The Pulaskian., 1917-03-02
ROUTING iNsTRUcTioNs-THElR
 EFFECT.
By Guy F. Williams.


 "Pine lumber from St. Louis, Mo, to Dundee, H., was specifically rout- ed by shipper over route taking a combination rate. A lower joint rate was applicable over four other routes; but the existence of a lower rate over other routes and the subsequent establishment of same over route of movement do not warrant the con- demnation of the rate charged" Sci del vs. Mo. Pae. By, 39-ICC-670.
 This decision, as we'll as hundreds of others, clearly establishes that. where a shipper routes his own freight via a route where higher rate is in effect, he will be held ae- countable for his own acts, while, on the other hand, if the shipment is un- routed the duty falls upon the origi- hating carrier to see that the ship ment is forwarded via the cheapest route, and should the originating car rier fail in this duty it will be accoun- table to the shipper for any damage he may sustain.
 '' * * In the absence of routing in structions it was the duty of origi- hating carrier to forward shipment over that reasonably available route by which lowest charges could be se- cured" Sanguinette vs. U. P. R. R., 39-ICC-515.
 Unless there exists an extremely important and special reason for in- serting routing beyond originating line it should be left off the bill 0f lading and the routing beyond left entirely to the originating carrier Then. if the shipment is improperly routed, resulting in higher rate, you will have recourse. Shippers gen. orally, are entirely too lax in this re- sDect and a good many have come to grief by reason of it. It often occurs by trying to favor some particular for eign line that is an intermediate car rier If this is desirable it would be better to make a request of the origi- hating carrier that you prefer such and-such routing if possible to do so without a difference in rate, but to state positively and specifically 8 cer- tain route means that you assume ab- solute responsibility for the rates in effect via that route
 Another point that is well to bear in mind is that, no matter what rate you have been quoted by an agent or officer of a railroad, it is not the law ful rate unless it is properly publish, ed-in other words, the fact that he quoted you such rate does not make it binding. Perhaps I may make ii clearer by putting it in this light. Sup pose the lawful published rate on lum- Der is 12 cents to St. Louis and through an error or otherwise, a rep resentatiYe of railroad quoted you 10c and you sold your lumber based on 10-cent rate? You may think that the carrier should protect the TO- cent rate, but the law is otherwise and to charge you less than the tariff rate renders both of you liable to criminal prosecution. You are charg- ed with knowing what the lawful rate is and the law will suffer no ex- cuses to defeat the lawful published rate.
 ''The Act charges a shipper with knowledge of the lawful rate" Franke Grain Go, vs L c. R. R., 27-ICC-625.
 'The carrier is not liable for dam. ages resulting from a mistake in quoting a rate less than the full pub fisher rate" K. c. s. R. R. vs. Carl, 33-SC-391, 227-US-699.
 From these decisions, and I might quote an indefinite number along the same line, it will be noticed that ig. norance of the higher lawful rate will not relieve you and you have ab- solutely no recourse against the car rier. Therefore, when representatives of carriers solicit freight from you via a certain. line, bear in mind that you are charged with the resDonsibil. fly of the correctness of the rate and whether or not it applies via that par 1 ticular route if you specifically route the shipment