjacent foreign country are subject to the Act. In re Acts and Doings of Grand Trunk R'y Co. of Canada, 89. DUTY OF, IN PASSENGER TRANSPORTATION.-Carriers must furnish equal comforts, accommodations and protection to passengers without regard to race, color or sex. Heard v. Georgia R. R. Co., 111. DUTY OF, IN FILING AND PUBLICATION OF JOINT THROUGH EXPORT RATES. New York Produce Exchange v. New York Central and Hudson River DUTY OF TO EXHIBIT BOOKS AND RECORDS.-The books of the defendant carriers as to rates charged, facilities furnished, and general movements of freight, being in the nature of semi-public records, to any extent that they can fairly and justly save time, labor or expense to complainant, or to their companies, by giving to him in response to any calls he may make, statements of facts shown by their books, records, or files which may probably have importance on the hearing, the officers and agents of the defendant carriers under the direction of defendants, ought to give such statements, and ought to do so as promptly as may be found reasonably practicable. Rice v. Cincinnati, Washington and Baltimore Railroad Co. et al., 186. Much unnecessary controversy, inconvenience and delay might well be avoided in the first instance, as well as in subsequent stages of proceedings, if carriers would exhibit, without technical objection, what their books show in reference to a transaction in question to any one who calls for the information in good faith, believing, though perhaps erroneously, that it is, or may be, important to his interests, and when the application is seasonably and properly made, with a due regard for the convenience of the carriers' agents and officers; and the instances are numerous in which it would put an end to the controversy, and in many others that the party would not then trouble the carrier for the production of the books.-Ib. METHODS OF, IN SHIPMENTS OF FREIGHT. Report of Interstate Commerce Commission, 321. RECORDS OF.-Ib. BURDEN IS ON CARRIERS TO JUSTIFY APPARENTLY DISPROPORTIONATE OR RELATIVELY UNEQUAL RATES. McMorran et al. v. Grand Trunk Railway of Canada et al., 252. BURDEN IS ON CARRIER TO JUSTIFY DIFFERENT RATES ON ARTICLES CLASSIFIED ALIKE.-Ib. COMPLAINTS AGAINST, WHEN INSUFFICIENT. White v. Michigan Central R. R. Co. et al., 281. |