National Republican., 1888-02-21
THE RICHMOND AND DANvILLE
The Interstate Commission DO Not
Sustain Complaints Made.

Sustain Complaints Made.
The interstate commerce commission yes
terday filed an opinion, by Chairman Cooley,
In the case OF the complaint Of the committee
on transportation Of the Dauville, Va, cham
Der of commerce against the Richmond and
Danville Railroad Company. The complaint
contained o number of charges the chief OF
which were that II made excessive charges;
that II Disseminated in its charges against
themerchants and traders of Danville and in
favor OF the merchants and traders Of Rich
mond, Lynchburg, and Charlottesville, and
especially that II Disseminated by refusing to
give to merchants and traders of Danville, in
respect to merchandise purchased by them at
from the point of purchase TO the point q.
which they might make sale thereof.
Elaborate proofs were taken In the case, and
the commission finds a number of instances
OF excessive charges TO be made out. In re-
spect to such charges the parties paying them
were not represented in the case before the
the rates were found to be erroneous they had
been corrected, and II the overcharges had not
| been repaid the party In each case was entitled
to have repayment on demand.
Through rates to Danville from both direo.
tions were complained of, but the commission
holds tnat in so far as the rates are made by
the defendant, the defendant does not charge
merely giving the rates In addition to Its own
to any one who asks for through rates.
The commission also holds that the justice
| of local rates cannot be determined by q COM
| parison Of them with tho rates charged on
long through lines upon which the freights are
carried for long distances In great volume and
| at relatively very much less expense than like
| freights can be carried when moved in less
| quantities and for comparatively short dis
| tances.
To present the ground for the charge of dis.
| elimination in favor OF Richmond as against
| Danville, nn illustrative instance may be
taken. The Danville merchant claimed that
| in case he bought merchandise in Richmond
| and shipped II to Danville, and then sold II 10
| Goldsboro' and other points further on, and
shipped II to such point he shoul d have a
| through rate on the merchandise from Rich.
| unless he was given such through rate, he was
| at n disadvantage In the competition with the
| Richmond merchants in making sales to the
| same point The railroad company comedies
| the through rate whom the Danyille merchant
| makes his shipment direct from Richmond TO
his place of sale, but refuses to do so when the
| shipment Is first to Danville and then second
| shipment made to the point of sale.
The commission holds that in the case sup
| posed the railroad cannot be compelled to
| give the same rate for the two shipments that
| IL gives when there is one only. The fact that
| its refusing to do 30 operates in favor Of one
| town or adversely to another does not charge
| It with unjust discrimination. Discrimination
| must consist in the doing for or allowing tc
| one party or place what is denied to another
| 4! cannot be predicated of action which In IL
selfis impartial.