Mexico weekly ledger. (Mexico, Mo.) 1855-1956, 1889-10-24
A Decision In the Leonard Case.

III NAV SOuAty.
A Decision In the Leonard Case.
WASHINGTON, D. c., October Is.
The Interstate Commerce Conn.,
mission, in an opinion by Chair
man Cooley, to-day made public its
decision in the cases of Abiel
Leonard and Logan B. Chappell
against the Chicago & Alton Rail-
road Company. The complainants
were formerly allowed to ship 1--we
cattle In car loads from Mount
Leonard, No., to Chicago at $50
per car, and to load twenty head
into a car. On January 81, 1889,
complainant, Leonard, offered $50
head of cattle for shipment in nine
cars, but this was refused, and he
was informed that the rate would be
24c per 100 pounds for a car load
of not less than 10000 and any
excess of tnat number of pounds to
a car would be charged for at the
same rate. The freight charge
was $590.SS, and the cattle were
loaded in twelve cars. The main
question in the case was whether
carriers can properly substitute for
the practice of charging car load
rates on cattle, irrespective Of
weight, the rule that while a car
lot rate is named, the minimum
weight for a Car load is prescribed
and any excess over the minimum
is to be charged for by the hundred
pounds in proportion to the car
lot rate.
The commission decides that
this rule is not unlawful, and
being more In proportion to the
service rendered, it is prima faeie
more just and reasonable than the
practice which it supplanted.
Upon the hearing 1t was shown
that by the State law or the rull-
ings of State Commissions, ship
pers of cattle in Kansas and Mis-
souri, 10 points within the State
had the right to load cars without
regard to weight at a stated price
per car. 1t was said that the rule
was the same in some other States,
and the commission was urged to
conform thereto.
The commission holds that such
State action is not a reason for
adopting like rule in interstate
traffic if that course is found not to
be most just and polite. The grant
TO regulate interstate commerce is
full and complete, and can not be
narrowed or encroached upon by
State authority either directly or
indirectly. State action will al
ways be treated with the highest
Difference and respect, but it can
not be allowed to control in mat
} ters within the Federal jurisdic-
, tion.
In the case of Henry Milmor and
Edmund B. Harrington, millers
and dealers in grain at Port Huron,
r Mich, against the Grand Trunk
Railway Company, of Canada, and
the Chicago and Grand Trunk
Railway Company, the opinion
: written by Commissioner Schoon-
maker holds that when a difference
/ in rates on grain and grain pro-
ducts is unreasonable, that the re-
latlon of local to through rates
should not be unduly dispropor-
tionate. Through rates are. not
i required to be made on a mileage
basis, nor local rates TO correspond
with the divisions of a Joint
through rate over the same line.
: Mileage is usually an element Of
. importance, and due regard to dis
\ tance proportions should be OBJ
served in connection with the other
considerations that are material in
e fixing transportation charges.
When rates ON the line of carri-
] er are on their face disproportion-
, ate or relatively unequal, the bur-
, den is on the carrier to Justify them
4 when challenged. Grain and grain
r products classified alike are pre-
5 sumptively entitled to equal rates,
I and if a difference is made by a
carrier it assumes the burden of
, sustaining it by satisfactory evil
I dence.
The commission has, in an opin-
ion by Commissioner Morrison,
announced its decision in the case
of James g. Abbott against the East
! tennessee, Virginia and Georgia
/: Railway Company and others.
This was complaint of transporta-
tion charges on lumber carried
from Johnson City, Tenn, to Bos-
> ton, Mass. The rate of which COM
tplaint was made was 36c per 100
pounds of lumber in the car load
for ID distance of 9l1 miles, though
from tae more distant point of At
lai.ta, Ga, l240 miles, a lower rate
"f BIC is charged, which i. alleged
! to br in violation of the fourth see
tion IF the act to regulate C ,m-
merce. From Macon, Ga to
Boston the freight char - he
same as from johnson CRY, III
miles the shorter distance o. =. .iie
/ same line.
The commission holds that COM
bined rail and water competition at
a lenger distance point does not
justify q greater charge for the
shorter distance while the shorter
distance rate il maintained by the
carrier at points where the Coca
. petition is of greater force and more
controlling than at the longer dis
tance point.
While distance is not always a
3 controlling element in determining
what is reasonable rate, there is
, ordinarily no better measure Of rail-
road service in carrying goods than
the distance they are carried; and
when the rate or freight charges
4