El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1910-01-19

the most distant of the gateways into
| Mexico, takes the same rates that are
enjoyed by the less distant gateways;
that the rates to Ell Paso are, there
fore. very low rates; and that these
competitive conditions at FL Paso fully
/ justify it in maintaining a rate ad-
! justment that Will prevent shippers
from using competing lines into Ell
| Paso on the low rates to that point,
and then shipping over its lines locally
| from FL Paso to Las Cruces at total
| through charge approximating its own
| through rates to the latter point.
| On the brief filed on behalf of the
defendant the 80 cent rate is spoken
Of as its regular local rate from Ell
Paso to Las Cruces on fifth class ar
| ticles; and, although the distance is
only a miles, the rate is justified on
the ground that the paucity of traffic
between those two points makes any
rate within reason a proper rate. The
| 10 cent rate is referred to as a pro
portional rate" and is said to be sim
| liar to proportional rates recognized
! by this commission and railway inter
ests all over the country.i 1t is con-
| tended that unless the defendant main
tains a rate from FL Paso to Las
! Cruces that is lower on merchandise
coming into Ell Paso over its lines than
over other lines, it will be deprived of
its revenue for the haul from Chicago
to Ell Paso. On that ground 1t is in
sisted that the defendant ought TO be
allowed to continue the socalled pro-
portional rate with the Limitation at
tached to it now appearing in its pub
llshed tariffs.
Proportional Rate.
We do not understand that the 10
- loFo L. &c
tional rate, or, as counsel assert that
such rate has at any time been rec
ognized by the commission or by rail-
way officials generally throughout the
country as a proportional rate. pro-
portional rate is nothing more or less
than a separately established rate, as
that phrase is used in section OF the
amended act, applicable to through
transportation. And it has not been
understood either by the commission,
or by others, so far as we are inform
ed, that a separately established rate
can be other than an open rate, avail
able to all. The separately established.
or proportional rate is simply one way
of making up the through charges be-
tween two points, but while we nave
no criticism, and. as at present ad-
vised. see no grounds for any criticism
of proportional rates applicable only
10 through movements lIOlH a
territory or group of points, We have
never recognized as valid, and, as at
present advised. see no grounds upon
which we could recognize as valid
proportional rate limited to sf;r ments
that come into the proportional rate
point over the lines Of a particular
carrier Proportional rates limited 10
through movements from defined ter
ritory, or from a group Of points. seem
20 form a proper basis for making up
through charges for transportation
from those points and that territory.
But a proportional rate, the use Cf
Which l. limited TO shipments over
particular line, would appear to be a
rate that discriminates against ship
pers over another line
Not a Proportional Rate.
But the 10 cent rate, as published,
| is not a proportional rate. 1t is sim
ply a local rate, with an unlawful lin
itation attached 10 its use. l. is IN
| tended to apply not as an extension or
| in any way as a part of a contract of
| Transportation upon which goods in
the indefinite past may have come into
| Ell Paso, but simply as a special basis
| for assessing charges or new con-
tract for a local movement to Las
| Cruces, and nothing can be clearer than
| that any basis for making Charges for
| a new and independent movement TO
Las Cruces must be available alike to
all shippers, regardless Of any previous
act of transportation. We regard the
contention as novelSas 1t seems TO be
without merit. that a carrier may
maintain a rate adjustment be-
tween two points that permits
wholesale merchant to pick out Of his
stock, regardless of the length of time
the goods have been in his possession,
a carload of merchandise and enter
into a contract with the defendant for
its transportation from FL Paso to Las
Cruces at a rate Of 10 cents per 100
pounds, because those particular goods
were received by him over that line,
although if he picked out other goods
of precisely the same nature that had
come into the distributing point over
another line he would be required to
pay a 80 cent rate, as would also a
competing merchant whose goods had
reached FL Paso over another line.
No Grounds for Rnte.
We see no grounds upon which the 10
cent rate as published in the defend
ants tariff may be properly sanction
| ed In its results it is simply con-
cession in the outbound rate, or re-
striction upon its use, that was in
tended by the defendant as a means Of
buying or forcing inbound traffic over
| It's own rails to Ell Paso- There are
transit, reconsignment and diversion
privileges of varying character in the
published tariffs of interstate carriers
| which permit the application OF the
balance of the through rate to the III
innate destination under certain de-
fined conditions. but the rate in ques-
ton is in no sense such a rate, 1t is
! merely a device on the part OF the de-
| PENDANT to force distributing mer-
| chants at FL Paso 70 use its line 10
! that point by offering them for SUD
sequent transportation to Las cruces.
| that has no relation either in point Oh
! time or otherwise to the original move
ment into Ell Paso, a rate that IL oe-
mics to other wholesale merchants
| whose wares have come into III Paso
over competing lines. We know OF no
! justification for such rate ana re-
| gard 1t as unlawful and discrimlnatory
Although it involves state OF iactS
| quite different to those disclosed mere
| the case of Alabama, ETC., Rali"ay
company VS.. Mississippi railroad com
mission, 203 U. s.. 496, is not without
interest in this connection.
| Unlawful Rate.