Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1911-07-25

number five, which is farther east,
because the rates from that territory
are not particularly involved in these
decisions. inasmuch as they generally
are controlled by ocean transportation
TO the Pacific coast.
In concluding the discussion of the
Spokane case, the commissions repor
says:
1T may be asked why the schedule
OF rates suggested by the commission
as reasonable should not be ordered in.
The answer is that carriers be permit
ted in so far as possible 10 adjust their
own tariffs and that II seems probable
that in compliance with this order car
riers must establish rates in substan-
tial accord with those suggested BY US
It should be ever borne in mind that
the acute complaint in this case is the
discrimination and not the unreason-
able rate. Obedience 10 this order will
doubtless result in some rates from the
east which are bigger and in others
which are lower than those suggested
by the commission since We did not
then feel liberty, as the complainants
Z Ittl utSltU- az llldht LuC sNBDhcii-S IA
depend upon the coast rate But il is
likely that the resulting schedule will
be more satisfactory 70 the complain
ants and no more burdensOme upon he
defendants. II the carriers establish
under this disposition Of the case rates
70 Spokane which are excessive, a fur
Their order can be made in this pro
ceeding reducing them TO a proper
basis
In an elaborate discussion of thu
long-and-short-haul provision in the
Reno case and the Phoenix-Arizona
case. Commissioner Lane. who prepar-
II the opinions in these cases for the
commission asserts that III must be
affirmatively shown by the carriers
seeking exceptions 10 the loug-and-shor,-
haul provisions that an injustice viii
not be done 10 intermediate points by
allowing lower rates to the more dis
tant points.
The intentment Of the amended
law says Commissioner Lane. is To
make its prohibition of the higher rate
for the shorter haul rule
OF wel-nish universal applica-
ton from which this commits
sion may deviate only in special cases
and then 70 meet transportation cir
cumstances which are beyond the car
ries' control"
Il IS held that in the light OF his
tory il is not 10 be gainsaid that the
transcontncutal lines must give con
sideraUion 70 sea competition" 1t was
held. also. however, that the carriers
herein involved have not shown that
undue discrimination was not effected
by their rate adjustments between
points il Nevada and points in Calf
ornia: nor have they established that
the rates TO the coast cities. if extend
ed by them from eastern points out
side the zone of water influence are
not compensatory"
The transcontinental carriers, there
fore are ordered 10 readjust their pres
enr rates by October 10. next. from
eastern territories 10 intermediate
points as compared with The rates
from Nevada points to the Pacific
coast. This will make a reduction OF
rates TO Reno and Nevada common
points from the east of approximately
50 1-3 per cent.
In the course OF the opinion. Commits
siOner Lane says:
We desire 10 be extremely conser-
vative in this first application OF the
new law. and 10 require an adjustment
of rates that will be safely within the
zone of our discretion For this reason
we have decided that the transconti-
mental carriers serving Reno and other
points upon the main line of the Cen
trail Pacific shall make no higher
charges upon any article carrying a
commodity rate than is contempor.
aneously in effect from Missouri rive
points. such as Omaha and Kansas
City. 10 coast terminal points This
principle we shall also expect to be ap-
piled on commodity rates TO all main
line intermediate points in Nevada and
California.
Some Of the petitions under the
fourth section are made by carriers
reaching California terminals through
southern Nevada and Arizona Those
for relief are denied in
so far as they involve the imposition
Of higher rates upon Intermediate
points are applied on commodities from
the Missouri river 10 Los Angeles, San .
orS