ners under the name and style of J. W. Fawcett & Co.; that Alfred Whitaker is doing business under the name and style of The Brooks Oil Co.; that William F. Vliet, Willard L. Nutt, and Martin P. Case are partners under the name and style of Vliet, Nutt & Co.; that W. Carroll Lawrence, Felix Burgert, Henry C. Meyers, and August C. Schade are partners under the name and style of The Merchants' Oil Co.; that the Excelsior Refining Co. is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Ohio; that the Globe Oil Co. is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Ohio; that The Cleveland Refining Co. is a corporation_duly organized under the laws of the State of Ohio, and that Louis C. Carran is doing business under the name and style of L. C. Carran & Co. The defendant, The Lake Shore & Michigan Southern R. Co., is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Ohio, and has its principal office in the city of Cleveland, in said State that it is consolidated with corporations duly organized in the States of New York, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois, respectively; that as thus consolidated it owns and operates a continuous line of railroad from the city of Buffalo, in the State of New York, through the said city of Cleveland, in the State of Ohio, to the city of Chicago in the State of Illinois; that said continuous line extends through and reaches places hereinafter named and others in the States of New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois; that said railway company is a common carrier upon said line of railroad, engaged in the transportation of passèngers and property to and from said city of Cleveland, from and to places without said State of Ohio. Complainants are all engaged in the business of refining, manufacturing, and dealing in petroleum and its products at said city of Cleveland, and in pursuance of said business ship their goods over defendant's said line of railroad to places without said State of Ohio reached by said line of road, its branches and connections. Ist. The defendant has established and published a schedule showing the rates and charges for the transportation of petroleum and its products in barrels upon its said railroad, in carload lots and in less than carload lots, and which is now in force thereon. Said rates and charges for less than carload lots are excessive, unjust and unreasonable; and as evidencing and illustrating said allegations of excessiveness, injustice and unreasonableness, they show that said rates in carload lots and in less than carload lots from said city of Cleveland to the places named are as follows, viz.: In carload lots, per barrel. 50 cts. To Chicago, in the State of Illinois.............. Less than carload 1 00 92 64 2d. The defendant has established and published a schedule showing the rates and charges for the transportation of petroleum and its products in barrels in carload lots, and in bulk in tank-cars upon its said railroad, which is now in force thereon. Said rates and charges for transportation in barrels in carload lots are excessive, unjust and unreasonable; and as evidencing and illustrating said excessiveness, injustice, and unreasonableness they show that said rates and charges in barrels in carload lots and in bulk in tank-cars from said city of Cleveland to the places named are as follows, viz.: Carload lots in bulk in 38 cts. To Chicago, in the State of Illinois.... 22 cts. Carload lots in bar rels, per barrel. 50 cts. 30 cts. 34 cts. 46 cts. 3d. The defendant has established and published a schedule of rates and charges for the transportation of petroleum and its products in barrels in carload lots and in less than carload lots upon its said railroad, and which is now in force thereon. Said rates and charges constitute and are an undue and unreasonable preference and advantage to the said traffic in carload lots, and an undue and unreasonable prejudice and disadvantage to said traffic in less than carload lots; and as evidencing and illustrating said undue and unreasonable preference and prejudice and disadvantage, respectively, they show that the said rates and charges in carload lots, and in less than carload lots, respectively, from said city of Cleveland to the places named are as follows, viz.: In carload lots, To Chicago, in the State of Illinois... 50 cts. 34 cts. 30 cts. 4th. Defendant has established and published a schedule of rates and charges for transportation of petroleum and its products in bulk in tank-cars and in carload lots in barrels, and in less than carload lots in barre's upon its said railroad, and which is now in force thereon, Said rates and charges constitute and are an undue and unreasonable preference and advantage to the said traffic in bulk in tank-cars and an undue and unreasonable prejudice and disadvantage to said traffic in carload lots in barrels and in less than carload lots in barrels; and as evidencing and illustrating said undue and unreasonable preference and prejudice and disadvantage, respectively, they show that the said rates and charges in bulk in tank-cars and in carload lots in barrels and in less than carload lots in barrels, respectively, from said city of Cleveland to the places named are as follows, viz.: 5th. The defendant has established and published a schedule of rates and charges for the transportation of petroleum and its products in barrels in carload lots and in less than carload lots from said city of Cleveland to places without and beyond the State of Ohio, reached by its said line of railroad, and which is now in force thereon; that as a part of said schedule of rates and charges it is provided that a minimum carload in barrels shall be sixty barrels. The rates and charges per barrel for less than carload lots as thus established is from fifty to one hundred and fifty per cent higher than the rate in carload lots. The floor capacity of defendant's cars, in which said commodities are transported in barrels, is from forty-eight to not more than fiftythree of said barrels, and for the transportation of said commodities when transported in said cars to the full floor capacity thereof, and in quantities less than sixty barrels, defendant charges the less than carload rates for each barrel. In order to transport in each of said cars sixty barrels of said commodities it becomes and is necessary that those barrels in excess of the floor capacity be placed upon the top of those upon the floor, which cause leakage and damage to the barrels thus placed above and below, which said leakage and damage is by said schedule entirely at the risk of the owner. Said regulation of said schedule, fixing sixty barrels as a 34 A. & E. R. R. Cas.-44 minimum carload, is unjust and unreasonable; and the charge per barrel at said less than carload rates on the full floor capacity of the car when that is less than sixty barrels, is excessive, unjust, and unreasonable. 6th. Defendant has established and published a schedule of rates and charges for the transportation of petroleum and its products in bulk in tank-cars, and that it transports a large quantity of said commodities at said rates in said tankcars; that defendant fails and refuses to furnish to complainants the tank-cars necessary to ship said commodities at said rates, according to said schedule, and defendant refuses to furnish the apparatus, facilities, and appliances needful to load and unload said commodities transported and to be transported in bulk in said tank-cars; that said defendant rebates from its said schedule rates and charges to shippers furnishing said tank-cars a mileage allowance of three-fourths of a cent for each and every said tank-car so furnished by shippers. Said defendant in its said schedule charges for the transportation of said commodities in said tank-cars a less amount than it charges for the transportation of said commodities in barrels, and that said less amount, in combination with said mileage allowance, constitutes and is an undue and unreasonable preference and advantage to the said traffic in bulk in tank-cars over the said traffic in barrels, and constitutes and is an undue and unreasonable prejudice and disadvantege to said traffic in barrels. 7th. The Standard Oil Co. is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Ohio, with its principal office in the city of Cleveland and in said State, and is engaged in the business of refining, manufacturing, and dealing in petroleum and its products, and ships said commodities in tankcars in the manner aforesaid over defendant's said railroad from said city of Cleveland to places thereon without the State of Ohio at said rates. That the facts, acts, and omissions of defendant hereinbefore set forth in the complaints numbered, respectively, from one to seven, inclusive, separately and in combination, all and singular, constitute and are, and by defendant are designed to be, a device whereby defendant charges, demands, collects, and receives from said Standard Oil Co. a less sum for a like and contemporaneous service in the transportation of a like kind of traffic under substantially similar circumstances and conditions than it charges, demands, collects, and receives from complainants therefor; and whereby defendant makes and gives and intends to make and give an undue and unreasonable preference and advantage to said Standard Oil Co. in the transportation of said commodities, and subjects and intends to subject complainants to an undue and unreasonable prejudice and disadvantage in the transportation of said commodities. By way of general averment, and as additional and supplementary to each and every of the above stated and numbered complaints, and for brevity of statement, complainants attach hereto the several schedules of rates and charges of the defendant above referred to, and make the same a part hereof and of each and every of said complaints stated and numbered as aforesaid. That petroleum and its products herein referred to are, by the classification adopted by the defendant and in force upon its said line of railroad, classed as third class and charged accordingly upon a computation of four hundred pounds weight for each and every barrel when transported in less than carload lots. The prayer of the petition is that the Commission investigate the charges and complaints herein preferred, and if said acts and omissions complained of are found to exist and to be unlawful, the Commission will order and direct said defendant to desist from and cease such unlawful acts and omissions, and for all such further action, order, and finding in the premises as to the Commission may seem just and right. To the foregoing complaint, the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern R. Co. answered as follows: Ist. It admits the allegations contained in the petition touching the complainants, copartnerships, and in Answer of corporations, and the incorporation of the respond- Lake Shore ent, and that respondent owns and operates a rail- Company. road as a common carrier, as alleged in said petition, and that complainants are engaged in business and ship some of their goods as alleged. 2d. It admits that it has established and published schedules showing the rates and charges for the transportation of petroleum and its products in barrels upon its railroad in car-load lots and in less than car-load lots and in bulk in tank cars, as alleged in the complaints numbered 1 to 4, both inclusive, in said petition; but it denies that said rates and charges for less than car-load lots or for the transportation in barrels in car-load lots are excessive, unjust, or unreasonable, or that said rates and charges, or any of them, constitute or are an unjust or unreasonable preference and advantage to the traffic in car-load lots, or that said rates and charges constitute and are an undue and unreasonable preference and advantage to said traffic in bulk in tank cars, or an undue and unreasonable prejudice and disadvantage to the said traffic |