Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1910-01-28
RAILROAD BOARD TURNS
DOWN COMPRESS MATTER
Petition of MiIIedgeviIIe Com
press Co. Refused Through
out by Commission

Railroads in Georgia. COMPRISING cot
ton for their own economy and conven-
fence in hauling, can have the v"Ck or
COMPRESSION done when and where and by
whom they please, holds the state rail-
road commission in its order handed down
Thursday in the case of Wall & Richard
son against the Georgia railroad and the
Central OF Georgia railway.
A number OF petitioners have interviewed
i'm this case. (which involves practically
every railroad operating in Georgia and
in which a large number of compress
companies appear as complainants.
BY its decision. the railroad commission
gives a sweeping victory to the railroads
in this dispute.
WHAT THE CHARGES WERE.
Wall & Richardson. organized into a
partnership under the trade name Of the
Nilledgeville Compress company, assert
ed that they had secured certain con-
tracts of patronage from the two rail-
roads they named, and that the railroads
had later refused 10 honor the contracts.
The railroads claimed no contract was
entered into.
Wall & Richardson asked that the rail-
roads be required to ship to them Cthe
AIilledgeville Compress company, all cot
ton which they. the complainants, pur-
chased within the Milledgeville territory,
for compression and that they be requir-
ed to pay compliments for such compress
sion. This was denied by the railroad
commission.
The petitioners further asked that the
two railroads named be required TO de-
liver to them for compression all I'M
pressed cotton passing through Milledge-
vile. whenever compression is required
This was denied.
They asked further that the railroads
be required to deliver to them for COM
preston all impressed cotton where back
hauls would be necessary in order to
reach any other compress. This was
also denied.
OTHER THINGS THEY ASKED.
They asked that the commission for
ward to the Interstate Commerce com
mission al questions in the case in
volving interstate shipments. This the
commission also refused to do, believ-
ing that % the question affects intra-
state IL also affects interstate ship
ments.
They asked that the Georgia railroad
and the Central of Georgia be required
to put in side tracks at their compress.
The commission deferred this prayer till
IT is shown that the compress is erected
and ready for operation.
The concluding prayer Of the petition.
pressed cotton was not granted by the
commission.
The commission held as to the alleged
contract between the compress company
and the railroads, that If such a con-
tract existed its enforcement would be
a question for the civil courts, as the
commission would lack such authority.
EXTRACTS FROM DECISION.
Following are some brief extracts from
the decision:
THE commission is of the opinion that
under existing conditions, compression is
an incident OF carriage. 1t is done mainly
for the convenience and economy of the
carrier. and at its expense when perform
eli in the interior. 1t is not obligatory on
the carrier either by statute or as a
public duty. 1t is not desired by many
purchasers of cotton, nor is 1t done in
this state without the owners consent.
IT seems therefore, that the carrier .
should have the right and power to Sc
lect the person or corporation with whom
It shall contract for such service. Such
selection does not constitute unlawful
discrimination"
Regarding the separate prayer for dis
tinct rates for soft and compressed cot
ton, the commission says:
THE broader general question of sepa-
rate rates on soft and compressed cot
ton has had our earnest consider alton. At
this tine. under the evidence developed in
this hearing. the commission does not feel
that IL would be justified, without furth-
er investigation and consideration, in
making separate rates for compressed and
impressed cotton