The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1897-12-15
DISCRIMINATION IN RAIL RATES.
Interstate Commission Ruling in Fa-
vor of Chattanooga Upheld.

Chattanooga. Tenn, Dec. 4-Judge Sew
erens of Kalamazoo. Mich, sitting in the
United States circuit court here to try
cases in which Judge c. d. Clark is in
competent. to-day rendered a decision in
the case of the interstate commerce COM
mission against the old East Tennessee.
Virginia and Georgia Railroad Company,
and other railroad companies entering
Chattanooga.
The case grew out of a complaint made
by the chamber of commerce of this city
to the interstate commerce commission in
1892, that the said railroads were discrim-
mating against this city in the matter Of
freigh rates in favor of Nashville and
Memphis, both of which cities were in
competition with the business of Chatta-
nooga. The point raised was that the rail-
roads were not justified in placing Nash
Vile on the water rate, as against Chatta-
nooga.
1t was charged and shown by the tariff
rates of the defendant companies that
goods We're shipped from the east to Nash
Vile ana back within a very short distance
of this city al a lower rate than was given
from the east to Chattanooga.
The question of the application Of the
long and short haul' clauses to the case
The interstate commerce commission
lad decided thai the roads were discrim-
mating, ana that Chattanooga should be
put on the same basis with Nashville and
that Chattanooga should be given the
some rates.
In his decision, fudge Severens said: in
considering the facts adduced by the inter-
state commerce commission, bearing upon
the question of discrimination, 1 have TO
say that l have been surprised. The
proof is startling. condition of affairs
which viii allow freight TO be shipped from
New York, through Chattanooga TO Nash
vile ana then shipped back by a local
rate cheaper than 1t could be shipped d.
rect to Chattanooga. must, Of necessity,
be radically wrong and badly in need of
correction.
Il shah not deny that the carriers had
right TO take into consideration the fact,
as adduced here, Of a low rail and water
rate from the east via Evansville to Nash
vile, in making and forming their rates,
but this rule is not to be carried to un-
reasonable lengths in making defense in
this instance, and unless the carriers can
show where the commission failed to take
into account some material right which
the carriers had, L will sustain the order
of the commission.
However, l do not believe counsel for
the carriers can prove this point. The bur-
den of the proof is upon the carriers,
and I shall give their attorneys ten days
in which to file a brief showing, il such
can be done, that the commission erred
i'm refusing to allow carriers to set up COM
petition 8 a defense to the charge of dis
elimination. 1 shall also grant the attor-
neys for the commission five days in which
to answer the brief of the railroads at
toruey. As l said before, the evidences
of discrimination against Chattanooga are
startling, and I do not see how the COM
Ls.r ~ a-1 Tho ~
they did. Unless the counsel for the car
riers shall find more proof than is in the
record now / shall sustain the commits
sion"
/, S. Shower of Washington, counsel for
the interstate commission, states that this
is the strongest case the commission has
ever had against railroads showing unlaw-
fnl discrimination