Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1925-02-05
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES

| the rates for like distances over the
direct route to the more distant
point. % that in no case shall rates
over routes via which relief Is grant
| ed be less than reasonably compens-
atory. The Commission in the New
, England revision of 1918 placed no
limitation upon the relief to circui-
| tous lines to meet the rates of direct
| lines. Since that time. owing to
pressure of other matters, it had
J never made further investigation of
| the fourth section situation in New
| England and on traffic to and from
| New England to meet the require
ments of these new provisions. Man.
| ifestly it is its duty as much to en-
| force these two additional require
| ments as the original provisions, and
the investigation recently instituted
in eastern territory. in SO far as it
covers New England. has been de-
termined upon partially because Of
| the necessity of working out this sit
| uatiOn.
| However, I wish to make it plain
! that the matter of fourth section de-
partures is not so important or
pressing within New England as
within other portions of official clas-
| siiication territory, particularly So
called trunk line territory which
bounds New England on the west
and extends as far west as the Buff
falo- Pittsburgh line. In that vast
.. territory rates have never been re-
vised on a mileage basis and there
are numerouse DEPARTURES not only
! over circuitous lines but also over
direct lines. AS to rates between
New England on the one hand. and
|
! the situation is that in many in
stances the rates to border points on
| the west are as high as to points in
trunk line territory many miles to
J the west. For example. the rates on
some classes of traffic from Boston
| to points in western New England
are the same as to New York. and
! in turn the rates to New York are
the same as to Philadelphia and 9TH
err points considerably beyond New
, York.
AS previously explained to you,
| the Commission set down for hear
! ing some months ago all existing
| fourth section departures in official
| classification territory including New
| England, trunk line, and central ter
ritories, and at the hearing in ques-
| ton the defendants indicated that
liltg lIdu no uClSIlSS " OiLCl AOA eAiS
existing departures and expected to
remove them by a revised basis OF
rates. Under the circumstances, the
| Commission had no option other than
| to deny the existing fourth section
relief because it had authority to
grant relief only where justification
| therefor is presented. Subsequent
| TO the entry of that denial order
! the carriers proposed revised class
| rates throughout official classi-
| 1ication territory. They would of
! course have had the right under the
| law to publish those revised rates
and file them with the Commission.
| In that event, said rates would have
, become effective 80 days thereafter
unless suspended by the Commits
! sion. However, conferences were
| held between the carriers and the
| shippers with respect to the situa-
! ton and Joint request was pre-
! scented to the Commission for the In
! stitution of an investigation rather
! than having the carriers proposed
rates published and filed. When |
say carriers and shippers OF course 1t