New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1907-04-24
Decision AGAINST
THE union pacific
COMMERCE BoDYs OPINION IN
PEAvY ELEVATOR CASE
ANNOUNCED.
Allowance Is Rebate-Declared IL
legal Because in Excess of the Ac-
tual Cost of Service and Must Be
Reduced.

Washington, April 19.-In what is
known as the Peavy elevator case,
the interstate commerce commission
Thursday announced its decision
against the Union Pacific Railroad
company. The commission holds that
the arrangement between the Union
Pacific and the Peavy elevators was
unlawful, as the allowance was in ex-
cess of the actual cost of the eleva-
rebate.
The decision was prepared by Com
missioner Harlan and his opinion was
concurred in by a majority of the
commission. Commissioners Glenn
ents and Lane, however, filed dissent
ing opinions.
Summary of Opinion.
The opinion of Commissioner Har-
Ian is summarized as follows:
"Elevation is defined as unloading
grain from cars or grain-carrying YES
sells into grain elevator and loading
it out again after period of not to
exceed ten days; it does not include
treatment or grading, cleaning and
clipping of grain; and retention in an
elevator beyond ten days becomes
storage and is not part of the serv-
ice of elevation as that word is used
in the statute.
"The law clearly recognizes eleva-
ton as faculty which the carrier
may provide, and this authorizes the
carrier to grant grain elevation at
destination or while the traffic is in
transit, subject only to the restric-
ton imposed by the act that eleva-
ton, like any other service offered
by the carrier to the shippers, must
be open to all on equal and reasona-
BILE terms
When Charge Is Rebate.
"Since carrier subject to the act
provide elevation for grain shipments,
such carrier may either construct and
operate the elevator itself or furnish
elevation by arrangement with an
owner of an elevator; and the amount
of compensation paid by the carrier
to the owner of an elevator rendering
the service, is of no concern to ship
pers or other carriers, unless it oper-
ates to affect the rates charged by the
carrier upon the grain traffic or by
some device a portion Of the allow
ance is returned to shippers and thus
becomes a rebate.
AN allowance made to shipper of
grain who furnishes elevation service
| under an arrangement with carrier
| is a rebate and an unlawful discrim-
nation when it involves profit over
| and above the actual cost to such
shipper of the service rendered. 1t is
| not a rebate when the allowance does
not so exceed the actual cost.
| Allowance Is Unlawful.
1.-THE arrangement between the
| Union Pacific Railroad company and
| the Peavy elevators at Council Bluffs
and Kansas City is not in itself I'M
lawful But the allowance of one and
quarter cents per 100 pounds paid
| by the railroad company to these ele
| vators, controlled by the Peavy in
| terests, who are large shippers OF
| grain and own practically all the
| grain going into the elevators, is in
! excess of the actual cost of the serv
ioe, and is a rebate and therefore I'm
| lawful.
"The commission orders that the al
lowance by the Union Pacific Railroad
company to the Peagy elevators
shall be reduced and shall not exceed
three-quarters of a cent per 10(
rounds, such order taking effect or
| Time 1 1907"