Wichita eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1886-1890, 1888-02-24
AN-OPlNiON.

tASB uNISlNs - ...,-E-s. ..-
WASHINGTON. Feb. 23.-The interstate
commerce commission: today promulgated
an elaborate opinion in the case of George
Rice, of Marietta, O., against, the Louis
Vile & Nashville and several other rail-
roads. charging among other things dis
elimination in favor of the Standard Oil
company.
The opinion says that compliments
method of shipment was in barrels; this
was the only method for which any Of the
defendants supplied rooling stock
to their patrons The Louisville &
Nashville and the Cincinnati, New
Orleans g. Texas Pacific company had each
a few tank cars, but the tanks upon them
were owned by the Standard Oil company
Of Kentucky. and they were not obtainable
by other parties desiring to ship oil In bulk
by tank cars. The defendants by their
rate sheets gave rates on oil in barrels, and
to many towns, but not on oil in tanks
also. Generally the rates on the transpor-
tation of oil in tanks were car rates, but in
some cases they were by the hundred
pounds. The rate sheets gave
cars were to be obtained.
The commission decided that it was the
duty of defendants to publish information
on this subject with their rate sheets and
that they did not fully give the informa-
ton regarding rates which the act to regu-
late commerce intends shall be placed be
fore the public unless they. did so. 1t is
obvious that instead Of the defendants Of
fering two methods Of transportation
which are open to acceptance Of all, they
offer only one which is open. The other is
offered on such terms that it can by no
possibility be accepted only by parties
who can control considerable capital
and who will supply for themselves an Inn
portant part Of the means, of transporta
The man of small means who adopts the |
methods of transportation barrels can |
not be said to do SO of choice when the fail |
ure of the carrier to supply for the other |
the customary means of transportation |
compels him to do so. 1t does not seem
to us either just or plausible |
to say under such circumstan-
barrels has voluntarily chosen that method
and has no concern with the charges i'm
posed on his competitor who adopted the
other He is, on the contrary, vitality con
cerned with those charges, and, and If his
own are not to be gagged in some degree
by them he may be ruined in his business
without redress, even though the charges
may seem not unreasonable The COM
mission lays d own the general rule that
the tank is to be considered part
Of the car itself, and for
is carried in it the charge ought
% be the same by the hundred pounds as is
made on the transportation of barrels of
oil i'll carloads, in other cars. Even then,
rye, for he must pay freight upon the
:askets as well as on the Oil,
)ut this, as between, him and the
,arrier. is not unjust. This ruling does
lot preclude such allowance for the use of
'ank cars as is customary, provided it be
but it assumes that such al
owance will be made. But it should be
ormity, aad the authority, to make it
must not carelessly or otherwise be made q
means of discrimination.
The case of each of the defendants was
hen considered separately and in the case
If the Louisville & Nashville railroad an
rider was entered that defendants cease
heir unjust discrimination, that they cease
o make tank rates when the tanks differ
II capacity, and that they conform their
charges on tank car and barrel shipments
o the rule above described.
In the case of the ST. Louis, Iron Noun
ain & Southern railroad the commission
inds that the defendant made excessive
dteS ou udTTcl SIllplueuuS, anu unaG Cne
fleet was unJustly discriminate against
and to give undue and I'M
preference to shippers of tank
ars. Orders were entered that its charges
e corrected and made to. confirm to the
ule In the other three cases, the Mobile
Ohio, Mississippi &, Tennessee and
illinois Central, no orders were entered.
The commission states that while the
uestions raised by the charges are i'm
Ortant thew scarcely recpiyad any affan- |
ion, either in the taking OF the evidence
r in the arguments which were made on
ehalf of complainant. A decision
pom them would affect other parties quite
S much as itawould the parties now be-
ore the commission, and under such cir
umstances it would be improper to pass
pOn them now. -.
lRRESTED FOR STEALING CATTLE.
MARSHAL, Mo-, Feb. 23.-Link Hunt,
ne of the men who stole thirty-two head
l. AZ