Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-09-06
Must Not be Used 10 Discriminate
Between Competing Shippers
of Petroleum.
RADICAL AND SWEEPING RULING
Rendered by the Interstate Commerce
Commission in the Cases So Long
Under Consideration.
QUITE A THRUST AT THE STANDARD.
The Latest Oil News and Notes From the Various
Fields Of Operation.

WASHINGTON, September 5.-The Inter
State Commerce Commission to-day filed
their decision by Commissioner Schoonmaker
in the case of Rice, Robinson. and Witherop,
against the Western New York and Penn
sylvania Railway Company, and others.
The complainant alleged that the road
charged 81 cents per barrel on petroleum
from TitusYille to Buffalo, n. Y, and but
Z cents per barrel from TitusVille to South
Amboy, n. J., the shorter haul being a
part of the latter haul only; that the de-
PENDANTS required barrel shipments to be
loaded in the cars in tiers, that the freight
charged was an unjust discrimination
against the complainants and against the
city of Buffalo, and that by making more
favorable charge to shippers in tank than to
shippers in barrels, unjust discrimination
was made in favor of the Standard Oil Com
pany. The Commission hold.
TEXT OF THE DECISION.
The acquisition and consolidation by rail
carrier under one system of management Of
different competing lines Of road, serving the
same territory in the carriage of competitive
trafie to the same markets, cannot create a
of the consolidation of interests to deprive the
pubhcs OF the benefits of fair competition, nor
afford warrant for oppressive discrimination
with a view to its own interests. such as equal
iZing profits from its several divisions, by
making rates and charges for one division that
give profitable markets to a portion of its pat
TonS and higher rates and charges for another
division, that are destructive to the pursuits of
other patrons who are competitors in the same
business; but Its duty to the public requires
that its services must be alike TO all who are
situated alike.
A carrier that employs different methods for
the transportation of petroleum oil and its
products in car loads, for example tank cars in
which the oil is carried In bulk and box cars,
in which the oil is carried in barrels, is not
relieved from its duty in respect to equality
OF rates by the difference IL makes between its
patrons in the mode of carriage but its charges
Tor like quantities carried between like points
Of shipment and destination must be equal
upon the commodity itself, irrespective of the
moce of carriage or the tank or barrel package
In which II is contained.
THE IMPORTANT POINTS.
Differences IN circumstances and conditions
of transportation that are of q carriers own
creation or connivance, or that by reasonable
effort on the part Of a carrier might be avoided,
cannot justify exceptional rates. A tank used
IN carrying OIL Is deemed by carriers part of the
car, and the rate is charged only upon the con-
tents, while for carriage in box cars the bar
rels containing the oil are treated as freight
ard the rate is charged both for the weight of
the barrel and its contents
The prevention of this prejudice to shippers
in barrels requires that for purposes ot rates
when carrier uses both tanks and bOxcars
for carrying oil in carloads, the barrels shall be
deemed part of the bOXcar; and that, as in the
case OF transportation in tanks the rates shall
be charged only for the weight or quantity of
oil carried exclusive of the weight of the bar
rels, and be the same tor like weight of Quap-
tity carried in tanks.
When carrier engages in transporting oil
IN tanks and also in barrels conveyed in box
cars, in carloads and charged for the weight of
the barrels as well as the oil carried by the
boXcar mode of transportion. but for the
weight Of the oil only when carried in tanks it
unJust'y discriminates between shippers and
subjects the traffic to undue prejudice and dis
ADVANTAGE.
THE CARRIERS DUTY,
The fact that carrier does not own tank
cars, but accepts and uses such cars supplied
by some of its patrons for their own traffic is
unlmportant so far as rates are concerned. 1t
is carriers duty to equip its road with in
strumentalites of carriages tor the traffic it
undertakes to carry; and to furnish them alike
to all who have occasion for their use, and its
duty to furnish equipment cannot be trans
terred to nor required of shippers When a
carrier accepts and uses cars for trapsnorta-
tion owned by shippers or others IN legal con-
poses Of rates and carriage, and neither the
manner of acquiring cars nor inability to fur
nlsh its general patrons the use of cars similar
TO those furnished by some shippers for their
own traffic can excuse or Justify carrier for
discrimination in rates thai may give one ship
per advantages over another, nor can any de-
vice. such As payment of unreasonable rent for
use of cars furnished by shippers be prac-
tlced to evade the duty of equal charges for
equal service.
The allowance by Garner to a slipper of oil
q val nr ,IoY
Ions from the actual quantity put in a tank
Tor alleged leakage or waste in importation is
in the absence of a corresponding allowance to
shippers in barrels unjust discrimination and
unlawful. The classification of petroleum nil
and its products in carloads adopted and gep-
orally applied by carriers is the same. and the
rates upon oil and Its products should corre-
sDond with their classification and be alike