The San Francisco call., 1905-02-24

FRUIT MEN
VICTORIOUS
Rates on Oranges
Declared to Be
Unjust.
Interstate Commerce Com
mission Renders Lengthy
Opinion.
Holds Southern Pacific and Santa Fe
to Be Unlawfully Engaged in
Pooling Traffic

WASHINGTON, Feb. 23.-The Inter-
state Commerce Commission. in an
opinion by Commissioner Clements, to-
day rendered it's decision in the Cali
fornia orange cases brought by the
Southern California Fruit Exchange
and the Consolidated Forwarding Com
pany against the Southern Pacific and
Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Rail
road systems, in which it holds that
the defendant carriers are unlawfully
engaged in pooling the traffic in citrus
fruits originating in Southern Cali
fornia and carried by them and their
connections to Eastern markets; that
the defendants, by compelling the ship
pers to pay icing charges as estab-
lished by the car lines have made such
charges part of the cost of transporta-
ton and subject to regulation under
the law, and that the rate on oranges
in carloads from Southern California
to points on and east of the Missouri
River are unreasonable and unjust
The rate on lemons is held to be rea-
sonable and present refrigerating
charges are held to be not unreason-
able
This decision by the commission is
on questions reserved in a former de-
eision by the commission in the same
cases which prohibited carriers from
from California to Eastern markets the
right OF directing over which Of the
established lines the shipments should
be carried.
RULINGS ARE MADE
Rulings are also made as follows in
the decision now rendered:
The carriers minimum carload
weight Of $4,000 pounds on citrus fruit
In refrigerator or ventilator cars from
o. fN~rfa b. E1oa
destinations Is not unreasonable with
the forty-foot car In general use.
Whether or not the regulating statute
applies to refrigeration charges in all
cases. the defendants, by compelling
shippers to pay icing charges in citrus
fruits as established by the car INES
or do without necessary refrigeration
for the traffic, have made these charges
a part of the cost Of transportation and
subject to regulation under the law.
The refrigeration charges applying
on these shipments Of citrus fruits TO
Eastern markets have been reduced
during the pendency Of this proceeding
and the present charges for refrtgera-
ton are not found, on the record IN
this case to be unreasonaD Die.
The defendant carriers are unlaWfully
engaged in pooling the traffic in citrus
fruits originating in Southern Call-
fornia and carried by them and their
connections to Eastern markets. but
further action on that branch OF the
proceeding is reserved by the commits
sion in view of the pendency In the
United States Supreme Court Of an ap-
peal from a like decision or the circuit
Court for the Southern District OF Cali
fornia In a suit brought by the com
| mission to enforce it's order as to the
routeing regulation above mentioned
LEMON RATE is FAIR
| The defendant carriers present rate
of 81 per 100 pounds on lemons in car
| loads from Southern California to
| points on and east OF the MISSOURI
| River Is apparently reasonable.
| The defendant carriers rate or 81 70
! per 100 pounds on oranges in carloads
carried from Southern California TO
| points on and east Of the Missouri
River is unreasonable and unjust. and
in the opinion of the commission It
should be reduced 10 cents per 100
pounds, but II the time Of service to
| Eastern markets should be restored to
| the old basis as indicated by eight days
| to Chicago and twelve days to New
York, a rate as high as 81 is would per-
haps be fair and reasonable.
Commissioners Prouty concurs in the
| proposed order and recommendation of
| the commission, but does not agree
with some Of the facts found and con-
| clusions drawn In the majority opinion.
| Such concurrence is based mainly on
| the ground that the 81 % rate on oranges
| Is unreasonable because the time
necessary in transporting these fruits
| to Eastern markets has been greatly
| lengthened. Chairman Knapp dissents
| from the decision. The chairman saws
! that in several important particulars
| the findings in the majority report do
not accord with his understanding Of
| the proofs, while the inference therein
| drawn is not warranted In his iudg-
ment, by due consideration of all the
/ facts and circumstances entitled to be
| taken into account: and further. that
even IL the specific findings In the ma
| jority opinion be accepted as fair and
J accurate summary of the facts and cir
cumstances entitled to be considered.
! he still is constrained to hold that the
unreasonableness Of the rate has not