United States District Court—Northern District of 
 Nem York 
 
 THE State OF NEw YorRK AND CHARLES | 
 D. Newron, Personally and as Attorney 
 General of the State of New York, 
 
 Plaintiffs 
 
 VS. 
 
 | 
 
 Tue Unitep States and Encar E. Criark, 
 CuHarRLEs C. McCuorp, Batruasar H. 
 Meyer, Henry C. Hatt, Winturor M. 
 DANIELS, CLtyDE B. AcHESON, ROBERT 
 i. Wouuey, Josepy B. Hastman, HENRY 
 J. Forp and Marxk W. Porter, constitu- 
 ting THe INTERSTATE COMMERCE Com- 
 MISSION. 
 
 Defendants 
 
 PETITION AND BILL OF COMPLAINT AND ORDER TO 
 SHOW CAUSE 
 
 Epwarp G. GRIFFIN, 
 Deputy Attorney General of New York, 
 Solicitor for the Plaintiffs, 
 Office and Post Office Address, 
 The Capitol, Albany, N. Y. 
 
‘ 
 f 
 
 ate ar f Ota! 
 ral Jean ? 
 Path ‘i ai, uy 
 
IN THE 
 DISTRICT. COURT OF THE UNITED 
 STATES — 
 
 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. 
 
 Tse State or New York and 
 Cuarues D. Newron, Personally 
 and as ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF 
 THE STATE or New York, 
 
 Plaintiff's, 
 
 agaist 
 
 Tue Unrrep States and Enaar 
 HK. Cuarx, Cuaries C. McCuorp, 
 BauttTuasar H. Meyer, Henry C. 
 Haut, Winturop M. Danizts, 
 Crype B. Acueson, Rosertr FE. 
 Wottey, JosepH B. Hasrman, mh es 
 Henry J. Forp and Marx W. 
 Porter, Constituting Tur Iv- 
 TERSTATE COMMERCE ComMISSION, 
 Defendants. 
 
 PETITION AND BILL OF COMPLAINT 
 
 To the Honorable the Judges of the District ® 
 Court of the Umted States for the Northern 
 District of New York: 
 
 The State of New York, Charles D. Newton, per- 
 sonally and as Attorney-General of the State of 
 
 cbietateer ee 
 a r 
 iSjers 
 oN 
 
10 
 
 A 
 Complaint 
 New York, bring this Bill of Complaint against 
 the United States and the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission and respectfully show unto this Hon- 
 orable Court and allege as follows: 
 
 1. That the plaintiff, the State of New York, 
 is one of the States of the United States, and 
 Charles D. Newton is Attorney-General of the 
 State of New York, duly qualified and acting as 
 such, and is a citizen of the State of New York 
 
 -and the United States, and have legal capacity to 
 
 sue herein as will be made to more particularly 
 appear with all other necessary allegations of 
 jurisdictional facts that can hereinafter be more 
 conveniently and precisely pleaded. The United 
 States is made a party defendant herein by virtue 
 of the authority and requirements of the Act of 
 October 22, 1913, (38 State L. 219) and known as 
 the District Court Act and because the Inter- 
 state Commerce Commission, defendant herein, 
 claims to have derived its authority for the uncon- 
 stitutional and illegal acts committed by said 
 Interstate Commerce Commission, and herein- 
 after complained of from said defendant, the 
 United States, and because the unconstitutional _ 
 statutes hereinafter complained of were enacted 
 pursuant to the authority of said defendant, the 
 United States. 'The Interstate ‘Commerce Com- 
 mission, a defendant herein, is a regulatory body 
 over common carriers engaged in interstate com- 
 merece established and existing under an Act of 
 Congress known as the Interstate Commerce Act 
 and consists of the following persons with their 
 
D 
 
 Complaint 
 residences as nearly as complainants can ascer- 
 tain: 
 
 Edgar IX. Clark, residing in the State of Iowa. 
 
 Charles C. McChord, residing in the State of 
 Kentucky. 
 
 Balthasar H. Meyer, residing in the State of 
 Wisconsin. 
 
 Henry C. Hall, residing in the State of Colo- 
 rado. | 
 
 Winthrop M. Daniels, residing in the State of 
 New Jersey. 
 
 Clyde B. Acheson, residing in the State of 
 Oregon. 
 
 Robert W. Wooley, residing in the State of 
 Virginia. 
 
 Joseph B. Eastman, residing in the State of 
 Massachusetts. 
 
 Henry J. Ford, residing in the State of New 
 Jersey. : 
 
 Mark W. Potter, residing in the State of New 
 York. 
 
 2. That this suit involves questions arising 
 under the Constitution and Laws of the United 
 States and is a case in which a State is a party 
 and in which the United States and officers thereof 
 are defendants as will be made to appear more 
 
 particularly herein, and the amount involved in | 
 
 the controversy as to each of the parties is in 
 excess of $3,000 exclusive of interest and costs. 
 - 3. That on or about the 28th day of December, 
 1917, the President of the United States took 
 possession and control of the steam railroads 
 operating as common carriers within the State 
 
 2 
 
 1l 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
16 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 
 6 
 
 ; Complaint 
 of New York under the war powers pursuant to 
 authority conferred by Congress. 
 
 4. That prior to May 28, 1918, the said common 
 carriers had filed, published and put into effect 
 certain schedules of fares, rates and charges 
 which were then and had been demanded and col- 
 lected by said common carriers for the transpor- 
 tation of passengers, milk and cream, excess bag- 
 gage and space in sleeping and parlor cars in 
 accordance with the laws and constitution of the 
 State of New York as made and provided. 
 
 5. That on or about the 28th day of May, 1918, 
 the Director General of Railroads of the United 
 States of America in disregard of the laws and 
 constitution of the State of New York, but pur- 
 suant to the authority conferred upon him by Con- 
 gress under the war powers authorized said 
 common carriers to increase in certain respects 
 the rates, fares and charges in effect as aforesaid 
 for the transportation of passengers and com- 
 modities generally within the State of New York 
 in intrastate traffic. 
 
 6. That pursuant to and in accordance with said 
 authorization the said common carriers increased 
 their fares and charges for the transportation of 
 passengers and commodities in intrastate traffic 
 within the State of New York. 
 
 7. That on or about the Ist day of March, 1920, 
 the United States of America relinquished the 
 possession, control and operation of said common 
 carriers, but by statute provided that no rate, 
 fare or charge then in effect should be reduced 
 by or under the laws of the State of New York 
 prior to the 1st day of September, 1920, without 
 
7 
 
 Complaint 
 the consent of the Interstate Commerce Commis- 
 sion. 
 
 8. That on September 1, 1920, the laws and 
 constitution of the State of New York in respect 
 to the rates, fares and charges of said common 
 carriers engaged in intrastate commerce within 
 the State of New York again became effective, 
 but said common earriers, continued to demand 
 and collect the rates and charges previously au- 
 thorized by the Director General of Railroads un- 
 til November 29, 1920. 
 
 9. That on the 29th day of July, 1920, the Inter- 
 state 'Commerce Commission, defendant herein, in 
 a proceeding known as Ex Parte 74, 58 I. C. C. 
 220, authorized within a region that includes the 
 State of New York an increase of 40 per centum 
 in the interstate freight rates, 20 per centum in the 
 interstate passenger fares, baggage charges and 
 rates for milk and cream and also a surcharge of 
 50 per centum of the charge for space in sleeping 
 and parlor cars in interstate carriage to accrue 
 to said steam railroads operating as common 
 carriers within the State of New York and else- 
 where. 
 
 10. That thereafter the said steam railroads 
 operating within the State of New York as com- 
 mon carriers made informal application to the 
 Public Service Commission, Second District of 
 
 the State of New York, a regulatory body of the 
 
 State of New York having general jurisdiction 
 over common carriers engaged in intrastate com- 
 merce, for permission to file effective on five days’ 
 notice tariff supplements providing increases in 
 
 21 
 
 23 
 
 24. 
 
 25 
 
26 
 
 27 
 
 28 
 
 29 
 
 30 
 
 8 
 
 Complaint 
 the rates, fares and charges applicable to intra- 
 state traffic within the State of New York and 
 corresponding to those authorized for interstate 
 traffic by the Interstate Commerce Commission 
 as aforesaid. , 
 
 11. That so far as said application to said 
 Public Service Commission related to the trans- 
 portation of freight, except milk and cream, it 
 was granted by said Public Service Commission 
 by an order duly entered the 19th day of August, 
 1920, but so far as said application related to the 
 transportation of passengers in intrastate com-— 
 merce it was denied by order of the same date, as 
 will more fully appear by true and complete 
 copies of said order and the opinion of said Pub- 
 lic Service Commission which are attached 
 hereto, made a part hereof as if pleaded herein 
 and marked ‘‘ papers 1 and 2.’’ 
 
 12. That thereafter a few of the steam railroads 
 serving the State of New York as common ¢ar- 
 riers filed with the Interstate Commerce Com- 
 mission a petition, which was received by said 
 Commission, pretending to act under authority of 
 the Laws of the United States, as will more fully 
 appear from a true and complete copy of said pe- 
 tition which is attached hereto, made a part hereof 
 as if pleaded herein and marked ‘‘ paper 3.’’ 
 
 13. That thereafter by order made on the 8th 
 day of September, 1920, the Interstate Com- 
 merce Commission, pretending to act under au- 
 thority of the Laws of the United States, set a 
 hearing upon said petition before one Mr. Wilbur 
 La Roe, Jr., Chief Examiner of said Interstate 
 Commerce Commission, on its behalf in the City 
 
Hy) 
 
 Complaint 
 of New York on the 13th day of September, 1920, 
 and said hearing was held as will more fully ap- 
 pear from a true and complete copy of the steno- 
 graphic minutes of said hearing which are at- 
 tached hereto, made a part hereof as if pleaded 
 herein and marked ‘‘ paper 4.’’ 
 
 14. That the State of New York, through its 
 Governor, was duly notified by the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission of such hearing as by the 
 statute of the Unted States made and provided 
 and the State of New York formally and duly ap- 
 peared therein, as a party respondent, by its At- 
 torney-General, Charles D. Newton, and objected 
 to the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission. 
 
 15. That thereafter the hearing for argument 
 was set by said Interstate Commerce Commission 
 on the aforesaid record made before said La Roe 
 and had before it, where said Commission pre- 
 tended to act under the authority of the Laws of 
 the United States, at its hearing room in the City 
 of Washington, D. C., on the 11'th day of October, 
 1920, at which time and place the State of New 
 York, formally and duly attended by its Attorney- 
 General as a respondent therein and objected to 
 the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Com- 
 mission. 
 
 16. That thereafter the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission, pretending to act under the author- 
 ity of the Laws of the United States, on the 13th 
 day of November, 1920, made its report, findings 
 and orders on said petition, and among other 
 things complained of herein set aside and declared 
 
 3 
 
 31 
 
 32 
 
 33 
 
 34 
 
 35 
 
36 
 
 37 
 
 38 
 
 39 
 
 40 
 
 10 
 
 Complaint 
 
 null and void the existing rates, fares and charges 
 for intrastate commerce allowed railroads oper- 
 ating as common carriers in the State of New 
 York under the laws and constitution o fthe State 
 of New York and under their charters and 
 franchises conferred upon them by the State of 
 New York, as will more fully appear by a true and 
 complete copy of said report, findings and orders 
 which are attached hereto, made a part hereof, as 
 if pleaded herein, and marked ‘‘paper 9.’’ 
 
 17. That thereafter the railroads operating 
 within the State of New York in intrastate com- 
 merce including some electric railways and which 
 were joined in said order (with the exception of 
 a few which are and had been defunct or have 
 not and had no trackage in the State of New York, 
 and do not and did not do any intrastate business 
 in the State of New York) filed with the Inter- 
 state Commerce ‘Commission certain tariffs and 
 schedules increasing the rates, fares and charges 
 for intrastate carriage as in said illegal and un- 
 constitutional report, findings and orders of the 
 Interstate Commerce Commission directed to be 
 effective on the 29th day of November, 1920, and 
 said Interstate Commerce Commission received 
 them, pretending to act under the authority of the 
 Laws of the United States. 
 
 18. That said railroads are now demanding and 
 collecting, or threaten to demand and collect, the 
 increased fares, rates and charges directed by 
 said illegal and unconstitutional order of the In- 
 
 terstate Commerce Commission. 
 
 19. That the New York ‘Central Railroad is a 
 corporation organized and consolidated and doing 
 
iid 
 
 Complaint 
 
 business under the Laws of the State of New York 
 and consists in part of a four track line running 
 from the City of Albany to the City of Buffalo 
 in the State of New York, chartered under a pri- 
 vate law of the State of New York, and known as 
 Laws of 1853, Chapter 76, duly enacted and pro- 
 viding as follows: 
 
 ‘“LAWS OF NEW-YORK 
 oy (GHAR st 60. 
 
 ‘* AN ACT to authorize the consolidation 
 of certain railroad companies. 
 
 ‘* Passed April 2, 1853. 
 
 ‘“ The People of the State of New-York, 
 represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact 
 as follows: — 
 
 ‘* Section 1. The Albany and Schenectady, 
 Schenectady and Troy, Utica and Schenec- 
 tady, Syracuse and Utica, Rochester and 
 Syracuse, the Buffalo and Lockport, the Mo- 
 hawk Valley, and the Syracuse and Utica 
 direct, Buffalo and Rochester, Rochester, 
 Lockport and Niagara Falls Railroad Com- 
 panies, or any two or more of them, are 
 hereby authorized at any time to consolidate 
 such companies into a single corporation, in 
 the manner following: 
 
 ‘¢ 1. The directors of any two or more of 
 such corporations may enter into an agree- 
 ment, under their respective corporate seals, 
 for the consolidation of the said corporations, 
 prescribing the terms and conditions thereof, 
 the mode of carrying the same into effect, the 
 name of the new corporation, the number of 
 directors thereof, which shall not be less than 
 thirteen nor more than twenty-three, the time 
 
 4] 
 
 43 
 
 ff 
 
46 
 
 47 
 
 48 
 
 49 
 
 50 
 
 12 
 
 Complaint 
 
 and place of holding the first elections of di- 
 rectors, the day for annual elections of di- 
 rectors, the amount of capital, and the num- 
 ber of shares of the stock of the new corpor- 
 ations, which shall not be larger in amount 
 than the aggregate amount of capital of the 
 several companies thus consolidated, and 
 shall not be increased, except in accordance . 
 with the provisions of the act passed April 
 second, eighteen hundred and fifty, the man- 
 ner of converting the shares of capital stock 
 in each of said corporations into the shares 
 of such new corporation, the manner of pay- 
 ing any shareholder that may decline taking 
 shares in the new corporation, with such 
 other details as they may deem necessary to 
 embrace in such agreement, not inconsistent 
 with the provisions of the act entitled ‘‘ An 
 act to authorize the formation of railroad 
 corporations and to regulate the same,’’ 
 passed April second, eighteen hundred and 
 fifty. 
 
 ‘¢ 2. Such agreement of the directors shall 
 not be deemed to be the agreement of the said ~ 
 corporations so proposing to consolidate, 
 until after it has been submitted to the stock- 
 holders of each of said corporations respect- 
 ively separately, at a meeting thereof to be 
 called upon a notice of at least thirty days, 
 specifying the time and place of such meet- 
 ing and the object thereof, to be addressed to 
 each of such stockholders, when their place 
 of residence is known to the secretary and 
 deposited in the post-office, and published for 
 at least three successive weeks in the state 
 paper, and in one of the newspapers printed 
 in each of the counties through or into which 
 the railroad of the said corporation shall ex- 
 tend, and has been sanctioned and approved 
 by such stockholders by the vote of at least 
 two-thirds in amount of the stockholders: 
 
13 
 
 Complaint 
 
 present at such meetings respectively, voting 
 by ballot in regard to such agreement either 
 in person or by proxy, each share of such 
 capital stock being entitled to one vote; and 
 when such agreement of the directors has 
 been sanctioned and approved by each of the 
 meetings of the respective stockholders sep- 
 arately, after being submitted to such meet- 
 ings in the manner above mentioned, then 
 such agreement of the directors shall be 
 deemed to be the agreement of the said sev- 
 eral corporations, and a sworn copy of the 
 proceedings of such meetings, made by the 
 secretaries thereof respectively, and attached 
 to the said agreement, shall be evidence of the 
 holding and of the action of such meeting's in 
 the premises. 
 
 ‘¢ Section 2. Upon the making of the said 
 agreement mentioned in the preceding sec- 
 tion in the manner required therein, and filing 
 a duplicate or counterpart thereof in the 
 office of the secretary of state, and immedi- 
 ately upon and after the first election of di- 
 rectors of said corporation, the said corpor- 
 ation shall be merged in the new corporation 
 provided for in the said agreement, to be 
 known by the corporate name therein men- 
 tioned, and the details of such agreement 
 shall be carried into effect as provided 
 therein, only such new corporation shall not 
 have any larger powers than are granted by 
 the act entitled ‘‘ An act to authorize the for- 
 mation of railroad companies and to regulate 
 the same,’’ passed April second eighteen hun- 
 dred and fifty, or be exempt from the per- 
 formance of any duty which the said several 
 corporations may be liable to perform, ex- 
 cept as herein provided. 
 
 ‘¢ Section 3. Such new corporatisn shall pos- 
 sess the general powers, and be subject to the 
 
 4. 
 
 ol 
 
 52 
 
 53 
 
 55 
 
a7 
 
 58 
 
 59 
 
 14 
 
 Complaint 
 
 general liabilities and restrictions expressed 
 in the third title of the eighteenth chapter of 
 the first part of the Revised Statutes; 11 shall 
 also have the general powers and privileges, 
 and be subjected to the general liabilities, re- 
 strictions, duties and provisions expressed 
 and contained in the said act entitled ‘An 
 act to authorize the formation of railroad 
 corporations and to regulate the same,’ 
 passed April second eighteen hundred and 
 fifty, and the acts amending the same, so far 
 as the same are applicable to a railroad cor- 
 poration, where a railroad is constructed and 
 put in operation. 
 
 ‘¢ Section 4. Upon the election of the first 
 board of directors of the said new corpora- 
 tion created by the agreement of the several 
 companies, all and singular the rights, fran- 
 chises and interests of the said several cor- 
 porations so consolidated, in and to every 
 species of property real, personal and mixed, 
 the things in action thereunto belonging, shall 
 be deemed to be transferred to and vested in 
 such new corporation, without any other deed 
 or transfer; and such new corporation shall 
 hold and enjoy the same, together with the 
 rights of way, and all other rights of prop- 
 erty, franchises and interests, in the same 
 manner and to the same extent as if the said 
 several corporations so consolidated should 
 have continued to retain the title and transact 
 the business of such corporation ;and the title 
 and real estate acquired by either of the said 
 corporations shall not be deemed to revert, or 
 be impaired by means of such act of consgoli- 
 dation, or anything relating thereto. 
 
 ‘* Section 5. The rights of creditors of any 
 corporations that shall be consolidated, shall 
 not in any manner be impaired by any act of 
 consolidation, nor shall any liability or cbli- 
 
15 
 
 Complaint 
 
 gation for the payment of any money now due 
 or hereafter to become due to this state, or 
 any individual, or any claim or demand for 
 damages for any act done, or neglect suffered 
 by any such corporation, be in the manner re- 
 leased or impaired, but such new corporation 
 is declared to succeed to such obligations and 
 liabilities, and to be held liable to pay and dis- 
 charge all the debts and liabilities of each of 
 the corporations that shall be so consolidated, 
 whether on contract, or for misconduct or 
 neglect, either to this state or to individuals, 
 and it shall be liable to have an action brought 
 against it to enforce the payment of any 
 money or damages, or the performance of 
 any duty which any corporation consolidated 
 into such new corporation was liable to pay 
 or perform, in the same manner as if such 
 new corporation had itself incurred the obli- 
 gation or liability to pay such money or dam- 
 ages, or perform such duty; and no svit, ac- 
 tion or other proceeding now pending before 
 any court or tribunal in which any railroad 
 company that may be so consolidated is a 
 party, shall be deemed to have abated or dis- 
 continued, by reason of any such agreement 
 of consolidation; but the same may be prose- 
 cuted to final judgment in the same manner 
 as if the said corporation had not entered into 
 such agreement of consolidation, or the said 
 new corporation may be substituted as a 
 party in the place of any corporation of 
 whick it shall be composed, by order of the 
 court in which such action, suit or proceeding 
 may be pending. 
 
 ‘¢ Section 6. If any stockholder shall, at 
 said meeting of stockholders, or within 
 twenty days thereafter, object to said consol- 
 idation, and demand payment for his stock, 
 such stockholder or said new company may, 
 
 61 
 
 62 
 
 63 
 
 65 
 
67 
 
 68 
 
 69 
 
 70 
 
 16 
 
 Complaint 
 
 if said consolidation take effect at any time 
 thereafter, apply to the supreme court at any 
 special term thereof, held in any county 
 through which any part of the said railroad 
 may pass, for the appointment of three per- 
 sons to appraise the value of ‘such stock. If 
 the court shall be satisfied that reasonable 
 notice has been given of such application, it 
 shall thereupon appoint three persons to ap- 
 praise the value of said stock, and shall des- 
 ignate the time and place of meeting of such 
 appraisers, and give such directions in re- 
 gard to the proceedings on said appraisement 
 as shall be deemed proper, and shall also di- 
 rect the manner in which payment for such 
 stock shall be made to such stockholder. The 
 court may fill any vacancy in the board of 
 appraisers occurring by refusal or neglect to 
 serve, or otherwise; the appraisers shall 
 meet at the time and place designated, and 
 they or any two of them, after being duly 
 sworn honestly and faithfully to discharge 
 their duties, shall estimate and certify the 
 value of such stock at the time of such dissent 
 as aforesaid, and deliver one copy of their 
 appraisal to the said company, and another 
 to the said stockholder, if demanded; the 
 charges and expenses of the appraisers shall 
 be paid by the company. When the corpora- 
 tion shall have paid the amount of the ap- 
 praisal as directed by the court, such stock- 
 holder shall cease to have any interest in the 
 said stock, and in the corporate property of 
 the said corporation, and the said stock may 
 be held or disposed of by the said corpora- 
 tion. 
 
 ‘¢ Section 7. When any two or more of the 
 railroad companies named in this act are so 
 consolidated, said consolidated company 
 shall carry way passengers on their road ata 
 rate not to exceed two cents per mile. 
 
17 
 
 Complaint 
 ‘* Section 8. This act shall take effect im- 
 mediately. ’’ 
 
 That the railroads named in said Laws of 1853, 
 Chapter 76, now constituting a part of the New 
 York Central Railroad as aforesaid, accepted the 
 conditions and provisions of said statute by filing 
 a consolidation agreement in the office of the Sec- 
 retary of State of the State of New York on July 
 Oo, 1855, in accordance with said statute and said 
 Laws of 1853, Chapter 76 remains unrepealed by 
 the Legislature of the State of New York ‘and un- 
 affected by any authority judicial or executive of 
 the State of New York, except that said two cent 
 fare was affirmatively duly and lawfully declared 
 again effective on September 1, 1920. Said con- 
 solidation agreement and said laws of 1853, Chap- 
 ter 76, coustituting a charter contract, are still 
 in full force and effect with many years to run and 
 the said two cent fare for way passengers on the 
 line between Albany and Buffalo is now the only 
 legal and constitutional fare for intrastate traffic 
 over said line in the State of New York. 
 
 20. ‘That the said New York Central Railroad 
 Company is a citizen of the State of New York 
 and a corporation organized ‘and doing business 
 under its laws was one of the parties and the prin- 
 cipal party upon whose petition said report, find- 
 ings and order relative to transportation were 
 made by the Interstate Commerce Commission 
 as aforesaid and had then and has now a residence 
 at the Union Station in the City of Albany, N. Y., 
 where it keeps its principal place for doing busi- 
 ness in the State of New York as a corporation 
 
 5 
 
 71 
 
76 
 
 a7 
 
 78 
 
 79 
 
 18 
 
 Complaint 
 organized under the Laws of the State of New 
 York and which is within the Northern District 
 of New York and said railroad company operates 
 many miles of railroad with the appurtenances 
 thereto within said Northern District. 
 
 21. That the plaintiff, State of New York, is 
 one of the states of the United States and was a 
 party in the proceeding before the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission as aforesaid, and said 
 railroads joined in said order of the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission operate within its 
 boundaries in intrastate commerce, as is more 
 particularly shown by a schedule which is at- 
 tached hereto, made a part hereof as if pleaded 
 herein and marked ‘‘ paper 6;’’ said railroads in 
 the carrying on of intrastate commerce within the 
 State of New York are solely under the dominion 
 of the State of New York and subject only and ex- 
 clusively to its laws and constitution. The State 
 of New York annually expends large sums of 
 money for milk and cream carried by said rail- 
 roads in intrastate commerce and spends more 
 and less than $365,000 in purchasing transporta- 
 tion for its employees traveling on its business 
 and governmental functions from said railroads, 
 joined in said order of the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission. Most of the railroads joined in said 
 order are corporations chartered under the Laws 
 of the State of New York and are citizens thereof 
 and all are doing business under the laws of the 
 State of New York which are set aside and de- 
 stroyed by the action of the Interstate Com- 
 merce Commission. The State of New York thus 
 suffers irreparable damage. 
 
ag 
 
 Complaint 
 That the rates, fares and charges for intrastate 
 commerce within the State of New York ‘fixed by 
 its laws and constitution as aforesaid for the rail- 
 
 roads joimed in said order of the Interstate Com- 
 
 merce Commission have not and will not result in 
 undue prejudice or unjust burdens or pre- 
 ference or advantage or discrimination in favor 
 of intrastate commerce and against interstate or 
 foreign commerce or against any person or 
 locality. That of the railroads joined in said 
 order of the Interstate Commerce Commission and 
 actually doing intrastate business within the State 
 of New York, the New York Central Railroad 
 Company over its main line between New York 
 and the Pennsylvania Railroad Company over its 
 main line, the Erie Railroad Company over its 
 main line, the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company 
 over its main line, the Delaware, Lackawanna & 
 Western Railroad Company over its main line, 
 the Delaware & Hudson Company over its main 
 line, The New York, New Haven and Hartford 
 Railroad Company over its main line, the New 
 York, Ontario and Western Railway Company 
 over its main line, the Central New England Rail- 
 way Company over its main line, the Buffalo, 
 Rochester & Pittsburg Railway Company over its 
 main line do a considerable interstate passenger 
 and milk and cream business in connection with a 
 very important intrastate passenger and milk and 
 eream business both in volume and revenue. That 
 as to the branch lines of the aforesaid railroads 
 and as to all the other railroads named in said 
 order of the Interstate Commerce Commis- 
 sion and aetually doing an intrastate business 
 within the State of New York, their interstate 
 
 81 
 
 83 
 
 84. 
 
86 
 
 87 
 
 88 
 
 89 
 
 20 
 
 Complaint 
 
 business for passengers and milk and cream is 
 insignificant as compared with their intrastate 
 business both in volume and revenue. That in the 
 case of the Ulster & Delaware Railroad Company 
 the rates, fares and charges allowed said carriers 
 under the laws and constitution of the State of 
 New York for intrastate business are higher than 
 those allowed by the United States for the same 
 classes of business in interstate commerce. That 
 many of the railroads joined in said order are 
 parallelled by or compete with common carriers — 
 operated by electricity or motive power other than 
 steam or compete with such carriers, but which 
 are not joined in said order. <As to the exact rela- 
 tions between said interstate and intrastate busi- 
 ness your complainants are unable to more ex- 
 actly allege because the method of bookkeeping 
 and accounting imposed upon such railroads by 
 the Interstate Commerce Commission does not - 
 permit a separation of the items in the two classes 
 of business and complainants, therefore, beg to be 
 left to their proof. 
 
 22, That Charles D. Newton, a plaintiff per- 
 sonally herein, is a citizen and taxpayer of the 
 State of New York residing in the Village of 
 Geneseo, New York, and is a consumer of milk and 
 cream and is frequently transported as a pas- 
 senger by said railroads operating as common . 
 carriers in intrastate commerce within the State 
 of New York and particularly over the Albany- 
 Buffalo lines of The New York Central Railroad 
 Company aforesaid and represents a class of con- 
 sumers and passengers so numerous as to make it 
 impracticable to bring them all before the Court 
 and is made a party hereto in his personal 
 
21 
 
 Complaint 
 capacity for the purpose of determining the rights 
 of all consumers and passengers under the laws, 
 constitution and acts of the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission hereinbefore and hereinafter referred 
 to and who now suffer irreparable damage. 
 23. That Charles D. Newton, plaintiff herein, is 
 
 91 
 
 also the Attorney General of the State of New 92 
 
 York duly qualified and acting as such and has his 
 office as is prescribed by law at the Capitol, in the 
 City of Albany, N. Y., within the Northern District 
 of New York. It is his duty under the laws and 
 constitution of the State of New York to bring all 
 actions in the judicial courts in which the People 
 of the State of New York are interested and par- 
 ticularly to sue the railroads joined in the order of 
 the Interstate Commerce Commission as afore- 
 said for the breaches as aforesaid of the condi- 
 tions of their charters and for the violations as 
 aforesaid of the laws and franchises of the State 
 of New York under which they operate in said 
 State. Otherwise he subjects himself as such 
 Attorney General to impeachment, criminal prose- 
 eution and a multiplicity of suits for damages and 
 the loss of an office of honor and profit to his 
 irreparable damage. | 
 
 24. That the report, findings and order marked 
 ‘‘naper 5’’ herein of the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission complained of as aforesaid are illegal, 
 
 93 
 
 94 
 
 unconstitutional and void and of no effect and 95 
 
 should be so declared by this Honorable Court in 
 
 the following particulars. 
 There were no facts before the Interstate Com- 
 
 merce Commission justifying its report, findings 
 and order and the record wholly lacks any founda- 
 
 6 
 
96 
 
 97 
 
 98 
 
 100 
 
 22 
 
 tion for the making of such report, findings and 
 order. 
 
 The report, findings and order of the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission were made in defiance and 
 disregard of the procedure and requirements of 
 the statutes of the United States and without the 
 full and fair hearing provided for therein. 
 
 The report, findings and order of the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission are indefinite, uncertain, 
 ambiguous and discriminate without just grounds 
 as between classes of common carriers. 
 
 No statute of the United States authorized the 
 report, findings and order of the Interstate Com- 
 merece Commission. 
 
 The report, findings and order of the Interstate 
 Conimerce Commission and the statutes of the 
 United States under which they pretended to act, 
 violate the 10th Amendment of the United States 
 
 Constitution, in that they invade powers reserved — . 
 
 to the State of New York to regulate intrastate 
 commerce and to create on proper conditions, con: 
 trol and regulate corporations doing business in 
 the State of New York. 
 
 The report, findings and order of the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission and the statutes of the 
 United States, under which they pretended to act, 
 violate the 5th Amendment of the United States 
 Constitution by taking property of all the Com- 
 plainants without due process of law in that they 
 impair the obligation of the contract existing be- 
 tween the State of New York and the New York 
 Central Railroad Company pleaded herein as 
 aforesaid. 
 
 The report, findings and order of the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission and the statutes of the 
 United States, under which they pretended to act, 
 
93 
 
 Complaint 
 violate Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4 of the United 
 States Constitution, in that they impose a capita- 
 tion and direct tax without the apportionment re- 
 quired. , 
 
 The report, findings and order of the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission, and the statutes of the 
 United States under which they pretended to act, 
 violate Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United 
 States Constitution in that they assume to regu- 
 late purely intrastate commerce and require that 
 revenue for interstate commerce be collected 
 from intrastate commerce. 
 
 The report, findings and order of the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission and the statutes of the 
 United States, under which they pretended to act, 
 violate Article 1, Section 5, Clause 9 of the United 
 States Constitution, in that they prefer ports of 
 other states to the ports of the State of New York. 
 
 25. That the Interstate Commerce Commission 
 threatens ‘now to sue the steam railroads joined in 
 its orders as aforesaid for penalties amounting to 
 millions of dollars if said railroads engaged in 
 intrastate commerce within the State violate said 
 report, findings or order of the Interstate Com- 
 merce Commission or any part of them. 
 
 Wherefore your complainants, the State of New 
 York, on behalf of all its citizens and all the per- 
 sons residing in the State of New York, and 
 Charles D. Newton as Attorney-General of the 
 State of New York, and Charles D. Newton for 
 himself personally and representing a class as 
 aforesaid, being without an adequate remedy at 
 law, and subject to irreparable damage and a mul- 
 tiplicity of suits pray: 
 
 101 
 
 102 
 
 103 
 
 108 
 
' 106 
 
 107 
 
 108 
 
 109 
 
 110 
 
 24 
 
 Complaint 
 
 1. That this Honorable Court may grant an in- 
 terlocutory injunction during the pendency of 
 this suit against the defendants, the United States 
 and the Interstate Commerce Commission and 
 each of them restraining the enforcement, opera- 
 tion and execution of and setting aside in whole 
 the report, findings and order made and entered 
 by the Interstate Commerce Commission as afore- 
 said, attached hereto and marked ‘‘ paper 5 ’’ and 
 restraining said defendants, their officers, em- 
 ployees, agents, and servants and successors in 
 office and each of them from doing anything or 
 beginning any suit, action or prosecution against 
 the railroads joined in said order or the plaintiffs 
 to compel the enforcement, operation and execu- 
 tion of said order or interfering with the enforce- 
 ment of the laws and constitution of the State of 
 New York. That the District Judge of this Hon- 
 orable Court upon presentation of this application 
 for an interlocutory injunction shall 1mmediately 
 eall to his assistance to hear and determine this 
 application two other judges, of whcm at least 
 one shall be a circuit judge; that this Honorable 
 Court by an order to show cause shall give at least 
 five days’ notice of the hearing of this application 
 for an interlocutory injunction to the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission and to the Attorney-Gen- 
 eral of the United States all as by statute made 
 and provided. | 
 
 2. That the report, findings and order of the 
 Interstate Commerce Commission attached hereto 
 and marked ‘‘ paper 5 ’’ be set aside in whole and 
 declared null and void, unconstitutional and ille- 
 gal, usurpatory and void. 
 
 3. That Section 13, subdivisions 3 and 4 of the 
 
25 
 
 Complaint 
 Interstate Commerce Act be declared null and 
 void, as unconstitutional and usurpatory. 
 
 4. That Section 15-a of the Interstate Com- 
 merce Act be declared null and void as unconsti- 
 tutional and usurpatory. 
 
 5. That this Honorable Court shall issue writs 
 of mandamus, certiorari and prohibition as war- 
 ranted by the principles and usages of law to the 
 defendants herein and to whoever else may be 
 necessary or proper parties, ancillary to the 
 Jurisdiction hereinbefore and hereinafter invoked. 
 
 6. That this Honorable Court shall issue a writ 
 of injunction against the defendants, the United 
 States and the Interstate Commerce Commission 
 and each af them perpetually restraining the en- 
 forcement, operation and execution of and setting 
 aside in while the report, findings and order of the 
 Interstate Commerce Commission attached hereto 
 and marked ‘‘ paper 95,’’ and restraining said de- 
 fendants, their officers, agents, employees and 
 servants and successors in office and each of them 
 from doing anything or beginning any sult, action 
 or prosecution against the railroads joined in said 
 order or against the plaintiffs herein to compel 
 the enforcement, operation and execution of said 
 report, findings and order or interfering with the 
 enforcement of the laws and constitution of the 
 State of New York. 
 
 Plaintiffs also pray not only for a writ of in- 
 junction conformably to the prayer, but also that 
 a subpoena of the United States of America issue 
 out of any under the seal of the Honorable Court 
 directed to the defendants, the United States and 
 the Interstate Commerce Commission thereby 
 
 fe 
 
 11%: 
 
 112 
 
 113 
 
 114 
 
 115 
 
116 
 
 117 
 
 118 
 
 119 
 
 120 
 
 26 
 
 Complaint 
 commanding them and each of them on a certain 
 day therein to be named to be and appear before 
 this Honorable Court then and there to answer, 
 (but not under oath, answer under oath being ex- 
 pressly waived) all and singular in the premises 
 and to perform and abide by such order and di- 
 rection or decree as may be made in the premises 
 and that on the final hearing hereof said writ of 
 injunction may be made perpetual and for such 
 other relief as to the Court may seem meet and 
 the plaintiffs will ever pray. 
 
 Subseribed by: 
 The State of New York, 
 Charles D. Newton, 
 personally and as At- 
 torney-General of the 
 State of New York. 
 Mdward CG. Griffin, 
 Deputy Attorney General of New York, 
 Solicitor for the Plaintiffs, 
 Office and Post Office Address, 
 The Capitol, Albany, N. Y. 
 
 Ciry anp County or ALBANY, 
 STATE OF NEW YORK, } if 
 
 Charles D. Newton, being duly sworn on oath, 
 says that he is the Attorney-General of the State 
 of New York, duly qualified and acting as such and 
 that he verifies this bill of complaint upon behalf 
 of the plaintiffs herein, the State of New York, 
 and himself personally and as Attorney-General 
 of the State of New York; that he has read the 
 above and foregoing bill of complaint and knows 
 
yA | 
 
 Complaint 
 the contents thereof and that the same is true in 
 substanee and in fact. 
 
 CHARLES D. NEWTON. 
 
 Subseribed and Sworn to before me 
 this 27th day of December, 1920. 
 
 (Sra) Wiiuiam M. 'T'Homas, 
 Notary Public, Albany County. 
 
 121 
 
 (22 
 
 124 
 
 125 
 
28 
 
 126 | PAPER 1 
 
 STATE OF NEW YORK 
 Pusuic SERvIcCE ComMMIssion — Srconp District 
 At a session of the Public Service 
 Commission, ‘Second District, held in 
 the city of ae on the 19th ae of 
 oe August, 1920. 
 Present: 
 Cuarues B. Hitt, 
 Chairman, 
 FRANK IRVINE, 
 JoHN A. BaRHITE, 
 JosEPH A. KELLOGG, 
 Grorce R. Van Names, 
 128 Commissioners. 
 
 In the Matter of the Petition or 
 Complaint of THz New York 
 CuntraL Ratroap ComMPany;. 
 THe Drnawart, LAcKAWANNA 
 AND WeEsTERN Rarttroap Com- Case 
 
 29 «69PANY; Tue Lenich Vatiey { No. 7704 
 
 Rartroap Company; and Other 
 Steam Railroad Companies; in 
 Respect to Proposed Higher 
 Passenger Fares. 
 
 Upon the facts found and for the reasons stated 
 in the accompanying opinion, it is 
 130. Onrprrep, That the petition herein be, and the 
 same hereby is denied, save in so far as it relates 
 to freight rates, and as to such freight rates, that 
 it be dismissed because the subject matter has 
 ‘been determined in Case No. 7693. 
 By the Commission, 
 [u. s.] FRANCIS E. ROBERTS, 
 Acting Secretary. 
 
29 
 
 PAPER 2 
 
 In the Matter of the Petition or 
 Complaint of Tue New York 
 CeNTRAL RarroaD Company; 
 also Ture Dertawarz, Lacxka- 
 WANNA AND WrsTERN RarLRoapD Case 
 Company; the Lenicn Vauusy f No. 7704 
 Rarttroap Company; and OTHER 
 STEAM RarLRoapD CoMPANIES, in 
 Respect to Proposed Higher 
 Passenger Fares. 
 
 Appearances: 
 
 C. C. Paulding, Grand Central Terminal, New 
 York city, and associated with him the following 
 as a Committee of Counsel: W. L. Visscher, Clyde 
 Brown, John B. Kerr, Mr. Andrus of the New 
 York, Ontario and Western Railway Company, 
 Messrs. Noyes and Waldron of The Delaware and 
 Hudson Company, Mr. R. W. Barrett of the 
 Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, and Mr. 
 Brownell of the HKrie Railroad Company, and 
 Mr. Cole of the Boston and Maine Railroad. 
 
 By THE CoMMISSION : 
 
 The steam railroads subject to the jurisdiction 
 of this Commission ask authority to file tariffs 
 effective on short notice whereby passenger rates 
 will be increased 20 per cent, a surcharge made 
 upon passengers in sleeping and parlor cars 
 
 amounting to 50 per cent of the charge for space 
 
 in such cars, and an increase of 20 per cent made 
 
 in excess baggage rates. The petition is informal 
 
 and very general in its terms, but at the hearing 
 
 held in Albany, August 17, 1920, it was stated on 
 8 
 
 131 
 
 132 
 
 133 
 
 134 
 
 135 
 
136 
 
 137 
 
 138 
 
 139 
 
 140 
 
 30 
 
 Paper 2 
 
 behalf of the petitioners that the object was to 
 make intrastate rates within the State of New 
 York correspond to the increased rates authorized 
 by the Interstate Commerce Commission in the 
 general rate increase case Ex Parte 74. Concur- 
 rently with this application there was made by the 
 same carriers an application to file effective on 
 short notice, increases in freight rates. Such 
 permission was granted in case No. 7693 for 
 reasons stated in a memorandum accompanying 
 the order. The instant case presents entirely 
 different legal questions. 
 
 The passenger rates now in effect are those im- 
 posed by the United States Railroad Administra- 
 tion during Federal control and continued in 
 effect with certain qualifications by the Trans- 
 portation Act of 1920. The basic rate is three 
 cents a mile and the proposed increase for ordi- 
 nary transportation results in a rate of three and 
 six-tenths cents a mile. The proposed surcharge 
 on passengers in sleeping and parlor cars still fur- 
 ther increases the rate for that class of passen- 
 gers. Section 57 of the Railroad Law provides 
 as follows: 
 
 ‘‘ Rates of fare. Subject to the provisions 
 of the public service commissions law, every 
 railroad corporation may fix and collect the 
 following rates of fare as compensation to 
 be paid for transporting any passenger and 
 his baggage, not exceeding one hundred and 
 fifty pounds in weight, for each mile or frac- 
 
 tion of a mile. 
 *& * 
 
 ‘<2. If a road not incorporated prior to 
 May fifteenth, eighteen hundred and seventy- 
 nine, and not located in the counties of New 
 
ol 
 
 Paper 2 
 York and Kings, or within the limits of any 
 incorporated city, and not more than twenty- 
 five miles in length, five cents; if over twenty- 
 five and not more than forty miles, four 
 
 cents; and if over forty miles, three cents. 
 * * * * *& * * 
 
 ‘¢ 5. In all other cases, three cents for 
 every such mile or fraction thereof, with a 
 right to a minimum single fare of not less 
 than five cents.”’ 
 
 Subdivision 1 not quoted provides for roads 
 propelled by rope or cable. The other portions 
 omitted relate to narrow-gauge roads, those with 
 erades of two hundred feet to the mile and up- 
 wards, and roads not exceeding fifteen miles in 
 length and not entering an incorporated city. 
 The section also provides that it shall not be con- 
 strued to allow any rate of fare for way passen- 
 gers greater than two cents per mile on The 
 New York Central Railroad Company’s tracks 
 wherever it is restricted to that rate of fare, that 
 is to say, between Albany and Buffalo. The gen- 
 eral effect of this section is to fix a maximum rate 
 of three cents a mile on all important roads in the 
 State. We therefore deal with the case on this 
 basis. If any roads not subject to the limitation 
 desire to put into effect the proposed rates they 
 may make separate application and show reasons 
 for exceptional treatment. This application 1s 
 made by the roads as an entirety, and the record 
 affords no basis for a discrimination among them. 
 
 It was held in People ex rel. U. € D. R. R. Co. 
 vy. Pub. Ser. Commission, 171 App. Div. 607, 
 affirmed, 218 N. Y. 642, that section 60 of the Rail- 
 road Law establishing mileage book rates was 
 
 141 
 
 142 
 
 143 
 
 144 
 
 145 
 
146 
 
 147 
 
 148 
 
 149 
 
 150 
 
 oo 
 
 Paper 2 
 amended and revised together with section 57 
 with reference to each other and to the Public 
 Service Commissions Law, and further that 
 under section 49 of the Public Service Commis- 
 sions Law the Commission is authorized to per- 
 mit a rate in excess of that fixed by statute when 
 after an investigation it appears that the statu- 
 tory rate is insufficient; that the limitations of the 
 statute remain on the railroads but not on the 
 power of the Commission. It quite clearly ap- 
 pears that the court was of the opinion that the 
 carrier could not of its own volition file tariffs and 
 put into effect rates in excess of those fixed by 
 statute, and that to effect this purpose it must 
 invoke the power of the Commission under sec- 
 tion 49. The relevant portion of section 49 is sub- 
 division 1 and is as follows: 
 
 ‘¢ Whenever either commission shall be of 
 opinion, after a hearing had upon its own 
 motion or upon a complaint, that the rates, 
 fares or charges demanded, exacted, charged 
 or collected by any common carrier, railroad 
 corporation or street railroad corporation 
 subject to its jurisdiction for the transporta- 
 tion of persons or property within the state, 
 or that the regulations or practices of such 
 common carrier, railroad corporation or 
 street railroad corporation affecting such 
 
 - rates are unjust, unreasonable, unjustly dis- 
 criminatory or unduly preferential, or in any- 
 wise in violation of any provision of law, or 
 that the maximum rates, fares or charges, 
 chargeable by any such common carrier, rail- 
 road or street railroad corporation are in- 
 sufficient to yield reasonable compensation 
 for the service rendered, and are unjust and 
 unreasonable, the commission shall with due 
 
30 
 
 Paper 2 
 regard among other things to a reasonable 
 average return upon the ‘value of the prop- 
 erty actually used in the public service, and 
 to the necessity of making reservation out of 
 income for surplus and contingencies, deter- 
 
 mine the just and reasonable rates, fares and. 
 
 charges to be thereafter observed and in 
 force as the maximum to be charged for the 
 service to be performed, notwithstanding that 
 a higher rate, fare or charge has been hereto- 
 fore. authorized by statute, and shall fix the 
 same by order to be served upon all common 
 carriers, railroad corporations or street rail- 
 road corporations by whom such rates, fares 
 and charges are thereafter to be observed.”’ 
 
 This section as originally enacted did not con- 
 tain the clause beginning ‘‘ or the maximum rates, 
 fares or charges, chargeable by any such common 
 carrier, railroad or street railroad corporation 
 are insufficient to yield sufficient compensation,”’ 
 ete. Originally the section referred to excessive, 
 unjust, or unreasonable rates or practices. The 
 provision last quoted permitting the carrier to 
 complain when rates are insufficient was added 
 by amendment by chapter 546 of the Laws of 1911, 
 and is the only provision directly applicable to 
 the case (People ex rel. U. € D. R. R. Co. v. Pub. 
 Ser. Commission, supra). On the hearing the 
 carriers did not assert that they claim relief be- 
 cause the rates are insufficient under section 49, 
 and they certainly presented no evidence suffi- 
 cient to warrant the Commission in making a 
 final determination to that effect. All that was 
 asserted was that when the interstate rates go 
 into effect the present intrastate rates will be un- 
 
 9 
 
 151 
 
 152 
 
 153 
 
 154 
 
 155 
 
156 
 
 158 
 
 159 
 
 160 
 
 34 
 
 Paper 2 
 justly discriminatory or unduly preferential as 
 between interstate and intrastate passenger traffic 
 and, therefore, unlawful under subdivision 4 of 
 section 13 of the Interstate Commerce Act as 
 amended by Transportation Act of February 28, 
 1920. Subdivision 4, section 13, is as follows: 
 
 ‘¢ Whenever in any such investigation the 
 Interstate Commerce Commission, after full 
 hearing, finds that any such rate, fare, charge, 
 classification, regulation, or practice causes 
 any undue or unreasonable advantage, prefer- 
 ence, or prejudice as between persons or 
 localities in intrastate commerce on the one 
 hand and interstate or foreign commerce on 
 the other hand, or any undue, unreasonable, 
 or unjust discrimination against interstate or 
 foreign commerce, which is hereby forbidden 
 and declared to be unlawful, it shall prescribe 
 the rate, fare, or charge, or the maximum or. 
 minimum, or maximum and minimum, there- 
 after to be charged, and the classification, 
 regulation, or practice thereafter to he 
 observed, in such manner as, in its judg- 
 ment, will remove such advantage, prefer- 
 ence, prejudice or discrimination. Sueh rates, 
 fares, charges, classifications, regulations, 
 and practices shall be observed while in effect 
 by the carriers parties to such proceeding 
 affected thereby, the law of any State or the 
 decision or order of any State authority to 
 the contrary notwithstanding.’’ 
 
 It is not claimed that the present rates are un- 
 justly discriminatory or unduly preferential as 
 between points wholly within the State of New 
 York. The discrimination claimed relates to dis- 
 crimination between persons or localities in intra- 
 state commerce on the one hand and interstate or 
 
30 
 
 Paper 2 
 
 foreign commerce on the other. <A diserimina- 
 tion may, however, as well result from interstate 
 rates that are too high or too low as from intra- 
 state rates that are too high or too low, and the 
 proper correction may be in the interstate rates 
 over which this Commission has no control. 
 There is no express authority given to the Com- 
 mission to grant rates in excess of those author- 
 ized by statute except under section 49, which has 
 to do only with rates insufficient in themselves. 
 We should not in the absence of legislative au- 
 thority arrogate to the Commission power to 
 authorize a rate in excess of the statutory maxi- 
 mum merely to enforce a recent act of Congress 
 which contains within itself a special remedy. 
 
 The freight rate case is nothing more than an 
 application for a:short notice permission and in- 
 volves no predetermination of the propriety of the 
 rates. This application while it is in part for a 
 short notice permission, demands as a prelim- 
 inary an investigation and finding of facts suffi- 
 cient to authorize and demand that the Commis- 
 sion disregard the statutory limitation, and the 
 applicants present no evidence warranting such 
 a finding. 
 
 As already stated if there are any carriers not 
 within the three cent limitation and whose cases 
 demand special consideration their claims may be 
 presented. The excess baggage rates as well as 
 rates for milk and cream carried on passenger 
 trains were treated by the Interstate Commerce 
 
 Commission as a part of the case relating to. 
 
 passenger rates. We should treat them in the 
 same manner and deny the application generally. 
 
 161 
 
 162 
 
 163 
 
 164 
 
 165 
 
36 
 
 ie PAPER 3 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION 
 
 In THE MATTER 
 | of the 
 ag Rates of Fare for Passengers 
 Charged and Taken upon the 
 Line of the New York Central 
 Railroad Company in the State 
 of New York and Other States. 
 
 Docket 
 No. 11623. 
 
 168 SECOND AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION 
 
 Cuarues C. PAuLpING, 
 
 CiypE Brown, 
 
 Francis I. Gowen, 
 
 Grorce F’. BRowNELL, 
 
 Epwarp G. BuckLanD, 
 
 R. W. Barrett, 
 
 W. S. JENNEY, 
 
 Watrer C. Noyes, 
 
 J. F. Kaany, 
 
 C. L. ANDRUS, 
 Counsel. 
 
 169 
 
 170 
 
a” 
 
 Paper 3 
 BEFORE THE 
 INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION 
 
 171 
 
 In THE Matter 
 of the 
 Rates of Fare for Passengers 
 Charged and Taken upon the 
 Line of the New York Central 
 Railroad Company in the State 
 of New York and Other States. | 
 
 Docket 
 No'11623). 4/4 
 
 SECOND AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION 
 
 Comes now your petitioner, the New York Cen- 
 tral Railroad Company, and by this, its second 178 
 amended and supplemental petition, respectfully 
 represents on its own behalf and on behalf of the 
 Pennsylvania Railroad Company, the Erie Rail- 
 road Company, the Lehigh Valley Railroad Com- 
 pany, the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western 
 Railroad Company, the Delaware and Hudson 
 Company, the New York, Ontario and Western 
 Railway Company, the New York, New Haven 
 and Hartford Railroad Company, the Central 
 New England Railway Company, the Long Island 
 Railroad Company, the Buffalo, Rochester and 
 Pittsburgh Railway Company, and other steam 
 railroad companies, doing business within the 
 State of New York, as follows: 175 
 
 174 
 
 I. That your petitioner and each of the railroad 
 companies above named is a corporation, doing 
 business, both freight and passenger, between 
 points within the State of New York and between 
 points within the State of New York and without 
 the State of New York, and in other states of the 
 
 10 | 
 
176 
 
 177 
 
 178 
 
 179 
 
 180 
 
 38 
 
 Paper 3 
 United States, and subject in all respects, to the 
 provisions of the Interstate Commerce Act, as 
 amended. 
 
 That the New York Central Railroad Company, 
 and each of the other companies above named or 
 referred to, 1s situated in the eastern group of 
 railroads of the United States, as such group is 
 described in the decision of this honorable Com- 
 mission in the cause designated on the docket of 
 this Commission, as Hx Parte 74 and styled ‘‘ In 
 the matter of the applications of carriers in offi- 
 cial, southern, and western classification terri- 
 tories for authority to increase rates,’’ and that 
 all steam railroads in the State of New York are 
 comprised within said eastern group. 
 
 Ii. That the Public Service Commission of the 
 
 tate of New York is a statutory body created by 
 statute of the State of New York, being chapter 
 429 of the Laws of 1907, as subsequently re-en- 
 acted and amended in the year 1910, constituting 
 chapter 48 of the Consolidated Laws, and as 
 amended from time to time thereafter, and has 
 jurisdiction over, among other matters, steam 
 railroads in the State of New York, including the 
 rates and fares charged and chargeable for the 
 transportation of persons and property upon and 
 over such railroads within said State. 
 
 That the Railroad Law, so-called, of the State 
 of New York, is a general statute of said State, 
 containing provisions with regard to railroads 
 within the State and that, among other provisions 
 of said statute, is contained the following: 
 
 ‘8 57. RATES OF FARE. Subject to the 
 provisions of the public service commissions 
 
ag 
 
 Paper 3 
 law, every railroad corporation may fix and 
 collect the following rates of fare as com- 
 pensation to be paid for transporting any 
 passenger and his baggage, not exceeding 
 one hundred and fifty pounds in weight, for 
 each mile or fraction of a mile: 
 * % * * * S 
 
 * * * * 
 
 ‘¢5. In all other cases, three cents for 
 every such mile or fraction thereof, with a 
 right to a minimum single fare of not less 
 than five cents. 
 
 ‘* This chapter shall not be construed to 
 allow any rate of fare for way passengers 
 greater than two cents per mile to be charged 
 or taken over the track or tracks of the rail- 
 road known as the New York Central Rail- 
 road Company, and the rate of fare for way 
 passengers over the track or tracks of such 
 company shall continue to be two cents per 
 mile and no more, wherever it is restricted 
 to that rate of fare, nor shall any consoli- 
 dated railroad corporation charge a higher 
 rate of fare per passenger per mile upon any 
 part or portion of the consolidated line than 
 was allowed by law to be charged by each 
 existing corporation thereon previous to such 
 consolidation.”’ 
 
 and that the said statute contains provisions in 
 section 60 thereof requiring every railroad within 
 the State of New York, the line or lines of which 
 are more than 100 miles in length and which is 
 authorized by law to charge a maximum fare of 
 more than two cents per mile and not more than 
 three cents per mile, and which does charge a 
 maximum fare of more than two cents per mile, 
 to issue mileage books, having either 500 or 1,000 
 coupons attached thereto, entitling the holder 
 
 181 
 
 183 
 
 184. 
 
186 
 
 187 
 
 188 
 
 189 
 
 190 
 
 40 
 
 Paper 8 
 thereof to travel either 500 or 1,000 miles on the 
 line or lines of such railroad mileage books shall 
 be good until all coupons attached thereto have 
 been used and providing a penalty for the refusal 
 to issue such mileage books. | 
 
 III. That heretofore, pursuant to an applica- 
 tion duly filed with this Commission by the rail- 
 road companies of the United States, wherein this 
 Commission was requested to increase rates, fares 
 and charges so that the railroads might earn the 
 net railway operating income provided by the 
 provisions of the Transportation Act, this Com- 
 mission held hearings and, on July 31, 1920, pro- 
 mulgated its report and order in said cause, which 
 is referred to in the first paragraph or subdivi- 
 sion hereof, and is entitled ‘* In the matter of the 
 applications of carriers in official, southern and 
 western classification territories for authority to 
 increase rates.’’ The report and accompanying 
 order referred to herein are made part of this 
 petition. 
 
 That this Commission, in its decision in ex 
 parte 74, determined the aggregate value of the 
 carriers’ property in the eastern group, for the 
 purposes of that proceeding, would be in round 
 numbers $8,800,000,000, and that in making this 
 valuation this Commission did not attempt to sep- 
 arate property devoted to the purposes of inter- 
 state transportation from property devoted to in- 
 trastate transportation, but that the said figure 
 comprised all the property of the carriers in the 
 said group devoted to the purposes of transporta- 
 tion. 
 
41 
 
 Paper 3 
 
 That in the decision in said proceeding certain 
 increases in freight rates and in passenger fares 
 were authorized by this Commission and it was 
 determined by this Commission that the increases 
 allowed would yield no more than was necessary 
 to permit the carriers to earn 6 per cent upon the 
 value of their property held for and used in the 
 service of transportation; that this Commission, 
 in making this decision, made no separation be- 
 tween interstate revenue and intrastate revenue 
 and did not separate the expenses for handling 
 interstate traffic and intrastate traffic, but regarded 
 the business of the carriers as a whole, both inter- 
 state and intrastate, both as to freight and pas- 
 senger. 
 
 That in the said cause, ex parte 74, this Com- 
 mission, among other things, granted an increase 
 in passenger fares as follows: 
 
 ‘¢1, All passenger fares and charges may 
 be increased 20 per cent. The term ‘ passen- 
 eer fares’ may be considered to include 
 standard local or interline fares; excursion, 
 convention, and other fares for special occa- 
 sions; commutation and other multiple forms 
 of tickets; extra fares on limited trains; club 
 ear charges. 
 
 ‘¢2. Excess baggage rates may be _ in- 
 creased 20 per cent. provided that where 
 stated as a percentage of or dependent upon 
 passenger fares the increase in the latter will 
 automatically effect the increase in the ex- 
 cess-baggage charges. 
 
 ‘<3. A surcharge upon passengers in sleep- 
 ing and parlor cars may be made.amounting 
 to 50 per cent. of the charge for space in 
 such cars, such charge to be collected in con- 
 
 11 
 
 191 
 
 192 
 
 193 
 
 194 
 
 195 
 
196 
 
 197 
 
 198 
 
 199 
 
 200 
 
 42 
 
 Paper 3 
 nection with the charge for space, and to ac- 
 crue to the rail carriers. 
 
 ‘<4, Milk and cream are usually carried in 
 passenger trains, and the revenue therefrom 
 is not included in freight revenue. Rates on 
 these commodities may be increased 20 per 
 cent.’’ 
 
 IV. That pursuant to the provisions of General 
 Order No. 28 of the Director-General of Rail- 
 roads, issued by him on May 25, 1918, the said 
 Director-General established standard passenger 
 rates on the basis of three (8¢c.) cents per mile 
 throughout the United States, which rate included 
 intrastate rates within the State of New York; 
 that commutation rates were, under said General 
 Order, increased 10 per cent.; that the use of 
 mileage books and all kinds of mileage tickets 
 were abolished by said order; and that all rates 
 of fare so established under the terms of said 
 General Order No. 28 by the Director-General 
 have been in foree since June 10, 1918, upon the 
 lines of the railroads of the State of New York 
 for intrastate transportation of passengers, and 
 are now in force for such intrastate transporta- 
 tion, pursuant to tariffs duly filed with this Com- 
 mission. 
 
 V. That following the decision of this Commis- 
 sion in ex parte 74 passenger tariffs in blanket 
 supplement form have been filed with this Com- 
 mission, making effective August 26, 1920, the 
 passenger increases allowed by the Commission 
 in the decision in said cause, and that such in- 
 creases apply, under the tariffs filed, to the fares 
 for interstate travel charged and taken upon the 
 
43 
 
 Paper 3 
 
 line of each of the railroads above mentioned and 
 referred to, and that after August 26, 1920, the 
 fares so fixed by said blanket supplements will be 
 the lawful rates of fare for interstate travel upon 
 the lines of said railroads; that the percentage of 
 increase authorized by this Commission means, 
 on interstate tickets, that a rate of fare of 3.6 
 cents per mile so fixed, is the normal one-way 
 rate of fare and that interstate passenger fares 
 and charges, including the charges for the trans- 
 portation of milk and cream, will be increased 
 over the present fares and charges by the amount 
 authorized by this Commission for interstate 
 transportation. 
 
 VI. That following the decision of this Com- 
 mission in the said cause, ex parte 74, the steam 
 railroad companies of the State of New York, in- 
 cluding your petitioner, the New York Central 
 Railroad Company, and each of the other railroad 
 companies above named and referred to, made 
 an application to the Public Service Commission 
 of the State of New York for permission to file, 
 effective upon five days’ notice, blanket form 
 supplements of tariffs naming passenger fares 
 and charges, commutation and other charges, ex- 
 cess baggage charges and milk and cream rates, 
 within the State of New York, such blanket sup- 
 plements to name fares and charges for intrastate 
 transportation within said State, equal to the 
 amount named in the tariffs filed with this Com- 
 mission under the said decision in ex parte 74. 
 
 That a hearing was had by said Commission 
 upon said application on the 17th day of August, 
 1920, and thereafter and upon the 19th day of 
 
 201 
 
 202 
 
 203 
 
 205 
 
206 
 
 207 
 
 208 
 
 209 
 
 210 
 
 44 
 
 Paper 3 
 August, 1920, the said Commission rendered its 
 decision, denying said petition in an opinion as 
 follows: 
 
 ‘STATE OF NEW YORK 
 
 ‘PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION — 
 SECOND DISTRICT 
 
 ‘* Decided: August 19, 1920. 
 ‘* Case No. 7704. 
 
 ‘In the matter of the petition (or com- 
 plaint, of The New York Central Railroad 
 Company; also The Delaware, Lackawanna 
 and Western Railroad Company; the Lehigh 
 Valley Railroad Company; and other steam 
 railroad companies, in respect to proposed 
 higher passenger fares. 
 
 ‘‘ By the Commission: 
 
 ‘¢' The steam railroads subject to the juris- 
 diction of this Commission ask authority to 
 file tariffs effective on short notice whereby 
 passenger rates will be increased 20% a sur- 
 charge made upon passengers in sleeping and 
 parlor cars amounting to 50% of the charge 
 of space in such cars and an increase 
 of 20% made in excess baggage rates. 
 The petition is informal and very gen- 
 eral in its terms but at the hearing 
 
 held in Albany, August 17, 1920, it was 
 stated on behalf of the petitioners that 
 the object was to make intrastate rates within 
 the State of New York correspond to the in- 
 creased rates interstate authorized by the 
 Interstate Commerce Commission in the gen- 
 eral rate increase case Ex parte 74. Coneur- 
 rently with this application there was made 
 by the same carriers an application to file 
 effective on short notice, increases in freight 
 
A5 
 
 Paper 3 
 rates. Such permission was granted in Case 
 No. 7693 for reasons stated in a memoran- 
 dum accompanying the order. The instant 
 case presents entirely different legal ques- 
 tions. 
 
 ‘‘The passenger rates now in effect are 
 those imposed by the United States Railroad 
 Administration during Federal control and 
 continued in effect with certain qualifications 
 by the Transportation Act of 1920. The basic 
 rate is three cents a mile and the proposed 
 increase for ordinary transportation results 
 in a rate of 3.6 cents a mile. The proposed 
 surcharge on passengers in sleeping and par- 
 lor cars still further increases the rate for 
 that class of passengers. Section 57 of the 
 Railroad Law provides as follows: 
 
 ‘Rates of fare. Subject to the pro- 
 visions of the public service commissions 
 law, every railroad corporation may fix 
 and collect the following rates of fare as 
 compensation to be paid for transporting 
 any passenger and his baggage, not ex- 
 ceeding one hundred and fifty pounds in 
 weight, for each mile or fraction of a 
 mile. 
 
 * SUDGIVISIONY = 
 
 ‘If a road not incorporated prior to 
 May fifteenth, eighteen hundred and sev- 
 enty-nine, and not located in the counties 
 of New York and Kings, or within the 
 limits of any incorporated city, and not 
 more than twenty-five miles in length, 
 five cents; if over twenty-five and not 
 more than forty miles, four cents and if 
 over forty miles, three cents. 
 
 12 
 
 211 
 
 212 
 
 213 
 
 214 
 
 215 
 
216 
 
 217 
 
 218 
 
 219 
 
 220 
 
 46 
 
 Paper 8 
 ‘ Subdivision 5 — 
 
 ‘In all other cases, three cents for 
 every such mile or fraction thereof, 
 with a right to a minimum single fare of 
 not less than five cents.’ 
 
 ‘¢ Subdivision 1 not quoted provides for 
 roads propelled by rope or cable. The other 
 portion omitted relate to narrow-gauge roads 
 those with grades of two hundred feet to the 
 mile and upwards, and roads not exceeding 
 fifteen miles in length and not entering an in- 
 corporated city. The section also provides 
 that it shall not be construed to allow any 
 rate of fare for way passengers greater than 
 two cents per mile on the New York Central 
 Railroad Company wherever it is restricted 
 to that rate of fare, that is to say between 
 Albany and Buffalo. The general effect of 
 this section is to fix a maximum rate of three 
 cents a mile on all important roads in the 
 State. We therefore deal with the case on 
 this basis. If any roads not subject to the 
 limitation desire to put into effect the pro- 
 posed rates they may make a separate appli- 
 eation and show reasons for exceptional 
 treatment. This application is made by the 
 roads on an entirety and the record affords 
 no basis for a discrimination among them. 
 
 ‘¢ Tt was held in the People Ex Rel U. & D. 
 
 ~ R.R. Co. v. Pub. Ser. Commission 171, App. 
 
 Div. 607, Affirmed 218, N. Y. 642, that section 
 60 of the Railroad Law establishing mileage- 
 book rates was amended and revised together 
 with section 57 with reference to each other 
 and to the Public Service Commissions Law, 
 and further that under section 49 of the Pub- 
 lic Service Commissions Law the Commis- 
 sion is authorized to permit a rate in excess 
 of that fixed by statute when after an investi- 
 
47 
 
 Paper 3 
 gation it appears that the statutory rate is 
 insufficient; that the limitations of the statute 
 remain on the railroads but not on the power 
 of the Commission. It quite clearly appears 
 that the court was of the opinion that the 
 carrier could not of its own volition file tariffs 
 and put inte effect rates in excess of those 
 fixed by statute and that to effect this purpose 
 it must invoke the power of the commission 
 under section 49. The relevant portion of 
 section 49 is subdivision 1 and is as follows: 
 
 ‘Whenever either commission shall 
 be of opinion, after a hearing had upon 
 its own motion or upon a complaint, that 
 the rates, fares or charges demanded, ex- 
 acted, charged or collected by any com- 
 mon carrier, railroad corporation or 
 street railroad corporation, subject to its 
 jurisdiction for the transportation of 
 persons or property within the state, or 
 that the regulations or practices of such 
 common carrier, railroad corporation or 
 street railroad corporation affecting such 
 rates are unjust, unreasonable, unjustly 
 discriminatory or unduly preferential, or 
 in anywise in violation of any provision 
 of law, or that the maximum rates, fares 
 or charges, chargeable by any such com- 
 mon earrier, railroad or street railroad 
 corporation are insufficient to yield rea- 
 sonable compensation for the service ren- 
 dered, and are unjust and unreasonable, 
 the commission shall with due regard 
 among other things to a reasonable aver- 
 age return upon the value of the property 
 actually used in the public service and to 
 the necessity of making reservation out 
 of income for surplus and contingencies, 
 determine the just and reasonable rates, 
 fares and charges to be thereafter ob- 
 
 221 
 
 222 
 
 223 
 
 224. 
 
 229 
 
226 
 
 227 
 
 228 
 
 229 
 
 230 
 
 48 
 
 Paper 3 
 
 served and in force as the maximum to 
 be charged for the service to be per- 
 formed, notwithstanding that a higher 
 rate, fare or charge has been heretofore 
 authorized by statute, and shall fix the 
 same by order.to be served upon all com- 
 mon carriers, railroad corporations or 
 street railroad corporations by whom 
 such rates, fares and charges are there- 
 after to be observed.’ 
 
 ‘‘ This section as originally enacted did not 
 contain the clause beginning ‘‘ Or the maxi- 
 mum rates, fares or charges chargeable by 
 any such common carrier, railroad or street 
 railroad corporation are insufficient to yield 
 sufficient compensation, ete.’’ Originally the 
 section referred to excessive, unjust or un- 
 reasonable rates or practices. The provision 
 last quoted permitting the carrier to com- 
 plain when rates are insufficient was added 
 by amendment by chapter 546 of the Laws of 
 1911 and is the only provision directly applic- 
 able to the case (People Ex. Rel U. & D. R. R. 
 Co. v. Pub. Ser. Commission, supra.) On the 
 hearing the carriers did not assert that they 
 claim relief because the rates are insufficient 
 under section 49 and they certainly presented 
 no evidence sufficient to warrant the Com- 
 mission in making a final determination to 
 that effect. All that was asserted was that 
 when the interstate rates go into effect the 
 present intrastate rates will be unjustly dis- 
 eriminatory or unduly preferential as be- 
 tween interstate and intrastate passenger 
 traffic, and, therefore, unlawful under subdi- 
 
 vision 4 of section 13 of the Interstate Com- 
 
 merece Act as amended by the Transportation 
 
49 
 
 Paper 3 
 Act of February 28, 1920. Subdivision 4, sec- 
 tion 13 is as follows: 
 
 ‘Whenever in any such investigation 
 the Interstate Commerce Commission, 
 after full hearing, finds that any such 
 rate, fare, charge, classification, regula- 
 tion or practice causes any undue or un- 
 reasonable advantage, preference, or 
 prejudice as between persons or locali- 
 ties in intrastate commerce on the one 
 hand and interstate or foreign commerce 
 on the other hand, or any undue, un- 
 reasonable, or unjust discrimination 
 against interstate or foreign commerce, 
 which is hereby forbidden and declared 
 to be unlawful, it shall prescribe the rate, 
 fare, or charge, or the maximum or min- 
 imum, or maximum and minimum, there- 
 after to be charged, and the classifica- 
 tion, regulation or practice thereafter to 
 be observed, in such manner as, in its 
 judgment, will remove such advantage, 
 preference, prejudice or discrimination. 
 Such rates, fares, charges, classifica- 
 tions, regulations and practices shall be 
 observed while in effect by the carriers 
 parties to such proceeding affected 
 thereby, the law of any State or the de- 
 cision or order of any State authority 
 to the contrary notwithstanding.’ 
 
 “Tt is not claimed that the present rates 
 are unjustly discriminatory or unduly pref- 
 erential as between points wholly within the 
 State of New York. The discrimination 
 claimed relates to discrimination between per- 
 sons or localities in intrastate commerce on 
 the one hand and interstate or foreign com- 
 merce on the other. A discrimination may, 
 however, as well result from interstate 
 
 13 
 
 231 
 
 232 
 
 233 
 
 234 
 
 235 
 
236 
 
 237 
 
 238 
 
 239 
 
 240 
 
 o0 
 
 Paper 3 
 rates that are too high or too low as 
 from intrastate rates that are too high or too 
 low and the proper correction may be in the 
 interstate rates over which this Commission 
 has no control. There is no express authority 
 given to the Commission to grant rates in ex- 
 cess of those authorized by statute except 
 under section 49, which has to do only with 
 rates insufficient in themselves. We should 
 not in the absence of legislative authority ar- 
 rogate to the Commission power to authorize 
 a rate in excess of the statutory maximum 
 merely to enforce a recent act of Congress 
 which contains within itself a special remedy. 
 
 ‘‘ The freight rate case is nothing more 
 than an application for a short notice per- 
 mission and invelves no pre-determination of 
 the propriety of the rates. This application 
 while it is in part for a short notice permis- 
 sion, demands as a preliminary an investiga- 
 tion and finding of facts sufficient to author- 
 ize and demand that the Commission disre- 
 gard the statutory limitation and the appli- 
 cants present no evidence warranting such a 
 finding. 
 
 ‘* As already stated, if there are any car- 
 riers not within the three-cent limitation and 
 whose cases demand special consideration, 
 their claims may be presented. The excess 
 baggage rates for milk and cream carried on 
 
 passenger trains were treated by the Inter- 
 
 state Commerce Commission as a part of the 
 case relating to passenger rates. We should 
 treat them in the same manner and deny the 
 application generally.’’ 
 
 and that the result of such decision is that, after 
 August 26, 1920, the one-way interstate rate of 
 fare for passengers upon the lines of the railroads 
 
ol 
 
 Paper 3 
 
 of the companies hereinabove named and referred 
 to will be 3.6 cents per mile, and the rate of fare 
 for intrastate passage upon such lines will be 
 three cents per mile; that the fare and charge for 
 commutation and other multiple forms of tickets, 
 for excursion, convention and other fares for spe- 
 cial occasions, for extra fares on limited trains, 
 for club car charges, and for excess baggage rates 
 will be, for interstate passage, twenty per cent 
 more than the fares and charges for intrastate 
 passage as to such transportation, and that no 
 sur-charge will be charged or taken for passen- 
 gers in sleeping and parlor cars in intrastate 
 travel, whereas a surcharge of fifty per cent of 
 the charges for space in such cars will be made 
 to passengers in such cars in interstate travel. 
 
 That the difference to the railroads, herein 
 named and referred to, in money, as between the 
 amounts, which would be received by these car- 
 riers for the transportation within the State of 
 New York, if the passenger fares and charges, 
 including fares and charges for standard local or 
 interline tickets, for excursion, convention and 
 other fares for special occasions, for commutation 
 and other multiple forms of tickets, for extra fares 
 on limited trains, for club car charges, for excess 
 baggage rates, for surcharge upon passengers in 
 sleeping and parlor cars, and for the transporta- 
 tion of milk and cream authorized by this Commis- 
 sion to be charged and taken in interstate com- 
 merce, and which are now being charged and 
 taken, were charged and taken in intrastate com- 
 merce within the State of New York, and the 
 amounts which will be received by these carriers 
 
 241 
 
 242, 
 
 243 
 
 245 
 
246 
 
 24 
 
 aj 
 
 248 
 
 249 
 
 250 
 
 o2 
 
 Paper 3 
 for such transportation within the State of New 
 York under the fares and charges as they now 
 exist for each and all of the different kinds of 
 transportation enumerated above, and are now 
 being charged and taken, and as they must be 
 charged and taken under the decision of the Pub- 
 lic Service Commission of the State of New York 
 above quoted, is many millions of dollars per 
 year, and that the decision of the said State com- 
 mission in forcing the railroads herein named and 
 referred to to charge rates of fare within the State 
 of New York for intrastate travel less than the 
 rates authorized by this Commission results and 
 will result in an undue and unreasonable advant- 
 age, preference or prejudice between persons and 
 localities in intrastate commerce on the one hand, 
 and interstate commerce on the other, and an un- 
 
 due, unreasonable and unjust discrimination 
 
 against interstate commerce in that, among other 
 things, unless the railroads named and referred 
 to herein are permitted to charge for the trans- 
 portation of passengers and milk and cream in- 
 trastate, within the State of New York, fares and 
 rates prescribed in the said decision and order of 
 this Commission, carriers within the eastern 
 group will earn less than six per cent upon the 
 
 aggregate value of their property within such 
 
 group held and used in the service of transporta- 
 tion with the result that the provisions of the 
 Transportation Act would not be carried out. 
 That the provisiuns of the Transportation Act 
 contemplated that rates and fares shall be ad- 
 justed with reference to the aggregate value of 
 the property of the carriers in the groups de- 
 
ah) 
 
 Paper 3 251 
 termined upon by this Commission and not with 
 reference to the value of the property of any par- 
 ticular carrier in any particular state. That the 
 decision of the Public Service Commission of the 
 State of New York, above quoted, disclaims au- 
 thority in the Commission to deal with the dis- 
 crimination against interstate commerce result- 
 ing from lower fares in New York and suggests 
 no proper basis for further proceedings before 
 State authorities with reference to the proposed 
 increase in passenger fares 
 
 252 
 
 VII. And your petitioner further shows, in its 
 own behalf and in behalf of all the railroad com- 
 panies named and referred to hereinabove, that 2953 
 the main line of the railroad of the New York 
 Central Railroad Company extends from New 
 York to Buffalo, in the State of New York, and, 
 as to that part of its line, is entirely within the 
 said state; that other railroad lines between New 
 York and Buffalo are the lines of the Lehigh Val- 
 ley Railroad Company, the Erie Railroad Com- 254 
 pany, the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Rail- 
 road Company, the New York, Ontario & Western 
 Railway Company, and the line of the West Shore 
 Railroad Company, which is a leased line of the 
 New York Central Railroad Company and is op- 
 erated by said company; that the line of each 
 of the said last named railroad companies be- 
 tween New York and Buffalo passes through 
 states other than the State of New York, and that 
 the transportation of passengers between such 
 points over each of such named lines is transpor- 
 tation in interstate commerce; that after August 
 26, 1920, the rate of fare for passengers between 
 
 14 
 
 bo 
 
 59 
 
256 
 
 257 
 
 258, 
 
 259 
 
 260 
 
 D4. 
 
 Paper 3 
 New York and Buffalo, upon the line of the New 
 York Central Railroad Company, will be three 
 cents per mile and no more, it being entirely an 
 intrastate journey; that the rate of fare for pas- 
 sengers between said points upon the line of each 
 of the other named railroad companies, including 
 
 the line of the West Shore Railroad Company 
 
 operated, as aforesaid, by the New York Central 
 Railroad Company, will be 3.6 cents per mile, such 
 transportation being interstate transportation 
 and that the rate of fare over the line of the New 
 York Centrai Railroad Company will be $13.16, 
 between said points, as compared with the rate of 
 fare over each of the other lines of $14.36, thus 
 constituting an obviously undue, unreasonable 
 and unjust discrimination against interstate com- 
 merce and in favor of intrastate commerce 
 
 That after August 26, 1920, the surcharge of 
 fifty per cent of the charge for space in sleeping 
 and parlor cars will be effective upon the lines 
 of the railroads running interstate between New 
 York and Buffalo, and will not be effective upon 
 the line of the New York Central Railroad Com- 
 pany, thus furnishing a further undue, unreason- 
 able and unjust discrimination against interstate 
 commerce. 
 ~ That such instances of discrimination occur be- 
 tween many other points within the State of New 
 York reached by the West Shore Railroad and by 
 each of the other railroad companies named and 
 by other railroad companies. That a few of such 
 instances are the following: Between New York 
 and Albany are the lines of the New York Central 
 Railroad Company and of the West Shore Rail- 
 
D0 
 
 Paper 3 
 road Company, one at intrastate line and the 
 other an interstate line. That between New York 
 
 261 
 
 and Utica extend the lines of the New York Cen- 
 
 tral Railroad, an intrastate road, and of the West 
 Shore Railroad and of the New York, Ontario & 
 Western Railway, both interstate roads. Be- 
 tween. New York and Syracuse are the lines of the 
 New York Central Railroad, an intrastate line, 
 and the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Rail- 
 road and the West Shore Railroad, interstate 
 lines. That between New York and Rochester 
 extend the lines of the New York Central Rail- 
 road, an intrastate line, and the Lehigh Valley 
 
 Railroad, the Erie Railroad and the West Shore . 
 
 Railroad, interstate ines. That passengers trav- 
 eling upon the line of the New York Central Rail- 
 road between each of such points travel in intra- 
 state commerce; passengers traveling upon each 
 of the other named lines between said points 
 travel in interstate commerce, the rate for intra- 
 state travel being three cents per mile and for the 
 interstate travel 3.6c. per mile. And that your 
 petitioner asks leave to give proof of other in- 
 stances than those named herein. 
 
 That after August 26, 1920, the rates for the 
 transportation of milk and cream intrastate 
 within the State of New York will be 20 per cent 
 less than the rates for the transportation of milk 
 and cream interstate; that to mention but one in- 
 stance, large quantities of milk and cream are 
 brought into the City of New York by the New 
 York Central Railroad from points within the 
 State of New York and from points without the 
 State of New York; that the increased rates 
 
 262 
 
 263 
 
 264 
 
 265 
 
266 
 
 267 
 
 268 
 
 269 
 
 270 
 
 o6 
 
 Paper 8 
 
 charged for the transportation of such milk and 
 cream on points from without the State over the 
 rates charged for the transportation for such 
 commodities from points within the State, con- 
 stitutes, and will constitute an undue and un- 
 reasonable advantage, preference or prejudice as 
 between persons or localities in intrastate com- 
 merce on the one hand and interstate commerce 
 on the other hand, and an undue, unreasonable 
 and unjust discrimination against interstate com- 
 merce; that milk and cream are transported to the 
 City of New York mterstate over the lines of the 
 railroad of the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western 
 Railroad Company, the Lehigh Valley Railroad 
 Company, the Erie Railroad Company, the New 
 York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Com- 
 pany, and the New York, Ontario & Western Rail- 
 way Company, many of the points from which 
 such commodities are transported over each of 
 such railroad lines interstate being points compet- 
 itive with points situated upon the line of the New 
 York Central Railroad Company over which the 
 transportation to the City of New York is intra- 
 state, and that the higher rates charged for the 
 transportation of these commodities over these 
 lines interstate as against the charge permitted 
 for the transportation intrastate constitutes an 
 undue and unreasonable advantage, preference or 
 prejudice, as between persons or localities in in- 
 trastate commerce on the one hand and interstate 
 commerce on the other hand, and causes an undue, 
 unreasonable and unjust discrimination against 
 interstate commerce. 
 
( 
 
 a | 
 
 e 
 
 Paper 3 
 
 That the rates on milk and cream, prior to the 
 decision of this Commission in Ex Parte 74, were 
 those fixed by this Commission in its decision in 
 Case No. 8558, Milk and Cream Rates in New 
 York City, reported in 45 I. C. C., 412, for inter- 
 state transportation and applied for intrastate 
 transportation within the State of New York in 
 order to secure a uniformity in rate between in- 
 terstate and intrastate rates, and as said rate was 
 increased under General Order No. 28 of the Di- 
 rector General. 
 
 Wherefore your petitioner prays, on its own be- 
 half and on behalf of the carriers named herein 
 and referred to herein, operating within the State 
 of New York, that this honorable commission, act- 
 ing under the powers conferred upon it by section 
 15 of the Interstate Commerce Act as amended, 
 institute an investigation as to the passenger 
 fares and charges for intrastate transportation 
 within the State of New York and as to the 
 charges for the transportation of milk and cream 
 within said state; that it cause the State of New 
 York to be notified of the proceeding and that an 
 order be entered, declaring discriminatory, unjust 
 and unlawful any fares or rates or charges initi- 
 ated by the President during Federal control or 
 required to be apphed by any state authority to 
 the transportation of passengers and of milk and 
 eream within the State of New York, less than 
 those provided in the said order of this Commis- 
 sion in ex parte 74, and prohibiting preferences 
 and discriminations by requiring the establish- 
 ment of intrastate passenger rates and fares and 
 charges for the transportation of milk and cream 
 
 15 
 
 271 
 
 272 
 
 273 
 
 274 
 
 275 
 
o8 
 
 276 | Paper 3 
 within the State of New York on the same level 
 
 and basis as those authorized by this Commis- 
 Slon in ex parte 74, and prescribing fares and 
 charges or the maximum or minimum, or the max- 
 imum and minimum fares and charges thereafter 
 to be charged on intrastate passenger traffic and 
 the intrastate. transportation of milk and cream 
 
 ate within the State of New York. 
 
 Respecifully submitted, 
 
 CHARLES C. PAULDING, 
 
 CiypE Brown, 
 
 Francis I. Gowsn, 
 
 Grorce EF’. BrowNeELt, 
 278 Epwarp G. BuckLanp, 
 
 R. W. Barrett, 
 
 W.'S. JENNEY, 
 
 Water C. Noyes, 
 
 J. F. Kany, 
 
 C. L. ANDRUS, 
 
 Counsel. 
 279 
 
 280 
 
59 
 PAPER 4 281 
 BEFORE THE 
 Interstate Commerce Commission 
 
 In tHE Marrer 
 of the 282 
 
 Rates of Fare for Passengers 
 Charged and Taken upon the 
 Line of the New York Central 
 Railroad Company in the State 
 of New York and Other States. 
 
 Docket 
 No. 11623 
 
 New York, N. Y., September 13, 1920. oa 
 10 o’clock a. M. 
 Before: 
 Witspur La Ros, Jr., Chief Examiner. 
 Met pursuant to notice. 
 284 
 
 Appearances: 
 
 Charles C. Paulding, Grand Central Terminal, 
 New York city, appearing for the New York Cen- 
 tral Railroad Company; Delaware, Lackawanna 
 and Western Railroad Company, New York, New 
 Haven and Hartford Railroad Company, and 285 
 Boston and Maine Railroad Company. 
 
 Joseph F. Keany and Alfred A. Gardner, Penn- 
 sylvania Station, New York city, appearing for 
 the Long Island Railroad Company. 
 
 H. A. Raylor, 50 Church street, New York city, 
 appearing for the Erie Railroad Company; New 
 
286 
 
 287 
 
 288 
 
 290 
 
 60 
 
 Paper 4 
 Jersey and New York Railroad Company, and 
 Bath and Hammondsport Railroad Company. 
 
 C. L. Andrus, 3714 Grand Central Terminal, 
 New York City, appearing for the New York, 
 Ontario and Western Railway Company. 
 
 Willam L. Barnett, New Haven, Conn., appear- 
 ing for the New York, New Haven and Hartford 
 Railroad Company; Central New England Rail- 
 way Company, and Boston and Maine Railroad 
 Company. 
 
 ‘Alfred G. Hagerty, 717 Munsey building, Wash- 
 ington, D. C., appearing for the Ulster and Dela- 
 ware Railroad Company. 
 
 R. W. Barrett, 148 Liberty street, New York 
 city, appearing for the Lehigh Valley Railroad 
 Company. 
 
 Charles L. Hunter, 1438 Liberty street, New 
 York city, appearing for the New York Central 
 Railroad Company. 
 
 Henry Wolf Bikle, 231 Broad Street Station, 
 Philadelphia, Pa., appearing for the Pennsyl- 
 vania Railroad Company. 
 
 W. D. Waldron, 32 Nassau street, New York 
 city, appearing for the Delaware and Hudson 
 Company. 
 
 John Adikes, 200 Fulton street, Jamaica, New 
 
 York city, appearing for the Jamaica Board of 
 
 Trade. 
 
 Vincent Victory, Assistant Corporation Coun- 
 sel; Municipal building, New York city, appearing 
 for the city of New York and its inhabitants. 
 
 John Rolley Clark, Jr., 120 Broadway, New 
 York city, appearing for the Chamber of Com- 
 merce of the Borough of Queens. 
 
61 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Ledyard P. Hale, Albany, N. Y., appearing for 
 the Public Service Commission, State of New 
 York, Second District. 
 
 Edward G. Griffin, Albany, N. Y., Deputy 'At- 
 torney-General, appearing for the State of New 
 York. 
 
 John A. Mullen, New York city, N. Y., appear- 
 ing for the Public Service Commission, First 
 District. 
 
 PROCEEDINGS 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Gentlemen, the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission has assigned for hearing 
 this morning, Docket No. 11623, In the Matter of 
 Interstate Rates and Fares of the New York Cen- 
 tral Railroad Company, and Other Carriers in 
 the State of New York. 
 
 Who appears for the State of New York? 
 
 Mr. Hale: Mr. Griffin, for the Attorney-Gen- 
 eral, Deputy Attorney-General of the State, and 
 Mr. Hale, myself, for the Public Service Com- 
 mission of the Second District, which I believe in 
 this State includes all steam railroads. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Who appears for the carriers? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I appear for practically all the 
 carriers, with the exception of the Pennsylvania 
 railroad and the Delaware and Hudson, who are 
 represented by their own counsel. 
 
 Mr. Waldron: I appear for the Delaware and 
 Hudson Company, W. D. Waldron. 
 
 Mr. Bikle: Mr. Bikle, for the Pennsylvania. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Are there any other appear- 
 ances for the carriers? 
 
 Mr. Keany: The Long Island Railroad Com- 
 
 pany appears by Mr. Joseph IF’. Keany. 
 16 
 
 291 
 
 292 
 
 293 
 
 294 
 
296 
 
 297 
 
 298 
 
 299 
 
 399 
 
 6% 
 
 Paper 4 
 Exam. LaRoe: Are there any other appear- 
 ances? 
 Mr. Hagerty: A. G. Hagerty, for the Ulster 
 and Delaware. 
 
 Mr. Clark: I appear for the Queens Borough 
 Chamber of Commerce, John Holley Clark, Jr. 
 
 Mr. Victory: John P. O’Brien, Corporation 
 Counsel of the city of New York, by Vincent Vic- 
 tory, Assistant Corporation Counsel. 
 
 Mr. Andrus: C. L. Andrus appears for the 
 New York, Ontario and Western. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Are there any other appear- 
 ances? 
 (No response.) 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: The issues are pretty clearly 
 defined in the Commission’s order, dated Sep- 
 tember 8th, part of which I will read: 
 
 ‘In the Matter of Intrastate Rates and 
 Fares of the New York Central Railroad 
 Company and other carriers in the State of 
 New York. 
 
 ‘‘ It appearing, That by order in Ex Parte 
 74, Increased Rates, 1920, 58 I. C. C. 220, 
 carriers operating within the State of New 
 York were permitted to increase intrastate 
 passenger fares and charges 20 per cent, ex- 
 cess baggage rates 20 per cent, surcharge 
 upon passengers in sleeping and parlor cars 
 50 per cent and the rates on milk and cream 
 when carried on passenger cars 20 per cent; 
 
 ‘¢ Tt further appearing, That a petition has 
 been filed on behalf of all the steam railroads 
 operating in the State of New York averring 
 that the State of New York Public Service 
 Commission, Second District, by report and 
 order promulgated on the 19th day of August, 
 1920, refused to permit increases for intra- 
 
63 
 
 Paper 4 
 state traffic similar to those permitted by 
 this Commission for interstate traffic as set 
 forth in the preceding paragraph; 
 
 ‘‘ It further appearing, That said petition- 
 ers allege that the observance by themselves 
 of said order of the New York Public Service 
 Commission, Second District, will cause and 
 result in undue and unreasonable preference 
 and advantage to intrastate commerce, to the ® 
 undue and unreasonable prejudice and dis- 
 advantage of interstate commerce and will 
 result in unjust and unreasonable discrimina- 
 tion against interstate commerce. 
 
 ‘And it further appearing, That by the 
 said petition there have been brought to is- 
 sue rates, fares and charges imposed by the 
 authority of the State of New York; 
 
 ‘* Tt is ordered, (1) That an investigation 
 be, and it is hereby instituted to determine 
 whether the rates, fares and charges required 
 by the State of New York Public Service 
 Commission, Second District, to be main- 
 tained by said railroads, cause or will cause 
 any undue or unreasonable advantage, pref- 
 erence, or prejudice as between-persons or 
 localities in intrastate commerce on the one 304 
 hand and interstate commerce or foreign 
 commerce on the other hand, or any undue, 
 unreasonable or unjust discrimination against 
 interstate or foreign commerce; and as to 
 what rates, fares and charges, if any, or what 
 maximum or minimum, or maximum and 
 minimum shall be prescribed to be charged 
 by the petitioners, in order to remove such go5_ 
 advantage, preference, prejudice or discrim- 
 ination, if any, as may be found to exist. 
 
 gy 
 2 
 SG) 
 
 303 
 
 At this point I should say, perhaps, that [ am 
 advised that Mr. Smith, the General Passenger 
 Agent of the New Haven Railroad, intended to 
 be here, but his train will be somewhat late. I 
 
306 
 
 307 
 
 308 
 
 309 
 
 310 
 
 64 
 
 Paper 4 
 would like to determine informally about how 
 long this proceeding is going to last. 
 (Here ensued an informal discussion off the 
 record. ) 
 
 Mr. Hale: I think perhaps now is the time to 
 interpose objection, but it is fair that the Inter- 
 state Commerce Commission should be duly ap- 
 praised of the position of the Public Service 
 Commission, and Mr. Griffin can speak, of course, 
 with regard to the State of New York. We object 
 to any proceeding or any evidence or any hear- 
 ing in this matter, because there is not any proper 
 complainant. In other words, no person inter- 
 ested in interstate as opposed to state rates has 
 made any complaint of the state raise. I do not 
 understand that it is a proceeding instituted of its 
 own motion by the Interstate Commerce Com- 
 mission, but that it is a proceeding instituted on 
 motion of the carriers, the New York Central and 
 other railroads. I do not think they can raise 
 that point, and especially as they have not asked 
 the state to increase their local rates. Now, in all 
 of this time that the New York Central has had 
 and the other railroads —JI speak of the Central 
 as perhaps governing all of them —it is our larg- 
 est sinner in the state, because it is the largest 
 railroad in the state, and because of the statute 
 of the state, which has been in existence since be- 
 fore the New York Central Railroad — now, there 
 has not been a suggestion to the Public Service 
 Commission that the 2-cent rate, for example, for 
 way passengers between Albany and Buffalo was 
 insufficient, either to pay for the service or to 
 vield an income on the cost of the railroad or to 
 vield a reasonable return on the value of the prop- 
 
65 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 erty employed in passenger transportation, and 
 for that reason we claim that the Interstate Com- 
 merce Commission ought not to be moved to this 
 investigation. The Examiner stated he would 
 like to know about how long the hearing is going 
 to take. We are not prepared with any evidence 
 at all and do not expect to introduce any, except 
 on cross examination if there is any evidence 
 that we ought to have which would be easily sup- 
 plied by the railroad people present. 
 
 Exam. La Roe: Your objection will be noted on 
 the record, Judge Hale. Just to get the record 
 clear, am I laboring under a misapprehension 
 when I think that the carriers have petitioned the 
 Public Service Commission of the Second District 
 for authority to put in the wncreased fares? 
 
 Mr. Hale: They petitioned for authority to put 
 in the increased fares because, and only because 
 they were put in by the Interstate Commerce Com- 
 mission. They want us to O. K. for State rates 
 exactly what the Interstate Commerce Commis- 
 sion did. 
 
 Hxam. LaRoe: And your position is, as I un- 
 derstand you, that you feel that the carriers have 
 failed to establish the insufficiency of the present 
 fares under the language of ithe statute. 
 
 Mr. Hale: They have introduced no evidence 
 bearing on that question, as I understand it, and 
 certainly they have not asked the Public Service 
 Commission to inerease the rates. 
 
 Now, I want your assent to my assertion, repre- 
 senting the New York State Commission, that the 
 statute of New York has vested the Public Ser- 
 
 17 
 
 311 
 
 312 
 
 313 
 
 314 
 
 315 
 
316 
 
 66 
 
 Paper 4 
 vice Commission of the Second District with suffi- 
 cient power to enable them, from proper proof, 
 to raise the passenger rate to 3.6 by any of the 
 tests which have now become established in the 
 United States, the reasonable income on the value 
 of the property in public use, or any other test 
 
 317 that you please that has been recognized by the 
 
 318 
 
 319 
 
 320 
 
 Supreme Court of the United States, and fur- 
 nishes the basis of its daily work by the Inter- 
 state Commerce Commission, especially under the | 
 valuation scheme of the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission There has not been proffered to us, 
 not even indirectly, a proposition to increase these 
 rates so that the State rates should be equal to the 
 interstate rates. There won’t be any quarrel, as 
 a matter of fact, on my part that when I went to 
 Chicago the other morning and got on at Albany 
 and rode to Buffalo, and paid 3.6, and my friend 
 got on the train and rode to Buffalo and paid 3 
 cents, that there is a difference between the State 
 and interstate rates. We do not contend there is 
 no difference. We do not contend that that may 
 not constitute a discrimination, but nobody has 
 asked us on any basis whatever, either from actual 
 value of service or actual financial need of the 
 carrier to increase it. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: As I understand the carriers’ 
 position, your position on the subject of discrimi- 
 nation is that as a matter of discrimination be- 
 tween intrastate commerce on one hand and in- 
 terstate commerce on the other, it is a matter of 
 determination by another tribunal, and you feel 
 the carriers should establish it before vou put the 
 insufficiency of the sresent rates — 
 
67 
 
 Paper 4 
 Mr. Hale: I might answer yes, and yet I think 321 
 due to you, representing the Interstate Com- 
 merce Commission, I should go a step further and 
 to deny the authority of Congress, under the Con- 
 stitution of the United States, to do what it has 
 done respecting the relation between interstate 
 
 and State rates. 
 
 | 22 
 Exam. LaRoe: You mean by that, that you ; 
 
 deny the power of Congress to vest in the Inter- 
 state Commerce Commission authority to require 
 the removal of undue prejudice, if found to exist 
 between State and interstate rates. 
 
 Mr. Hale: I always lke to state the question 
 exactly as I see it. My point is that I believe that 393 
 the State still has under the Constitution the 
 power to determine in a state what is a reasonable 
 rate for a railroad in the carriage of freight or 
 passengers. Now, I am aware of the Shreveport 
 decision. JI am aware of the Illinois case. I am 
 aware of the Minnesota rate cases. Of course, we 
 have got to accept this as part of the jurispru- 9394 
 dence of the United States, but to go beyond that 
 and branch out entirely and to give to the Inter- 
 state Commerce Commission the power over local 
 rates, absolutely to fix them, and the only stand- 
 ard of doing that which is fixed by the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission, that we object to, and we 
 
 hope to prevail ultimately on that contention. 395 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: You have stated your position 
 so fully and freely that I hesitate to ask you to de- 
 velop it further, but do you distinguish between 
 the matter of reasonableness or the sufficiency of 
 the rates and the matter of discrimination? 
 
68 
 
 326 Paper 4 
 Mr. Hale: I do not quite know where we would 
 have to argue that ultimately. Of course, I must 
 concede that where a rate fixed by a state, is a 
 direct interference with the power of Congress, 
 as declared now in the Shreveport and other cases, 
 or perhaps not the power of Congress declared 
 397 there, but the result of the provisions of the Con- 
 stitution, giving Congress the power over inter- 
 state commerce, we come right up to the square 
 conflict there and of course the State has got to 
 yield. It cannot help it, but I do want in all legit- 
 imate and proper ways to urge upon the Inter- 
 state Commerce Commission, of course, through 
 you, that Congress has not in the first place — 
 that it has not done it; in the second place, that 
 if it has tried to do it, it could not remove all jur- 
 isdiction of the State of New York over the rates 
 of the New York Central Railroad and other 
 railroads. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I think it is only fair to state 
 399 for the purpose of the record — 
 
 Mr. Griffin: May I put in my objection? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: Pardon me just a moment. In 
 the hearing before the Public Service Commis- 
 sion, upon the petition of the carriers to put in 
 the tariffs blanket supplements, showing the in- 
 
 399 creased rates, the entire record before the Inter- 
 “~~ state Commerce Commission was offered in evi- 
 dence and accepted. | 
 
 Mr. Hale: I assume that is true. I was not 
 there. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Were they physically filed with 
 the New York Commission? 
 
69 
 
 Paper 4 
 Mr. Paulding: The New York Commission had 
 a copy in their possession, and that prompted us 
 to make the formal offer, and they stated they 
 would use that copy. 
 
 Mr. Hale: There won’t be any point about the 
 physical presence, if that is true, of course. 
 
 Hxam. LaRoe: May I ask if any one else would 
 like to be heard? 
 
 Mr. Clark: I would like to make one additional 
 objection to what Judge Hale has said, particu- 
 larly as regards the Long Island Railroad and the 
 City of New York, in which the people of Queens 
 are particularly interested, of course. The Long 
 Island Railroad has not interstate passenger traf- 
 fic at all. Of course, the force of Mr. Hale’s argu- 
 ment about the jurisdiction of the Interstate Com- 
 ‘merce Commission and Congress, itself, is par- 
 ticularly forceful in the case of the Long Island. 
 There are no ways by which the Long Island rates 
 
 could directly compete with the interstate rate,. 
 
 under the theory of the Minnesota Rate cases and 
 it seems to me that if the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission is to take jurisdiction of the local 
 rates on what is really a rapid transit railroad in 
 many respects, which has a majority of its traffic 
 in the city of New York, and in many cases runs 
 parallel to and competes with the city rapid tran- 
 
 ‘sit lines, why then I say that if this. Transporta- © 
 
 tion Act authorizes any such interference with 
 
 local rates on the Long Island Railroad, it ought 
 
 to also authorize its interference with the local 
 
 rates on the city rapid transit lines. You could 
 
 just as well increase the five-cent fare on the sub- 
 18 
 
 331 
 
 332 
 
 333 
 
 334 
 
336 
 
 337 
 
 338 
 
 339 
 
 340 
 
 70 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 way as you could increase the rates on the Long 
 Island Railroad. That is the preliminary objec- 
 tion I make, and then if the court desires or 
 wishes to continue the Long Island Railroad in 
 this hearing, why, I want to point out that the 
 rates on the Long Island Railroad have always 
 been higher than those on the New Jersey roads; 
 that in spite of the 20 per cent increase granted 
 to the New Jersey railroads, the Long Island 
 commutation rates to the Pennsylvania station 
 are still higher than those on the New Jersey 
 roads. The fifty-trip rates on the Long Island 
 Railroad are higher than those in the New Jersey 
 railroads, and in many cases the single and 
 round-trip fares on the Long Island Railroad are 
 higher than on the New Jersey roads with their 
 increase. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Are there any other prelim- 
 inary remarks? 
 
 Mr. Griffin: If the Examiner please, on behalf 
 of the Attorney-General, instead of joining Judge 
 Hale’s objections, I want to make some of my 
 own. I object first on the ground that the peti- 
 tioners may not be heard here, complaining 
 against any discrimination as between interstate 
 and state rates; that only some person who suf- 
 fers from that discrimination may be heard. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: I do not have a copy of the new 
 law before me, but as I recall it, it specifically 
 authorizes a carrier to file such a petition. Am I 
 incorrect in that? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I will read it. 
 
“fi 
 
 Paper 4 
 My. Griffin: Will you wait until I finish? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: Yes. 
 
 Mr. Griffin: And secondly, I object to this peti- 
 tion, upon the ground that there can be no dis- 
 crimination in passenger rates where a passen- 
 ger steps off at a station and buys a state ticket. 
 
 Thirdly, upon the ground that so far as the 
 
 two-cent fare on the New York Central is con- 
 - cerned, and so far as their rates are concerned, 
 they constitute charter contracts which Congress 
 may not by its authority, delegated to the Inter- 
 state Commerce Commission, impair. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Those objections will be noted 
 in the record. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I wish to call attention upon 
 the record to the language of section 13. It is in 
 the third subdivision of section 13 of the Inter- 
 state Commerce Act: 
 
 - “* Tn any investigation upon the petition of 
 the carrier concerned, which petition is 
 hereby authorized to be filed ’? — 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: I think that is enough. That 
 is part of the law I had in mind. 
 
 Mr. Victory: The corporation counsel of the 
 city of New York joins in the objection of coun- 
 sel for the Public Service Commission of the 
 Second District, Mr. Griffin and also Major Clark. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Now, apparently with a little 
 pressure we shall be able to finish today. 
 
 Mr. Taylor: On behalf of the Erie Railroad, 
 I would like it known before you start that Mr. 
 
 341 
 
 343 
 
 345 
 
346 
 
 “847 
 
 348 
 
 72 
 
 Paper. 4 
 Paulding’ represents some witnesses who will 
 speak jor us, as well as for other railroads, but 
 we may find it necessary to have some short time 
 to present some facts peculiar to the Hrie Rail- 
 road. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Very well. For the informa- 
 
 tion of those present I will say, although I assume 
 
 it to be generally known, that 1a very similar pro- 
 ceeding is now pending with regard to the rates . 
 in the State of Illinois. I think that that 1s now 
 in course of hearing in Chicago, although I am 
 not generally advised. 
 
 Mr. Hale: Itis. I was there on Saturday. 
 Exam. LaRoe: Mr. Paulding, are you ready 
 to proceed? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I do not know that a formal 
 opening 1s necessary im a proceeding before the 
 Commission, but briefly I will say this, Mr. 
 
 Examiner: In the State of New York there are 
 
 349 
 
 300 
 
 58 steam railroads. Of these, ten have no passen- 
 ger revenue. Of the remaining forty-eight, thir- 
 teen have total passenger revenues of over a mil- 
 lion dollars a year. The main roads concerned 
 in that revenue are the New York Central, the 
 Erie, the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western, the 
 Lehigh Valley, the Long Island, the Ontario & 
 Western, the New Haven Railroad, Buffalo, 
 Rochester & Pittsburg and Delaware & Hudson. 
 The other interstate roads doing a business of 
 over a million dollars have a small mileage in 
 New York. The intrastate business of the roads 
 I have named is very large. It amounts to about 
 fifty million dollars a year, roughly speaking. 
 
13 
 
 Paper. 4 
 The milk and cream business is very large, 
 amounting to several million dollars a year, which 
 I will prove. The surcharge upon Pullman tick- 
 ets, which has been denied by the Public Service 
 Commission would amount to a great deal a year, 
 as prior to the time the Pullman Company was 
 
 allowed 20 per cent increase on their charges, their \, 
 
 intrastate income in the State of New York for 
 local tickets was about $1,400,000 a year. The 
 interstate railroads in the State — all railroads in 
 the State are interstate railroads, excepting as to 
 New York State traffic on the New York Central, 
 which business ‘New York and Buffalo is entirely 
 an intrastate line, New York being selected as one 
 end of the State and Buffalo being at the end of 
 the Great Lakes —the New York Central is an 
 intrastate line. The West ‘Shore line, a leased 
 line of the New York Central, is an interstate 
 line, and parallels the New York Central for its 
 entire length. The Lehigh Valley, Delaware, 
 
 Lackawanna & Western and Erie are all inter-: 
 
 state lines, going through the states of New Jer- 
 sey and Pennsylvania and passing in and out of 
 New York and Pennsylvania. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: May I interrupt on one point? 
 Did you say the New York Central line between 
 Albany and Buffalo? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: Between New York and Buffalo. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Of course, that portion of the 
 line is an intrastate line, but that is not all 
 there is. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I am speaking entirely as to New 
 York state. 
 [9 
 
 352 
 
 354 
 
 300 
 
14 
 
 poe Paper 4 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: I do not get the force of the dis- 
 tinction you are drawing, because the West Shore 
 Railroad is an intrastate line with respect to that 
 portion of the line that is in the state. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: Not as between New York and 
 
 357 Buffalo. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: No, not as between New York 
 and Buffalo. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: That was the point I was trying 
 to make. 
 Kixam. LaRoe: I see. 
 
 358 
 Mr. Paulding: There are other points in the 
 
 state of New York which have the same geogra- 
 phical position, not only in the southern part of 
 the state, but in the western part of the state, the 
 central and northern part of the state. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: How many of the railroads that 
 359 are here involved are physically totally intrastate 
 carriers? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: One. 
 Exam. LaRoe: Which one is that? 
 
 ‘Mr. Paulding: New York Central Railroad. 
 
 That is as to its New York state business. Of 
 
 360 course the New York Central Railroad, runs 
 through seven states. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Is there any railroad that is 
 here respondent that has its whole line within 
 New York state? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: Oh, yes, the Ulster & Delaware. 
 
(i) 
 
 Paper 4 361 
 Mr. Taylor: I appear for the Bath & Ham- 
 mondsport, a small branch of the Erie. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: There are several roads in this 
 proceeding which are not only entirely within the 
 state of New York, but the great bulk of their 
 income — 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Mr. Clark made that statement 362 
 clearly in regard to his road, and I was just won- 
 dering to what extent that is true of the others. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: That is true as to perhaps half 
 of the forty-eight roads which I have mentioned, 
 but they all do an interstate business. 
 
 Mr. Clark: The Long Island does not. 363 
 
 Mr. Gardner: The Long Island does an inter- 
 state business. The Long Island does an inter- 
 state passenger business. The tariffs show it. 
 
 ‘Mr. Paulding: With that short opening I will 
 eall Mr. Porter. 
 364 
 LeRoy B. Portser was thereupon called as 
 a witness, and having been duly sworn, testi- 
 fied as follows: 
 
 Direct Examination: 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding.) What is your occupa- 
 tion, Mr. Porter? A. Assistant Controller of the 
 New York Central. 
 
 Q. Have you secured from a number of rail- 
 roads in the state of New York, statements of 
 their intrastate revenue in the state for certain 
 periods as to passenger, and as to milk and cream 
 divided in that way? A. Yes, sir, I have. 
 
 365 
 
16 
 
 366 Paper 4 
 
 @. What rates have you? A. I have the Penn- 
 sylvania; the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western; 
 the New York, Ontario & Western; Long Island; 
 Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburg; the New York 
 Central; the Erie; the Lehigh Valley; the New 
 York, New Haven & Hartford; the Central of 
 New England and the Delaware & Hudson. — 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe.) Do you have that in ex- 
 hibit form? A. Why, some of them only came in 
 this morning and I haven’t had them typewritten. 
 
 367 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I have given Judge Hale a copy 
 of it, so far as it was prepared up to ten o’clock 
 this morning. 
 
 368 Hixam. LaRoe: Will you file it later as an ex- 
 
 hibit? 
 Mr. Paulding: Yes. 
 
 (The statement was thereupon received in evi- 
 dence, marked ‘* Defendants’ Exhibit No. 1, Wit- 
 ness Porter,’’ and is forwarded herewith.) 
 
 369 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding.) Is that divided as to 
 passenger revenue, so-called, and milk and cream 
 revenue? A. Yes, sir; it is. 
 
 Mr. Hale: I do not suppose, Mr. Examiner, it 1s 
 necessary to repeat? Our point is considered? 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Your fundamental objection will 
 370 »o all through the proceedings. Proceed, please. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding.) What was the total in- 
 trastate revenue, passenger, of these lines for the 
 calendar year 1919 as you have secured the fig- 
 ures? A. Why, I have not got the total passen- 
 ger, Mr. Paulding. I only have the total as to all 
 
17 
 
 Paper 4 
 of the revenue, which includes the passenger, ex- 
 cess baggage and milk and cream, and the total of 
 that for the year ended June 30th, 1920, was $55,- 
 605,322.48. ) | 
 (). Have you secured from the Pullman Com- 
 pany a statement of their intrastate earnings in 
 
 the state of New York during the year 1919?. 
 
 A. Yes, sir; we have a statement from the Pull- 
 man Company, which shows that their intrastate 
 earnings in the state of New York for the year 
 ended December 31st, 1919, was a total of $13,- 
 000,007.00, and that was before they had any bene- 
 fit of the 20 per cent increase in Pullman fares. 
 
 Q. Have you figures from the Pullman Com- 
 pany, or have you not, as to the six months fig- ° 
 
 ures for the first six months of 1920, which in- 
 cludes two months of the 20 per cent increase? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Where are those and what are they? A. The 
 total of those for the six months to June 30th, 
 1920, is $810,898.14. 
 
 Q. Now, take these three figures which you 
 have given, ‘Mr. Porter, the passenger revenues 
 intrastate in the state of New York, and the Pull- 
 man figures, will you say what, if the rate of in- 
 erease authorized by the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission had been in effect during the period 
 you have covered, would have been the difference 
 in the figures you have given and the figures as 
 they would be by adding 20 per cent? <A. Yes, 
 sir; on the passenger, excess baggage and milk 
 and cream, the effect is a loss of $11,121,066. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe.) That is on the basis 
 of the year? A. On the basis of the business 
 done for the year ended June 30th, 1920. 
 
 20 
 
 ‘371 
 
 as 
 New 
 
 374 
 
 375 
 
— 3876 
 
 377 
 
 378 : 
 
 380 
 
 18 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Q. May that then fairly be regarded as the an- 
 nual amount that is involved in this proceeding? 
 Does that represent the annual difference {be- 
 tween what the rates would be, if they were on 
 an interstate basis as compared with what they 
 are on the intrastate basis? A. Yes, sir; assum- 
 ing of course that the same amount of business is 
 done throughout. 
 
 Q. I just wanted to get in my mind an idea as 
 to the amount in controversy here, and as I un- 
 derstand you it is in the neighborhood of eleven 
 million dollars a year? A. That is on the passen- 
 ger, excess baggage and milk and cream, and in 
 addition to that the loss on the surcharge from 
 the figures which have been furnished by the 
 Pullman Company would mean about eight hun- 
 dred thousand dollars additional. 
 
 Q. About twelve million dollars, in round fig- 
 ures? A. About twelve million dollars, yes, sir. 
 
 @. Do you have any information showing how 
 g that figure of fifty-five million dollars which you 
 9 pave for the intrastate business, compares with 
 the total interstate business into and out of the 
 state of New York? A. I have not that, only for 
 the New York Central. I would say that the New 
 York Central’s intrastate business is about 35 
 per cent. 
 
 Q. That is to say—. A. Of their total passen- 
 ger business in the state of New York —their 
 total passenger business in the state of New York 
 is about 70 per cent of their total passenger rev- 
 enue. 
 
 (). Well, now, let me get that. That is import- 
 ant, if true. 
 
79 
 
 Paper 4 
 Mr. Paulding: I was coming to that. 
 
 Kixam. Le Roe: Pardon the interruption. Per- 
 haps I had better let you proceed. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding.) Now, your figures have 
 been based upon the assumption that the traffic is 
 the same? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And without taking into account any differ- 
 ence that may be made as between interstate and 
 intrastate fares, by a reduced rate or an increased 
 rate? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. The Examiner has asked you some ques- 
 tions as to the interstate rates. I show you a 
 paper. This is a carbon copy. I have used the 
 original and I ask you if you know what that is. 
 A. This is a statement of the annual and quar- 
 terly revenues received from milk and passenger 
 train service on steam railroads reporting to the 
 Public Service Commission of New York for the 
 year ending December 31st, 1919, and for the 
 quarter ended June 30th, 1920. 
 
 Q. That is for all the steam railroads in the 
 state reporting to the Public Service Commission, 
 is it not? A. As far as I know, it is. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I will say for the information 
 of the Examiner this is furnished me by the Pub- 
 lic Service Commission. 
 
 381 
 
 382 
 
 383 
 
 384 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding.) That shows the total 385 
 
 revenues of all of the roads — the total passenger 
 revenues for the year 1919 for all of the roads 
 reporting to the Public Service Commission? A. 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Making the total about $315,000,000? A. Yes. 
 
80 
 
 386 Paper 4 
 Mr. Paulding: That is all I wish to ask. I will 
 
 offer that and I will furnish copies. 
 
 (The statement was thereupon received in evi- 
 dence, marked ‘‘ Defendants’ Exhibit No. 2, Wit- 
 ness Porter ’’, and is forwarded herewith.) 
 
 387. QQ. (By Exam. LaRoe): That figure includes all 
 revenue, both state and interstate, does it— all 
 passenger revenue, both state and interstate? A. 
 Yes, sir. ) 
 
 Q. For example, includes interstate revenue — 
 
 Mr. Paulding: That is the total passenger rey- 
 enues. 
 
 ‘388 Exam. LeRoe: The question that I asked was 
 
 whether you have a figure, showing the total pas- 
 senger revenue, interstate between New York and 
 other states. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: No; the only figures we have 
 are the intrastate figures for New York and these 
 389 total figures. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Of course, the only interstate 
 passenger business that is here in issue is that 
 into and out of the state of New York, and you 
 have no figures showing what that is. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I have no figures showing what 
 390 that is. 
 
 Cross Examination: 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Hale.) I would like Mr. Porter to 
 be just a little more definite in how he arrives at 
 the estimate he has given as to what the effect, 
 for example, of an order of the Interstate Com- 
 
81 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 merce Commission, put into effect now, based 
 upon the figures he has given, would be annually 
 or otherwise. A. That is on a 20 per cent basis? 
 Of course, the figures which I have submitted are 
 the passenger revenues, excess baggage, milk and 
 cream on the basis of the tariffs as they now ex- 
 ist or before the 20 per cent increase was granted 
 by the Commission. Now, of course, by applying 
 to that amount 20 per cent, which was the increase 
 we would get under the Commission’s ruling, 
 why, that would give us approximately twelve 
 million dollars. 
 
 Q. Now, you are assuming in that — I think Mr. 
 Paulding was fair about that in his question and 
 I want to be quite sure —you are assuming that 
 the advanced rate for the intrastate service + 
 domestic service — would not diminish the traffic? 
 For instance, take the Pullman cars. You are 
 assuming that the revenue would be increased, 
 and are not assuming that people would use the 
 
 391 
 
 393 
 
 Pullman and pay twice as much for it. <A. No, _ 
 
 sir; not assuming that. These are the figures 
 
 that were compiled for the year ending June 30th, 
 1920. We have made no assumptions. 
 
 Q. When you go into the future, is not the as- 
 sumption, in order to raise this additional rev- 
 enue—is not the assumption necessary that the 
 number of people who use the Pullman will not 
 be diminished? In other words, a man wil: pay 
 twice as much for his Pullman and continue to 
 do that? A. That might make some difference. 
 I do not know as to that. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: I will ask Mr. Paulding to be 
 careful to see that copies of these exhibits are 
 21 
 
 "395 
 
82 
 
 6 Paper 4 
 furnished to all persons whose appearances are 
 entered here. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: Every one who wants one. 
 
 Mr. Adikes: Mr. Chairman, I wish to be entered 
 as appearing for the Jamaica Board of Trade. 
 
 397 Exam. LaRoe: What is the name? 
 
 Mr. Adikes: John Adikes, Chairman Transit 
 Committee of the Jamaica Board of Trade. 
 
 CuarLtes L. Hunter was thereupon called 
 as a witness, and having been duly sworn, 
 398 testified as follows: 
 
 Direct Examination: 
 
 Q. (By ‘Mr. Paulding.) What is your occupa- 
 tion? A. Assistant to Chairman, Trunk Line As- 
 sociation, Passenger Department. 
 
 Q. Have you been with the Trunk Line Asso- 
 
 399 ciation for a length of time? A. Some thirty 
 years. 
 
 Q. What positions? A. I have occupied sub- 
 stantially every position in that organization, 
 from statistician, rate clerk, secretary and assist- 
 ant to the Chairman. 
 
 Q. Has your experience in that position been 
 confined especially to passenger or freight, or has 
 
 400 it included both? A. Substantially and almost 
 exclusively to passenger traffic, sir. 
 
 Q. Has that experience given you an oppor- 
 tunity to become familiar with the passenger 
 condition of the different states, as to rates and 
 as to the physical conditions? A. It has, sir. 
 
83 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 (). And in the state of New York particularly? 
 ay Y Bs, Sir. 
 
 Q. Your office has been in New York most of 
 these years? A. Entirely. 
 
 Q. Are you familiar with General Order 28 of 
 the Director General, Mr. Hunter? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That was an order fixing passenger fares 
 throughout the country, was it not? A. It was. 
 
 Q. At what rate? A. On a basis of not less 
 than three cents per mile. In other words, where 
 any rates were less than three cents per mile they 
 were advanced to that minimum. 
 
 Q. Did that affect any rates within the state of 
 New York? A. It did, sir. 
 
 @. For instance, what rate? A. It had the ef- 
 fect of increasing the intrastate rates in the state 
 of New York which ranged from two to three 
 cents per mile, to a minimum of three cents per 
 mile. : 
 
 @. Does that traffic rate continue? What is 
 the present rate of fare for passengers within the 
 state of New York? A. The present fare for pas- 
 sengers interstate in the state of New York is 
 3.6 cents per mile. 
 
 Q. And intrastate? A. Three cents per mile. 
 
 Q. How long has that interstate fare been in 
 effect? A. Since August 26th, 1920. 
 
 Q. Are you familiar with the status in the stat- 
 ute of New York governing the issuance of mile- 
 age books? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What is that? A. It requires that a mile- 
 age book be issued in denomination of five hun- 
 dred or a thousand miles, good for bearer on the 
 basis of two cents per mile. 
 
 A401 
 
 402 
 
 403 
 
 404 
 
 405 
 
406 
 
 407 
 
 408 
 
 409 
 
 84: 
 
 Paper 4 
 Mr. Paulding: At this point I will ask to have 
 read in evidence Section 57 of the Railroad Law 
 of the state of New York and Section 60 of the 
 law of the state of New York. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Those sections are quoted in 
 your petition. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: They are quoted in my petition. 
 I will furnish copies. 
 
 (). (By Mr. Paulding) Has there been any ac- 
 tion of any kind by the state of New York towards 
 requiring the re-establishment of mileage books? 
 A. Not as yet. Me 
 
 Mr. Hale: I wrote a letter to Mr. Paulding. 
 There are several things — for example, the mile- 
 age book, the checking of baggage, such as bicy- 
 cles and several other things, which rest exclu- 
 sively on the state statute and I made the sug- 
 gestion to him that I bring a summary proceeding 
 under our statutes, making all operating rail- 
 roads defendants, not on the ground that they 
 were jointly interested in any act, but on the 
 ground that they are all jointly interested in the 
 principle involved and suggesting that we pro- 
 ceed in a non-technical way and have the Court 
 decide the question. 
 
 Exam. La Roe: It would be in the nature of a 
 proceeding to require the carriers to show cause. 
 It would be a mandamus proceeding. 
 
 Mr. Hale: It is called a summary proceeding, 
 but it is mandamus really. Here is the Ulster & 
 Delaware made an application to the Commission 
 
85 
 
 Paper 4 
 some years ago, on the theory that the Commis- 
 sion had power to increase this two cents a mile 
 under the mileage book law, and the Court held 
 that the Public Service Commission had that 
 power, and acting under it they raised that rate 
 to 2.9 cents per mile. In other words, if they 
 were going to charge 30 cents for the book, there 
 would not be any object in issuing it. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Then it is the intention of your 
 Commission to see to it that the railroads are re- 
 quired to conform to all of the provisions of the 
 state statutes? 
 
 Mr. Hale: It is our intention to take that case 
 in the Court of the state of New York, with full 
 knowledge, of course, that if the state goes 
 wrong — 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: I see. Proceed. 
 
 Mr. Hale: Does the Examiner know what we 
 have had in this state? The Federal judges de- 
 cided that the state had authority over state mat- 
 ters, and a state judge deciding that it did not. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Proceed, please, Mr. Paulding. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding.) Did Order 28 of the 
 Director-General concern mileage books in any 
 way, Mr. Hunter? A. Yes, sir; it did. 
 
 411 
 
 412 
 
 413 
 
 414 
 
 Q. What happened as to that? <A. It directed 45 
 
 that all fares should be brought, as I have said 
 before, to a basis of three cents per mile, and 
 mileage books were on sale at that time, generally 
 on the basis anywhere from two cents to two and 
 one-quarter cents a mile, and those books were 
 
 22 
 
416 
 
 417 
 
 418 
 
 419 
 
 420 
 
 86 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 continued to be honored on the basis of the full 
 tariff rates, namely three cents per mile, and in 
 1918 the Director-General decided that they 
 should be withdrawn, and a so-called interchange- 
 able script book sold in denominations of $15, $30 
 and $90, at their face value, and be accepted for 
 transportation on the basis of the full tariff fares, 
 and since Federal control those book have been 
 kept on sale. 
 
 (). But the mileage book as such is not sold to- 
 day? A. The mileage book as such is abolished in 
 all parts of the country. There are none of them 
 in effect or on sale whatever. 
 
 (). As to these script books, what is the fare that 
 is being taken when they are presented to-day? 
 A. On interstate, 3.6 cents per mile, and on intra- 
 state, in New York state, three cents per mile. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) What are those seript 
 books? A. Nothing more or less than the equiva- 
 lent of money and they are accepted for transpor- 
 tation fares, baggage and various other transpor- 
 tation charges. In other words, more as a matter 
 of convenience than really money value. In other 
 words, their value they have to whoever buys 
 them is the fact that they afford a facility to the 
 frequent traveler. 
 
 @. Do you have any objection to the continua- 
 tion of these? A. No, sir. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Are they involved in any way 
 here in this proceeding? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: Except as to the price, that is 
 all. 
 
 EKixam. LaRoe: As to the fare level? 
 
87 
 
 Paper 4 
 Mr. Paulding: As to the fare level, that is all. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) Your experience, of 
 course, has made you familiar with the effect of 
 the geographical situation the State of New York 
 has on the passenger rate structure in the east? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What is that effect? A. Well, the effect is 
 that New York and Buffalo, being such important 
 commercial centers that they practically are a 
 fundamental key, you might say, to the entire 
 rate fabrie of this country. You cannot disturb 
 the rate between New York and Buffalo or Albany 
 and Buffalo, for instance, in this particular in- 
 stance and make it three cents a mile against 3.6 
 cents a mile, without very seriously affecting the 
 entire rate fabric of the country. 
 
 Q. Will you enlarge that a little bit and show 
 how and in what way, as a practical matter, that 
 statement of yours works out? <A. Passengers 
 ean take advantage of the lower intrastate fares 
 of the New York Central from New York and 
 other points to Buffalo, to secure through trans- 
 portation at less than the interstate fares on com- 
 binations, by buying tickets to Buffalo and repur- 
 chasing therefrom, as ilustrated by the following 
 examples: 
 
 Through fare New York to Cleveland, which is 
 interstate, $20.52. Combination New York to 
 Buffalo, intrastate, $13.16, Buffalo to Cleveland, 
 interstate, $6.56; total $19.72, or on repurchase a 
 saving of 80 cents on every ticket. 
 
 Q. And as to the surcharge on Pullman, is there 
 a difference as to that? A. With respect to the 
 surcharge on Pullman, not being collected in the 
 
 421 
 
 422 
 
 423 
 
 424 
 
 425 
 
426 
 
 427 
 
 428 
 
 429 
 
 430 
 
 88 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 State of New York, it means a passenger riding 
 from New York to Buffalo in a sleeping car is 
 enabled to save $1.25, which is the rate on which 
 the surcharge is based, while other lines direct 
 between New York and Buffalo, being intrastate, 
 passengers would not be enabled to get through at 
 less than paying the $1.25 surcharge. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) Does that mean on the 
 through passenger traffic from New York to 
 Cleveland, the interstate fare would be defeated 
 to the extent of $2.05 for a passenger traveling in 
 a sleeping car? A. Yes. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) What are the roads run- 
 ning between New York and Buffalo — the main 
 railroads? A. The New York Central, as you 
 have claimed, wholly in the State of New York. 
 The other lines are the Delaware, Lackawanna & 
 Western, the Erie, the Lehigh winllor a the 
 West rite 
 
 (. Are these interstate lines? A. All lines ex- 
 cept the New York Central are interstate. 
 
 Q. As to other points in the State of New 
 York, is Syracuse an important commercial cen- 
 ter? <A. Yes, it is. 
 
 (). Is Rochester an important city? <A. It is 
 
 Q. Is Ogdensburg a large city? A. It is, in the 
 northern section of the State. 
 
 Mr. Hale: I am glad to hear that evidence. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe.) Is there any evidence 
 showing that as a fact what you fear is really hap- 
 pening? That is to say, that passengers are stop- 
 ping off and rebuying? A. Mr. Commissioner, 
 
89 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 we have some cases, but this arrangement as you 
 can appreciate has only been in effect a very short 
 time, since August 26th, and comes in the season 
 when the Labor Day traffic was on, which was ex- 
 ceedingly heavy, and we are not in a position at 
 the moment to give any very concrete cases, but 
 from our general knowledge and experience in the 
 situation, we know that there are shoppers or bar- 
 gain hunters in transportation, the same as there 
 is in other lines of business, and particularly on 
 the part of frequent travelers. For instance, 
 those engaged in commercial pursuits, so that we 
 feel more than confident that these advantages 
 that are possessed by the New York Central Rail- 
 road are going to be taken advantage of by 
 passengers to a considerable extent. 
 
 Q. I do not understand that you directly 
 answered Mr. Paulding’s inquiry, which is one I 
 am considerably interested in, and that is the ex- 
 tent to which, if any, the lower rates between 
 Buffalo and Albany will affect the through passen- 
 ger rates between the east and the west. Will it, 
 in your judgment, require a reduction in the inter- 
 state fares below their present level, or will it 
 merely facilitate the defeat of the interstate fares 
 through repurchase? A. Well, Mr. Examiner, in 
 that regard, in addition to the possible manipu- 
 lation of the rates on the part of passengers, as I 
 have said before, a situation of this kind is very 
 serious, in that there are other arteries of travel 
 that are affected by it. For example, between 
 New York and Chicago, as I explained before, 
 Buffalo is a very important gate-way. The New 
 York Central operates via that gate-way. These 
 
 23 
 
 432 
 
 434 
 
436 
 
 437 
 
 438 
 
 439 
 
 440 
 
 90 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 opportunities for repurchase are there. Now, 
 there are other lines operating via various other 
 eate-ways, through Pittsburg, Salamanca, Wheel- 
 ing, through Parkersburg, and the lines being on 
 their own bottoms, under existing conditions, and 
 competition being an element in the conduct of 
 the properties, you can see that sooner or later 
 there is going to be an agitation on the part of 
 these lines which are adversely affected, to bring 
 about some parity of conditions that exist under 
 a normal basis of making interstate rates, thut is 
 one of the things that is involved in this whole 
 situation. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) Now Mr. Hunter, 
 going to the New York-Buffalo situation, what is” 
 the intrastate rate between New York and 
 Buffalo? A. The intrastate rate between New 
 York and Buffalo is $13.16 over the New York 
 Central. 
 
 (). And take the other lines between New York 
 and Buffalo, what is the rate under present inter- 
 state rates over those lines? A. $14.27. 
 
 (). All of those rates being larger? A. They are. 
 
 Q. Assume, if you will, that the New York State 
 rates continue in effect, three cents a mile, what 
 will be the ultimate effect on the other rates be- 
 tween New York and Buffalo? A. Well, judging 
 by past experience, I should say that they might 
 net endure for any great length of time. 
 
 . Would they have to meet the New York 
 
 State rate? A. They would, sir. - 
 
 (). Decrease interstate rates to that extent? A. 
 I think it would, inevitably. 
 
th 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Q. Prior to Federal control and of General 
 Order 28, what was the basis of the rates inter- 
 state between New York and Chicago? A. The 
 rate was on the basis of two and one-half cents per 
 mile and no combinations over any intermediate 
 points that reduced it. 
 
 Q. Did the rate between Buffalo and Albany 
 have any effect on the through rate at that time? 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 (J). Assume that the three-cent rate from New 
 York to Albany were continued in effect and the 
 two-cent rate were in effect between Albany and 
 Buffalo, would that asi an intrastate combination 
 affect the interstate rate between New York and 
 Buffalo? A. Yes, sir; it would reduce the rate 
 from $13.16 to $10.21 combination. I might say 
 for the record, being on the basis of three cents 
 a mile New York and Albany and two cents a mile 
 between Albany and Buffalo. 
 
 (). If a mileage book were required to be sold 
 in the State of New York at two cents a mile, 
 would that affect in any way the through rate 
 intrastate between New York and Buffalo and the 
 through rate interstate between New York and 
 Buffalo? <A. It would have the effect of establish- 
 ing a rate between New York and Buffalo of $8.78, 
 and taking New York to Chicago, for illustrative 
 purposes the through rate interstate is $32.67, 
 while the combination of the New York-Buftalo 
 2-cent mileage book, $8.78, the Buffalo-Chicago 
 interstate fare of $18.81 would establish a through 
 rate of $27.59, or a difference of $5.08 per ticket. 
 
 Q. Now, answering me from your experience in 
 the passenger business in all these years you have 
 
 441 
 
 443 
 
 444 
 
 445 
 
446 
 
 44 
 
 coe | 
 
 448 
 
 449 
 
 92 
 
 Paper 4 
 been in it, would that or would it not be the in- 
 evitable effect of the sale of mileage books, or the 
 continuance of the three cent fare in the State of 
 New York? <A. Beyond question. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) Is it possible to police 
 your passenger traffic in such a way as to prevent 
 abuse of the interstate fare? In other words, is 
 there any practical way to prevent a man who 
 wants to repurchase a ticket at Buffalo from doing 
 so? A. I should say, as a practical matter, Mr. 
 Examiner, only get a very small proportion of 
 such cases, for the reason that most of the service 
 at Buffalo is broken. Itis a point where a change 
 of motive power is made and passengers have 
 opportunity, if they are so disposed, to Jump into 
 the station and get a ticket from Buffalo to their 
 interstate destination. Similarly, reversing it, 
 you have the same situation to New York. 
 
 ®. If the basis of $13.16 continues from New 
 York to Buffalo via your line, whereas the basis 
 of $14.20 is continued between the same points 
 via the other routes, is that difference, in your 
 judgment, enough to divert a substantial amount 
 of passenger traffic from the interstate routes to 
 the intrastate route? A. I would answer that by | 
 stating that under normal condition of rates, the 
 greater proportion of the traffic between New 
 York and Buffalo moves intrastate over the New 
 York Central Railroad, and by having a lower 
 rate, logically the traffic would very materially 
 increase over that line. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) Do you know of your 
 own experience in the last few weeks what has 
 
93 
 
 Paper 4 
 happened in that regard, Mr. Hunter, as to 
 whether the traffic has decreased upon the inter- 
 state lines or increased on the intrastate lines 
 between those points? A. I simply know what 
 the traffic officials have told me, that the business 
 is being diverted to the other lines. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) Are you able to say 
 whether the interstate railroads have taken that 
 matter up with the New York Central and com- 
 plained aboutitinany way? A. Yes, sir; they have 
 complained about it, but in view of this proceed- 
 ing and the matter being, you might say, in abey- 
 ance, awaiting the outcome of it, why, they are 
 simply suffering the situation. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) In other words, the 
 interstate rate is being charged by the interstate 
 railroads, and the intrastate rate by the intra- 
 state road? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Hale: I suppose your efforts are somewhat 
 altruistic, therefore. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: No; I would not say that, Judge 
 Hale. It goes further than the mere matter of 
 rates. The matter of equipment and the matter 
 of service is involved. 
 
 Mr. Hale: You are not appearing here selfishly 
 for the New York Central. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: If I were appearing only for 
 the New York Central, I would still complain of 
 
 that rate and that situation. The situation as to 
 the New York Central is a very serious one. 
 
 24. 
 
 451 
 
 452 
 
 453 
 
 454 
 
 455 
 
456 
 
 457 
 
 458 
 
 459 
 
 460 
 
 94. 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) Take the New York Cen- 
 tral — take the two points now, Mr. Hunter, be- 
 tween New York and Buffalo, the stations upon 
 the line of the New York Central, the intrastate 
 road, and the stations upon the lines of the inter- 
 state roads, as to the other roads which you have 
 mentioned, do the conditions which you have men- 
 tioned as to rates apply only to Buffalo and New 
 York, or do they apply to all the stations in that 
 territory? A. They apply to every common point 
 in the State of New York, Utica, Syracuse, 
 Rochester, Buffalo, Ogdensburg, Plattsburg. I 
 say practically every point where the New York 
 Central is a factor, and then I should say prac- 
 tically the entire State. 
 
 Q. Do those conditions or do not those condi- 
 tions affect stations other than the stations which 
 you have mentioned in the state of New York? 
 A. They do, yes, sir. 
 
 (J. Will you say in what way they do? A. Well, 
 they have the effect of establishing lower rates 
 over the New York Central than via the lines do- 
 ing the interstate business. 
 
 (). And as a practical matter, does that make 
 any difference to a man going, say, from Ithaca, 
 which is not on the main line, to Chicago? In 
 what way would that happen? A. Well, he would 
 in all probability take advantage of the lower rate 
 to Buffalo and repurchase. 
 
 (). Prior to Federal control, following the ques- 
 tion asked by Mr. LaRoe a few moments ago, do 
 you know the experience that was had on the ex- 
 tra fare trains between New York and Chicago, 
 as to the practice of passengers beating the extra 
 
95 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 fare? What did they do and was it a practical 
 matter? A. They charge an excess fare on cer- 
 tain trains operating between Chicago and New 
 York, but no excess fare was charged between Chi- 
 cago and Albany, so some passengers —in fact, 
 it grew to quite a practice, would buy a ticket to 
 Albany and then buy their ticket from Albany to 
 New York, and in that way tried to evade the ex- 
 cess fare. The conductors had instructions under 
 those conditions that if they could determine if 
 the passenger was a through passenger, which 
 they were able to do in a good many cases, why, 
 he charged him the excess fare, notwithstanding 
 he was trying to evade it. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe.) There was no extra fare 
 from Chicago to Albany? <A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding.) Was that a well known 
 common practice? <A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Practiced by many people? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And something that could not be overcome? 
 A. It could not. 
 
 Q. In spite of the efforts of the railroad com- 
 pany to do it? A. Mr. Paulding, in connection 
 with that question of manipulation, it was very 
 evident in connection with the central states, 
 when they had two cents a mile there, so much so 
 
 461 
 
 462 
 
 463 
 
 that the Interstate Commerce commission called AGS 
 
 upon these carriers to devise ways and means for 
 getting the interstate rates, and they had circu- 
 lars issued to their conductors and agents. They 
 even had to break the lines at the state borders in 
 order to prevent it. 
 
466 
 
 467 
 
 468 
 
 469 
 
 470 
 
 96 
 
 Paper 4 
 .Q. Did that have any effect as a practical mat- 
 
 _ter? Of course, efforts were made, but did it 
 
 amount to anything? A. I understand in a very 
 small number of cases were they able to protect 
 themselves and get the interstate revenue. I 
 might also present another case here, which is 
 particularly interesting: Taking the line of the 
 New York Central and the West Shore, operat- 
 ing on opposite sides of the Hudson river between 
 New York and Albany, with a substantially like 
 distance, the fare of the New York Central, $4.27, 
 was not advanced as against the increased fare 
 of $5.13 over the West Shore Railroad, which is 
 interstate, while the fares in the past had been 
 the same by both lines. 
 
 Q. The West Shore Railroad —do you know 
 what control that is under? A. Controlled by the 
 New York Central, under lease. 
 
 (J). And operated by them? A. And operated 
 by them. ! 
 
 Q. Does the West Shore go all the way to Buf- 
 falo? A. It does —practically parallels the New 
 York Central for the entire distance. 
 
 (). Now, these conditions as to the main p)ints 
 which you have mentioned occur practically at 
 every station in the state of New York? A. I 
 should say at every station. 
 
 (). That is if the three cents fare is continued in 
 New York that it is not only probable, but possi- 
 ble that the interstate fare is defeated by practi- 
 cally every passenger who goes in or out of the 
 state of New York? A. Yes, sir, I think that is 
 going to be the inevitable effect. 
 
 (). Will you say what the through fares are be- 
 tween a few of the principal points in the eastern 
 
97 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 country, taking some of these instances which 
 you have given to me, from points within the 
 state of New York to points without, Buffalo to 
 Chicago, Buffalo to Boston, etc.? A. Well, the 
 through fare, Albany to Chicago, today, is $29.48; 
 combination Albany to Buffalo intrastate, $8.89 ; 
 Buffalo to Chicago $18.81, $27.70; a difference of 
 $1.78. 
 
 To Boston — Buffalo to Boston, using the same 
 combination, we have a rate interstate of $17.90; 
 and combination, $16.12, or a difference of $1.78. 
 Now, that is true of every rate on the Albany- 
 Buffalo line, no matter where you are going, east 
 or west, all the way to the Pacific Coast. In fact, 
 around the world. 
 
 Q. In other words, the Albany—Buffalo rate is 
 the key to the eastern rate situation? A. Albany-— 
 Buffalo is the key to the New England situatior: 
 and the New York—Buffalo is the key to the bal- 
 ance of the country. 
 
 @. And if the rates remain as they are inter- 
 state will that inevitably affect the intrastate rate 
 as a matter of competition? <A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Will it bring it down or leave it alone? A. 
 Bring it down. 
 
 Q. To the level of the state rate? A. To the 
 level, at least, of the combination and to the state 
 rate, I should say. 
 
 Q. I interrupted you. Goon. A. We will take 
 from Philadelphia to Albany. The interstate rate 
 is $8.37; on a combination over New York, $7.51; 
 a difference of 85 cents. That means everything 
 south of New York is 85 cents, as far as Albany 
 is concerned. Albany to Montreal $9.04; com- 
 
 29 
 
 AT) 
 
 AT2 
 
 473 | 
 
 474. 
 
 475 
 
 ; 
 
476 
 
 477 
 
 478 
 
 479 
 
 480 
 
 98 
 
 Paper 4 
 bination $7.89; difference $1.15. The Delaware & 
 Hudson tell me that that rate is being manipu- 
 lated very considerably. In other words, passen- 
 gers are buying to Rouses Point and repurchas- 
 ing. 
 
 Q. Take the Ontario & Western Railroad, run- 
 ning into New York, interstate to Cornwall and 
 intrastate from Cornwall to the west side of the 
 river? A. Take New York to Oswego, the On- 
 tario & Western rate is $11.75, whereas the com- 
 bination over Cornwall makes it $10.11, a differ- 
 ence of $1.64. 
 
 Q. Do you or not know whether the Ontario & 
 Western is to-day selling any through tickets 
 between Oswego & New York? <A. We are ad- 
 vised they are practically selling no through 
 tickets, but passengers are taking advantage of 
 this Cornwall combination. 
 
 @. (By Exam. LaRoe) Is there a break in the 
 service of Cornwall, or does the passenger have 
 to leave the train? A. I understand they buy 
 their tickets to Cornwall and pay their fare on 
 the train. All trains stop at Cornwall. 
 
 Mr. Andrus: Passengers have ample time to 
 get tickets leaving the Ontario & Western. I de- 
 sire to state that is being done largely by local 
 passengers—not only confined to through pas- 
 sengers, but local passengers from Cornwall 
 north are to a considerable extent availing them- 
 selves of that situation. 
 
 The Witness: You see, Mr. Examiner, as the 
 distance increases the spread becomes wider, and 
 the example I gave you on Oswego was a long 
 distance point. 
 
oY 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) Have you any knowledge 
 as to whether the Long Island is to-day selling 
 any interstate tickets? A. I understand substan- 
 tially none at all. In other words, passengers 
 are buying to New York and repurchasing. 
 
 (). So the condition is a practicable and not a 
 theoretical one? A. A very serious one. 
 
 Cross-Hxamination: 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark) May I ask you whether the 
 Long Island ever did sell any interstate tickets 
 in any amount? A. The Long Island, as you are 
 aware, covers a very large section of this state, 
 and they do a very considerable interstate busi- 
 ness. Relatively, they do as large a business :.s 
 other lines similarly situated. 
 
 Q. Do you know how much they took in in in- 
 terstate tickets in any year? A. No. 
 
 @. Do you know whether they took in a con- 
 siderable amount? A. I do not know, but I un- 
 derstood Mr. Porter — 
 
 Mr. Paulding: During the year 1919 it was over 
 one million dollars interstate passenger business. 
 
 The Witness: That is on the record here. I 
 understood Mr. Porter to say about one million 
 dollars. 
 
 481 
 
 482 
 
 483. 
 
 484 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark) Have they ever done that Ags 
 
 before? Do you know? Have you got the fig- 
 ures before 1919? 
 
 . Exam. LaRoe: I would like to have the record 
 show for the last two or three years exactly what 
 the Long Island interstate traffic amounted to. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: That will be done. 
 
486 
 
 487 
 
 488 
 
 439 
 
 490 
 
 100 
 
 Paper 4 
 Re-direct examination: 
 
 (J. (By Mr. Paulding) In the matter of commu- 
 tation tickets, have you anything to say as to 
 that? A. With respect to commutation fares 
 which were also advanced twenty per cent inter- 
 state under the authority of the Commission, 
 similar conditions exist as in connection with one 
 way passenger fares, with the result that taking 
 for illustrative purposes in New York, New Jer- 
 sey, Connecticut suburban districts, commuters 
 living in New York State are traveling at the old 
 fares, while the commuters residing in New Jer- 
 sey and Connecticut are paying the increased 
 commutation fares, the former being intrastate, 
 while the latter are interstate, and all of these 
 commuters are doing business in the city of New 
 York. Mr. Examiner, further touching upon the 
 commutation situation, as also in connection with 
 the one way passenger fares, where illustration 
 was given as between the New York Central and 
 the West Shore Railroad between New York and 
 Albany, there are in effect commutation fares as 
 far north as Poughkeepsie on both lines, which 
 prior to August 26, 1920, between common points 
 connected by ferries, were the same, and the tick- 
 ets were honored optionally on either road, but in 
 view of the increase not having been approved 
 by the Public Service Commission, it results in 
 the situation under which the commutation fares 
 of the New York Central Railroad remain un- 
 changed, while the West Shore Railroad fares on 
 account of being interstate have been advanced, 
 and if the interchangeable arrangement is con- 
 tinued, passengers will naturally buy New York 
 
101 
 
 Paper 4 491 
 Central commutation tickets in order to obtain 
 advantages of the lower fares, which in turn has 
 the effect of defeating the fares of the West 
 Shore Railroad. 
 
 Q. (By Examiner LaRoe) What is the ter- 
 ritorial region involved there? A. New York isa 
 
 terminal, 492 
 
 (). Where does this commutation traffic come 
 from? <A. Well, it comes from the outlying dis- 
 tricts here, New Jersey, Connecticut and New 
 York. Now, the New York Central and the West 
 Shore are parallel with the Hudson river here 
 and they have a commutation fabric rate that 
 extends as far north as Poughkeepsie. Now, on 
 either side of the river there are important sta- 
 tions, and the commutation rates from these sta- 
 tions to New York are the same, and in the past 
 the tickets over either road have been good. 
 
 Q. Well, Poughkeepsie is not on both sides of 
 the river, is it? A. No, but I said connected by A904 
 ferry. 
 
 Q. And the commuter could go from Pough- 
 keepsie to New York by crossing the river to the 
 West Shore by ferry and then coming down on 
 the west side of the river? A. Yes, optionally, 
 or the West Shore passenger could cross the river 
 and come down on the New York Central. 
 
 Q. What would be the object of the Poughkeep- 495 
 sie passenger in crossing the river and coming 
 down on the West Shore? A. On account of more 
 accommodating train service at times, and vice 
 versa — gives the maximum service at the same 
 rate. Now, manifestly if the West Shore rates 
 
 26 
 
 493 
 
496 
 
 497 
 
 498 
 
 AGG 
 
 102 
 
 Paper 4 
 are increased 20 per cent, and this point that is 
 optional, Poughkeepsie—the optional arrange- 
 ment is continued —the passengers will buy New 
 York Central tickets. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) Is there a, situation 
 where any roads running in or out of the city 
 and state, has commutation rates, both interstate 
 and intrastate on the same train? A. Yes, sir; a 
 similar condition also exists as to commutation 
 fares on the New York, New Haven & Hartford 
 Railroad, as outlined in connection with one way 
 passenger fares, in that a commuter, traveling on 
 the New Haven trains to Portchester, N. Y., and 
 located in the same seat with another commuter 
 from New York to Greenwich, Conn., the next 
 station beyond, the passenger to Portchester is 
 traveling on a commutation ticket on the basis of 
 the old fare, while the other passenger to Green- 
 wich is paying the 20 per cent increase. | 
 
 (). (By Exam. LaRoe) What is the difference in 
 amount? Do you have the figures? How much 
 would that amount to on a monthly ticket? A. 
 The Portchester fare is $10.89 and the Green- 
 wich, Conn., fare $13.47. 
 
 Q. By Mr. Paulding) And the distance between 
 the two? A. Only 2.4 miles distance. 
 
 (). And that applies as far east as New Haven, 
 does it not? <A. Yes, sir; the suburban zone of 
 the New Haven line extends as far east as New 
 Haven. 
 
 Q. Now, as to the surcharge upon Pullman 
 space, will you state what the effect of that is as 
 
103 
 
 Paper 4 
 to passengers in the state of New York and pas- 
 sengers interstate? A. The Interstate Commerce 
 Commission authorized a surcharge for space 
 occupied by passengers traveling in parlor and 
 sleeping cars on the basis of 50 per cent of the 
 Pullman rate, but the Public Service Commission 
 did not approve it and hence taking the New 
 York-Buffalo situation for illustrative purposes, 
 a passenger occupying a lower berth in a sleeping 
 car over the New York Central Railroad, does 
 
 o01 
 
 502 
 
 not pay the surcharge of $1.25, while such sur- 
 
 charge collection is made from passengers travel- 
 ing over the other lines between the same points, 
 and which has the effect of further widening the 
 disparity between the cost of the trip where a 
 sleeping car is used by the other lines operating 
 between the same points. There are through pas- 
 sengers destined to or from points west of Buf- 
 falo, as for example, Chicago, who only purchase 
 their sleeping car accommodations as far as But- 
 falo, on account of the surcharge not being made 
 there. The New York Central Railroad in New 
 York state, it extends no equal conditions under 
 which passengers may journey that way at less 
 cost than passengers traveling in sleeping cars 
 ‘over the other lines operating between New York 
 and Chicago. I have figured the entire situation 
 here, taking the difference in the passenger fare 
 surcharge and war tax, and I find that between 
 New York and Buffalo the total for the New York 
 Central is $16.91, and for all the other lines 
 $19.46; or, in other words, taking into account the 
 difference in the lower rate of the New York 
 Central and the addition of the surcharge a pas- 
 
 503 
 
 504 
 
104 
 
 6 Paper 4 
 
 ‘Senger is enabled to travel from New York to 
 Buffalo in a lower berth in a sleeping car for 
 $2.55 less than by all the other lines operating 
 between those points, and the same comparison 
 on Chicago, assuming that the passenger travels 
 west of Buffalo in a coach. In other words, only 
 
 _._ in a sleeping car between New York and Buffalo, 
 
 SON G91 15 
 
 Q. Now, going back for a moment, Mr. Hunter, 
 to the competitive situation in New York with 
 these different railroads, how many roads reach 
 Syracuse, for instance, from the city of New 
 York? <A. There are three lines, New York Cen- 
 tral, West Shore and Delaware, Lackawanna & 
 
 508 Western. 
 
 . Two interstate and one intrastate? A. The 
 intrastate and the two latter interstate. 
 
 (). And Rochester? A. There are four lines, 
 one of which, the New York Central, is intra- 
 state, while the other three lines, the West Shore, 
 the Erie and Lehigh Valley are interstate. 
 
 509 =. At Ogdensburgh there is a similar situation, 
 iis there not? A. Yes; I think I have Ogdensburg 
 here. The same situation — similar situation. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) Do the Lehigh Valley 
 and Lackawanna have a heavy passenger traffic 
 from New York to Buffalo? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 510 Q. The Lehigh Valley runs the Black Diamond 
 Kixpress? A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And a number of other special trains? <A. 
 
 Well, they have accommodating service between 
 
 New York and Buffalo. Of course, they do not 
 
 operate anything like the service of the New 
 
105 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 York Central. The Lackawanna has trains be- 
 tween New York and Buffalo. 
 
 Q. How about the Erie? A. The Erie as well. 
 
 (). Reverting to this subject of commutation 
 fares, there is a very heavy commutation traffic 
 into the city of New York from almost all direc- 
 tions? A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That comes, part of it from New Jersey, 
 
 part from Long Island, part from Connecticut, 
 
 part from New York. A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (). Has the 20 per cent been applied already to 
 all commutation business to New York except that 
 originating in the state of New York? A. Yes, 
 sir, effective August 26, 1920. 
 
 (). Approximately what percentage, just as a 
 rough estimate, of the total commutation business 
 into New York has had the 20 per cent imposed 
 upon it? That would include, of course, Con- 
 necticut and New Jersey? <A. I haven’t those 
 figures, Mr. Examiner, but will be very glad to 
 supply them for the record. 
 
 Q. Well, New Jersey commutation traffic into 
 New York is very heavy, is it not? A. Very, yes, 
 sir. 
 
 Mr. Clark: I think the Long Island is the 
 heaviest. 
 
 Mr. Taylor: Mr. Examiner, I would like to eall 
 your attention to one point. That is there are 
 some points in New York state from which the 
 commutation traffic to New York is through the 
 state of New Jersey. Some of them are quite sub- 
 stantial as commutation points, and yet they are 
 so located as to be adjacent to stations which have 
 
 27 
 
 511 
 
 512 
 
 513 
 
 514 
 
 515 
 
516 
 
 517 
 
 518 
 
 519 
 
 520 
 
 106 
 
 Paper 4 
 the intrastate commutation service to New York 
 City. For example, Nyack on the Northern Rail- 
 road of New Jersey, operated by the Erie, is con- 
 nected by ferry with Tarrytown on the New York 
 Central, and the service from Nyack is largely 
 suburban service, while the Erie to New York 
 is interstate. The service from Tarrytown to 
 New York over the New York Central is intra- 
 state. There are other places similarly situated. 
 
 The Witness: It is very true of the West Shore 
 Railroad. They have a very heavy suburban 
 commuting business. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Is there any way the Nyack 
 passengers can defeat the interstate fare? 
 
 Mr. Taylor: They can cross by ferry to Tarry- 
 town, landing near the New York Central station 
 in Tarrytown. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Do you know whether that is 
 done or not? 
 
 -Mr. Taylor: Ido not know. It has hardly been 
 in effect long enough. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) Following those ques- 
 tions as to commutation tickets, Mr. Hunter, can 
 you state from your experience as to whether 
 there is competition between the stations in the 
 commuting zones in New York, Connecticut and 
 New Jersey, the localities endeavoring to obtain 
 more business or more inhabitants by reason of 
 railroad rates? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What have you to say as to that? A. Well, 
 I will say with respect to commutation business, 
 
107 
 
 Paper 4 
 there is competition to the extent that those re- 
 siding in one locality are interested to the extent 
 that they want to have rates that are reasonably 
 fair to them as in contrast with persons living in 
 other localities, similarly situated. 
 
 (). I want to know whether or not the fact that 
 lower competitive rates are given to one locality 
 in one part of the country and another locality in 
 another part, both going to a common point for 
 business has any effect on making people live i» 
 one place or the other? A. I think that that would 
 naturally have a very considerable effect. For in- 
 stance, a passenger who lives in New Jersey to- 
 day and formerly had a commutation rate of $10, 
 is now paying $12, whereas the commuter who is 
 more fortunately situated and living in the state 
 of New York is still paying $10. Now, that neces- 
 sarily has an influence on other persons who are 
 thinking of going out of the city to live and locat- 
 ing where the rate is the cheapest. I should say 
 _to that extent there is real competition on com- 
 mutation traffic as between localities. 
 
 Q. It is only incidental, but the question of war 
 tax means a great deal, does it not, in these 
 matters? <A. Yes, sir; the United States Govern- 
 ment is an interested party in that relation. 
 
 Mr. Hale: Any more than to get all they can? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: That is a good deal for the 
 Government now-a-days. 
 
 Mr. Hale: The higher the rate, the higher the 
 taxes. ! 
 
 The Witness: That is what we are working for. 
 
 521 
 
 52? 
 
 524. 
 
 525 
 
at 
 
 108 
 
 Paper 4 
 Mr. Paulding: I think that is all I have to ask. 
 
 Mr. Hale: I want to ask just one or two funda- 
 mental questions. 
 
 Mr. Griffin: I would like to ask the witness a 
 couple of questions. 
 
 Hixam. LaRoe: Yes. 
 
 Re-cross examination: 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Hale) This loss of interstate busi- 
 ness by a passenger buying a ticket to Buffalo 
 when a train is broken is largely speculative, is 
 it not? <A. Yes, it is largely speculative, but with 
 our general knowledge of the ways among pas- 
 sengers who are experienced we know beyond 
 peradventure of a doubt that as this thing be- 
 comes more pronounced, a large number of pas- 
 sengers will naturally take advantage of it; par- 
 ticularly those engaged in commercial pursuits 
 and that travel constantly, and here again comes 
 the situation which railroads do not like to be 
 placed in, nor would we think that the state au- 
 thorities would want to have the passenger who 
 knows the ways and means of getting the advan- 
 tage by the combination process, be in a more 
 favorable position than his neighbor who knows 
 not of it. 
 
 Q. Well, then, it follows that you are able to 
 estimate what percentage of the interstate busi- 
 ness passing through Buffalo in all directions 
 will take advantage of the opportunity to get off 
 the train and buy'a state rate ticket? A. I can- 
 not say that for the reason that the new interstate 
 fares — 
 
109 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Q. Are you able to say it or not — what the per- 
 centage will be? A. Absolutely not. 
 
 (). Are you able to estimate the percentage will 
 be around 5 per cent of interstate passengers who 
 do this? A. I am not prepared to state any per- 
 centage. 
 
 @. Would you place it as high as 95 per cent? 
 A. I would not. 
 
 Q. Would you place it as low as 1 per cent? 
 A. I would not. 
 
 Q. The bulk of the interstate passenger 
 business to Buffalo will be by Pullman sleeper, 
 chair car, club car, etc. A. Are you speaking 
 with respect to New York, now? 
 
 Q. Well, would you say that into the State of 
 New York through Buffalo, will the bulk of inter- 
 state business be by special car of some kind? A. 
 It all depends on the length of the haul, I should 
 say. 
 
 Q. Taking all of the business together, will the 
 bulk of the business be by Pullman? A. I should 
 say long haul business, a large proportion of it 
 will be by Pullman, but I should say the greater 
 proportion of it would be in coaches. I think all 
 of the through travel would be in Pullman service 
 —that is'a great proportion of it. It all depends, 
 as I say, upon the length of the haul, which would 
 determine as to the kind of equipment that the 
 passenger would travel in. 
 
 Q. It follows it would be more difficult for a 
 Pullman passenger who has got his ticket through 
 to accommodate himself by stopping off and buy- 
 ing another ticket, does it not? A. Well, there is 
 a certain amount of inconvenience about it, per- 
 
 28 
 
 631 
 
 532 
 
 533 
 
 035 
 
110 
 
 536 Paper 4 
 haps, but then the fellow who wants to save the 
 money will suffer that inconvenience. 
 
 . Well, the Pullman and railroad conductors 
 together can check that pretty well? A. They can 
 endeavor to check it, but I think that they will 
 fail in a great many cases. 
 
 Q. But to a large extent they can check it? A. 
 We hope that they can. 
 
 Q. The difficulty would probably be mostly on 
 short hauls into this state on coach traffic, is that 
 so? A. There would be a very large traffic. 
 
 Q. But of course the loss in revenue on short 
 hauls would be much less, naturally, than it would 
 be on the long Pullman hauls? A. Then you are 
 speaking of the relation of the density of the 
 traffic conditions. 
 
 (). Well, that is apparent of course on the face 
 of it. The man coming through from Chicago to 
 New York who splits his ticket at Buffalo, the 
 loss in revenue to the railroad is much greater 
 than it would if he was going a few miles beyond 
 539 Buffalo from a few miles outside the state? A. 
 
 Yes, but on the other hand the traffic between the 
 shorter points might be more dense and in the 
 ageregate it might exceed the through. 
 
 (). But you know, of course, that there is really 
 no commuting from outside of the state of New 
 York through Buffalo to points beyond Buffalo 
 
 549 that amounts to anything? A. What do you mean 
 by commuting? 3 
 
 Q. Well, people who come in daily to their work. 
 A. Well, in the Buffalo district, of course, thie 
 commutation traffic is comparatively small when 
 compared with New York. 
 
 | 
 
 53 
 
 538 
 
a ah 
 
 Paper 4 
 (). If there is any commutation traffic it is into 
 the city of Buffalo and not to any points beyond 
 there? A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Griffin: 
 
 Q. Buffalo and Albany are ports, Buffalo on 
 Lake Erie and Albany on the Hudson river, abort 
 330 miles apart? A. Well, from a passenger 
 standpoint we regard Buffalo as a port in con- 
 nection with any business we might have over the 
 lakes. 
 
 Q. Well, Albany is a port, in that you may con- 
 nect with day boats and night boats running be- 
 tween Albany and — A. Yes, sir; we have freight 
 rates that way. 
 
 (). And the two cent fare for way passengers to 
 and from the ports of Buffalo and Albany on the 
 New York Central Railroad, is an advantage that 
 the people of this state have long enjoyed, is it 
 not? A. I think they have, yes, sir. 
 
 @. And if the two cent state rate is raised to 
 the level of the interstate rate that advantage 
 will be destroyed, will it not? A. Well, it will not 
 exist any more. If I may comment on that — 
 
 Q. I would rather you would not. A. All right. 
 
 By Mr. Hale: 
 
 Q. Mr. Hunter, I would like just two or three 
 things that I think are fundamental, but I would 
 like to have the record show. How many com- 
 petitive routes between New York and Chicago 
 for passenger traffic? A. How many? 
 
 Q. Yes. A. Do you want me to enumerate the 
 - lines? 
 
 541 
 
 542 
 
 543 
 
 545 
 
112 
 
 546 Paper 4 
 Q. I would lke to have you. A. All right, the 
 New York Central, West Shore, New York, On- 
 tario & Western, Erie, Delaware, Lackawanna & 
 Western, Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania, Balti- 
 more & Ohio — eight lines. 
 Q. Now, the New York Central, goes up north 
 as faras Albany, then west to Buffalo and around 
 547 Take Erie by the Lake Shore and Michigan Cen- 
 tral, and the most southern route is the Balti 
 more & Ohio? A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Does that go through Washington? A. Yes. 
 
 (). The Pennsylvania is the short line of all? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (). And the through rate of all of these rail- 
 roads is found by multiplying the mileage of the 
 Pennsylvania by 3.6? A. Substantially so, Judge, 
 but I would like to get this clear upon the record 
 just how the rate is made to-day. 
 
 Q. Very well. A. The short line from New 
 York to Chicago is via the Pennsylvania Rail- 
 road, distance 906 and a fraction miles. It makes 
 549 three cents a mile, as established by the Railroad 
 
 Administration $27.22. To that, under the au- 
 thority of the Interstate Commerce Commission 
 in Ex Parte 74, 20 per cent was added, so that 
 that has the effect of establishing the present in- 
 terstate rate between New York and Chicago of 
 $32.67. 
 seq Q. Well, that really if you divide $32.67 by the 
 number of miles you get the quotient of 3.6? A. 
 Substantially I should say. I have not tried it. 
 Q. Well, that is the basis. A. That is the basis. 
 Q. If there is any difference, it is one of frac- 
 tional and not of consequential moment? A. Yes. 
 
 548 
 
113 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 (). That makes the rate, therefore, 3.6, less than 
 that on every competing line? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Which is the longest road, Baltimore & Ohio 
 or New York Central? A. I could not say off- 
 hand. The New York Central is not the longest 
 line. I should imagine perhaps the Baltimore & 
 Ohio. 
 
 Q. Have you any idea what the Baltimore & 
 Ohio gets per mile on that same rate? A. No, I 
 have not precisely, but we could figure it out. 
 
 Q. It is a question of computation, is it not? A. 
 A question of computation, yes, sir. 
 
 Q. In other words, there is only one carrier be- 
 tween here and Chicago that is going to receive 
 net 3.6 per mile? A. Yes. 
 
 @. And yet you propose to make —I say you 
 propose —-I assume you identify yourself with 
 the New York Central and these other petitioners 
 here. You propose to make every local passenger 
 in the State of New York pay a greater rate for 
 his ride from one point to another than you re- 
 ceive on the through route or any of these others’ 
 except the Pennsylvania? In other words, that 
 the rate fixed by the Pennsylvania by reason of 
 eompetitive conditions, between New York and 
 Chicago is to determine every local rate in the 
 State of New York, and determine it at a higher 
 figure than between New York and Chicago? A. 
 Well, Judge, of course, I could not subscribe to 
 that proposition. 
 
 Q. You think I am arguing the case. <A. Be- 
 cause it 1s competitive. 
 
 Q. Is not that the fact, beneath it all, that only 
 one earrier — that the whole business is deter- 
 
 29 
 
 551 
 
 502 
 
 503 
 
 554: 
 
 555 
 
114 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 “mined by competitive conditions, so far as the 
 
 New York-Chicago rates are concerned; that you 
 eannot allow any one road to charge or make the 
 others charge the same rates precisely; if they did, 
 one road would get all the traffic — is that the idea 
 — the short road? A. Well, the Railroad Adminis- 
 tration, I might say, prior to Federal control, the 
 
 2 yates between New York and Chicago were not 
 
 alike by all lines. They were alike by the New 
 York Central and the Pennsylvania, and the other 
 lines were known as differential lines and a like 
 rate obtained. Ths Railroad Administration de- 
 cided that the rate should be alike by all lines. 
 
 _ In other words, that the basic rate of three cents 
 
 (es 
 
 qn 
 cm 
 em 
 
 oGC 
 
 ‘per mile should be the establishing factor in 
 
 making the rate. They, therefore, established 
 like rates on all lines between New York and 
 Chicago, made on the short mileage on the Penn- 
 sylvania. Now, in approaching the equalization 
 of fares, the long prevailing custom and practice 
 that had been in effect throughout the country 
 
 ' was taken into consideration. In other words, 
 
 the fares between New York and Chicago, being 
 ereat commercial centers, it was felt that they 
 should be alike in order to accommodate the enor- 
 mous travel between those two points, by giving 
 the passengers the maximum train facilities be- 
 tween those two points; and that was true of a 
 ereat many other commercial centers, like be- 
 tween New York and Pittsburg, New York and 
 Washington, and New York and St. Louis. 
 Entirely aside from the competitive conditions, 
 as you are trying to represent as between the car- 
 riers themselves, my own view is that while the 
 
115 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 carriers were naturally concerned as between 
 themselves, from a competitive standpoint, it 1s 
 not one-sided, in that the traveling public were 
 benefited to the extent that the carriers have not 
 taken the full advantage of the 3.6 cents per mile, 
 so that the passengers on the long haul got the 
 advantage of the common rates and with the maxi- 
 mum train service. 
 
 q. I understand you are making here for a rate 
 of 3.6 cents per mile on all local tickets between 
 any two points, between stations on the New 
 York Central, including Albany and Buffalo? <A. 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. The real foundation for your asking for 
 that is the fact that the rate from Chicago to New 
 York is determined by the mileage of the Penn- 
 sylvania? A. No, sir, absolutely not. 
 
 @. Why should the rate between Schenectady 
 and Utiea, for illustration, or Utica and Syra- 
 euse, or any other two stations ten miles apart, 
 depend remotely on a fare which must be fixed 
 by competitive conditions existmg between Chi- 
 eago and New York, by reason of these various 
 routes? A. Judge, we are not attempting to rest 
 our ease on the New York-Chicago situation. As 
 I understand it, we are simply trying to explain 
 the facts in the case — what the result would be 
 if the rate fabric in the State of New York stands 
 where it is today. - 
 
 (). I suppose there are no two-roads to Buffalo 
 — that is the Lehigh, the Lackawanna, the Erie 
 and the New York Central all have different 
 mileages? A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That rate is determined by the road with 
 
 561 
 
 562 
 
 563 
 
 564 
 
 565 
 
116 
 
 Paper 4 
 the least mileage? A. The Lackawanna Railroad. 
 
 @. So you take a passenger who rides over 
 
 your road from Albany to Buffalo — you take a 
 less rate per mile than the Lackawanna receives? 
 A. That is true, but again I say, if there is any dis- 
 advantage in that, it is against the carrier and 
 not the public. 
 567 (). There is no, exception in your prayer for 
 relief, or what you desire to accomplish by this 
 proceeding or any similar proceeding —no ex- 
 ception in favor of local fares at any less than 
 3.67 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Without any regard to what local conditions 
 may be? <A. No, we think, Judge, that the rate 
 fabric of the country, both intrastate and inter- 
 state ought to be on a uniform basis, in order to 
 eliminate all discriminations as between persons 
 and localities. You cannot do it otherwise. There 
 is no reason in the world why the people of the 
 State of New York should be in a preferred class 
 against those who live in the State of Pennsyl- 
 969 vania. 
 
 (). Is there any reason why people who want 
 to travel locally between short distance points 
 should pay a higher rate for their passage than a 
 road like the New York Central or the Baltimore 
 & Ohio is going to get out of this rate structure, 
 because confegsedly they are going to get less 
 
 570 than 3.6 cents per mile? A. I don’t follow you, 
 Judge, on that line of argument. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) Mr. Hunter, what Judge 
 Hale has asked you concerning the Chicago rate, 
 made over Pittsburg and adopted by the lines 
 having a longer mileage than the Pennsylvania, 
 
 566 
 
 56 
 
 00 
 
117 
 
 Paper 4 571 
 illustrates what you have said as to the necessity 
 of roads having a right, if you please, to charge 
 a higher rate of fare, being compelled to meet this 
 through rate of the road having a lower rate of 
 fare. Is that not a fact? A. That 1s a fact. 
 
 Q. If the intrastate rate governs the low rate 
 of fare made by that road, the other roads must 
 reduce their fixed rate to meet that condition, is 
 that not a fact? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 @. (By Mr. Clark) There is not any case on 
 the Long Island Railroad where the Long Island 
 Railroad train goes out of the State of New York, 
 is there? A. No, I do not ‘so understand there is. 
 
 Q. You don’t understand that there is? A. No, 
 sir. 
 
 Q. And there isn’t any other railroad that runs 
 a train—a passenger train — to a station on the 
 Long Island, from outside the State of New York? 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 @. Do you know whether the New York Cen- 574 
 tral Railroad sells tickets or publishes tariffs of 
 fare to points on Long Island? A. What line? 
 
 @. The New York Central. A. They do. 
 
 (). And all the other interstate roads? <A. Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 Q. To what stations do they sell those tickets, 
 do you know — all stations on Long Island? A. 575 
 They carry in their tariff the principal points, and 
 they will sell a ticket to any point not carried or 
 from any point. 
 
 (. And the Long Island sells to any point on 
 any other railroad, you understand? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Are you familiar with the Long Island 
 
 30 
 
 572 
 
 573 
 
576 
 
 ov7 
 
 578 
 
 579 
 
 580 
 
 118 
 
 Paper 4 
 traffic? Have you ever lived in Long Island? A. 
 No, I have not lived there, but I have been to Long 
 Island several times. 
 
 Q@. Have you made a study of it to some extent? 
 A. No —in what respect? 
 
 Q@. Well, do you think there is a general move- 
 ment from any point in Long Island to any point 
 without the State of New York? Is there a line 
 of travel from any point on Long Island to any 
 point outside the State of New York? A. Well, 
 I cannot speak definitely upon that point, but I 
 know that there are a great many residents on 
 Long Island, and I have to assume that they 
 travel the same as people living in other parts of 
 the country, and relatively to the number living 
 there, I should imagine they would travel sub- 
 stantially the same as those living in other sec- 
 tions, on interstate journeys. 
 
 (). As a matter of fact, Long Island 1s merely 
 a residential section of the state, is it not? A. 
 Residential? 
 
 @. Yes. A. I should say it is residential, just 
 the same as New York City. 
 
 Q. No large cities on Long Island with the 
 exception of Brooklyn — is that not so? A. There 
 is no other city on Long Island that will compare 
 
 ‘with it, I should say. 
 
 Q. Weil, no city on Long Island except Brook- 
 lyn that would compare with Buffalo or Albany? 
 AGING: | 
 
 Q. Or any of the other cities which you have 
 been talking about? A. None of these larger 
 cities, no. 
 
 ©. Now, do I understand you, it is the purpose 
 
119 
 
 of this application to increase all single and 
 round-trip tickets to 3.6 cents per mile? A. No, 
 sir; the proposition here is to increase the fares 
 that were in effect prior to August 26, 1920, 20 
 per cent. We are simply stating this comparison 
 between 3 and 3.6 for illustrative purposes. The 
 application is to increase the fares as they existed 
 on August 26, 1920, 20 per cent. 
 
 Q. You know, do you not, that the Pennsylvania 
 Railroad, the New York, New Haven & Hartford 
 and the New York, Westchester & Boston all have 
 local rates considerably under 3 cents per mile? 
 A. The 20 per cent would apply to these rates. 
 It was not the intention to put them on a 3 cents 
 per mile basis. 
 
 Q. If they were left at that rate, which would 
 still leave them below 2 cents a mile, it would be 
 a penalization against Long Island points which 
 had 3 cents, would it not? A. In connection with 
 comparisons, insidious and otherwise that may be 
 drawn, and between rates in different sections, I 
 would like to get into your mind the thought that 
 the Interstate Commerce Commission, in granting 
 this advance generally to the carriers, because of 
 conditions with which you are entirely familar, 
 stated that manifestly they could not go into all 
 of the then existing relationships as between 
 fares, either freight or passenger fares, but if 
 there were any situation where it might be 
 thought that attention should be given to the con- 
 sideration of them upon merit, those cases might 
 be presented later and so considered; so that in 
 this matter we are not coming here and asking 
 or seeking out any particular rates or kind of 
 rates or fares, as to whether they may be com- 
 
 581 
 
 582 
 
 583 
 
 585 
 
120 
 
 6 _ Paper 4 
 paratively one with the other. In other words, 
 this is a revenue producing measure. It does not 
 run, as I understand it, to the question of maxi- 
 mum rates or minimum rates or anything else. 
 
 Q. Regardless of the justice of the present 
 rates, you want the 20 per cent increase? A. Yes, 
 that is the idea. I do not understand that ques- 
 tion is in issue at all. At least that has been my 
 understanding. 
 
 Q. Have you any record of what was the 
 amount of money paid into your road for inter 
 state tickets to points on Long Island in the last 
 three years, or any other railroad? A. You under- 
 stand I don’t represent any particular railroad. 
 I am connected with an association, and I think 
 Mr. Paulding will be very glad to furnish you any 
 statistics you want. 
 
 (). Could they be secured? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I think so, Mr. Clark. 
 
 Mr. Gardner: I understood that was to be 
 secured. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark) The first question was 
 raised as to tickets sold on the Long Island. I 
 ‘want to find out how many tickets were sold on 
 
 other roads to points on the Long Island. A. That 
 is, you want the information in both directions? 
 
 589 
 
 590 . Yes; unless it will be conceded that it is 
 practically negligible. 
 
 @. (By Mr. Victory) Do you know whether or 
 not a passenger can buy a ticket at the New York 
 Central office, say at Albany and ride through 
 to Jamaica, in the County of Queens? A. He 
 could, yes. 
 
121 
 
 Paper 4 591 
 (J). Over the Long Island Railroad? A. Yes; 
 
 and have his baggage checked through, too. 
 
 Q. Could he buy a passenger ticket? A. Yes, 
 absolutely. 
 
 Q. When did that practice go into effect? A. 
 That practice has been in effect for a great many 
 years, has it not, Mr. Woodward? 592 
 
 Mr. Woodward: It has been in effect ten years, 
 anyhow. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Victory) And you can buy at Ja- 
 maica, Long Island, a through ticket to Albany? 
 A. Any place in the country. 
 
 Q. That is in practice to-day? A. Yes, sir. 593 
 
 (). (By Mr. Paulding) Of any other place in the 
 United States? A. I might say for your informa- 
 tion that the Long Island Railroad has on file 
 with the Interstate Commerce Commission the 
 ‘basing and interstate basing tariff which they 
 use in selling tickets from points on their line to 
 any point in the United States. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark.) Is there any way that we 
 could form an opinion on the amount of tickets 
 sold on other roads to points on the Long Island? 
 A. We could call upon the lines to furnish that 
 information. 
 
 594 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: I am afraid that would be dif- 595 
 ficult to get in the eastbound direction. 
 
 The Witness: I do not mean all the railroads 
 in the country. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Victory.) May I ask if the agent 
 that sells that ticket is not the agent of the Long 
 ol 
 
122 
 
 596 | Paper 4 
 Island Railroad Company or is not the agent of 
 the New York Central? A. He is the agent of 
 the Long Island railroad, selling a ticket from 
 Jamaica to a point on the Baltimore and Ohio, 
 or wherever the passenger desires to travel. He 
 sells what is known as an inter-line ticket, read- 
 
 597 ing from a point on the Long Island railroad to 
 the other lines. | 
 
 Mr. Bikle: Mr. Examiner, is not the informa- 
 tion you requested a little while ago substantially 
 what these gentlemen are asking? That is the 
 passenger revenues of the Long Island, derived 
 from the interstate traffic, so that would cover it 
 
 598 both ways and that is readily available? 
 
 Kixam. LaRoe: Please show in the same con- 
 nection what the total passenger revenue of the 
 Long Island is, so we can have a basis of com- 
 parison. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Victory.) There is no line compet- 
 599 ing with the Long Island railroad on Long Is- 
 land? A. No. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe.) That is not strictly 
 true, is it? I thought there were several subways 
 that were in competition with the Long Island 
 railroad. A. Steam roads, say for instance, be- 
 yond Jamaica up to Jamaica, there are surface 
 
 600 lines and elevated lines that operate to within the 
 city of New York. 
 
 @. You said something about the history of 
 fares and I am interested in that phase of the 
 matter. Was there a time within the last ten or 
 fifteen years when there was a general two cents 
 
123 
 
 Paper 4 
 per mile basis of passenger fares in this terri- 
 tory? How far back did the two-cent basis ap- 
 ply? A. There has not been any two-cent rate. 
 
 Q. Then it was 214 cents, was it? <A. It was 
 21% cents; in the early days is was three cents a 
 mile, but there was some agitation in some of 
 the states for a two-cent rate. For instance, in 
 this State. The bill was vetoed by Governor 
 Hughes and left to the determination of the rea- 
 sonableness of the rates in the hands of the Pub- 
 lie Service Commission. Then there was an at- 
 tempt in the State of Pennsylvania to put in ef- 
 fect a two-cent law and it was declared unconsti- 
 tutional by the Supreme Court of that State, and 
 rates have been established generally in this 
 eastern territory, interstate of 214 cents a mile. 
 The only exception to that was I think on the New 
 York Central between Albany and Buffalo. 
 
 Q. Approximately, when did the 214 cent basis 
 take effect? A. I think it was in 1916, was it not? 
 
 Q. You say prior to that, the basis was higher 
 than 21% cents. A. Yes. 
 
 @. And generally on a three-cent level? A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. What was the territorial extent of that 
 three-cent fare that was in existence prior to 
 1916? A. Well, it covered, you might say, the 
 Trunk Line territory. 
 
 (). Did it cover Central Freight Association 
 territory, also? A. Personally, I think it was 
 pretty well on a three-cent basis until the states 
 came along and established the rates on two 
 cents a mile, but the interstate bases were gen- 
 erally on 214 cents a mile. 
 
 601 
 
 602 
 
 603 
 
 604 
 
 605 
 
124 
 
 606 Paper 4 
 Q. Is it fair to say that prior to 1916, the fares 
 
 both State and interstate in Trunk fine and New 
 England were on a basis of three cents a mile? 
 A. Within the State? : 
 Q. Both State and interstate rates. Get that 
 straight, now. Prior to 1916, as I understood 
 go7 Your answer, the State and interstate fares in 
 New York, Vermont and New Jersey, as well as 
 Pennsylvania — most, if not all of New England 
 and Trunk Line territory —were on the basis of 
 three cents a mile; is that correct? A. Well, 
 generally, they were on a three cents a mile basis, 
 but there were exceptions. For instance, any 
 between Albany and Buffalo, the rate was two 
 608 cents a mile— had been in effect for years. The 
 rate between New York and Buffalo was made 
 over Albany; that established a lower rate than 
 three cents a mile, whereas the rate from New 
 York to Washington and Philadelphia was take 
 cents. 
 Q. In 1916 the 21/,-cent basis became effective 
 609 on interstate traffic? A. And also largely in the 
 states, except where as in the central states, the 
 statute fixed the maximum of two-cent fare laws. 
 (). Is it a correct statement to say that in 1916 
 a basis of 214 cents became effective on passenger 
 tariffs, except where provided by State statute? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 610 . There are no important interstate excep- 
 tions to that basis that you know of? A. No, sir. 
 Q. And that applies to all of the eastern terri- 
 tory, including trunk line and New England? A. 
 Yes, sir; I am going to confirm that particular 
 year, Mr. Examiner. 
 
125 
 
 Paper 4 611 
 
 Q. Yes, I wish you would. Now, that 214-cent 
 basis established in 1916, continued in effect until 
 General Order 28 of the Director-General of 
 Railroads? <A. Yes, sir. 
 
 -Q. When the fare became three cents? <A. Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 Q. And that applied, both State and interstate, 612 
 throughout all the territory we have been talk- 
 _ ing about, regardless of State laws? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And that continued in effect until August 
 26th of this year? A. Yes, sir. : 
 
 (). What is the prevailing fare level in the 
 states surrounding New York? <A. Well, in all of 
 New England, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Dela- 613 
 ware, Maryland and Virginia, 3 cents a mile. 
 
 Q. That is, they are now 3.6 cents?) A. I mean 
 3.6 cents on the interstate basis. 
 
 (). That is to say both State and interstate in 
 those states, the basis is now 3.6 cents? A. Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 Q. Is that true also of Ohio? A. No, sir. 614 
 
 Q. What is the basis in Ohio? A. It is still 3 
 cents a mile. 
 
 Q. By virtue of State laws? A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The situation in Ohio then is similar to what 
 it is in New York? A. Yes, sir, and in Illinois 
 too, you covered this morning. 
 
 Q. How long have the New York State rates — 
 intrastate rates been on the same general basis 
 as the interstate rates, with the exception of that 
 haul between Albany and Buffalo? A. Substan- 
 tially always as I understand it, prior to June 
 10, 1918. 
 
 - Q. Can you say that confidently for the period 
 
 32 | 
 
 615 
 
126 
 
 61 Paper 4 
 with which you have been connected with the as- 
 sociation? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Mr. Paulding, I wonder if you 
 could furnish for the record a copy of the order 
 of the New York Public Service Commission 
 with regard to freight rates. I have never seen 
 
 617 it. 
 
 Mr. Hale: I have them here, Mr. Examiner, 
 and thought I would offer them. I will offer them 
 now. 
 
 | Exam. LaRoe: Thank you very much. 
 
 Mr. Hale: I think they constitute all of the 
 
 gig Orders that the Commission has made, but if I 
 
 find to the contrary I will inform you. There 
 
 are proof sheets of two opinions that were not 
 printed when I left. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Now, this No. 526, relates to 
 what, the freight or passenger? 
 
 Mr. Hale: I cannot tell by number. There are 
 
 ne two special orders here. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Mr. Reporter, will you mark as 
 Exhibit No. 3, the opinion headed No. 526, and as 
 No. 4 the one marked No. 527; as No. 5, the one 
 marked, ‘‘ Special Commission Order No. 7363 ’’; 
 No. 6, the opinion dated August 24, 1920; No. 7, 
 
 g29 the one dated August 19th; No. 8, the one entitled 
 ‘¢ Granting Special Permission, No. 7363,’’ dated 
 August 26th. 
 
 (The papers referred to were thereupon re- 
 ceived in evidence, marked, ‘‘ Complainant’s Ex- 
 hibits Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, Witness Hunter,’’ 
 and are forwarded herewith.) 
 
127 
 
 Paper 4 
 Mr. Hale: In that connection, I would like to 
 make this inquiry; I suppose you would like any 
 statute that we have, but we do not need to offer 
 it in evidence? 
 
 Hixam. LaRoe: It won’t be necessary, but I 
 would like to have it in convenient form. 
 
 Mr. Hale: I would like to have you take under 
 your consideration our law, section 57 of the Rail- 
 road Law, and I will furnish you with our entire 
 railroad law here, and I want to say in connec- 
 tion with that, what Mr. Paulding will not dispute 
 me in saying, and, therefore, equivalent to testi- 
 mony, I hope, that that rate of two cents a mile 
 for local way passengers, all points between AI- 
 bany and Buffalo, inclusive, has never been more 
 than two cents a mile in the history of the State, 
 being originally fixed in the act which author- 
 ized the consolidation of six or seven short rail- 
 roads into one railroad, to be then and thereafter 
 known as the New York Central, and that was 
 chapter 76 of the Laws of 1853, which has been 
 continued and carried into the general railroad 
 act, and now a part of the Railroad Law, and 
 these are the vital particulars so far as it now 
 20eS. 
 
 ‘This chapter shall not be construed to allow 
 any rate of fare for way passengers greater than 
 2 cents per mile to be charged or taken over the 
 track or tracks of the railroad known as the New 
 York Central Railroad Company.’’ 
 
 Now, of course, that does not mean the New 
 York Central Railroad, as it exists today, but it 
 does mean what was then the New York Central 
 Railroad between Albany and Buffalo. 
 
 621 
 
 622 
 
 623 
 
128 
 
 626 Paper 4 
 Exam. LaRoe: What does the expression 
 ‘‘ way passengers ’’ mean in there? 
 
 Mr. Hale: I assume that anyone who gets on 
 at Albany, for example, and goes to Buffalo, or 
 any station east of Buffalo like Schenectady or 
 Rochester. 
 
 627 
 Exam. LaRoe: Suppose he gets on at Syra- 
 
 cuse to go to Troy, is he a way passenger then? 
 
 Mr. Hale: He is, because Troy is part of the 
 New York Central Railroad as originally consoli- 
 dated. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Suppose he gets on at Troy to 
 
 a go to Poughkeepsie? 
 
 Mr. Hale: No, he is not a passenger on the 
 New York Central. He is on another line. The 
 New York Central is as meant by that term in this 
 statute —it has two eastern termini, one at Troy 
 and one at Albany. They converge at Schenec- 
 629 tady. They separate again at Syracuse, one going 
 by the old road as it is called, and one by direct 
 line to Rochester, and then they go on, one to 
 Niagara Falls and one goes to Buffalo. 
 
 Kixam. LaRoe: Mr. Paulding, will you have a 
 witness to testify as to transportation conditions, 
 
 630 or have you not contemplated that? 
 Mr. Paulding: No, I have not, but I can very 
 
 easily furnish one. I have all sorts of experts 
 here. 
 
 Hixam. LaRoe: I think we had better have the 
 Railroad Law of New York marked Exhibit No. 
 9. | na 
 
129 
 
 Paper 4 
 (The paper was thereupon received in evi- 
 dence, marked, ‘‘ Complainant’s Exhibit No. 9, 
 Witness Hunter,’’ and is forwarded herewith.) 
 Mr. Hale: In that connection, would you like 
 the Public Service Commissions Law? 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Yes; we will mark that Exhibit 
 No. 10. 
 
 (The paper thereupon received in evidence, 
 marked, ‘‘ Complainant’s Exhibit No. 10, Witness 
 Hunter,’’ and is forwarded herewith.) 
 
 Mr. Holmes: Before you adjourn, Mr. Exam- 
 iner, I would like to enter an appearance, Hugh 
 A. Holmes, representing the American Manufac- 
 turers’ Association. 
 
 Exam. La Roe: We will take a recess until 2:15 
 o’clock. 
 
 (Whereupon, at 12:30 p. m., a recess was taken 
 until 2:15 o’clock p. m.) 
 
 AFTER RECESS — 2:15 pe. M. 
 Exam. LaRoe: Will you proceed, Mr. Pauld- 
 ing? 
 Mr. Paulding: I will call Mr. Vosburgh. 
 
 : L. F. Vossurcu was thereupon called as a 
 witness, and having been duly sworn, testi- 
 fied as elgues 
 
 } Direct-examination : 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding). What is your position? 
 A. Traffic manager of the New York Central Rail- 
 road. | 
 
 oo 
 
 631 
 
 632 
 
 633 
 
 634 
 
 635 
 
636 
 
 637 
 
 638 
 
 639 
 
 640 
 
 130 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 (). How long have you been connected with the 
 New York Central Railroad? A. About 28 years. 
 
 @. What capacities? A. Starting in as a ticket 
 seller, and acting in the capacity of city passenger 
 agent, general western passenger agent, general 
 eastern passenger agent, assistant general pas- 
 senger agent, general passenger agent and passen- 
 ger traffic manager. 
 
 @. As general eastern passenger agent, you 
 were located in New York city, were you not? A. 
 Yes. 
 
 (J. And as general passenger agent, you had 
 charge of all passenger traffic over the New York 
 Central? <A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And located in the city of New York? A. 
 Yes, sir. | 
 
 Q. With or without particular knowledge of the 
 traffic conditions in the State of New York on the 
 passenger side? <A. I did not get that. 
 
 @. Did you have particular knowledge as to 
 passenger conditions in the State of New York? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 . Some testimony was given this morning as 
 to the different roads running out of New York 
 to common points in the’State of New York, intra- 
 state and interstate lines. Are you familiar with 
 the traffic conditions upon each of those roads? 
 A. In a general way, yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What was it that made it necessary for you 
 to be familiar? A. Principally because there was 
 keen competition between the lines. 
 
 (). Between what points? A. Well, between New 
 York and Buffalo, New York and Rochester, Syra- 
 cuse, Utica and points west. 
 
131 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Q. That is, competition existed all of the time? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Does it exist today? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Well, now, is that competition in service, or 
 as to rates or as to what, Mr. Vosburgh? A. Both 
 service and rates. 
 
 Q. Is or is not the service rendered by the differ- 
 ent roads between the different common points or 
 between New York and points in the State of New 
 York, a similar service or is it otherwise? A. 
 (Juite similar. 
 
 Q. Will you say in what respects it is similar? 
 A. As to approximate running time, character of 
 equipment, dining car service. 
 
 (). And as to number of trains? A. Yes; there 
 is, speaking directly of the service, between New 
 York and Buffalo—there are more trains via 
 the New York Central than via the other lines. 
 A very large percentage of the business, how- 
 ever, is done on night trains, and the service both 
 as to the character of equipment and running time 
 is approximately the same. 
 
 Q. Now, take the service over the New York 
 Central Railroad between New York and Buffalo 
 and other intrastate points, and New York and 
 Chicago, Cleveland and other interstate points, 
 will you say in what respect the service is similar 
 or different, as to service between intrastate 
 points and interstate points? A. There is no dif- 
 ference in the character of the service between 
 intrastate or the interstate points. 
 
 (). As to equipment or as to time? A. No ma- 
 terial difference, generally speaking. Of course, 
 in the case of the service between New York and 
 Chicago, we have the Twentieth Century Limited. 
 
 641 
 
 642 
 
 643 
 
 644 
 
 645 
 
646 
 
 648 
 
 649 
 
 650 
 
 132 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Q. But that is a particular Chicago train? <A. 
 That is a particular Chicago train. 
 
 @. But as to other trains, outside of the Cen- 
 tury, passengers are taken upon those trains, ir- 
 respective of whether they are interstate or in- 
 trastate passengers, are they not? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (). And persons going from New York to Cleve- 
 land will travel upon the same train, with persons 
 going from New York to Buffalo, especially upon 
 a night train, is that not a fact? <A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Does that hold good as to the through rides 
 out of New York? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 @. Several questions were asked this morning 
 as to the history of the passenger rates in the 
 State of New York. Are you familiar with the 
 history of those rates? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You had personally to do with most of it, did 
 you not? A. So far as our line is concerned, yes. 
 
 (). Won’t you give in your own words what the 
 history of that was, going back to say fifteen 
 
 years ago? A. Well, as the record shows by the 
 ‘testimony this morning, the basis of fare between 
 
 Albany and Buffalo for way-passengers, by rea- 
 son of the State statute, has been two cents a © 
 mile, or was two cents a mile for a number of 
 years prior to June 10, 1918. The fare between 
 Albany and New York was likewise two cents a 
 mile for a number of years prior to about 1910, 
 when those fares were advanced to a basis of 2.17 
 cents per mile. The fares on other parts of the 
 line, the northern New York territory, described 
 as the Rome, Watertown and Ogdensburg dis- 
 trict, and the Adirondack divisions, and what 
 
133 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 might be described as the Pennsylvania division, 
 were the basis of three cents a mile until about 
 1907, when they were reduced to two and one-half 
 cents per mile. Those fares were in effect under 
 the order of the Director-General, effective in 
 June, 1918, when they were made three cents a 
 mile uniformly. 
 
 (). What particular traffic reasons caused the re- 
 duction in those fares? A. So far as our line is 
 concerned, I think a very important governing 
 influence was the fact that under the New York 
 State statute we were required to sell a 500 or a 
 1,000-mile ticket at 2 cents per mile, good for 
 bearer and unlimited, and we found that in the 
 territory where our normal fares were very much 
 in excess of this mileage fare, that a very large 
 percentage of our local business was handled by 
 the use of these mileage tickets, and I think that 
 was one of the compelling influences for reducing 
 the fare at that time. 
 
 Q. You are familiar, are you not, with the situa: 
 tion in New York, as to the rate situation in the 
 eastern district? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (). Just say in your own words what the influ- 
 ence of New York, if any, is upon the rate situa- 
 tion generally? A. You mean New York State? 
 
 Q. New York State, yes. A. Because of the im- 
 portance of the cities of New York and Buffalo, 
 and the service that operates via the Buffalo gate- 
 way, the fares in New York State have a very con- 
 trolling influence on fares generally, as was out- 
 lined in some detail by Mr. Hunter this morning. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether since the 26th of Au- 
 oust, this year, there has been any difference in 
 
 o4 
 
 651 
 
 502 
 
 653 
 
 655 
 
656 
 
 657 
 
 658 
 
 659 
 
 660 
 
 134 
 
 Paper 4 
 the traffic between Buffalo, or between New York 
 and Buffalo and Buffalo and New York, as to the 
 different railroads? <A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What is that difference? A. I know that 
 there has been considerable falling off in the traf- 
 fic, heretofore handled by the lines other than the 
 New York Central, and it is my opinion that if 
 this difference in fares should continue, with a 
 difference of $2.55 in favor of the New York Cen- 
 tral for a passenger in a sleeping car between New 
 York and Buffalo, it will have the effect of divert- 
 ing practically all of the business of the other 
 lines to the New York Central. 
 
 Q. Or is there an alternative to that as to its 
 effect upon the through rate? <A. Yes; the al- 
 ternative would be for the other lines to reduce 
 their fare to the basis of the intrastate fare. 
 
 Q. Is the falling off in traffic attributable to the 
 fact that the service on the other lines has de- 
 teriorated in any way, either as to time or char- 
 acter of service? A. Not at all, sir. There has 
 been no change. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I think that is all. 
 Cross-examination: 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Hale): Mr. Vosburgh, take the fare 
 via the Lackawanna to Utica. What determines 
 how much that shall be? A. I think that fare 
 
 ‘today is figured on actual mileage basis. 
 
 Q. Of what road? A. Of the various lines. For 
 instance, the fare via the Lackawanna, is figured 
 via the mileage of the Lackawanna. 
 
 (). Are there different rates between New York 
 and Utica? A. Yes, sir. 
 
135 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Q. And each road is collecting 3.6 cents that has 
 the right to collect it? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q@. The New York Central is collecting 3 cents? 
 A. Yes, sir; there are a number of those condi- 
 tions, Judge, that were created during Federal 
 control, that you can realize could not continue 
 permanently under competitive conditions. 
 
 @. You had in mind, of course, your own policy. 
 What will be the condition of things, provided 
 this increase should be made, provided, for ex- 
 ample, that the New York Central should be re- 
 quired — privileged or required, as the case may 
 be, to charge 3.6 cents? A. Then the State of New 
 York will gain. 
 
 (). Within the State of New York for its local 
 traffic? A. In what regard do you mean? 
 
 Q. On the total fare, New York to Utica. 
 Wouldn’t you have to charge more than the Lack- 
 awanna? <A. No, sir; I should say the fare would 
 be common. 
 
 @. And that would be determined by the road 
 that had the shortest mileage? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (). Which has the shortest mileage, the Lacka- 
 wanna? A. No; I think the New York Central. 
 
 (). You think your distance is less than the Lack- 
 awanna? <A. I think so. 
 
 Q. So that the Lackawanna would have to take 
 less than 3.6 cents? <A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, that would be the same at Syracuse? 
 A. Precisely. 
 
 @. And Rochester and Buffalo? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. So that only one railroad competing for 
 Utica traffic, or Syracuse, or Rochester, or Buffalo 
 traffic between New York and those points, would 
 
 661 
 
 662 
 
 663 
 
666 
 
 667 
 
 668 
 
 669 
 
 670 
 
 136 
 
 | Paper 4 
 really receive 3.6 cents; the rest would be receiv- 
 ing a little less? A. Yes, that is true. 
 
 (). Now, why should not the local traffic which 
 hasn’t anything to do with New York or Buffalo, 
 or anything to do with Syracuse, Utica or Roch- 
 ester as competing points—why should that be 
 made on the basis of competitive rates? A. As 
 was covered by Mr. Hunter—I thought he an- 
 swered that question this morning — we are au- 
 thorized by the Interstate Commerce Commission 
 to advance our fares 20 per cent, and as he pointed 
 out we did not single out any particular situation. 
 We purpose carrying out that authority and ap- 
 plying that basis throughout the country. 
 
 Q. Now, the examiner asked you about the his- 
 tory of these rates. I will ask you just one ques- 
 tion in that connection. Has there been any statu- 
 tory change respecting railroad rates, by the State 
 of New York — local rates — in the last ten years, 
 say, except the enactment of the Public Service 
 Commissions Law itself in 1907; but apart from 
 that, has not the statute been amended which 
 fixes a rate, like the rate between Albany and 
 Buffalo, or the rate generally of 3 cents a mile, 
 which included the Erie, Lackawanna, etc.? A. 
 I don’t know as I am competent to answer that, 
 but it is my impression, not. 
 
 Q. I think there has not been. I think that might 
 be conceded on the record, so far as fixing a spe- 
 cific rates, there has been no change of the stat- 
 ute, but of course, the Public Service Commis- 
 sions Law has come on, under which the Public 
 Service Commission has the power, upon showing, 
 to either raise or lower. (No response.) 
 
137 
 
 Paper 4 
 Mr. Paulding: Do you think the Ulster and 
 Delaware case goes to that full extent? 
 
 Mr. Hale: I think it does, if you construe it 
 along with what they hold in the other utilities. 
 
 Tixam. LaRoe: I take it your Commission has 
 never passed upon the general passenger-fare 
 level? 
 
 Mr. Hale: Perhaps I ought to let Mr. Pauld- 
 ing, who is more familiar with it, state in regard 
 to an application to raise the rates of the New 
 York Central between Albany and Buffalo to 214 
 cents, some years ago. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: A general application was made, 
 between four and five years ago, by the New York 
 Central Railroad, in connection with the other 
 railroads in the State, to increase passenger 
 rates. It was-made, of course, by filing the tariffs, 
 showing the increased rates throughout the State, 
 raising them to the general level of 3 cents a mile. 
 The Public Service Commission suspended those 
 tariffs, and after a very extended and exhaustive 
 investigation into the matter, denied the applica- 
 tion and continued the suspension. A long opin- 
 ion was written by the Commission, the chief rea- 
 son for it being that the statutory rate of 2 cents 
 per mile for way passengers between Buffalo and 
 Albany, while it was a discriminatory rate against 
 the rest of the State, prevented them from grant- 
 ing a general increase in passenger rates, and, 
 therefore, they were compelled to deny the whole 
 ‘Increase. 
 
 30 
 
 671 
 
 672 
 
 673 
 
 674 
 
 675 
 
138 
 
 Paper 4 
 Exam. LaRoe: Was that a state-wide applica- 
 tion? , 
 
 676 
 
 Mr. Paulding: That was a state-wide applica- 
 tion. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: What was the date of that ap. 
 677 plication? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I think that was 1916 — the early 
 part. 
 
 Mr. Hale: Of course, that record will speak for 
 itself, and the opinion of the court and the order 
 made. I will furnish that if you would lke it. 
 
 678 Exam. LaRoe: I think that is sufficiently im- 
 portant to be filed in the record, at least as a 
 matter of history. 
 
 Mr. Hale: I never have understood that on that 
 application the Commission held that they had 
 not the power on an application made to increase 
 
 g79 the 2-cent rate for local passengers between AI- 
 bany and Buffalo —that they had not the power 
 to do it, but simply that that action was necessary 
 in view of the legislation of the State. I will be 
 olad to furnish the order and the opinion. Now, 
 the record —TI do not suppose you would want 
 your record lumbered with it. 
 
 680 Exam. LaRoe: No, I think not, just the opin- 
 ion, if you please. 
 
 Mr. Hale: I will do that. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) Your testimony with 
 regard to the extent of the 214 cents fare, when 
 it was in effect, seems to differ slightly from that 
 of the witness this morning. A. Yes, I think so. 
 
139 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 (). It was not the state-wide fare. As I under- 
 stood the witness this morning, he said that that 
 fare was pretty general in this state, except for 
 the portion of the line between Buffalo and 
 Albany. That does not conform with your under- 
 standing. A. That is generally so, yes. As I 
 stated, the fare between Albany and Buffalo was 
 on the basis of 2 cents. 
 
 (). Where else in the state was not the 214 
 - cents fare applied? A. Between Albany and New 
 York. 
 
 Q. It did not apply there? A. No, where the 
 basis was 2.17. 
 
 Q. Yes; you mentioned that. Now, where else? 
 A. That is all, so far as our line is concerned. 
 
 Q. How about other lines? A. I think the basis 
 generally was 21% cents. 
 
 (). The date should be changed then from 1916 
 to 1907? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Then the 214 cent fare was in effect from 
 1907 to 1918? A. That is correct. 
 
 Q. Did that apply also to states surrounding 
 the state of New York? A. I think so, yes. 
 
 Mr. Hunter: Mr. Examiner, I kept saying 1916 
 this morning, but I really meant 1906. Since 
 luncheon I confirmed it. It took effect on Nov- 
 ember 1, 1906. 
 
 The Witness: Well, I have not checked the 
 date, but I knew it was either late in 1906 or 1907. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) Your line has the 
 heaviest passenger service, | assume, of any line 
 in the State of New York? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 681 
 
 682 
 
 683 
 
 684 
 
 685 
 
686 
 
 687 
 
 688 
 
 689 
 
 690 
 
 140 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 @. And your line between New York and 
 Buffalo is the heaviest density line in the state? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You said something about different fares to 
 Utica. Do I understand that at the present time 
 there are three or four different fares from New 
 York to Utica? _A. I think so. 
 
 Q. To what extent is that situation general? 
 A. Well, I should say that it is true more or less, 
 but not general. In establishing the new fares, 
 the Director General authorized different fares 
 via different lines between given points, based in 
 some instances on mileage and other conditions. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: If I might say there, I have 
 figures here which show that is true as to Utica 
 and Syracuse — between New York and Utica 
 and New York and Syracuse, only. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: That is a rather unusual situa- 
 tion, and one is naturally prompted to inquire 
 why it was not corrected when Federal control 
 terminated. 
 
 Q. You have in mind correcting it? A. Oh, yes. 
 
 (). It is just a temporary proposition? A. Ca 
 tainly. 
 
 (). Now, with regard to the transportation con- 
 ditions; take the line of the New York Central, 
 extending into the State of New York from the 
 west, through Buffalo. Are the transportation 
 conditions within the State of New York differ- 
 ent from those in the territory west thereof? A. 
 West of the State of New York? 
 
 Q. Yes; in other words, what I am trying to get 
 at is this, whether or not there is a difference in 
 
141 
 
 Paper 4 691 
 transportation conditions within the State of New 
 York, which may possibly justify a lower level 
 of rates within the State of New York? A. I 
 should say not, sir. 
 
 Q. Are you familiar with the transportation 
 conditions generally in the territory west of the 
 State of New York? A. Yes, sir. 692 
 
 Q. And in your judgment the transportation 
 conditions are sufficiently similar to justify the 
 same level of fares in that territory as in the State 
 of New York? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (). Are you familiar with the transportation con- 
 ditions in New Jersey, and in Massachusetts and 
 Connecticut? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (J). Are the transportation conditions generally 
 in those states, substantially the same as those 
 within the State of New York? A. I should say 
 particularly in New England, because of the den- 
 sity of traffic. 
 
 Q. That is to say the density of traffic in New 
 England is relatively quite heavy? A. Yes, sir. g94 
 
 (). Especially southern New England? <A. Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 Q. Take the line of the Lehigh Valley, or the 
 Lackawanna, both of which I believe enter the 
 State of New York from the south? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Are the transportation conditions on those 
 lines within the State of New York more favor- | 
 able than they are within the State of New Jer- oe 
 sey and the State of Pennsylvania? A. I should 
 say not, sir. 
 
 Q. Is it your judgment that the transportation 
 conditions are such that the rate of fare should 
 be the same? A. I think so. 
 
 36 
 
 693 
 
142 
 
 696 : Paper 4 
 
 (). Do you know of any instance where the trans- 
 portation conditions of any interstate railroad 
 entering New York, are more favorable with re- 
 gard to its intrastate traffic than they are with 
 regard to interstate traffic? A. I should say none. 
 
 (. Well, then, to sum up your various answers, 
 they seem to come down to this: That there are 
 no transportation conditions within the State of 
 New York—and when I say transportation con- 
 ditions, of course, I mean geographic conditions 
 and traffic conditions, everything bearing on the 
 cost of the service —I take it that your answers 
 might be construed to mean that the transporta- 
 tion conditions in the State of New York as a 
 whole, are not more favorable than they are for 
 the various interstate hauls into and out of the 
 State of New York via the lines of these rail- 
 roads? A. That is correct. 
 
 697 
 
 698 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Do you have any further ques- 
 tions? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Hale) In that connection, Mr. Vos- 
 burgh, don’t you think running upon a water- 
 level absolutely to Albany, then running on a 
 water-level from there to Buffalo, make condi- 
 tions more favorable for the New York Central 
 than for the Lackawanna? <A. That is one feature, 
 yes. | 
 700 
 
 699 
 
 Q. But that is not sufficient to qualify your an- 
 swer, you think? A. The conditions, so far as 
 that is concerned, are no different, for instance, in 
 New England than they are in New York State. 
 
 (). I had in mind particularly the competition 
 between here and Buffalo. Would not a diagram 
 
143 
 
 Paper 4 701 
 of the elevations the Lackawanna has to over- 
 
 come be very much greater than the New York 
 Central? <A. Yes. 3 
 
 Q. Would not that be true of the Erie and the 
 Lehigh? <A. Yes. 
 
 (J. And is not the density of traffic along your 
 line, including the Hudson Valley cities of Al- 702 
 bany, Schenectady, Utica and so on to Buffalo — 
 would not that give you a density of traffic that is 
 lacking on all of these other lines? <A. Yes, but it 
 all requires the same service. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: I do not want the general 
 nature of my inquiry to be misunderstood or its 
 purport to be misunderstood. Of course, we al- 703 
 ways find in a large State, different transporta- 
 tion conditions in various parts of the State, and 
 I think it will be generally understood that the 
 traffic conditions along the Hudson river, and 
 along the Mohawk river, are much more favor- 
 able, for example, than they are in the mountain 
 regious in other sections of the State, but I take yoy 
 it that the water level route is used quite as much 
 by interstate travelers as by intrastate travelers, 
 and my questions were merely intended to de- 
 velop the question whether, taking the territory 
 as a whole, the conditions in southern New York, 
 for example, were more favorable than in north- 
 ern New Jersey, northeastern Pennsylvania, or 
 whether the transportation conditions in eastern 
 New York were more favorable than western 
 Massachusetts and western Connecticut. JI was 
 trying to ascertain whether there was any rea- 
 son for excepting the State of New York as a 
 whole from a general level of rates than was ap- 
 plicable throughout a given territory. 
 
 705 
 
144 
 
 706 : Paper 4 
 The Witness: Might I say that doubtless Judge 
 Hale’s reference to the water-level route applies 
 to our main line, and the operating conditions on 
 other parts of our railroad within New York State 
 do not differ materially from the lines he men- 
 tioned so far as grades, etc., are concerned. 
 707. +. (By Mr. Hale). That is quite true of your 
 Adirondack division? A. That is true of the Penn- 
 sylvania division. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding). And the Boston and Al- 
 bany? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Griffin). The operating conditions 
 over your main line are more favorable than the 
 other lines in surrounding states? In that par- 
 ticular territory, because of lack of grades. 
 
 708 
 
 Q. The population, in number, too? <A. Yes, sir, 
 but the population requires service. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe.) Is not the route from 
 
 New York to Chicago generally regarded as the 
 
 709 best one from the company’s point of view? A. 
 We naturally feel that it is. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding.) Well, now, what is the 
 fact, Mr. Vosburgh—is it not that on trains 
 leaving New York for western points, whether 
 within or without the State of New York on any 
 of these railroads excepting on one train passen- 
 
 710 gers are accepted and do ride both interstate and 
 intrastate in the same cars and on the same 
 train? <A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Hale.) I would like in this connec- 
 tion to get a little information. It may be legiti- 
 mate here. What percentage, if you can tell us, 
 
145 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 of passengers on the Empire State, going west, 
 have already signified their intention to go be- 
 yond Buffalo by the purchase of transportation? 
 A. Judge, you have picked out the one train on 
 our railroad which is almost exclusively an intra- 
 state train. It carries only coaches and parlor 
 cars, and as I say, it is almost exclusively intra- 
 state. That is not true of any other important 
 train on the railroad. We have trains leaving for 
 Chicago through the day, carrying sleeping cars 
 to Chicago and the west, on which we handle in- 
 trastate travel, and which could be used without 
 the slightest difficulty in defeating the interstate 
 fare, as brought out this morning in the testi- 
 mony. 
 
 Q. Now, that is a very fair answer in all re- 
 spects but the one I want, namely, what percent- 
 age, if there be an ascertainable percentage on 
 the Empire State going west, are really inter- 
 state? A. I do not think I could answer. 
 
 Q. Is there 1 per cent? Well, I just said I don’t 
 think I can tell you. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Are there any further ques- 
 tions of this witness? 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Holmes.) In your line running 
 from, we will say Dunkirk down toward Titus- 
 ville, what was the local fare in 1907, up to the 
 time the Federal order went into effect? A. I 
 am not sure, I would say 214 cents a mile. 
 
 Q. And on the line going down to Williams- 
 port? A. 314 cents per mile. 
 
 Q. During that time was there a mileage book 
 sold at a less rate net than 214 cents? A. There 
 
 ot 
 
 711 
 
 712 
 
 713 
 
 714 
 
 715 
 
716 
 
 717 
 
 718 
 
 719 
 
 720 
 
 146 
 
 Paper 4 
 was a mileage book sold in that territory at, as I 
 recall it, 214 cents net. 
 
 Q. In other words, there was $35 collected for 
 a thousand mile book, with a rebate of $2.50 or 
 $3.50, as the case might be? A. I think so. 
 
 Q. You are familiar with the traffic between 
 Detroit and Chicago? A. In a general way. 
 
 @. And the rate between Detroit and Chicago 
 in 1907, or we will say prior to the Federal con- 
 trol, was what? <A. I do not believe I can tell you, 
 Mr. Holmes. 
 
 Q. Well, it was based on the Wabash mileage 
 at any rate? A. I would not undertake to tell 
 you that. 
 
 Mr. Holmes: I would like to have the record 
 show the rate over the Wabash railroad and our 
 line between Detroit and Chicago on passenger 
 fares, and I would like to have the mileage book 
 rate, the gross and the net. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: What is the object of that, Mr. 
 Holmes? 
 
 Mr. Holmes: Well, the object is simply to 
 show in the further proceeding of which this may 
 be part, the mileage book question which was 
 brought up here this morning. It has a bearing 
 on the New York Central Lines. Nevertheless, I 
 don’t care to come in on that. 
 
 _ Exam. LaRoe: I prefer that we leave that to 
 a subsequent proceeding. I cannot concede, if I 
 
 correctly understand this proceeding, that the 
 
 Commission will make any order in this case with 
 regard to mileage books — that is the propriety of 
 issuing them. I do not understand that to be one 
 
147 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 721 
 of the issues in this proceeding. Is that your 
 
 understanding, Mr. Paulding? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: As part of the general case, 
 Mr. Examiner, that the statute is here in New 
 York as to the issuance of a two-cents mileage 
 book. 
 
 Hxam. LaRoe: You do not have any mileage 
 books in effect? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: No, and it was only as part of 
 the history in the case that I put it in. What we 
 are asking is the application of the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission’s order, interstate to 
 State rates, and that of course, includes all rates. 
 
 Mr. Holmes: The question has a bearing on 
 the net earnings of the road previous to govern- 
 ment’s control, and previous to the time of the 
 Interstate Commerce Commission’s order of this 
 increase. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Of course, our tariffs show in 
 Washington what the rates are between Detroit 
 and Chicago during any period that you have in 
 mind. They also show what the distances are 
 and what mileage books are, so we have the in- 
 formation right there. 
 
 Mr. Holmes: I have the information in connec- 
 tion with this, however, and I will bring it up and 
 
 722 
 
 123 
 
 file the report with you as part of these proceed- 725 
 
 ings. 
 Exam. LaRoe: (Very well. You may do that. 
 Is there anything further from this witness? 
 
 (No response. ) 
 
148 
 
 726 Paper 4 
 Exam. LaRoe: That is all. 
 
 (Witness excused.) 
 
 Wirtiam S. Katuman was thereupon called as 
 a witness, and having been duly sworn, testified 
 as follows: 
 
 127 I a 
 
 Direct examination: 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding.) What is your posi- 
 tion? A. Commerce assistant to the vice-presi- 
 dent, traffic department, New York Central Lines. 
 
 (). You have been connected with the railroad 
 business in New York State for a number of 
 years? A. New York Central, twenty years; 
 thirty years altogether. 
 
 (). Have you had any particular experience 
 with the rates in the milk and cream business in 
 the State of New York and interstate in your 
 locality? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you made a study of that situation? 
 729 A Yes, sir. 
 
 @. And you have testified before the Commis- 
 sion a number of times, upon matters particularly 
 in so-called milk and cream cases?, A. 8558, yes, 
 sir. 
 
 (). The rates upon milk and cream were on Au- 
 gust 26th, interstate, advanced 20 per cent in ac- 
 
 730 cordance with the decision of the Interstate Com- 
 merce Commission, were they not? <A. Inter- 
 state, yes. 
 
 Q. And intrastate, what happened? <A. No ad- 
 vance —that is within New York State. 
 
 Q. Will you in your own words give us a pic- 
 
 728 
 
149 
 
 Paper 4 
 ture, if you can, of the situation in the milk and 
 cream business in the State of New York, and in 
 the surrounding states, interstate and intrastate? 
 A. The rates on milk and cream into New York 
 —and when I say milk and cream, that includes 
 buttermilk, condensed milk, evaporated milk, pot- 
 cheese,’ skim-milk—they are all carried in the 
 same character of service —were fixed by the 
 Commission in Docket No. 8558, reported in 49 
 I. C. C. 418, into New York city, Hoboken, Wee- 
 hawken and Jersey City, on a mileage basis, 
 graded from ten miles up to 6380 miles. Of course, 
 those rates were fixed by the Commission as ap- 
 plicable to interstate traffic, but the New York 
 Central adopted the same rates as to intrastate 
 traffic into New York city at that time. The New 
 York Central transports into the Metropolitan 
 district, which includes, I will say, New York, 
 Brooklyn, The Bronx, Hoboken, Weehawken and 
 Jersey City, about 40 per cent of all the milk and 
 cream that is consumed. The New York Central 
 operates into the New York district, nine milk 
 trains every day, 365 days a year, approximately 
 160 cars, and the tonnage of the milk and cream 
 is shipped in various packages, such as cans and 
 bottles and so forth, but calculated into 40 quarts 
 a can, the daily transportation of milk and cream 
 by the New York Central is approximately 32,500 
 40-quart cans on a calculated basis of bottles and 
 cans. Of that 40 per cent of the total consump- 
 tion in this district, about 75 per cent is intra- 
 state; the other 25 per cent is interstate. The 
 New York Central hauls one milk train on the 
 Harlem division which is purely intrastate. An- 
 
 38 
 
 731 
 
 732 
 
 733 
 
 134 
 
 735 
 
150 
 
 Paper 4 
 other train is received from the Rutland railroad 
 at Chatham, New York, all of which is interstate. 
 That train has about sixteen cars in it, and it 
 stops at Ogdensburg, New York, on the Rutland 
 railroad, and Ogdensburg is also reached by the 
 New York Central direct. That milk train picks 
 up milk across the State of New York to Rouses 
 737 Point, and picks up milk through Vermont, and 
 also again picks up a little milk in New York 
 State. The New York Central receives from the 
 Central New England railroad at Beacon every 
 night a train of milk, which is combined with milk 
 picked up on the Hudson division south of AI- 
 bany. It receives from the Delaware and Hud- 
 son one train daily at Albany, all of which is in- 
 trastate, originating on the Delaware and Hud- 
 son between Albany and Binghamton. The other 
 it receives at Troy, and that milk transported on 
 that train is largely interstate, by reason of the 
 movement of the train over the Delaware and 
 Hudson railroad. It also receives from the UI- 
 739 ster and Delaware at Kingston a milk train every 
 day. That is all interstate, because it moves to 
 New Jersey and is delivered at Weehawken, New 
 Jersey. It originates on its own lines west of 
 Albany, three milk trains a day, all of which is 
 intrastate. 
 
 The deliveries of the milk on the New York 
 740 Central are at 30th street, 130th street and Mel- 
 “"* rose Junction, New York city. It also delivers 
 milk at White Plains, Mount Vernon, Tarrytown 
 and Yonkers. Some of it is intrastate and some 
 of it interstate; and one train on the river divi- 
 sion of the West Shore, which moves to Weehaw- 
 
 ken and is interstate. 
 
 736 
 
151 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 At the time of the Commission’s decision in 
 Case 8558, the net result of the adoption of those 
 rates by the New York Central, as applied to in- 
 trastate traffic, was a reduction in its revenue, 
 but from time immemorial, rates into New York 
 city have been carried on an equal zone basis via 
 all intrastate and interstate routes. The New 
 York Central adopted the same rates that were 
 fixed by the Commission in the interstate case, 
 and that condition exists to-day, with one excep- 
 tion. The Commission itself stated that rates on 
 milk on the Ulster and Delaware railroad should 
 be properly higher than rates from points on 
 other roads of origin. That is the single excep- 
 tion. 
 
 If we take the line of the Delaware and Hud- 
 son railroad, it will be seen that that railroad has 
 a line of railroad extending from Whitehall, New 
 York, eastwardly to Castleton, Vermont, thence 
 southerly to Hagle Bridge, New York. That is 
 the end of the Delaware and Hudson railroad on 
 its line down to Eagle Bridge. That line crosses 
 the Vermont State line four times between Eagle 
 Bridge and Whitehall, and from all of those 
 points including Eagle Bridge that are shown in 
 red circle on the map, milk is regularly shipped 
 to New York. The train stops at Eagle Bridge, 
 proceeds northerly to Castleton, crosses the Ver- 
 mont boundary line to Whitehall and down to 
 Troy, where the New York Central takes it to 
 New York. That is a daily service. A farmer 
 located just east of the Vermont line to-day is 
 bearing a 20 per cent increase over the rates in 
 effect in August, 1920, while his neighbor just 
 across the line has no increase. 
 
 741 
 
 42 
 
 ~J 
 
 743 
 
 TA4 
 
 745 
 
(0) 
 
 152 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 (). That is an actual condition, is it? A. That 
 is an actual condition. The Central New Eng- 
 land railroad, from which the New York Central 
 receives the same load of milk every night at Bea- 
 con, opposite Newburgh—its line runs across 
 the Connecticut boundary line — if it has a cream- 
 ery located in Connecticut, shipping to New York, 
 the farmer pays more than his neighbor just west 
 of the New York State-Connecticut line. 
 
 On the Ulster and Delaware they have higher 
 rates than apply on other roads; but take the 
 West Shore railroad: The West Shore railroad 
 has a branch extending from Kingston down to 
 Campbell Hall, forty miles, called the Wallkill 
 Valley branch. About six or seven carloads of 
 muk originate there every night. That milk, 
 being delivered at Weehawken and being moved 
 to New Jersey, pays the 20 per cent increase, but 
 a farmer on the east side of the Hudson river, 
 his deliveries being at New York city, bears no 
 increase. 
 
 Now, Mr. Examiner, I would lke to hand you 
 a map of the railroad of New York State. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Do you want this filed in the 
 record? 
 
 The Witness: Yes, sir. 
 
 (The map was thereupon received in evidence, 
 marked, ‘‘ Complainant’s Exhibit No. 11, Witness 
 Kallman,’’ and is forwarded herewith. ) 
 
 The Witness: As is shown on this map, Mr. 
 Fixaminer, in colors, the lines of the railroad that 
 transport milk from points in New York State 
 
153 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 to New York City, and compete with the New 
 York Central Railroad — you observe the lines of 
 the New York, Ontario & Western Railroad shown 
 in green, running up from the state line to Delhi, 
 Kidmeston, Utica, Rome and Oswego, and the lines 
 of the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad 
 are shown as extending from the Pennsylvania-— 
 New York State boundary line up to Richfield 
 Springs, Utica and Oswego. The lines of the 
 Lehigh Valley Railroad extend from the New 
 York State-Pennsylvania boundary lne to Cam- 
 den, N. Y., North Fairhaven on Lake Ontario, 
 Auburn, Geneva, Naples, Hemlock and Rochester. 
 [ should have said the Delaware, Lackawanna & 
 Western also has a line to Buffalo. 
 
 @. Do you reach Syracuse with the Delaware, 
 Lackawanna & Western? <A. Yes, sir; I men- 
 tioned Oswego as the uttermost end of the Penn- 
 sylvania Railroad, extends from the New York 
 State-Pennsylvania boundary line to Buffalo. I 
 am speaking now of milk traffic points of origin, 
 not necessarily the ends of these railroads, from 
 the Pennsylvania State line to Buffalo, and as far 
 as Mayville, New York. 
 
 I should have stated the territory of origin of 
 the milk traffic of the New York Central which is 
 delivered in New York City. It is received on the 
 Harlem division of the New York Central, extend- 
 ing from New York City to Chatham, at a poimt 
 north of Brewster, about 35 miles up from New 
 York. It also originates milk on the Hudson 
 division north of Poughkeepsie to Albany. That 
 milk is intrastate. It receives milk on its Mohawk 
 division, extending from Albany to Syracuse. It 
 
 ag 
 
 751 
 
 752 
 
 753: 
 
 (54 
 
 755, 
 
759 
 
 760 
 
 154 
 
 | Paper 4 
 
 receives on the Shenango branch of the West 
 Shore Railroad, extending from Syracuse to EKarl- 
 ville, 40 miles. It receives milk on all of its 
 stations on the Ontario and St. Lawrence divi- 
 sions, north of the line from Albany to Syracuse, 
 and east cf the line from Oswego to Syracuse. 
 That is the great bulk of the milk traffic today. 
 That extends as far as Massena Springs, New 
 York, near the St. Lawrence River, where two 
 ears of milk start every morning from Messina 
 Springs at seven o’clock and arrive at New York, 
 midnight. It also receives some milk on its main 
 line west of Syracuse, to. Lyons, New York. 
 
 The milk it receives from connecting lines are 
 a car from the Lowville and Beaver River Rail- 
 road at Lowville, New York; a car from the 
 Albany Southern Railroad at Albany, New York; 
 a car from the Mohawk Railroad at Mohawk, New 
 
 York—the Oswego & Herkimer Railroad, I 
 
 should have said; a car from the Norwood & 
 St. Lawrence at Norwood, N. Y.; one trainload 
 from the Delaware & Hudson at Albany, which 
 originates on its line between Albany and Bing- 
 hamton; ene trainload from the same railroad at 
 Troy, which originates on its line between New 
 York State and Vermont. 
 
 As I sad at the outset, 40 per cent of the whole 
 milk trade of New York is hauled into New York 
 on the New York Central and of that approa- 
 mately 75 per cent 1s intrastate. I also said we 
 received a train from the Ulster & Delaware at 
 Kingston, New York, delivered at Weehawken. 
 The traffic itself requires immediate delivery upon 
 arrival, and that has brought about the delivery 
 
155 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 of the milk at the Jersey railroads on the Jersey 
 shore of the Hudson River, and those roads that 
 do transport the milk traffic keep the ferries in 
 operation at night principally for the aceeommoda- 
 tion of the milk traffic, which is very extensive 
 with all of them, so that the situation with the 
 New York Central Railroad is that the lines on 
 both sides of the Hudson River, one being an 
 intrastate line, the other an interstate line, we 
 charge higher rates on milk originating in New 
 York State and transported over the rails 
 operated by the New York Central Railroad at 
 Weehawken, than we do milk originating on the 
 other side of the river, transported wholly intra- 
 state into New York City. All of the other Jersey 
 roads, the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western, the 
 New York, Ontario & Western, the Erie, the Le- 
 high Valley and Pennsylvania Railroad deliver 
 their milk either at Hoboken or Jersey City. 
 
 A glance at the map will show that the roads 
 that have been colored with green, red, yellow and 
 blue largely reach into the same territory the 
 New York Central does. 
 
 The general rule in the sale of milk by the 
 farmers today is it 1s sold and delivered at the 
 ereamery. It is weighed, and the farmer’s return 
 is based upon the butter fat content of the milk. 
 Take a point like Camden, New York, which is 
 reached by the New York Central and Lehigh 
 Valley, the creamery may be located on the rails 
 of the Lehigh Valley or the New York Central 
 but these farmers are paid on a periodical basis, 
 so that right now, even with the 20 per cent dis- 
 advantage in the through rate against a farmer 
 
 761 
 
 765 
 
766 
 
 167 
 
 156 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 using an interstate route, he would not be bene- 
 fited until his contract with the creamery has ex- 
 pired. After that he might fight to have the 
 rates continued as they are, just to draw his 
 milk to the adjacent station of the New York 
 Central Railroad and get the advantage of the 
 20 per cent increase in rates. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe): So at the present time 
 this difference does not — A. Does not make any 
 difference whether — they are under periodic con- 
 tracts, but when those contracts expire, the result 
 would be in many cases that the farmers would 
 draw their milk to the creameries on the New York 
 
 768 Central, instead of to the creameries on com- 
 
 769 
 
 770 
 
 peting roads. 
 
 @. To whom does this make a difference now? 
 A. The wholesale receiver, Borden Company, 
 Sheffield-Slawson Company, mostly, who are the 
 largest operators. They operate creameries all 
 over the states of Connecticut, New York, Ver- 
 mont and New Jersey, and they pay for the milk 
 on the basis of the butter fat content. Whatever 
 advantage has accrued from those milk adjust- 
 ment rates, in my judgment they are getting the 
 benefit of. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding): Take the milk district 
 in the western and southern part of the state is 
 a very large district, is it not? A. That is mostly 
 handled in passenger trains and baggage cars. 
 
 Q. Some of that goes— A. In that case that 
 would not be sold on that basis. The farmer 
 there would elect for himself whether he would 
 ship it inte Buffalo or try the New York market. 
 
157 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Q. Which is done; are both kinds of traffic — 
 A. No, the milk that supplies the cities of 
 Syracuse, Rochester and Buffalo is either milk 
 hauled directly into the cities by the farmer, or 
 shipped in on passenger trains and baggage cars. 
 
 @. But the farmers in that district, do they ship 
 as well to Rochester, Buffalo and Syracuse as to 
 the City of New York? A. Well, it would be to 
 their interest if they shipped it to Buffalo and 
 Rochester. They get better prices and don’t 
 have to deal through the receiver. 
 
 Q. I mean the distance itself; milk goes both 
 east and south and west? A. It does and the milk 
 will find the market where it gives the farmer 
 the most money. 
 
 Q@. Not only intrastate, but interstate? A. 
 Interstate, both. 
 
 (). And the fact is that today, as a matter of 
 rate, the farmer living perhaps two miles west 
 of the New York State line, has a distinct advan- 
 tage as to rate over tne farmer living two miles 
 east, over the line? A. Absolutely. I think the 
 most flagrant illustration of this discrimination 
 is the line of the Delaware & Hudson Railroad 
 from Kagle Bridge to Whitehall, crosses the Ver- 
 mont boundary lne four times. The farmer, 
 depending on the advantage of his location, sub- 
 jects himself to a penalty of 20 per cent. 
 
 Q. But the milk on all of these railroads trans- 
 porting milk into the city of New York, is that of 
 a similar character? A. Entirely. 
 
 Q. That is transported in solid trains? A. In 
 solid trains, milk trains, and I would like to 
 point out in that connection—I haven’t the 
 
 40 
 
 771 
 
 712 
 
 773 
 
 774 
 
 175 
 
776 
 
 777 
 
 178 
 
 779 
 
 780 
 
 158 
 
 Paper 4 
 decision with me—have you the decision in 
 ex parte 74? 
 
 Q. Yes. A. The Interstate Commerce Commis- 
 sion in its decision in Ex parte 74, said, page 242: 
 ‘¢ Milk and cream are usually carried in passen- 
 ger trains, and the revenue therefrom is not in- 
 cluded in freight revenue. Rates on these com- 
 modities may be increased 20 per cent.’’ 
 
 Now, with all deference to the Commission, so 
 far as that statement has any application to the 
 territory east of the Mississippi river and north 
 of the Ohio and Potomac rivers, it is incorrect. 
 The milk and cream that is carried into the larger 
 cities, and in that I include New York, Boston, 
 
 Philadelphia, Baltimore and Cincinnati, is not 
 
 carried in passenger trains. It is carried in milk 
 trains. It is true the service from the standpoint 
 of speed of those trains is nearly equivalent to 
 the passenger trains, but they are not passenger 
 trains at all. No passengers are carried on them, 
 solid milk trains. The type of the car is an in- 
 sulated baggage car, suitable of refrigeration 
 from heat in summer and cold in winter; but they 
 are not passenger trains. However, the Inter- 
 state Commerce Commission’s classification of ac- 
 counts provide as a primary item 109, that rev- 
 enue from milk and cream, when it is transported 
 at rates per package, regardless of weight, shall 
 be reported as milk revenue, and when trans- 
 ported at rates per 100 pounds, shall be reported 
 as freight revenue. Merely as to this milk traffic 
 into these large cities in this territory, it is re- 
 ported as milk revenue, not passenger revenue, 
 because it is carried —98 per cent of this milk 
 
109 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 traffic, outside of passenger trains and baggage ~ 
 
 cars 1s carried at rates per package, regardless of 
 weight. 
 
 ~ Q. (By Exam. LaRoe). Then the latter part of 
 
 the Commission’s statement is correct? <A. Is 
 
 not included in freight revenue. Yes, that is cor- 
 
 rect. Now, the Public Service Commission in its 
 
 decision as to milk traffic said: 
 
 ‘* Insofar as the petition asks an increase of 20 
 per cent in rates on fluid milk, cream and articles 
 taking the same rates, the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission treated this traffic on the same basis 
 as it treated the passenger rates, because milk 
 and cream are usually carried in passenger trains. 
 It may be that in this state the great bulk of milk 
 and cream is carried in special milk trains, but 
 their equipment and movement harmonizes more 
 closely with passenger operation than freight op- 
 eration. Fluid milk and cream and articles tak- 
 ing the same rate should, therefore, be excepted 
 from the operation of this order.’’ 
 
 I am trying to convey that was a misconception 
 under which this milk and cream traffic is classi- 
 fied generally. Certainly as to the large cities in 
 the eastern part of the country, it is not trans- 
 ported in passenger trains. It is transported in 
 special milk trains. 
 
 Q. But the carriers in Ex parte 74, you will 
 recall, asked the Commission to grant a 40 per 
 cent increase or whatever it was in freight rev- 
 enue? A. True. 
 
 (). Milk revenue is not freight revenue, is it? A. 
 That is entirely correct, and I may say in explana- 
 tion of that, there was a misunderstanding about 
 
 731 
 
 783 
 
 784 
 
 785 
 
786 
 
 787 
 
 788 
 
 789 
 
 790 
 
 160 
 
 Paper 4 
 that. What they intended to apply for was a 40 
 per cent increase in all rates on milk, and the ac- 
 counting department did not figure in the revenue 
 on the milk that was carried on rates per package. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding). Answer this question, 
 will you? The milk as brought into the City of 
 New York by the railroads you have mentioned, is 
 not entirely from the State of New York; some of 
 it is from other states? A. Oh, no; the nearest I 
 can arrive at that is this: Of the whole milk 
 traffic into the New York city district, the New 
 York Central hauls 40 per cent, and of that 40 
 per cent, approximately 75 per cent is intrastate. 
 All the rest of it is interstate. 
 
 (). As to the roads delivering upon the Jersey 
 shore, on the other side of the river, the milk 
 which they deliver does not all originate within 
 the State of New York? A. Oh, no; Pennsylvania 
 and New Jersey. 
 
 (J). And that takes the higher rate? A. That 
 takes the higher rate. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: That is all I have. 
 
 Cross-examination: 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Hale). Just one question, Mr. Kall- 
 man,. about that situation up between Vermont 
 and New York. You say there are three little 
 patches of territory, as I understand you, in New 
 York, whose stuff goes through Vermont before 
 it gets to New York city? A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Does the New York man pay under this pres- 
 ent arrangement the interstate rate? A. He pays 
 it on the interstate traffic. We have fourth sec- 
 
161 
 
 Paper 4 
 tion relief order with the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission. 
 
 791 
 
 (). So really the State line makes no difference? - 
 
 A. Yes, it does, because on traffic originating and 
 terminating in New York State, we don’t charge 
 the 20 per cent increase. 
 
 @. In other words, you don’t think that inter- 
 state commerce? A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Although the train goes outside of the line? 
 A. That is correct. We have relief of the fourth 
 section — fourth section relief from the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission, but it is a situation that 
 cannot continue. 
 
 (). Is that not according to all the definitions 
 we have interstate traffic? Is it not interstate 
 traffic? A. Yes, but we have a fourth section 
 order, traffic relief. If that case ever comes to 
 trial, that won’t be continued. It is a temporary 
 relief, for the purpose of putting these rates into 
 effect immediately. 
 
 Q.: (By Exam. LaRoe). I am afraid I miss the 
 point there. You have fourth section relief to 
 protect the lower rates to New York, interstate? 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That applied where? A. Intrastate. 
 
 (). Are your interstate rates lower than your 
 intrastate rates? A. No, they are higher. 
 
 Q. You have got me all mixed up. A. Take the 
 map you have before you, Mr. Examiner, please. 
 Eagle Bridge, New York, is on the line of the Dela- 
 ware and Hudson, extending down from Castle- 
 ton, Vermont; that is the end of the line; they 
 start milk out of Hagle Bridge. They haul it 
 north through Cambridge, crossing the line of 
 
 41 
 
 792 
 
 795 
 
162 
 
 796 | Paper 4 
 Vermont to West Rupert, back across the line 
 at an unnamed point twice, finally reaching Castle- 
 ton, Vermont, then over Whitehall into New York 
 State, then over the main line of the Delaware 
 and Hudson to Troy. We have a 36 section relief 
 order from the up-State Commission, granting 
 797 velief from the long- and short-haul clause as to 
 all rates covered by its order, and we have a 
 fourth section order from the Interstate Com- 
 merce Commission as to interstate traffic. If 
 either one of these cases should be set for hear- 
 ing, [am frank to say in my judgment either Com- 
 mission would not sanction a departure from the 
 798 long- and short-haul clause. HKagle Bridge is the 
 end of the line, but we have the authority to do 
 what we have been doing up to the present time. 
 
 Q. Let us go back to West Rupert again. Take > 
 a can of milk originating there and moving 
 through Castleton to New York, the interstate 
 rate from Rupert —let me start the other way 
 around. That route to Castleton is a very cir- 
 cuitous route. A. It is. 
 
 Q. There is a more direct line through Cam- 
 bridge? A. But that is the end of the Delaware 
 and Hudson Railroad at Eagle Bridge. It wants 
 to get the 100-per cent haul for itself. 
 
 (. Yes, but as I understand it, the rate via that 
 circuitous route meets the rate of the direct route 
 to New York. A. No, the rate from Hagle Bridge 
 is what it was on August 25, 1920. The rate from 
 West Rupert, Vermont, is 20 per cent higher, 
 because it is in Vermont. That situation cannot 
 exist continuously. | 
 
 799 
 
 800 
 
163 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 @. You mean to say that you did not increase 
 by 20 per cent the rate from EHagle Bridge to New 
 York, via Rupert? A. I should say not. 
 
 @. Why didn’t you? A. Because it would be 
 regarded as intrastate. 
 
 Q. Who would regard it as intrastate? A. Ido 
 not know. 
 
 Mr. Waldron: It is all interstate from Eagle 
 Bridge clear to Fairhaven, inclusive, because it 
 passes in and out of the State of Vermont. We 
 increased all of the rates. 
 
 Hixam. LaRoe: Then Mr. Kallman’s testimony 
 will have to be corrected to that extent. 
 
 The Witness: I am in error. 
 
 Mr. Waldron: To Whitehall there has been no 
 increase, but Fairhaven, the last station in Ver- 
 mont has been increased, and all stations south 
 of Fairhaven and Castleton, whether in the State 
 of Vermont or in the State of New York. 
 
 The Witness: I stand corrected. 
 
 (. Well, Mr. Kallman, in a Shreveport case of 
 this kind, it is usually necessary for the Commis- 
 sion to make some finding as to who is prejudiced 
 or hurt, and who is unduly preferred by such an 
 adjustment as this. 
 
 ‘Tf you had to make a finding, in your own 
 words as to who was really hurt by this adjust- 
 ment of milk rates, who would you say was really 
 hurt by the present adjustment? <A. I should say 
 that the producer of milk at Whitehall in this case 
 would be unduly favored. 
 
 801 
 
 802 
 
 803 
 
 804 
 
806 
 
 807 
 
 808 
 
 809 
 
 810 
 
 164 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 ‘* @. You said he did not pay the freight?’’ <A. 
 I know, but he will when his contract expires with 
 the receiver. 
 
 Q. Confirming your answer to the period of the 
 present contract, who will be hurt? A. As long 
 as these contracts exist, I do not see how the 
 farmer could claim he was injured, but as soon as 
 they expire, he would be. These contracts are 
 sometimes for a month, sometimes for three 
 months — rarely more than three months in dura- 
 tion. That is the bulk of it—not all the milk is 
 sold that way, but the bulk of it is handled that 
 
 way. 
 
 Hixam. LaRoe: Is there anything further from 
 Mr. Kallman? (No response.) 
 
 Q. Mr. Kallman, Mr. Paulding asked you wheth- 
 er the milk coming in on the Jersey shore — 
 whether it came partly from New York and partly 
 from other states, and you said partly from other 
 states. A. It does. 
 
 (). Is it not the fact that much or the greater 
 part of it originates in New York State? A. Yes, 
 perfectly true; a little originates in Pennsylvania 
 and very little in Jersey. 
 
 Q. You also made a statement which perhaps I 
 misunderstood. I understood you to say that milk 
 from the southern and western part of New York 
 State was mainly carried in passenger cars and 
 baggage cars. A. Buffalo, Rochester and Syra- 
 cuse,— milk for these points. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Taylor) Is it not a fact that the 
 Delaware, Lackawanna & Western and Erie carry 
 milk in large quantities in milk trains from south- 
 
165 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 ern New York? A. Certainly, the bulk of it. 
 Kivery one of the railroads reaching into Jersey 
 City and Hoboken, the Delaware, Lackawanna & 
 Western, the Ontario & Western, the Erie, the 
 Lehigh Valley and Pennsylvania carry their milk 
 into Jersey City and Hoboken in solid milk trains, 
 one, two or three trains a night, and that milk that 
 comes on the Pennsylvania comes from very near 
 the boundary line between New York State and 
 Pennsylvania. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) Will you state once more 
 just what milk traffic originating on the line of the 
 New York Central, if any, goes to Weehawken? 
 A. One train. That train starts from Kingston, 
 New York, and receives there 9 or 10 or 11 cars 
 from the Ulster & Delaware, all of which orignates 
 in New York State, and picks up milk between 
 there and Newburgh which is delivered at Wee- 
 hawken. 
 
 Q. All the rest of your milk traffic then goes 
 down the east side of the river. A. But it is not 
 all intrastate. 
 
 Q. I didn’t say it was. A. The Rutland Railroad 
 comes down through Vermont and part of the 
 D. & H. milk. | 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Taylor) Does milk into Rochester 
 and Buffalo move to some extent from the same 
 territory as milk which moves to New York City? 
 A. It does, and in that case that milk there is 
 shipped into Rochester on passenger trains, and 
 is not handled under contract with the receivers, 
 as is the case with New York City; so there the 
 
 42 
 
 811 
 
 812 
 
 813 
 
 814 
 
 815 
 
166 
 
 816 Paper 4 
 farmer would have the option of electing for 
 himself where he would send his milk. 
 
 (). And the freight rate would affect their re- 
 lationship as between the shipment to Buffalo or 
 Rochester and the shipment to New York? A. It 
 would; 20 per cent is an item of freight rate. 
 
 817 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) In this train to Wee- 
 hawken, you did not mean to say outside of that 
 one train all of the other milk into the New York 
 Central comes down over the New York Central; 
 lots of milk comes over the Harlem division? <A. 
 Yes, sir. | 
 Mr. Paulding: Now, I will formally offer the 
 decision of the Interstate Commerce Commission 
 
 in Ex Parte 74 and the order of the Commission, 
 dated July 29th. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: We won’t file them as exhibits, 
 because it 1s not necessary. 
 
 818 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I have before me a few copies 
 of the figures that were asked for from the Long 
 Island Railroad this morning. 
 
 Hixam. LaRoe: Can you file them in exhibit 
 form? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: I can file them in exhibit form. 
 
 819 
 
 Hxam. LaRoe: If you will, please. Mark that 
 Exhibit No. 12. 
 
 (The statement was thereupon received in 
 evidence, marked, ‘‘ Defendant’s Exhibit No. 
 12, Witness Kallman,’’ and is forwarded 
 herewith.) 
 
167 
 
 Paper 4 
 Mr. Paulding: Do I understand that Hx Parte 
 74, the decision is received and is part of the 
 record —is physically in evidence? 
 
 Kixam. LaRoe: Yes, that is not necessary; we 
 will understand that that is part of the record. 
 
 Mr. Paulding: Then that completes all that I 
 have to offer, with the exception of the copies of 
 the exhibits. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Does that complete your presen- 
 tation? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: That completes our presentation. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Now, who is next? Who else 
 wants to be heard? 
 
 Mr. Clark: I have a little testimony. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: We will hear you next. 
 
 JoHN ApIcKES was thereupon called as a 
 witness, and having been duly sworn, testi- 
 fied as follows: | 
 
 Direct Examination: 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark) Mr. Adickes, where do you 
 live? A. 211 Fulton Street, Jamaica. 
 
 Q. You have lived there how long? A. In 
 Jamaica I have lived sinee 1855 —in the village 
 of Jamaica. I have lived in my present residence 
 18 years. 
 
 (). Have you been interested in transit prob- 
 lems and civic problems in the Borough of Queens 
 for a great many years? A. I have. 
 
 Q. For how long? A Since 1880. 
 
 823 
 
 824. 
 
 825 
 
826 
 
 827 
 
 168 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Q. And you have made a study of the condi- 
 tions as they affect the people of Queens? A. I 
 have. 
 
 Q. During that time? A. To a certain extent. 
 
 @. You are a member of what civic organiza- 
 tion? A. lam amember of the Queens Chamber 
 of Commerce, and chairman of their transit com- 
 
 mittee; also Jamaica Board of Trade and chair- 
 
 828 
 
 829 
 
 830 
 
 man of their transit committee. 
 
 @. Did you make a study to some extent of the 
 comparative rates between places on Long Island 
 and places in New Jersey, prior to this 20 per cent 
 increase granted on August 26th? A. I did, in 
 Jersey and points in Queensboro. 
 
 (). Did you find that there were discriminations 
 in favor of some portions of New Jersey, as 
 against Long Island—some portions of Long 
 Island? <A. I did, from 40 to 100 per cent. 
 
 @. Where are the low rates in New Jersey? 
 A. From Manhattan to Newark and to the towns 
 adjacent to Newark. 
 
 (). That is, Newark is the central point which 
 is a focus of numerous trolley lines? A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) What fares do you use 
 to Newark, those of the Hudson & Manhattan or 
 the railroad? A. The Hudson & Manhattan are 
 the fares that show the discrimination. 
 
 (. What line does not serve Long Island? A. 
 The Hudson & Manhattan does not. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark) The Pennsylvania sells its 
 tickets over the Hudson & Manhattan line? A. 
 The Hudson & Manhattan gives the same service 
 to New Jersey that the Interborough does to 
 Queensboro from Manhattan. 
 
169 
 
 Paper 4 
 Q. Does the Pennsylvania in your estimation 
 give the same service from points in New Jersey 
 
 that the Long Island gives to points in Long 
 
 Island? A. The. Long Island does not give the 
 same service from its junction points with the 
 Interborough Rapid Transit System at Hunter’s 
 Point and Woodside Junction that the Pennsyl- 
 vania and the Hudson & Manhattan give at Jersey 
 City and Manhattan Transfer. 
 
 Q. Well, because of that, did you have any- 
 thing to do with instituting the movement which 
 resulted in the passage last year of what is known 
 as the Kar] Pette Bill? A. Yes, by a resolution of 
 the Jamaica Board of Trade, a bill was prepared 
 to require the Long Island Road as a part of the 
 Pennsylvania System, to give the same rates — 
 to give rates in Queens not to exceed rates that 
 the Hudson & Manhattan and Pennsylvania gives 
 to points in New Jersey. 
 
 Mr. Clark: I would like to introduce in evi- 
 dence a copy of that Karl Pette Bill, which is now 
 a law in the State of New York. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: That will be received and filed 
 without objection as Exhibit No. 18. 
 
 (The paper was thereupon received in evidence, 
 marked ‘‘ Defendant’s Exhibit No. 13, Witness 
 Adickes,’’ and is forwarded herewith.) 
 
 (). Since the increase was granted to the New 
 Jersey Roads, have you had occasion to compare 
 the rates charged by the Pennsylvania over its 
 own lines, or over the lines of the Hudson & Man- 
 hattan Railroad Company and the rates charged 
 
 43 
 
 831 
 
 832 
 
 833 
 
 834 
 
 835 
 
170 
 
 836 Paper 4 ; 
 by the Long Island Railroad to points like 
 Hunter’s Point Avenue and Woodside, where it 
 joins the City rapid transit system? A. I have. 
 ~Q. Is there still a discrimination in favor of 
 New Jersey? A. There is still a discrimination 
 of 20 to 8U per cent in favor of New Jersey. 
 
 937. -«. You believe with Mr. Hunter that testified 
 this morning, that a discrimination in favor of the 
 towns in New Jersey is calculated to increase the 
 population of those towns, as against the popula- 
 tion of the towns on Long Island? A. Ido. 
 
 Q. Owing to that fact, did you prepare a com- 
 plaint which I have here a copy of, asking the 
 83g Public Service Commission of the City of New 
 York and State of New York for the First Dis- 
 trict, to eliminate those discriminations under the 
 Karl Pette Bull, and to enforce the Karl Pette 
 Bill? A. I was authorized by the Queens Cham- 
 ber of Commerce to appear for the —as chair- 
 man of the Transit Committee to act with you. 
 g39_-—Sé«(). Just: answer the question. You did file such 
 a complaint? A. I did file by authority of the 
 Queens Chamber of Commerce. 
 Q. Would you verify this copy? A. That is a 
 copy of it. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe:. That will be marked as Ex- 
 hibit No. 14. 
 
 840 (The paper was thereupon received in evl- 
 
 dence, marked ‘‘ Complainant’s Exhibit No. 14, 
 Witness Adickes,’’ and is forwarded herewith.) 
 
 Q. In your own residence on Long Island, and 
 your large acquaintance there, have you ever 
 known of any person buying an interstate ticket 
 
171 
 
 Paper 4 
 on the Long Island Railroad to a point outside of 
 the State? A. I do not know of anybody. 
 
 Q. Would you say from your knowledge of the 
 habits of the people in Queens County, that it is 
 or is not a custom for any large proportion of 
 those inhabitants to buy interstate tickets on Long 
 Island, for journeys outside of the State? A. 
 Well, I travel considerably myself and my family 
 too, and have never heard of them, or I have never 
 heard of tickets being sold, or a custom made of 
 tickets being sold at the Long Island depot for 
 stations beyond the State of New York. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) How do you buy them? 
 A. Buy them from New York. 
 
 (). How do you have your baggage cared for? 
 A. My mileage book on the Long Island, or my 
 fifty-trip book gives me the right to have my bag- 
 gage checked at Jamaica. I have got one right 
 here. If I am coming in from Utica, I have a 
 ticket over the New York Central to New York, 
 and. this is from New York to Jamaica. 
 
 Q. You check your baggage on one ticket and 
 
 travel on another? A. Oh, no; I travel on that 
 too. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark) When you get to New York, 
 you buy a ticket to Utica? <A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that is the case with the majority of 
 the people who live in the Borough of Queens? 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) Now, this ticket appar- 
 ently is good only between Jamaica and Brook 
 lyn? A. It gives me the right to go to Long Isl- 
 and City. 
 
 841 
 
 842 
 
 843 
 
 844 
 
 845 
 
172 
 
 846 Paper 4 
 
 Q. You cannot get to Utica on this? A. No. 
 
 Q. When you start your journey at Jamaica to 
 oo to Utica, what do you show, the local ticket at 
 Jamaica to get your baggage checked through to 
 Utica? A. I buy my Utica ticket when I am in 
 town. 
 
 @. Then you show that to the Jamaica agent, 
 in addition to this? A. Yes, in addition to that, 
 or if I had my mileage book —we formerly used 
 a mileage book. 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark) Now, Mr. Adickes, the city 
 rapid transit system, socalled, extends as far as 
 Jamaica, does it? A. There is one line extends to 
 
 848 the village of Jamaica. That is four miles be- 
 yond the Brooklyn city line. Another division 
 on Liberty avenue extends about two miles into 
 the Borough of Queens, beyond the Brooklyn city 
 line. What is known as the Corona avenue divi- 
 sion extends into the Borough of Queens, about 
 four and a half miles, perhaps five. 
 
 849 (. That parallels the north side division of the 
 
 Long Island Railroad? A. Yes; and another short 
 
 division of the city rapid transit system extends 
 to Astoria. 
 
 (). I have here a copy of the map of the Bor- 
 ough of Queens, which I believe was prepared by 
 you. Will you examine it and state whether it 
 was? A. Yes, I prepared that map. 
 
 Q. That shows the lines of the Long Island 
 Railroad? A. Yes. 
 
 Q. It also shows the line which was made by 
 the Long Island Railroad and the B. R. T. rapid 
 transit company dividing the territory to which 
 they would severally extend trolley lines? A. The 
 
 850 
 
173 
 
 Paper 4 
 red line here shows a line that on an agreement 
 between the Long Island Railroad and the Brook- 
 lyn Rapid Transit, by which they divided that 
 territory and by which they were never to go be- 
 yond those lines. 
 
 Q. The Long Island Railroad Company, to- 
 gether with the Interborough Rapid Transit 
 Company owns certain trolley lines up farther on 
 Long Island? A. On the south side there are two 
 trolley lines, acquired by the Interborough and 
 the Long Island in about 1906. They acquired 
 jointly and took control of both lines. 
 
 Q. Since they got control of those lines, has 
 the Long Island extended any trolley lines or have 
 any been-projected? A. No, these lines, each had 
 —under their franchises certain extensions were 
 to be made, but since the Long Island has got 
 control there have been no extensions made. 
 
 Q. Now, from Jamaica to Flatbush avenue, the 
 Long Island has a local service? A. Has a local 
 service. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether that was operated in 
 competition with the service on the Brooklyn 
 Rapid Transit Lines? A. It was operated in the 
 middle eighties to compete with the Brooklyn 
 Rapid Transit lines. 
 
 Q. The fare was reduced for that purpose? A. 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. The fare to-day is 11 cents from Jamaica to 
 Flatbush avenue? <A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. A distance of a little over nine miles? A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. The fare on the city rapid transit lines from 
 Jamaica to Brooklyn is five cents? <A. Yes. 
 
 44 
 
 851 
 
 852 
 
 853 
 
 854 
 
 855 
 
856 
 
 857 
 
 858 
 
 859 
 
 860 
 
 174 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 Q. The difference in fare does not keep the 
 Long Island Railroad from filling its local trains, 
 does it? A. No, their trains are loaded. In fact, 
 they say they are overloaded on that division, 
 which is a fact, and which would be relieved by 
 them running the same service over their Long 
 Island division to Long Island City or to Wood- 
 side. 
 
 Q. That is what you have been endeavering to 
 have the Long Island do, to give the same service 
 to Woodside and Hunter’s Point avenue, to the 
 junction with the city rapid transit lines that they 
 now give to Flatbush avenue, in Brooklyn? A. 
 That is correct, and we were promised that by 
 Mr. Peters in 1909. 
 
 (). And they have never done it — always have 
 refused to do it? A. They have refused to give 
 us those local trains to Long Island City, and I 
 wish to say, Mr. Examiner, that Mayor Gaynor 
 appointed me on the committee known as a com- 
 mittee to relieve congestion back in 1910. The 
 Committee was composed of representatives from 
 all of the boroughs, to make a study of some meth- 
 od of relieving the congestion in the congested 
 part of Manhattan, and after making that study 
 for a year, I could see that Queens Borough, if it 
 had the proper service, would give relief to a 
 ereat many of the congested districts. As it is 
 now, 70 per cent of the Borough of Queens is de- 
 pending on the Long Island road for its transit. 
 That portion of the borough that has a city sys- 
 tem, especially on the Jamaica end, we have lower 
 fares on the Long Island system beyond Ja- 
 maica; everything is based on three cents a mile, 
 
175 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 a bee ; : 61 
 which in my judgment is a detriment to the city 8 
 
 —to the railroad, because of the fact that this 
 Atlantic Avenue division from Jamaica to Flat- 
 bush avenue is now a splendid paying proposi- 
 tion, according to the reports made by former 
 officials of the road, and if that rate that they 
 now have in New Jersey, based on the mileage, 
 was in force as this Act provides, it would give 
 all of these people in the congested district a 
 chance to get from any of the suburban sections 
 of Queens. 
 
 Hixam. LaRoe: The map will be marked Exhibit 
 15. 
 
 (The map was thereupon received in evidence, 
 marked, ‘* Defendant’s Exhibit No. 15, Witness 
 Adikes,’’ and is forwarded herewith. ) 
 
 Cross examination: 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Paulding) In taking the map which 
 you have just put in evidence from Mr. Clark, 
 you said that showed the lines of the Long Island 
 Railroad Company. You did not mean it showed 
 all of the lines of the Long Island Railroad Com- 
 pany? A. It is an official map of the city in which 
 all of the lines of the Long Island Road are laid. 
 
 Q. Not the whole of Long Island? A. No, 
 Queens Borough. 
 
 Q. That is what I mean. Your testimony is 
 confined to the Borough of Queens? <A. Yes. 
 
 @. You do not touch the other portion of the 
 Long Island Railroad? <A. No, sir. 
 
 (). And when you said that through tickets 
 were not bought from Jamaica to any points off 
 of the lines of the Long Island, you confined your 
 
 862 
 
 863 
 
 864 
 
 865 
 
866 
 
 868 
 
 869 
 
 870 
 
 176 
 
 Paper 4 
 testimony strictly to Jamaica? <A. Not the points 
 beyond Queens Borough. 
 
 Q. In other words, you are talking about the 
 rapid transit proposition of the Long Island 
 Railroad Company in the Borough of Queens? 
 A. I was talking of the railroad situation in the 
 Borough of Queens in comparison with the same 
 rates in New Jersey. 
 
 Q. Chiefly with the Hudson and Manhattan? A. 
 Oh, no; the Pennsylvania picks up its passengers 
 at Jersey City from the Hudson tube and also by 
 ferry. 
 
 Re-Direct Examiniition: 
 
 Q. (By Mr. Clark) As a matter of fact, does the 
 Pennsylvania have any great local business to the 
 Pennsylvania station? A. Well, the statistics 
 show that there were only — at the reports made 
 to the Queens Chamber of Commerce showed that 
 in 1915-1916 report to the Public Service Commis- 
 sion showed that the Pennsylvania passengers in 
 and out of the Pennsylvania depot were about 
 five millions. 
 
 (). Through and local passengers? <A. Yes, sir, 
 through and local passengers. That same year 
 the Long Island had out of the Pennsylvania sta- 
 tion, by this report, thirteen millions of passen- 
 gers, 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, are not the fares on the 
 Pennsylvania road to the Pennsylvania station 
 put so high that all of the traffic is thrown in at 
 
 the Hudson terminal? <A. Yes. 
 
 Q. A difference of twelve cents on the local 
 fares— one way fares? A. Before the 20 per cent 
 
177 
 
 Paper 4 
 
 increase went into effect, a round trip ticket from 
 the Pennsylvania station to Newark, if I remem- 
 ber right, was 64 cents, but to get to Newark, if 
 you wished to go that way direct, you could go, 
 one who used the Hudson and Manhattan tickets, 
 would only cost 33 cents for the round trip from 
 Sixth avenue and Thirty-third street, one block 
 away —that could be bought for thirty-three 
 cents. If you wanted to go in by way of the Penn- 
 sylvania station to Newark, you bought what was 
 known as a terminal ticket, costing twelve cents, 
 that enabled them to avoid paying the Govern- 
 ment tax—1614 cents and 12. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Mr. Clark, let me suggest you do 
 not get into too great detail on that. 
 
 Mr. Clark: That is all. 
 
 Q. (By Exam. LaRoe) Just one question. Is 
 it your understanding that there is keen compe- 
 tition in the matter of these commutation fares? 
 That does not express my meaning exactly. Does 
 the Borough of Queens, for example, compete 
 actively with New Jersey and with New York 
 State and with Connecticut for this commutation 
 traffic for the commuters? A. For the suburban 
 traffic? 
 
 Q. Yes. A. I would say it would be an advan- 
 tage for the people of Manhattan to get in Queens 
 for one reason, that between Jersey City and 
 Newark, practically there is a lot of meadow land, 
 not suitable for residences. 
 
 (). Aside from that, is it or is it not true that 
 the communities on the Jersey side of the river 
 
 45 
 
 871 
 
 872 
 
 873 
 
 874 
 
 875 
 
178 
 
 Paper 4 
 compete with Long Island for these commuters? 
 A. They do. 
 
 (J. here is more or less rivalry between those 
 communities to attract people to live within their 
 respective districts. A. Yes, and they also have 
 the benefit of the competition between the Penn- 
 sylvania, the Erie, the Delaware, Lackawanna & 
 Western and the Jersey Central, which we don’t 
 have in Queens Borough, outside of the city’s 
 rapid transit system. 
 
 @. Do you think that that competition is suffi- 
 ciently keen, so that a shght difference in the 
 fares makes quite a difference. A. I am quite 
 positive that it does make a difference in the de- 
 878 velopment of Queens Borough. 
 
 877 
 
 HKxam. LaRoe: Is there anything further of 
 this witness? 
 
 (No response.) 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Is there anything further now? 
 
 879 Mr. Clark: I had some tables prepared. I tele- 
 graphed the Interstate Commerce Commission 
 and asked whether the Long Island had put in 
 any application. I received word they had not. 
 I have a man working up fares. Perhaps he is 
 through with some tables, showing the compara- 
 tive rates. 
 
 880 Exam. LaRoe: We will give you permission to 
 file later tables of comparative rates on Long Is- 
 land passenger fares, with fares on lines in New 
 Jersey, if that is what you have in mind. 
 
 My. Clark: Yes; also I had a table which shows 
 various fares on the Long Island Railroad, which 
 
179 
 
 Paper 4 
 range all the way from one cent to three cents a 881 
 mile. I would like to file that, to show the injus- 
 tice of the accrual if the straight 20 per cent in- 
 crease was granted. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: I think there will be no objection 
 to filing that later. Now, do you have anything 
 further? : 
 
 Mr. Clark: That is all I have. 
 
 882 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: It is going to be desirable to get 
 this case submitted as soon as possible, in order 
 that the Commission may take an early action as 
 is practicable. Do you desire to file briefs in this 
 case? 
 
 | 883 
 Mr. Clark: I would like to file a brief. 
 Mr. Victory: The City would also like to file a 
 brief. 
 Mr. Paulding: I would like an opportunity, and 
 I will do it in a very short time. 
 884 
 
 Hixam. LaRoe: Do the parties desire oral argu- 
 ment before the Commission in Washington? 
 
 Mr. Hale: The Public Service Commission 
 would lke to be heard orally through counsel. Of 
 course, there is a fundamental issue here, which 
 you can readily understand, Mr. Examiner. I 
 want the record clear on one point, and that is 
 that neither the New York Central nor any other 885 
 railroad represented here has made any applica- 
 tion to the Public Service Commission to increase 
 any of these rates on any other basis whatever. 
 If there is any misunderstanding on that point, I 
 will eall Mr. Paulding as a witness. 
 
886 
 
 887 
 
 888 
 
 889 
 
 180 
 
 Paper 4 
 Exam. LaRoe: That is your understanding, is 
 it not, Mr. Paulding? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: That is perfectly true. I will 
 add simply this, that at the hearing before the 
 Public Service Commission in August, upon an 
 application of the railroads, Mr. Willard, who 
 was the only oral witness called by the railroads, 
 laid a great deal of stress on the need of the rail- 
 roads for additional revenue. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: How soon can we get briefs 
 ready? Will 20 or 30 days suffice? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: Yes, sir, ten days. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Can you get them ready by the 
 first of October, Mr. Clark? 
 
 Mr. Clark: I think so, yes. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Will that suffice for you, Mr. 
 Paulding? 
 
 Mr. Paulding: Yes. 
 
 Exam. LaRoe: Let the record show that all 
 briefs will be due the first of October, and that 
 there will be no reply briefs. Those will be final 
 briefs. There will be no proposed report issued 
 in this case. In other words, the report, when it 
 comes out, will be the final decision of the Com- 
 mission. I shall try to arrange for oral argument 
 soon after the 1st of October, and you will be 
 duly notified as to the exact date later. 
 
 All statements and other matter for which per- 
 mission has been given to be filed in this record, 
 must be received in our office at Washington not 
 later than one week from today. 
 
181 
 
 Paper 4 
 Please be sure that counsel are furnished with 
 copies of anything that has been or will be sub- 
 mitted. If there is nothing further, the hearing 
 is closed. 
 
 Mr. Mullen: May I ask that the appearance for 
 the Public Service Commission, First District, be 
 noted, and that they be given notice of the oral 892 
 argument? My name is John A. Mullen. 
 
 Hixam. LaRoe: Yes. The hearing is closed. 
 
 (Whereupon at 4:20 o’clock p. m., September 
 13th, 1920, the hearing of the above entitled mat- 
 ter was closed.) 
 
 46 ‘eles 48 803 
 
 894 
 
 895 
 
182 
 
 PAPER 5 
 INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION 
 
 In the Matter of Rates, Fares, and 
 Charges of THz New York Crn- 
 TRAL Rar~roap Company and No. 11623. 
 Other Railroad Companies in 
 g97_~—sothe State of New York. 
 
 Submitted October 11, 1920. Decided November 
 1385 1920) 
 
 Certain fares, charges, and rates required by 
 State authority to be maintained by the 
 
 } respondents within the State of New York 
 898 found to be lower than the corresponding 
 interstate fares, charges, and rates author- 
 ized by the order in Ex Parte 74, Increased 
 Rates, 1920, 58 I. C. C., 220, and to be unduly 
 prejudicial to interstate passengers and ship- 
 pers, unduly preferential of intrastate passen- 
 gers and shippers, and unjustly discrimina- 
 
 899 tory against interstate commerce. 
 
 John E. Benton, for National Association of 
 Railway and Utilities Commissioners. 
 
 Charles D. Newton and Edward G. Griffin, for 
 the state of New York; Ledyard P. Hale and 
 Joseph A. Kellogg, for New York State Public 
 
 900 Service Commission, Second District; Terence 
 Farley for New York State Public Service Com- 
 mission, First District; Fred W. Putnam, for 
 Minnesota Railroad & Warehouse Commission; 
 R. Hudson Burr and James E. Calkins, for Rail- 
 road Commission of Florida; Morton T. Culver, 
 W. HE. Trauimann, A. D. Rodenberg, and H. M. 
 
183 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 Slater for Illinois Public Utilities Commission; 
 A. H. Helm and W. L. Huggins, for Court of 
 Industrial Relations, State of Kansas; J. H. Hen- 
 derson, for State of Iowa; Hugh LaMaster, for 
 State Railway Commission of Nebraska; Dwight 
 M. Lewis, for Board of Railroad Commissioners 
 of lowa. 
 
 John Holley Clark, Jr., for Chamber of Com- 
 merce of the Borough of Queens; John Adikes, 
 for Jamaica Board of Trade. 
 
 Alfred P. Thom, Charles C. Paulding, Francis 
 I. Gowen, John C. Bills, W. S. Bronson, Clyde 
 Brown, N. S. Brown, George F. Brownell, E. G. 
 Buckiand, and R. V. Fletcher, for respondent 
 carriers. 
 
 Report oF THE CoMMISSION 
 
 Forp, Commissioner: 
 
 In pursuance of our findings in Ex Parte 74, 
 Increased Rates, 1920,'58 I. C. C., 220, we author- 
 ized within a region that includes the State of 
 New York an increase of 40 per cent in the inter- 
 state freight rates; 20 per cent in the interstate 
 passenger fares, baggage charges, and rates on 
 milk and cream; and also a surcharge amounting 
 to 50 per cent of the charge for space in sleeping 
 and parlor ears, to accrue to the rail carriers. 
 
 Thereupon the steam railroad companies serv- 
 ing the State of New York made formal applica- 
 tion to the Public Service Commission of the State 
 of New York, Second District, for permission to 
 file effective on five days’ notice, tariff supple- 
 ments providing increases in the rates, fares, and 
 
 901 
 
 902 
 
 903 
 
 904 
 
 905 
 
906 
 
 907 
 
 908 
 
 909 
 
 910 
 
 184 
 
 Paper 5 
 charges applicable to intrastate traffic in the State 
 of New York corresponding with those authorized 
 in our report. So far as the application related 
 to rates and charges for the transportation .of 
 freight except milk it was granted by the Public 
 
 Service Commission, by an order entered August 
 
 19, 1920, and the increases became effective 
 August 26, 1920, contemporaneously with the in- 
 
 -ereases in interstate rates. But so far as’ it 
 
 related to passenger fares, sleeping-car and par- 
 lor-car fares, baggage charges, and rates on milk 
 and cream, the application was denied by the Pub- 
 lic Service Commission. Thereafter the principal 
 steam railroads serving the State of New York 
 filed with us a petition for relief in accordance 
 with the provisions of section 13 of the interstate 
 commerce act. A hearing upon the petition has 
 been held, and the views of parties in interest 
 have been presented to us on brief and by oral 
 argument. 
 
 This case raises again the question whether in 
 regulating interstate commerce, under authority 
 reposed in us by Congress, we have incidentally 
 the power of regulating intrastate commerce so 
 far as it affects interstate commerce. In the 
 Shreveport Case, 23 I. C. C. 31, we held that we 
 did possess that power by act of Congress, and 
 we pointed out: 
 
 ‘‘ Congress passed this act with full knowl- 
 edge and profound appreciation of those de- 
 cisions of the Supreme Court in which it had 
 been held that state commerce was that 
 wholly within a state ‘and not affecting 
 interstate commerce,’ as is fully shown by 
 the Cullom report of 1886, out of which grew 
 the act to regulate commerce.”’ 
 
185 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 The position we took was sustained by the 
 United States Supreme Court, and the principle 
 on which we acted then continues to be our guide. 
 But since then the general obligation resting upon 
 us to exercise control over intrastate commerce 
 so far as it affects interstate commerce has been 
 put in the form of a mandate by section 13 of the 
 interstate commerce act, as amended by the 
 transportation act, 1920.” 
 
 “Sec. 13 (3). Whenever in any investigation under the provi- 
 sions of this Act, or in any investigation instituted upon petition 
 of the carrier concerned, which petition is hereby authorized to be 
 filed, there shall be brought in issue any rate, fare, charge, 
 classification, regulation, or practice, made or imposed by 
 authority of any State, or initiated by the President during the 
 period of Federal control, the Commission, before proceeding to 
 hear and dispose of such issue, shall cause the State or States 
 interested to be notified of the proceeding. The Commission may 
 confer with the authorities of any State having regulatory juris- 
 diction over the class of persons and corporations subject to this 
 Act with respect to the relationship between rate structures and 
 practices of carriers subject to the jurisdiction of such State 
 bodies and of the Commission; and to that end is authorized 
 and empowered, under rules to be prescribed by it, and which 
 may be modified from time to time, to hold joint hearings with 
 any such State regulating bodies on any matters wherein the 
 Commission is empowered to act and where the rate-making 
 authority of a State is or may be affected by the action taken by 
 the Commission. The Commission is also authorized to avail 
 itself of the co-operation, services, records, and facilities of such 
 State authorities in the enforcement of any provision of this Act. 
 
 (4) Whenever in any such investigation the Commission, after 
 full hearing, finds that any such rate, fare, charge, classification, 
 regulation, or practice causes any undue or unreasonable advan- 
 tage, preference, or prejudice as between persons or localities 
 in intrastate commerce on the one hand and interstate or foreign 
 commerce on the other hand, or any undue, unreasonable, or 
 unjust discrimination against interstate or foreign commerce, 
 which is hereby forbidden and declared to be unlawful, it shall 
 
 prescribe the rate, fare, or charge, or the maximum or minimum, * 
 
 or maximum and minimum, thereafter to be charged, and the 
 classification, regulation, or practice thereafter to be observed, 
 in such manner as, in its judgment, will remove such advantage, 
 preference, prejudice, or discrimination. Such rates, fares, 
 charges, classifications, regulations, and practices shall _ be 
 observed while in effect by the carriers parties to such proceeding 
 affected thereby, the law of any State or the decision or order of 
 any State authority to the contrary notwithstanding. 
 
 47 
 
 911 
 
 912 
 
 913 
 
 914 
 
916 
 
 917 
 
 918 
 
 919 
 
 920 
 
 186 
 
 Paper 5 7 
 
 It has been urged in opposition to the applica- 
 tion of this principle to the pending case that such 
 incidental jurisdiction as we may possess over 
 intrastate rates is contingent upon proof that dis- 
 crimination exists affecting particular persons or 
 localities. But inasmuch as the basis of our juris- 
 diction 1s our power to regulate interstate com- 
 merece, it follows that the decisive factor is 
 whether the rates under consideration injuriously 
 affect interstate commerce. It is no answer to 
 this to say that if this conclusion be admitted it 
 may have the effect of completely displacing State 
 jurisdiction over State commerce. There may 
 be eases in which intrastate rates affect interstate 
 commerce injuriously in ways so manifest as to 
 make them subject to our control. There may be 
 eases in which the connection of intrastate rates 
 with the movement of interstate commerce is so 
 remote and unimportant that we may properly 
 
 disregard it. But in every case which puts in 
 
 question intrastate rates, the decisive factor 1s 
 whether or not they affect interstate commerce 
 injuricusly to a considerable extent. If they do 
 they are brought under our jurisdiction and made 
 subject to our control, even although the whole 
 rate structure of a State should be involved. 
 
 It has not happened heretofore that we have 
 had occasion to make such an extensive exercise 
 of our authority as is now contemplated, and we 
 could not be moved to do so save by the most 
 cogent reasons. Such reasons have been supplied 
 by the situation in which the transportation inter- 
 ests of the country were placed and the action 
 taken by Congress to relieve that situation. 
 
187 
 
 Paper 5 921 
 
 Our findings in Increased Rates, 1920, supra, 
 were responsive, as the report shows, to legisla- 
 tion enacted by the Congress as part of the trans- 
 portation act, 1920, approved February 29, 1920, 
 now incorporated in the interstate commerce act 
 as part of section 1lda thereof, paragraphs 2 and 
 3) reading as follows: we 
 
 ‘¢(2) In the exercise of its power to pre- 
 scribe just and reasonable rates the Commis- 
 sion shall initiate, modify, establish or adjust 
 such rates so that carriers as a whole (or as 
 a whole in each of such rate groups or terri- 
 tories as the Commission may from time to 
 time designate) will, under honest, efficient 993 
 and economical management and reasonable 
 expenditures for maintenance of way, struc- 
 tures and equipment, earn an aggregate an- 
 nual net railway operating income equal, as 
 nearly as may be, to a fair return upon the 
 aggregate value of the railway property of 
 such carriers held for and used in the service 
 of transportation: Provided, That the Com- 
 mission shall have reasonable latitude to 924 
 modify or adjust any particular rate which 
 it may find to be unjust or unreasonable, and 
 to prescribe different rates for different sec- 
 tions of the country. 
 
 ““(3) The Commission shall from time to 
 time determine and make public what per- 
 centage of such aggregate property value 
 constitutes a fair return thereon, and such g95 
 percentage shall be uniform for all rate 
 groups or territories which may be desig- 
 nated by the Commission. In making such 
 determination it shall give due consideration, 
 among other things, to the transportation 
 needs of the country and the necessity (under 
 honest, efficient and economical management 
 
926 
 
 927 
 
 928 
 
 929 
 
 930 
 
 188 
 
 ; Paper 5 
 
 of existing transportation facilities) of en- 
 larging such facilities in order to provide the 
 people of the United States with adequate 
 transportation: Provided, That during the 
 two years beginning March 1, 1920, the Com- 
 mission shall take as such fair return a sum 
 equal to 5144 per centum of such aggregate 
 value, but may, in its discretion, add thereto 
 a sum not exceeding one-half of one per cen- 
 tum of such aggregate value to make provi- 
 sion in whole or in part for improvements, 
 betterments or equipment, which, according 
 to the accounting system prescribed by 
 the Commission, are chargeable to capital 
 account. ”’ 
 
 In accordance with these statutory provisions 
 we designated four rate groups, one of which em- 
 braces the territory bounded on the west by the 
 Mississippi river and on the south by the Ohio 
 river and the main line of the Norfolk & Western 
 Railway; and we authorized increased rates, 
 fares, and charges that were designed to enable 
 the carriers as a whole in that rate group, ‘‘ under 
 honest, efficient, and economical management and 
 reasonable expenditures for maintenance of way, 
 structures, and equipment,’’ to earn an aggregate 
 annual net railway operating income equal, as 
 nearly as may be, to 514 per cent upon the aggre- 
 gate value of the railway property of such ear- 
 riers in that group, plus one-half of 1 per cent of 
 that aggregate value for improvements, better- 
 ments, or equipment, chargeable to capital 
 account. 
 
 Congress has taken, as the basis for determin- 
 ing a fair return for the railroads, the aggregate 
 value of the railway properties in each group held 
 
189 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 for and used in the service of transportation. In 
 making a tentative finding of the value of the rail- 
 way properties in each group, for the purposes of 
 our report, we included all the railway property of 
 each carrier held for and used in the service of 
 transportation. This should not be construed as 
 holding that jurisdiction over intrastate rates and 
 fares has been taken away from the states and 
 reposed in us. We find nothing in the law to indi- 
 eate that such was the intent of Congress. But 
 Congress has directed that we allow rates that 
 will yield in the aggregate a return of 514 or 6 
 per cent upon the value of the railway property 
 in each of the groups. There can be no doubt of 
 the power of Congress to devise and provide for 
 carrying into effect a plan for assuring to the na- 
 tion’s interstate railroads a fair return upon the 
 value of their property; and the full control by 
 Congress of this matter is not to be denied on 
 the ground that the carriers’ aggregate earnings 
 are a commingling of intrastate revenue and in- 
 terstate revenue. In The Minnesota Rate Cases, 
 230 U.S., 399, the Supreme Court said: 
 
 ‘¢ This reservation to the States manifestly 
 is only of that authority which is consistent 
 with and not opposed to the grant to Con- 
 gress. There is no room in our scheme of 
 government for the assertion of state power 
 in hostility to the authorized exercise of Fed- 
 eral power. The authority of Congress ex- 
 tends to every part of interstate commerce, 
 and to every instrumentality or agency by 
 which it is carried on; and the full control by 
 Congress of the subjects committed to its reg- 
 ulation is not to be denied or thwarted by the 
 
 48 
 
 931 
 
 932 
 
 933 
 
 934 
 
 935 
 
190 
 
 936 i Paper 5 
 commingling of interstate and intrastate op- 
 erations. This is not to say that the Nation 
 may deal with the internal concerns of the 
 State, as such, but that the execution by Con- 
 gress of its constitutional power to regulate 
 interstate commerce is not limited by the fact 
 that intrastate transactions may have become 
 
 937 so interwoven therewith that the effective 
 government of the former incidentally con- 
 trols the latter. This conclusion necessarily 
 results from the supremacy of the national 
 power within its appoited sphere.’’ 
 
 The record shows that the refusal of the state 
 
 of New York to permit the carriers to increase the 
 
 938 rates and fares here in controversy to the extent 
 
 approved by us is costing the railroads between 
 
 $11,000,000 and $12,000,000 annually. In other 
 
 words, the annual earnings of the interstate car- 
 
 riers operating in New York are now between 
 
 $11,000,000 and $12,000,000 less than they would 
 
 be if the general level of rates and fares approved 
 
 939 by us had become effective on intrastate traffic; 
 
 and to that extent the declared purpose of Con- 
 
 gress is defeated by a preferential basis of rates 
 
 and fares maintained by authority of the State 
 of New York. 
 
 This proceeding presents a practical question 
 which we have endeavored to deal with in a prac- 
 tical way. The needs of these interstate carriers 
 for revenue to enable them to provide adequate 
 transportation service and facilities are immedi- 
 ate and, in the interest of the public, can not be 
 permitted to await the consideration in detail of 
 individual fares, charges, and rates. The record 
 shows that the respondent carriers perform the 
 
 940 
 
heat 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 services here in question under substantially simi- 
 lar circumstances and conditions, whether in re- 
 spect of interstate or intrastate transportation ; 
 and that the lower basis of intrastate fares, 
 charges, and rates results in undue prejudice 
 against interstate passengers and shippers and 
 unjust discrimination against interstate com- 
 merce. The present record warrants the findings 
 hereinafter made. Those findings are without 
 prejudice to the right of the authorities of the 
 State of New York or of any other interested 
 party, to apply in the proper manner for a mod- 
 ification of our findings and order as to any fares, 
 charges, or rates on the ground that the latter are 
 not related to the interstate fares, charges, or 
 rates in such a way as to contravene the provis- 
 ions of the Interstate Commerce Act. 
 
 PASSENGER E‘ARES. 
 
 The record leaves no doubt as to the unduly 
 preferential character of the intrastate fares and 
 charges now in effect in the State of New York. 
 Interstate passenger fares are in general on a 
 basis of 3.6 cents per mile as maximum. Passen- 
 gers traveling between points in the State of New 
 York and points in other states may be required 
 to pay 3.6 cents per mile, whereas passengers 
 
 941 
 
 942 
 
 943 
 
 944 
 
 traveling within the State of New York pay only 
 
 3 cents per mile. The basis of 3.6 cents apples 
 on intrastate traffic in every state bordering on 
 the State of New York. In other words, intra- 
 state passengers in New York enjoy a basis of 
 fares distinctly lower than those exacted of inter- 
 state travelers in the same territory, often riding 
 
 945 
 
946 
 
 947 
 
 948 
 
 949 
 
 950 
 
 192 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 in the same. trains, and also lower than the fares 
 paid by intrastate passengers in neighboring 
 states. The record shows beyond question that 
 there are no transportation conditions in the 
 State of New York that justify lower rates or 
 fares, on the whole, than those applicable in 
 neighboring states, or lower than the interstate 
 rates and fares between points in New York and 
 points in other states. 
 
 The situation is well illustrated by the fares be- 
 tween New York City and Buffalo. Of the several 
 available routes connecting these points that over 
 the New York: Central is intrastate while the 
 others are interstate. Exclusive of war taxes it 
 appears that since August 26, 1920, the fare has 
 been $14.27 over the interstate routes and $13.16 
 over the New York Central, a difference of $1.11 
 in favor of the passenger using the latter route. 
 In the case of a passenger occupying a lower Pull- 
 man berth the difference is inereased to $2.36. 
 Moreover, a passenger traveling from New York 
 City to a point west of Buffalo can, by buying a 
 ticket to Buffalo over the New York Central and 
 buying another ticket at Buffalo to his destina- 
 tion, defeat the through interstate fare. Repre- 
 sentatives of the carriers stated that the inevita- 
 ble result of this situation would be the reduction 
 of the interstate fare from New York to Buffalo 
 to the level of the intrastate fare, and that this 
 would tend to disrupt the entire fabric of the in- 
 terstate passenger fares in the territory involved. 
 
 Inasmuch as the excess-baggage charges are 
 arranged upon a scale bearing a fixed relationship 
 to passenger fares and correspondingly graded in 
 
193 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 amount, such charges are governed by the pas- 
 senger fares, and any discrimination in passen- 
 ger fares would necessarily involve a discrimina- 
 tion in excess-baggage charges. This statement 
 concerning the manner in which the baggage 
 charges are determined is based upon the schedule 
 of rates and charges of the carriers now on file in 
 the Commission’s office. 
 
 Rates on MiitK AND CREAM. 
 
 The expression ‘‘ milk and cream ’’ as used 
 herein includes milk, cream, skim milk, butter- 
 milk, condensed milk, evaporated milk, and pot 
 cheese, and for the purpose of indicating the effect 
 upon interstate commerce and upon the revenues 
 of carriers, of the discrimination under consider- 
 ation, we give illustrations as follows: 
 
 The New York Central Railroad Company op- 
 erates nine milk trains daily into the New York 
 City district, carrying 1,300,000 quarts of milk 
 and cream, of which approximately 75 per cent is 
 shipped over intrastate routes and approximately 
 _ 25 per cent over interstate routes. 
 
 Nine or ten carloads of milk and cream per day 
 originate on the Ulster & Delaware Railroad, 
 which extends from Kingston, N. Y., northwest- 
 erly to Oneonta, 107 miles. The cars are delivered 
 to the New York Central at Kingston and, to- 
 gether with six or seven cars originating on a 
 branch of the latter carrier extending southwest- 
 erly from Kingston, are there formed into a milk 
 train which moves to New York over the tracks 
 of the West Shore line. This route runs through 
 a part of the State of New Jersey, the West Shore 
 
 49 
 
 951 
 
 952 
 
 953 
 
 954. 
 
 955 
 
956 
 
 957 
 
 9 
 
 ies] 
 
 58 
 
 194 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 terminals being at Weehawken, N. J., and is 
 therefore an interstate route. Shipments of milk 
 and cream also originate at points along the east 
 side of the Hudson in territory not far distant 
 from that served by the Ulster & Delaware and 
 move to New York over the intrastate route of 
 the New York Central along the east bank of the 
 Hudson River. Cn shipments using the interstate 
 route the rates charged are 20 per cent higher 
 than those over the intrastate route, although 
 there 1s no justification from a transportation 
 viewpoint for a difference in the rates. 
 
 Again, a milk train is operated by the Delaware 
 & Hudson Railroad from Eagle Bridge, N. Y., 
 which is northeast of Troy, in a northerly direc- 
 tion, a distance of 52 miles, to Castleton, Vt., 
 thence southwesterly to Troy, N. Y., where it is 
 delivered to the New York Central. Between 
 Kagle Bridge and Castleton this train crosses the 
 state line three times and again shortly after leav- 
 ing Castleton for Troy. All shipments received 
 before the last crossing of the State line are in- 
 terstate shipments, and others intrastate ship- 
 ments. On milk and cream in this train which 
 happens to cross a state line charges must be paid 
 substantially in excess of those applying on in- 
 
 _trastate shipments moving in the same train. 
 960 
 
 There is no doubt that shipments of milk 
 and cream originating in western Vermont 
 and shipped to New York City district 
 over interstate routes are in direct compe- 
 tition with shipments of the same commodi- 
 ties originating in the eastern part of the State of 
 
195 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 New York and moving to the New York City dis- 
 trict over intrastate routes. 
 
 Furthermore, there is a substantial portion of 
 the State of New York, which embraces, generally 
 speaking, the central portion of the state, from 
 which milk and cream may move to the New York 
 City district over either interstate routes or intra- 
 state routes. For the purpose of illustration we 
 may refer to the line of the New York Central ex- 
 
 tending from Albany to Syracuse with a branch 
 
 line extending from Syracuse southeasterly to 
 Harlville, and to the line of the Delaware & Hud- 
 son from Binghamton to Albany. From this whole 
 territory shipments of milk and cream may move 
 to the New York City district over intrastate 
 routes. From the same general territory, how- 
 ever, shipments may move over the interstate 
 routes of the New York, Ontario & Western, the 
 Delaware, Lackawanna & Western, and the Le- 
 high Valley railroads. Each of these roads has 
 one or more points of contact with the New York 
 Central’s main line between Utica and Syracuse 
 and with its branches in that territory. Ship- 
 ments moving over the interstate routes now pay 
 charges 20 per cent higher than those charged 
 for shipments from substantially the same terri- 
 tory moving over intrastate routes. 
 
 The rates on milk and cream to the New York 
 City district have been considered by us at vari- 
 ous times. In Milk and Cream Rates to New York 
 City, 45 I. C. C., 412, we found that the interstate 
 rates on this tratic were unreasonable and unduly 
 prejudicial to shippers from near-by points and 
 unduly preferential of shippers from distant 
 
 961 
 
 962 
 
 963 
 
 964 
 
 965 
 
966 
 
 967 
 
 968 
 
 969 
 
 970 
 
 196 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 points; and we prescribed a scale of mileage rates, 
 in blocks of 10 miles each, for distances up to 630 
 miles. "The prescribed basis was also adopted by 
 the New York Central on intrastate traffic, re- 
 sulting in a uniform scale of rates over interstate 
 and intrastate routes. By the application of the 
 20 per cent increase to interstate rates without a 
 corresponding increase in intrastate rates, this 
 uniformity has been destroyed. 
 
 COMMUTATION F'aREs. 
 
 The record contains comparatively little evi- 
 denee on the subject of commutation fares, but so 
 far as it goes it discloses facts in the presence of 
 which we can not presume that the existing rate 
 structure is Just and reasonable in its established 
 relationships and that it should be adopted as the 
 basis upon which a general advance should be au- 
 thorized, as in the foregoing particulars. We 
 shall, therefore, reserve for future consideration 
 his branch of the case, and as to it we do not now 
 make any finding or enter any order, but we shall 
 keep the ease open for further investigation, lim- 
 ited to the subject of commutation fares and com- 
 mutation baggage charges in the State of New 
 York as to the question whether they cause any 
 undue or unreasonable advantage, preference, or 
 prejudice as between persons or localities in in- 
 trastate commerce on the one hand, and interstate 
 
 or foreign commerce on the other hand, or any 
 
 undue, unreasonable, or unjust discrimination 
 against interstate or foreign commerce. 
 
19% 
 Paper 5 
 
 FINDINGS. 
 
 Subject to the above reservation in the matter 
 of commutation fares and commutation baggage 
 charges, we are of the opinion and find that the 
 increases made by the carriers under Kix Parte 
 74, relating to passenger fares and baggage 
 charges, and now in effect, result in reasonable 
 passenger fares and baggage charges for inter- 
 state transportation within the territory involved 
 in this proceeding, and that the failure of the car- 
 riers within the State of New York to increase 
 the standard intrastate fares and charges corres- 
 pondingly has resulted in the past and will result 
 in the future: In intrastate fares and charges 
 lower than the corresponding interstate fares and 
 charges; in undue prejudice to persons traveling 
 in interstate commerce within the State of New 
 York and between points in the State of New 
 York and points in other states; in undue prefer- 
 ence and advantage to persons traveling intra- 
 state in New York, and in unjust discrimination 
 against interstate commerce. 
 
 We further find that said undue prejudice and 
 unjust discrimination should be removed by mak- 
 ing increases in said intrastate passenger fares 
 and baggage charges which shall correspond with 
 the increases heretofore made as aforesaid in in- 
 terstate passenger fares and baggage charges. 
 
 We further find that the increases made by the 
 earriers under Ex Parte 74, relating to space oc- 
 cupied by passengers in sleeping and parlor cars, 
 result in reasonable charges for the occupancy of 
 such space by passengers traveling in interstate 
 
 a0 
 
 971 
 
 972 
 
 973 
 
 974 
 
 975 
 
976 
 
 977 
 
 978 
 
 979 
 
 980 
 
 198 
 
 Paper Hi) 
 commerce in the territory involved in this pro- 
 ceeding, and that the failure of the carriers within 
 the State of New York to increase correspond- 
 ingly the charges for like space for passengers 
 traveling in intrastate commerce has resulted in 
 the past and will result in the future: In intra- 
 state charges lower than the corresponding inter- 
 state charges; in undue prejudice to persons trav- 
 eling in interstate commerce within the State of 
 New York and between points in the State of New 
 York and points in other states; in undue prefer- 
 ence and advantage to persons traveling intra- 
 state in New York, and in unjust discrimination 
 against interstate commerce. 
 
 We further find that said undue prejudice and 
 unjust discrimination should be removed by mak- 
 ing increases in said intrastate charges which 
 shall correspond with the increases heretofore 
 made as aforesaid in interstate charges. 
 
 We further find that the increases made by the 
 carriers under Ex Parte 74, relating to rates on 
 milk and cream, and now in effect, result in 
 reasonable rates on milk and cream for interstate 
 transportation within the territory involved in 
 this proceeding, and that the failure of thecarriers 
 within the State of New York to increase the in- 
 trastate rates on milk and cream correspondingly 
 has resulted in the past and will result in the fu- 
 ture: In intrastate rates lower than the corres- 
 ponding interstate rates; in undue prejudice to 
 shippers of milk and cream in interstate com- 
 merce within the State of New York and between 
 
 points in the State of New York and points in 
 
 other states; in undue preference and advantage 
 
199 
 
 Paper 5 
 to shippers of milk and cream in intrastate com- 
 merce in New York, and in unjust discrimination 
 against interstate commerce. 
 
 We further find that said undue prejudice and 
 unjust discrimination should be removed by mak- 
 ing increases in said intrastate rates on milk and 
 eream which shall correspond with the increases 
 heretofore made as aforesaid in the rates on milk 
 and cream shipped in interstate commerce. 
 
 We further find that, whether the aforesaid pas- 
 senger fares, baggage charges, surcharges, or 
 rates on milk and cream pertain to transporta- 
 tion in interstate commerce or to transportation 
 in intrastate commerce, the transportation serv- 
 ices, In each instance, are performed by the car- 
 riers under substantially similar circumstances 
 and conditions. 
 
 An appropriate order will be entered. 
 
 Kastman, Commissioner, dissenting: 
 
 I am unable to join in the decision of the ma- 
 jority, because I believe it goes beyond our lawful 
 power. The objection is more than technical, for 
 it concerns the basic relations between the state 
 and federal governments, a matter of great 
 moment. 
 
 In essence, the carriers’ position is that when 
 we authorize an increase in interstate rates under 
 section 15 (a) of the Interstate Commerce Act a 
 corresponding increase must be made in intra- 
 state rates; otherwise unjust discrimination 
 against interstate commerce results which it is 
 our duty under section 138 to correct. State com- 
 
 981 
 
 982 
 
 983 
 
 984 
 
 985 
 
986 
 
 987 
 
 988 
 
 989 
 
 990 
 
 200 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 missions may be asked to authorize the intrastate 
 increases, but they need ‘be offered no evidence 
 except the fact of our decision and have no real 
 discretion. The carriers accept the logical conse- 
 quence of this view, if I understand them cor- 
 rectly, by holding that applications to the State 
 commissions are in substance a matter of courtesy 
 and that we could, under section 13, either upon 
 complaint or upon our own motion, prescribe the 
 intrastate rates desired even if no such applica- 
 tions had been made. If this be so, it follows that 
 we could practically at will deprive any or all of 
 the states of authority over intrastate rates, for 
 when such rates are once prescribed by our order 
 under section 13 they ean not thereafter be 
 changed without our consent. 
 
 The record in the instant case is based upon and 
 conforms to this general theory of our power, and 
 it is the only theory, 1t seems to me, upon which 
 the decision of the majority can in full measure 
 be supported. JI am unable to believe that it is 
 sound. 
 
 The Supreme Court of the United States has 
 said : 
 
 In construing federal statutes enacted 
 under the power conferred by the commerce 
 clause of the Constitution the rule is that it 
 should never be held that Congress intends to 
 supersede or suspend the exercise of the re- 
 served powers of a State, even where that 
 may be done, unless, and except so far as, its 
 purpose to do so is clearly manifested. Illi- 
 nos Central R. R.v. Public Utilities Commis- 
 ston, 245 U.S., 498, 510. 
 
 It is in the light of this wise and salutary rule 
 that we should approach the issue before us, con- 
 
201 
 
 Paper 4 
 struing the provisions of the act with scrupulous 
 respect for State authority. It is, I think, our duty 
 to conclude that when the Congress expects us to 
 exercise new powers at the expense of the states, 
 we shall be told to do so in plain and unmistaka- 
 ble terms. 
 
 in defining our jurisdiction, at the very begin- , 
 
 ning of the Interstate Commerce Act, paragraph 
 2 of section 1, states that the provisions of the act 
 shall not apply — 
 
 To the transportation of passengers or 
 property, or to the receiving, delivering, stor- 
 age, or handling of property, wholly within 
 one State and not shipped to or from a for- 
 elen country from or to any place in the 
 United States as aforesaid. 
 
 The language is unequivocal, and there is no 
 subsequent provision which runs counter to the 
 limitation. It is interstate and not intrastate 
 transportation with which the act has to do. Un- 
 der paragraph 4 of section 13 it is true that we 
 may preseribe intrastate rates, but only for the 
 purpose of removing unjust discrimination 
 against interstate commerce. Plainly this power 
 springs from and is merely an incident of the duty 
 to regulate and protect interstate traffic. 
 
 Turning to section 15(a), our duty to establish 
 rates which will enable carriers to earn a fair re- 
 turn upon the aggregate value of their railway 
 property relates and is confined to interstate 
 rates. Without regard to the limitation of section 
 1, there is no ‘‘ clearly manifested purpose ’’ to 
 extend our authority over intrastate rates, and 
 certainly there is none in view of this limitation. 
 
 OL 
 
 ee) 
 © 
 i) 
 
 993 
 
 994 
 
 995 
 
202 
 
 996 
 Paper 5 
 
 Nor is such a conclusion inconsistent with a 
 reasonable interpretation and practical applica- 
 tion of this section. A rule is laid down for our 
 ouldance, but our duty is confined to interstate 
 rates and it is a duty merely to maintain such 
 rates at the level which will yield the return de- 
 sired, assuming that the states will exercise their 
 own power justly and taking into consideration 
 our right to correct intrastate rates which un- 
 justly discriminate against interstate commerce. 
 At this point we may consider for a moment 
 whether or not there is reason to believe that the 
 Public Service Commission of New York is  dis- 
 posed to deal justly with the carriers. Following 
 our decision in Increased Rates, 1920, supra, ap- 
 plications were filed with that commission for au- 
 thority to make like increases in intrastate rates, 
 fares, and charges. With afew minor exceptions 
 the freight increases sought were permitted at 
 once to become effective, as was possible under 
 the state statutes, without indication of approval 
 or disapproval and subject to complaint or inves- 
 tigation in the future. The situation was different 
 as to passenger fares. By a provision of the New 
 York law these are limited to a maximum of 3 
 cents per mile, but the State commission pointed 
 out that it could permit fares in excess of this 
 1000 limit upon a showing that existing fares were in- 
 sufficient to afford reasonable compensation for 
 
 the service rendered. Notwithstanding this inti- 
 mation the carriers offered no evidence and did 
 
 not assert that the fares were insufficient, but re- 
 
 lied upon the fact that we had permitted an in- 
 erease of 20 per cent in the interstate fares. 
 
 997 
 
 993 
 
 999 
 
203 
 
 Paper 5 
 Under the circumstances no course seemed open 
 to the New York commission except to deny the 
 appleation, and this it did upon the sole ground 
 of lack of evidence. 
 
 There is no basis for a belief that the New 
 York commission is disposed to deal other than 
 justly with the carriers, or that it would have 
 been unduly exacting if they had undertaken to 
 show insufficiency of compensation. Upon the 
 facts before us and in a spirit of comity the car- 
 riers might well be remitted to the State tribunal 
 to exhaust their remedies before coming to us for 
 action which will deprive the State of all author- 
 ity over intrastate fares so long as our order re- 
 mains in effect. In this view of the matter what- 
 ever losses in revenue the carriers may have suf- 
 fered are chargeable to their own default. 
 
 But approaching the matter solely from the 
 viewpoint of our own jurisdiction, it is clear, I 
 think, that for such authority as we possess over 
 intrastate rates we must now look to the provis- 
 ions of section 13. The question at once arises 
 whether by reason of this section we have an es- 
 sentially different issue before us than has fre- 
 quently been considered under section 3 of the 
 act to regulate commerce in so-called ‘‘ Shreve- 
 port cases.’’ 'The carriers assert that the issue is 
 different because section 13 not only prohibits 
 
 1001 
 
 1002 
 
 1003 
 
 1004 
 
 ‘any undue or unreasonable advantage, prefer- 1995 
 
 ence, or prejudice as between persons or localities 
 in intrastate commerce on the one hand and inter- 
 _state or foreign commerce on the other hand,’’ 
 but also prohibits ‘‘ any undue, unreasonable, or 
 unjust discrimination against interstate or for- 
 
1006 
 
 1007 
 
 204 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 eign commerce.’’ Their view, as I understand it, 
 is that the word ‘‘ discrimination ’’ in this latter 
 phrase is equivalent to the word ‘‘ burden,’’ and 
 that the effect is to prohibit what was not prohib- 
 ited by section 3, namely, an unduly low level of 
 rates within the State which is yet not alleged or 
 shown to be unduly preferential of or unduly 
 prejudicial against any particular person or com- 
 munity. 
 
 This conclusion I fin'd it difficult to accept. Upon 
 protest the conference committee of the Senate 
 and House of Representatives struck from sec- 
 tion 13 the words ‘‘ undue burden ’’ and wrote in 
 their place the words ‘‘ undue, unreasonable, or 
 
 1008 unjust discrimination,’’ which now are there. I 
 
 1009 
 
 iliy 
 
 hesitate to believe, as the carriers urge that no 
 change In meaning was intended or accomplished 
 by this change in words. Moreover, in speaking 
 of section 3 of the act to regulate commerce in the 
 consideration of the original Shreveport case, the 
 Supreme Court of the United States said: 
 
 It is apparent from the legislative history 
 of the act that the evil of discrimination was 
 the principal thing aimed at, and there is no 
 basis for the contention that Congress in- 
 tended to exempt any discriminatory action 
 or practice of interstate carriers affecting in- 
 terstate commerce which it had authority to 
 reach. (Houston East &@ West Texas Ry. 
 Co. v. Umted States, 234 U. S., 342, 356). 
 
 Surely this language is quite as broad as the 
 words in section 13 to which our attention is now 
 directed. 
 
 If the issue before us is not essentially different 
 from the issue which has been considered in prior 
 
205 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 ‘‘ Shreveport caves,’’ it will, I think, be conceded 
 that while the evidence may be ‘sufficient to justify 
 action against certain intrastate fares and 
 charges, it is not sufficient to justify the all-em- 
 bracing action which the majority approve. This 
 is indicated by the fact that the carriers have not 
 seen fit to rely upon preference to persons or com- 
 munities, none of which are complaining, but have 
 rested their case chiefly upon the allegation that 
 the intrastate rates are upon a lower level than the 
 interstate and fai! to contribute their fair share 
 of the railway operating income to which we have 
 found that the carriers in the eastern group are 
 entitled. For the reasons above stated I doubt 
 our power to change State rates upon this ground. 
 It falls nothing short of an appellate power to 
 substitute our judgment as to the reasonableness 
 of such rates for the judgment of the States. But 
 assuming that we possess this power, is the ev1- 
 dence sufficient to justify us in exercising it? 
 
 Stating the question differently, is there evi- 
 dence that the intrastate fares and charges in 
 question are not producing their fair share of 
 railway operating income and, if they are not, that 
 the percentage increase desired is necessary to 
 bring them to the proper level? ‘That is not, it 
 seems to me, an inevitable conclusion from our 
 decision in Increased Rates, 1920, supra, and in 
 this connection it is desirable to understand 
 clearly the purport and effect of that decision. 
 We were there faced with the necessity of provid- 
 ing without delay the additional revenue needed 
 to bring the aggregate income of the carriers to 
 the level prescribed by the act, and we adopted 
 
 D2 
 
 1011 
 
 1012 
 
 1013 
 
 1014 
 
 1015 
 
1016 
 
 1017 
 
 1018 
 
 1019 
 
 1020 
 
 206 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 the expedient of authorizing horizontal percent- 
 age increases in rates, fares, and charges within 
 and between certain territorial groups. This ex- 
 pedient was necessary, for any detailed consider- 
 ation of individual rates was impracticable in the 
 time available. Nevertheless, it should be noted 
 that the act does not prescribe this method of in- 
 creasing rates, that our duty under section 15(a) 
 is a continuing duty, and that our finding was only 
 that the method employed would ‘‘ result in rates 
 not unreasonable in the aggregate.’’ It rested 
 upon the assumption that extensive readjust- 
 ment would probably be necessary. It is not 
 equivalent to a finding that individual rates, fares, 
 and charges, or classes of rates, fares, and 
 charges, so inereased and now in effect, are just 
 and reasonable. Still less does it follow as a nec- 
 essary conclusion, where State authority is in- 
 volved, that the passenger fares within any par- 
 ticular state must be increased 20 per cent in 
 order to produce their fair share of railway oper- 
 ating income. But if our decision in Increased 
 Rates, 1920, is not evidence of that fact, certainly 
 there is no other evidence of record upon which 
 such a conclusion can be based. 
 
 No doubt it may be unnecessary that the indi- 
 vidual fares and charges within the State should 
 all be considered separately or that the value of 
 the property used in the intrastate transportation 
 should be established and the return now earned 
 upon that value estimated by elaborate computa- 
 fions. But J am unable to escape the conclusion 
 that even if the theory of the carriers as to our 
 power under section 13 be accepted, at least it 
 
207 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 should be shown, by evidence sufficient to justify 
 a valid opinion, that the intrastate fares and 
 charges in question are not now furnishing ade- 
 quate compensation for the service rendered 
 judged by the standard which the Congress has 
 set forth, and that an increase of 20 per cent 1s 
 necessary to this end. 
 
 Summing the matter up, without going into 
 further detail, I am of the opinion that upon the 
 record berore us the decision of the majority in- 
 volves the exercise of a power which goes beyond 
 any ‘‘ clearly manifested purpose ’’ of the Con- 
 egress, and which we ought not to attempt to exer- 
 cise until it is conferred upon us in plain and un- 
 mistakable terms. Nor would such a conclusion 
 leave the carriers without a remedy, if they are 
 prepared to bring the necessary evidence to the 
 attention of the New York Commission. 
 
 1021 
 
 1022 
 
 1023 
 
 1024 
 
 1025 
 
208 
 1026 | Paper 5 
 ORDER. 
 
 At a general session of the Interstate Com- 
 merece Commission, held at its office in Washing- 
 ton, D. C., on the 13th day of November, A. D. 
 1920. 
 
 1027 
 In the Matter of Rates, Fares, 
 
 and Charges of THz New York 
 
 CentraL Rarroap Company and }+No. 11623. 
 
 Oruer Rarmroap CoMPANIES in 
 
 the State of New York. 
 
 1028 
 This case being a proceeding instituted by the 
 Commission upon petition filed, and having been 
 duly heard and submitted by the parties, and full 
 investigation of the matters and things involved 
 having been had, anid the Commission, on the date 
 hereof, having made and filed a report containing 
 1029 its findings of fact and conclusions thereon, which 
 said report is hereby referred to and made a part 
 hereof : 
 
 It 1s ordered, That the common carriers who 
 are parties to this proceeding, namely, Skaneate- 
 les Railroad Company; Norwood & St. Lawrence 
 
 1030 Railroad Company; Middletown & Unionville 
 Railroad Company; Grasse River Railroad Cor- 
 poration; Dansville & Mount Morris Railroad 
 Company and A. 8. Murray, receiver; Massena 
 Terminal Railroad Company; Sterling Mountain 
 Railway Company; West Shore Railroad Com- 
 
209 
 
 Paper 5 
 pany (The New York Central Railroad Company, 
 lessee); Rutland Railroad Company; The New 
 York, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad Company; 
 The New York Central Railroad Company; The 
 Michigan Central Railroad Company; Lehigh 
 Valley Railroad Company; Fulton Chain Rail- 
 way Company; The Delaware, Lackawanna & 
 Western Railroad Company; Boston & Maine 
 Railroad; Boston & Albany Railroad Company 
 (The New York Central Railroad Company, les- 
 see); The Lehigh & Hudson River Railway Com- 
 pany; Fonda, Johnstown & Gloversville Railroad 
 Company; Central New York Southern Railroad 
 Corporation; Buffalo & Susquehanna Railroad 
 Corporation; Arcade & Attica Railroad Corpor- 
 ation; Prattsburgh Railway Corporation; Pere 
 Marquette Railway Company; Genesee & Wyom- 
 ing Railroad Company; New Jersey & New York 
 Railroad Company; Grand Trunk Railway Com- 
 pany of Canada; Erie Railroad Company; Cen- 
 tral Vermont Railway Company; Bath & Ham- 
 mondsport Railroad Company; The Staten Island 
 Rapid Transit Railway Company; Lehigh & New 
 England Railroad Company; The Baltimore & 
 Ohio Railroad Company; The Pennsylvania Rail- 
 road Company; The Long Island Railroad Com- 
 pany; The New York, New Haven & Hartford 
 Railroad Company; Buffalo, Rochester & Pitts- 
 burgh Railway Company; Adirondack & St. Law- 
 rence Railroad Company; The Ulster & Delaware 
 Railroad Company; Niagara Junction Railway 
 Company; New York, Ontario & Western Rail- 
 a) 
 
 1031 
 
 1032 
 
 1033 
 
 1034 
 
 1035 
 
210 
 
 Paper 5 
 1036 Way Company; Unadilla Valley Railway Com- 
 pany; The Pittsburgh, Shawmut & Northern Rail- 
 road Company and F.. 8. Smith, receiver; Marcel- 
 lus & Otiseo Lake Railway Company; Lake Cham- 
 plain & Moriah Railroad Company; Delaware & 
 Northern Railroad Company; Wabash Railway 
 Company; Napierville Junction Railway Com- 
 pany; Greenwich & Johnsonville Railway Com- 
 pany; The Delaware & Hudson Company; The 
 Central Railroad Company of New Jersey; ‘The 
 Lowville & Beaver River Railroad Company ; New 
 York & Pennsylvania Railway Company; Catskill 
 Mountain Railroad Corporation; Central New 
 1038 {ngland Railway Company; Deer River Railroad 
 Company; Dexter & Northern Railroad Com- 
 pany; Glenfield & Western Railroad Company; 
 Marion Railway Corporation; Middleburg & 
 Schoharie Railroad Company; New York Con- 
 necting Railroad Company; Raquette Lake Rail- 
 way Company; and Schoharie Valley Railway 
 1039 Company, according as they respectively partici- 
 pate in the transportation, be, and they are 
 hereby, notified and required to cease and desist 
 from practicing the undue prejudice, undue pref- 
 erence and advantage, and unjust discrimination, 
 found in said report to exist, and to establish, put 
 in force, and maintain passenger fares and bag- 
 1040 gage charges for the transportation of passen- 
 gers and their baggage in intrastate commerce 
 within the State of New York which shall exceed 
 the fares and charges of the carriers now in force 
 and applicable to such transportation in amounts 
 
 1037 
 
211 
 
 Paper 5 
 corresponding to the increases heretofore made jo41 
 by the carriers, row in effect, under Ex Parte 74, 
 referred to in said report, in said carriers’ pas- 
 senger fares and baggage charges for the trans- 
 portation of passengers and their baggage in in- 
 terstate commerce within the State of New York 
 and between points in the State of New York and 
 points in other states; 1042 
 
 It ws further erdered, That said carriers, ac- 
 cording as they respectively participate in 
 the transportation, be, and they are hereby, 
 notified and required to cease and desist from 
 practicing the undue prejudice, undue preference 
 and advantage, and unjust discrimination found 1943 
 in said report to exist, and to establish, put im 
 foree, and maintain charges for space in sleeping 
 cars and in parlor cars occupied by passengers 
 traveling in intrastate commerce within the State 
 of New York which shall exceed the charges of the 
 carriers now in force and applicable to the occu- 
 panecy of such space in said transportation in 1044 
 amounts corresponding to the increases hereto- 
 fore made by the carriers, under Ex Parte 74, in 
 said carriers’ charges for the occupancy of lke 
 space in sleeping cars and in parlor cars by pas- 
 sengers traveling in interstate commerce within 
 the State of New York and between points in the 
 State of New York and points in other states; jo45 
 
 It is further ordered, That said carriers, accord- 
 ing as they respectively participate in the trans- 
 portation, be, and they are hereby, notified and 
 required to cease and desist from practicing the 
 
212 
 
 1046 | Paper 5 
 undue prejudice, undue preference and advantage, 
 and unjust discrimination found in said report ‘to 
 exist, and to establish, put in force, and maintain 
 rates for the transportation of milk and cream 
 in intrastate commerce within tthe State of New 
 York which shall exceed the rates of the carriers 
 1047 now in foree and applicable to such transporta- 
 tion in amounts corresponding to the increases 
 heretofore made by the carriers, under Ex Parte 
 74, in said carriers’ rates for the transportation 
 of milk and cream in interstate commerce within 
 the State of New York and between points in the 
 ane State of New York and points in other states; 
 It ws furthered ordered, That nothing contained 
 herein shall be construed as either authorizing or 
 requiring said carriers, or any of them, to change 
 in any manner or to any extent the commutation 
 fares, or any of the commutation fares, or charges 
 upon excess baggage carried in connection with 
 any of the commutation fares, of said carriers 
 now in foree and applicable to the transportation 
 of passengers or to other transportation in intra- 
 state commerce within the State of New York; 
 
 1049 
 
 It is furthered ordered, That this order shall 
 
 become effective on or before December 18, 1920, 
 
 1050 upon notice to this Commission and to the general 
 
 public by not less than five days’ filing and post- — 
 
 ing in the manner prescribed in section 6 of the 
 
 interstate commerce act and remain in foree until 
 
 the further order of the Commission in the 
 premises ; 
 
And it is further ordered, That a copy of this 
 order be served upon each of the common car- 
 
 213 
 
 Paper 5 
 
 riers who are parties to said proceeding. 
 
 By the Commission. 
 
 [SEau] 
 
 o4: 
 
 GEORGE B. McGINTY, 
 Secretary. 
 
 1051 
 
 1052 
 
 1053 
 
 1054 
 
 1055 
 
214 
 
 oe: elas 2 ota porate 
 gy ee ty oe ae oe a ee 
 oe Ao Te ee eae aaa 
 12:0 fee 6Fr'T 
 16'S ge ge | 1s" 16" 
 o6's¢ | zo-ze | 02% | 02°F 
 felis Sa ae 
 Pe Gs ae ae Ce 
 Seer eee 1s <P x Poe 
 ee GO len saw, «one 
 aac 4 ee is ern 
 a ee adel ies cota eee 
 oe epee ie ee Ura 
 bore eS ae eee eee 
 ah: io Sea eae 
 ahs 5 ee ae He eee 
 ik! ao ae ee ee eee 
 Liat a mys hei BAS clad ee a 
 Ss 2 eon) Sa eg ower 
 Sag ed a a A ah ee 
 EE SS Clipe aes a eee 
 spy | son | som | son 
 syoery | , soaie Syoviy yoe ty 
 Tl® ‘yoer} UIBUL uTeUr 
 IOL | preg | PUO | PATOL 
 
 24819 YIOX MON ut uoryzlod jo yysueT 
 
 ia; 8 16pm ums Se: 
 
 Va 
 soytW 
 
 yorsz 
 ureulr 
 puooveg 
 
 NONANAHANSH Hat On 
 
 re 
 
 Nelaa) 
 
 or) 
 
 “8E 
 “OL 
 G8 
 VV 
 Sot W 
 
 9 
 
 youl} 
 ureul 
 
 qsiy 
 
 10 pvory 
 
 Ce rer ae et 
 
 ores, mi as 
 
 2 AiG ST a Oe! we Se yw eles uUBgzIO jo Ayio ul 
 ** 9UuT] 97819—O]ByNg ‘Jo91}s YsIVg 
 C0 Sener ie Bo. s onele sv.8 “uae oyeyng jo Ayo ul 
 
 ore awe vive: (sila; ee et eve 08 ji("6 ojeyng jo Ayto Ul 
 ie PWR 8) Amy (a Nella '@) Aa 40) in” famine oyeyng jo Ayo ut 
 
 Sigefofian di, w. alanl | siisneet “tees oyeyng Jo £410 Ul 
 he a OUT] 978}IS—AND PUBS] SUO'T 
 
 SNSIepuvuvy—9yVT BNsiepususy 
 
 Ric Here Stee ats qui0og snpog—Agjuey1¢9 
 
 enstepuvueyj—uorjounsr SUNS) 
 
 aval e alate! abla enbnewneyj—o]Ahe py 
 wi Ghent je, trikes ip omen ra pe oyeyng jo Ayto Ut 
 ah marae oie /h) sms gana com Aiouuey eitduiy—uve]() 
 4). esas’) (0, ata oaip yIVed U[OvUL T—10}soGooy 
 foie te) arve Se)- 6) gr elk ofan are: 49NGIVI—9]IIAS}IOOS 
 
 [lopse[q—toysoyout A 
 pees ces 2 cee uops10g IveuU—UBIIO 
 ees at STIMA SUN Ivou—ojyeyng 
 buco tues Seen spltyD rvou—ojeyng 
 eae isan esak tence dur] a1eyg— VITA 
 
 23819 YIOX MON Ul uorjzs0d jo rurursa J, 
 
 orgy 
 Dijantar Peare tints Sim. ales Wem yuniy, puery 
 "+ *"TIO4SOM PUB VUUBMBYOVyT ‘aeavpoq 
 6) {ete in te [a fa @ (8° Bets) © 18 .o, es,el ep Olly oyey pus ystuoT 
 ig. acolo page e muae TO yaorg oyeyng 
 Form aes Ys AE nets see ye1}Wa7) YOK MON 
 sons [BUIUIay, puv jouuNy, viuva[Asuusg 
 cna eg eee oUeIUy oye] pus BiLUpy 
 oie Meer sae eR Sco OLIvIUG eFe'] puv BiuAly 
 Piet + A seer as OLZeJUG Oye] pue wALUI[s] 
 “"ULOJSOMYPION PUB PTEUISAAA ‘UMOJSOMTBL 
 ete aS ojeyng jo ‘w;WY [eururzeay, uormpy 
 ‘*-eiueATAsUUOg pue YIOK MON ULO}SOM 
 "++ -eruvAlAsuueg pus YIOR MON UlEysSO My 
 ‘---erueatAsuueg puv 410K MON, Ul04sa MM 
 ‘+ -ermpatAsuueg pue HIOX MON U10}s9 AQ 
 “""-BTUBALASTUOg Pus FIO MON U194S9 AA 
 "*-gruBA[ASUMOg PUB YIOX MON UI9jSO AA 
 "*-erueALAsuueg pues FIO K MON UI0}SO MM 
 ‘*-eruBATAsUUsg PUB YIOK MON UsJE}S9M 
 “erTueATAsUUOg pus YIO KX MON UlOsA AM 
 ok a 6 a8) Oe.) Posie oe ZIOUSUIVITIT AA pue VIIA 
 
 > eluvalAsudog 
 
 poyeisdo pwor pue worye10d109 Jo suey 
 
 ta 
 
 OCDARAARAARRAARAAARAR RARE 
 
 | 
 | 
 
 SSB 
 
 (Q) ‘UolZVIepIsuod I9Y}O IO SSUTUIVS UO 4U9SUTZUOD SI UII OY} VIM IO ‘QUOUIEOIEB IO YOVIZUOD JapuN poze1edo suVT (qq) 
 
 ‘S}USLI VIVyOVIy dapun pezesedo oury 
 
 {{UdI [VNUUs PULP B IO} VSB 
 
 Jepun poezeredo oury (OD) ‘uoljeiodios Suiyesedo ay} Aq pjoy st yooys [eyideo ssoymM jo [[B uoTyBIodi00 Aq psuxo eur] (q) ‘sands puw sayouBiq (q) ‘oul] 
 ureul (8) :uort}e1odios sutyeisedo ay} AQ pouMo ouUTT (VY) ‘:SMO][O} SB Sosse[O OFUT UOTZVIOdIOD SuTye1edo ayy Jo eUIvU OY} JepuN pednois a18 spBoI oy, 
 
 SNOLL 
 
 “VaOddOO GVOUTIVY WVALS ONILVYAdO ‘MHOA MAN AO ALVIS FHL NINLIM GELVYAdO GVOU JO HLONYT ANV NOILLVOOT 
 
 1056 
 1057 
 
 1058 
 
 9 TAdVd 
 
 1059 
 
 i) 
 CO 
 i) 
 — 
 
215 
 
 Paper 6 
 
 1061 
 
 > 09 09 09 09 0019.10 SHON 
 
 © 
 i] 
 re 
 
 OI 100 09 HAD LS 
 Ke Ae 
 
 2 a 
 
 1062 
 
 Cue wueeter fuels 6, Seen 
 
 wiper 60 :8t age ES eer Sr wie: 
 
 mN 
 
 LC kaak ACSA, aL tm (IR Ck Sa Wal 
 
 lor) 
 
 ‘ogan @ 3eue 
 
 ona Denese 
 
 wls) ‘ween 
 
 eee 
 
 Pe ee tak 
 
 aide si we @ 
 
 ee ONE tHe 
 
 a 
 
 ‘oie te Vp are) 
 
 eat Awege) pee! 
 
 et at at 
 
 Co a Tr i Te) 
 
 Cit ia ie Jie te | 
 
 cree ee 
 
 S © 
 an) 
 ra 
 
 =) 
 re 
 
 Gas ese ea oe bey SinqsuspsQ—uorpoune qreyed 
 eel a eee sprvMpa—uoroune “OQ 9 °5 
 [ZnCl eles 8}00}T—UM0}109B MA ‘4991}S ULB] 
 6feg uk g[[eq WOON —UMOIOIE MM, 
 Glo PZ ot | ee yusoutA odeg—uorpunf UM0}I978 A 
 CF IL | “aoqsey syoxovg—worpUNG UMOZIOZB A 
 [ited a ae Jo,SoyooY—yorag JOspurm 
 We . CLT BuO. 050) On 0,'O 01 S560 S26 ssplig uo1susdsng—tyse[ng 
 rt Aya ta ae TO}N,J——Psepoo MA 
 C6L00TS tee ssulidg vuesse j\[—osnovihg 
 TON Qe foie nen woryoUNL BsNoVBIAG—esnoVIAG Seq 
 02°F “++ “gUIOY ‘JooI}S SoPIBYO—FE “ON JOMOT, 
 peeeg | [See ata Set aw ze purlyorny—owoy 
 cg . GI Coe 6 6 ve ewe 6 ee ee Oy, wre (See ow WOPABLQJ— OF VSIOATY 
 Ze . FEI Cnitmndu ie @. 0 @ 0: .OTS 8 Ce -@ Ries 0.10Ue ee sinqsuspsQ—*®91} 7) 
 1% . 69 ae ee eat em leew oe gy 6) ae, Tae opuvs N—oyV'T zoddn J, 
 GSECw S| e aye] ovuvreQ—uorpoune Iv9[Q yey 
 CGC ere ane ee AgpyoutF7A—uorpoune yoodsoirg 
 COR CIT at seein. ae UOIpOUN[ SUOTV [| —1CULY10 Fy 
 OC ZO esses = Bese stesso —ST[BA FT 
 CEC 2 |e uoTpyoUNne UTBp19}0Y—S UB YOP] 
 16 . 0Z 89, 0.8 8 ieunw 18 cot hwy we eae) Tele ylle foL1y—Apvyzousyog 
 OOo Poe ee Apeyoousyog yNoG—ueulse,) 
 $Z . T seep aa w sisi. 0 Sue edeene . Aueqrpy—Aurqry 4SOM 
 COS Bike seq oBdoysjy—eov[d ulMpleg 
 Wi Ara SI9yUO K—APULTIION uBA 
 Ser let eee aoe a ue ee uorjoune 
 
 wusujng—AjziI9 YIOX MON ‘Joo1}S ICT 
 Rew Lye | eae yieg suyor yg—AAnq uezAndg 
 $8 66F | OUryT 098719 IvdU—UOTPUNL UIAVH 40 
 CeCe |e ee a woTpoune suUNMIEYO—UOTpUNS oI 
 BOTS Se ce te oul] 938}G—UOTPUN[’ OpIsIOATY 
 OL ®. .. _ oe ew we OR Oe eae Ole Shi ee ae ae yapjunqd jo Ayo uy 
 rath wee. . . ee =e ee | 8 Of we ee}, e Cerere aL yIDyUNnd jo A410 uy 
 ceahoneio 9% [Ge ecahe te shag ak a Smee Marerense seal iebeta ranean Sor) TW 
 Pa Om (a a a at $0185) 1V 
 Rien ohe8. fink chiacla-Syrouoh os aerial Soiepres chien a PSSMee oe aN La oat tae $0185) TW 
 © ee ele ore fl 6 © ee ou. le (ee & 6a) Bielle e eifere e716 yo uveIO jo A410 uy 
 ayere ee oe of © e460 © ee ole ew petees el 7 ee EVAL G). 101s} 10.U | 
 
 a rr 
 
 a mm J ie Wk Ti CL TO) a ek IS ede Sen youeisq qleyeqd 
 oeuy "sie We eae wus teh ea) eee aCe qouriq SIYOVESIMSC) 
 
 qoueiq sproyurg 
 ara ho Pe Rr Rud cot yours oseyre) 
 Si ea ee ay Se cite youriq yuaout, ede 
 A REE Rens ee youesq 1oqaezy sjoyoug 
 
 yoursq 104s9qo03y 
 SPs tec ale. coo ah ogee ge saa poo NEN qouvsq o1eyUC 
 
 craic cel Wy eiuewtierie wi /ée ta (el eure) “ee! (6 ey ,et1h bians qouesq x1us0ug 
 pss pT erie ee ehere wiwwarw «| 6 erm ile, © qouvsq UMO}I97B A 
 AES Sea NING) “eee youviq uorjouns gsndBIAG 
 elsde bE Me lisa! fel (ole! Ve) 8, tr olen, ote qouesq oul] pro ‘QULOY 
 So sigs ob GS. See ge eins! eythntephns. Iw. eet wt Ate youesq ouloy 
 iON (Coe er geen. Piece ys Cham ee qoueiq WOJABID 
 ze ‘a lalieret 6) le) 08-5) >¥,-6)-8. s) ison m: Ie qouesq siInqsuspsQ 
 bn. 0 Te eet landal ie) oe ie) abe males wie) ehlectetay Me youeiq BMBIIQ, 
 a’ fa “ei iw! witegio, be) ere! a! eure pl whje, wi (eel yqouriq OVUBIBO 
 shelter ale fel at Wiel wows, ere le: Tena erie wy wne. 6) yqoue.sq AgTOurpL 
 06, @ 0 6 eo -o- phe edge =e) Shee @ aie youeiq YoeVpuolipy 
 @ shew ites w: Wig, (wire) 1a) UIW INES wise sare wBOMS youeiq oT[LAes[0q 
 ay Antero) Siva ya atiexe yqouriq uoTyo9UUOD) S UBULOF 
 Resesyyt 0 px youviq Apeyoousyag puv AOL], 
 Ayre road car eee youviq mojyq Apeyouseyog 
 © Bi Syiel ge ee) louis) eco? Rie Awl kel ne Be, youBiq MOTIOFL TTOATT, 
 
 SR aN Sk Saas (A) CS aI EM IAL COND 12H Yh 
 Ge wus Te wi(elln fete fe: spew lw ‘oie (ome) sh © qouviq S19yU0 X 
 
 suite ic 6 Cire Gad Omy Oe Oly. qouvaq ureuyng 
 TET BORO CRNA MOKA youeaq 490139 YIOE 
 OPE ihe, cane a ate a eC OUT] UIRTA, 
 
 t[BIjUIQ YIOX Mony 
 Pee Ta ote G ce A BS cs oe aunt 
 Be so ysingsi}ig pus Joysoyooy ‘oyeyng 
 EES smno'y 49 puv OsvBoIyH ‘FIO MIN 
 ee se ae sIno'y 49 pus’ OsBoryD ‘YIOX MON 
 Bee ysingsi}ig pus’ Joysoyooy ‘oyeyng 
 Sy eaatatnce sions eet aqjopreyO pues yreg upooury 
 SOG ee Oa: [B1yUWID YIOK MON 
 on ta y UlOyWAON pus ynuImMVYS ‘s1nqsziq 
 ‘tts UTeyQION pus ynuMmeyg ‘sings}ztq 
 
 FRR RRR ae e 
 
Ww 
 
 216 
 
 Paper 6 
 
 OF . 6 ZS . = foe tag tae Tc Vat ga [lk AC Te TOM anh (pm Tin Yar JIRG Dot Oe Vere . L Kee: ha os alge eS ovdoye iy oye jl —espug susp[oy a] Tahini mfa\ Te] Jay fe) (Osh) ee wR? AL youviq ovdoye ayeT e) 
 61° OL 13°9 tee wee) i oe Ok ee Ae, 6F I ret & PGs \eintno Lens wen euis SLLIOPT 410 g—Ajpto yo X MON nines Fore. b)0 oer eer ere ee Se soe qoueiq STIIO JT 40g “J 
 LE 66E 6° Sol | IS ST Ig cI 91° 4S LIAS Ne ep UIsyqyey— AF BIO X MON UIO/IG HT Pur a0. MeN e) 
 Hele . cg ZO . EI Be Get Ge So 9 ERO Ob - a” we Le OL . Or i ee er ee ee ee ar a tor ee o] [LAT IBY esnoev hg OR a) tae! eh ee) TE: WO ere Ee cera ee yousiq osueusyy ay 
 ZS . EL 1Z . Z er ee ee be ee eet eee! eee ST Sar ee A cc . iil a) Bi ye ae eae, oye azae uorjouns poomMusy—vBuoAey Stare te Meets re Se ers) eyes er Beek youviq Ausqly e) 
 O08 . I e9 a a 8) Meine ce ely BP eee a ee D.C Se ae Wei LI . I BL 6, ee) i ee eae SO oye] puvpyooy—siesu0y ie ow ae, Mh) ie To mtartey erie) Tereg, Sue yqoueviq oyeyT puspypooy @) 
 62° 99TT 6g" Ite al di Wika) 10 58 92° CT OS FOF £8 FOF 0. eR, co Foe rc ee, Ve eds) uvdde J, revou—o[eyng 6 aS 8 Soe ee eee ee Se” mee Plow be pew woe, Ss a10yg 489 AA e) 
 SI Sete Ne icameemerte ftw. 6\ re Je acce elise eae Pe uk lve le tote, ST Chet amicgtay frit rere sere Arepunog jeuorjeus1seyUuy—opuvsN 6 Go f6) (eb cence) (a) winte) sua’ ToS Tans. wigikster ore) espug [[esus0g q 
 06 . 6F $9 . L eae wee TP ed) Ve Ta SG Mo OR Me a Oe i) 9% . SP Oy 2" a 0 NOK Ie (ire o[[TAu0jUaT Ivou—yALjgunqd oe oie ee & 0 6 0 "eee le Smee ¢ tae ae Sere youeiq AQTTBA qv 
 OL “OL 26°F ek: ani eh ae we Ons, Goh i SMa gems ST . TT . ‘uorjouns 410d yoo T—¥vpuBMevuO T, YON ome OS Ww yey ess) Me Wee yee Bae youeiq ysodyoo'T av 
 Se SFL 02°68 SI mE SI . I Mra 3 co og o Rome Op. 10 2 9. 6 8, 6 “erg .6) ene, es See: u0}SIMe"J—O[eyNng Sues, 6. (8 f0.ce arene! gece: Se eye “wee meee yqouviq BIVSCINT qv 
 98 EF en ee Zz ee, foc uorjoune opepng YwoN—opegng [oo qouvlg yoq opeyng | qv 
 yes, - 8 €0 . 6S Me enie4 8 18. ori Suianio ip) 2a) a i@) SL . AL 96 . ZI 0. © Oca. 0.6) 0 (bie BO Oe Ope een A MOTA Aegq—Modeqd SGC Ces ee et A ek Ss ee oe oer Yok Tot youviq O[[LAUIpIeY) qv 
 ZG‘ OF ee foot doce: 19'T ppcge. [occ epueMBUO], YWON—eanyeg Joost yoursg epuvameuoy, | qy 
 C0 ZT Geary ce [reece | eee es [ot oe ® IBOL [oe aT —erAwieg |i eer eee qouvsq woyy | qv 
 Ze eg 730) eee coe Z6'9 oe ee yovog oueyuQ—seysoyooyy fro tttttttt young eropreyg | qv 
 80° FES 16° SOT CMa ret ter ee Ml CTS SC het mer | ZI ‘FG GO FL ee ene .@ a) ep 8 asplig wOoTsUsdSNE—19 Sao Y ovey.@ 6: S16) PPO oO Cea eee ae, (ew sr renionie rere ali youBlg ST[B 7 qv 
 09 . FI eT . el BG oO (O. 9)- OL ooh —) one ue fe 85g ZL . GL Bee ee EO! 6) 8 A e-em 16) (Se ig, sulu10oj—uorzyoun¢? SuUTUIO‘ a8) 6 0. 8) SP pe kt PCE de Cle) ee ee ee! ome youelq SUlULOZ) qv 
 eF OL Gghe- | trees pigre ces foe reaes ogg [ttt ttt mex WUuey-—uopedicy |~ 2  eeaee e yoursq ue, uueg | qy 
 GG . GGz 29 . 88 mae er tye ay ae fon AL tas ee oer sha . Tg 19 . cere) or lere (@46) ne 6b 6.8) 0 1% OT[LADNUOIM BT Ivou—suoAT met d) Se a ee WOW eee youelq AIIBQ MO N—SUOA'T qv 
 8% . e9 Z6 . ZI :6ceene  -. Mere o o-se*. fake aod gh 9¢ - os TERS SAS Oe 0 ON'er WS telne” eROLe BIABYB q—ensiepueuey 6S a! oe 8 a Pee e ia ea Breyrs: youelq ensiepueuey qv 
 Lt . Sct reat . 29 at» ee 4-6 oe : er er Yom) ect 2 ee Yee Sa a 62 . 96 2 eh 6, Ge) eo .e 0-0) 6) 0) e)0\-ege? Beas I9}seyo0y—osnowvIhg arceketion serie Shs eRe wee Peel ar sa) et eee aw youviq uinqny qv 
 
 san W son W Sent sad od 4 a bee 42 sed 62 'h Spanuijuo) — [eayua) YIOX MON 
 
 syovly |. see SyOVIy yoery yoe ly fo 
 
 Ie ‘soe ureul ureul urlevul 4814 
 TROL pre x 19440 PALES | PHO0O8. FG peoy 
 e 07819 YO X MON UT uoTZ20d fo rurut4a 7, poyeiodo pvor pu’ uoryesodioos Jo owen | SsB[D 
 
 a 
 
 27819 yIOX MON ut uoTyI0d jo yysue'T 
 EE SY 
 EN, f HUHIUCGHjTUQUUHUHQjiCT TT LLL 
 ‘SUSI oOSvyoVI} Jopun poyeiedo oury 
 (q) ‘WOTZBIOpIsUOd JOYZO IO SSUTUIVS UO JUISUIZUOD ST JULI OY} OIOYM JO ‘JUSUTOVISB IO JOVIZUOD JopuN poyeiodo oury (q_) ‘uel [enuue opIUysep B 1Of Vsvoy 
 
 Jepun peyeiedo oury (OQ) ‘uoreiodioo Suryesedo ay} Aq prey St yoo4s [vyidvo soy jo []¥ uoTye1OdI09 Aq poUMO e9UT'T (q) ‘sands pu® seyouviq (q) ‘euly 
 uteur (8) :u0Tye10di09 surye19do 943 AG pouMO oUTT (W) ‘:SMOT[OJ SB Sess¥[o OJUT UOT}eIOdIOO SuTyesiodo 94} Jo sUIvU OY} Jopun pednois viv spol ey], 
 
 SNOLL 
 -VUOdUOO GCVOUTIVU WVALS DNILVUUdO ‘MUOA MAN JO ALVLS AHL NIHNLIM GALVYAdO GVOU 40 HLONYT AUNV NOLLVOOT 
 
 1066 
 1067 
 1068 
 1069 
 1070 
 
217 
 Paper 6 
 
 a e = 2 
 oO =) —) So 
 
 RGus fe pe 60°28 (eo eee ta ee ee sqOIN—*Bouvure[eg |°° °° OlyO pus eviuvalAsuued ‘YIOX MON 
 9) AR pir cri ark ea eel DES oes 0S Cj I st ws eiele) Is) letats oul] 97849—uolpouns 4seqq 44410 N by ie) fe) Aye). #1 <n; ton 8; 0” ahalyiel fysnal eal teres ee teRe Rename ouedéyy 
 OSs Caryn yest ue et | Bo PLT {2.71 * (00W yoelgq—uoyoune joy Bow” | HOY PV[ PU oLigy 
 cy Sg at (Se aaa ed (acide ey eee ae {ie Sree Se anissyert——eyery Masao, | se ee ayery snseuos) 
 CeOeelace orc |e ee [oe FL "7" *  9UTT 0987Q—"IUBATASUUSJ—UOPJOIIBD Joo ysingspiig puv piojpeig ‘ojeyng 
 Ge re ore ee Pope aiced  es e qty Mun, | eee IOATY] 99801104) 
 ae . T aig ee tet Wi reiay ocahs ei ce, aire) elie) : 09 . ge 09 . Re ay wey) e2 ethics (eer a oan hare pavurAny—sjjIpy puvlysipy aioli Cote eats sie ‘e)tene te)e) wel eh ot (ele ta tery, Aasio ¢ pue oly 
 
 Ze" 2 Som Se [sone Sar 0¢°F 0° °F PET herve prey A). ay TWAS MOT Se: Ar'SU? (Oper 0) <8 er ob) aan.e ener be oSpligl 
 [VUoI}eUsIE}U[—uUOoTJOUN ¢* PEWOTVCUIOS UE | eee gr ee a ns ee peory youvig 
 ee ete |o ee ee pee 19° S200 we lms ann UMOjSOWIS-—UOTPOUNL Yoo oyeyng | UISJSeMYINOG pus oyeyng 
 yy ae Te°9 TO eee eee ssplig uotsusdsng—oy[vyng yseq |" * UOTJOUNL OLIGy PUB OD plzg uotsuedsng 
 (Bog B\ tina, at fctheS Mad Gad 00-9, aa a been. Oat FENARONE ee (UOAY BIA) B01Iy4y—}S0g poyuIeg | -° oll puv yIOX MON ‘oyeyngG 
 zereep Joc feces 91°26 Giese | oe eae Open suas | (ee a ees youeaq opeyng 
 TOL Cate ST Cashes al Micha a acm ee°9 21° ST ek ee felae ca elie ie re: jeinet<e o<f e716: ysingqmoe\N—mo0hairy wie ge-fe te, fe vte\ @: lorhdl a ip) ve eps. Meee e youeiq YsIngMoN 
 eae | eeknee os Lenora 62° 79'ZI | ‘uooune 97e45 Ss [IeA—uorlpoune Uopiy J yIOX MON pusw Ysmqman 
 70°eTe | 90° Or: ae peek een | HIPN CPeeTOULaO LT Ey ee oe eee eee one 
 :3tly 
 
 ZE6E e6' II $8 II 66° IT ah Gea Ras ae ala i Bo [eurursa J, 
 [eryueg «=: puBIXy)—uOTJOUNF UMBIPOOM | °° [e44u99 YIOX MON 
 Poo | 20 Un etree Od | VorltaieZeell Slag os oe aeyooy MeN—woATY wepweyy fo Jo4s9YyO Hog pue Jeary wopreyy 
 
 66ST $Z EI °0' FI $0 FL Gee S | Gaal ey ee le a ae aut] 
 
 07e4Q-gnoTposuMOD—uCTJoUN,, + UMBTPOOM |°°* ‘P1OJJIVFY puv UIAVTT MONT “HIOX MON 
 :pPAO}JIVH_ Pu USABP Mop] ‘YIOK MON 
 Brie eile ee ose ens, Soe burg a eka ee 00°Z £0'°Z Bree D ee eee ee ee ee aC [ie LOR TL ORT pad es ies eas eh eet B 16) 90 q pe VON Ay 
 | Rec, a te eee meh al (a Garner il meer. ae QF vores sss err Taqdurwg—AroUul03}U0 Py Do eae cee mn ee pet are wee SS COL it 
 S, sees Bi 0 ia Bs ee C6 QF'S oc'¢ ee peae Sie bela ee epee 2 ne Tage | jo A410 Uy Sepia es EL Sh Sieh ONS ae ee TOTO) ojeyng 
 7G. c Oko: Yh eogoket nm: hy SB etortane dh ceeterncs CL: oe oie it es. oct nl Pe ola a epg tar a] Syst ont Ae wine netS US AM ers TINT 
 [ole opts o pacenentteceo. | | Rotten. | Pac aceta ele Ol Ze [occ cco. ‘wemoune euopepy—poomson [vert c ttt ttt poepny 
 Sere TOC tee nS | ae eonare ge fy hl ree mcr 2° ZI SAS onli GAN teat AN Se MO DO ANG Cpe LOOTING "sss ) TIOISIAA PUB OLIVIUGO ‘YIOX MON 
 Aerator 4 ecenttimronr. When catcances OL: Trt worst cesses s ABQ; y—uoToun sr poomudysy a0 Orta fet IR 2 KOS | OLA Sf pue IIVMBIOC 
 coum ioe | Wa Nogsacacao. || Paced | menencen ace SOOT [occ ple exey—eyey ovmereg [oo  suospngy puv oremvpoq 
 Pt TOE ie, | HRC PORCe. Al Mens Cee SSeS FED Fe. Desi Taney Onaga) CROC aa and FLO Can de gee MORO) BY (reese tess eees* = “OSPHE Pal SIUMBTacy 
 OF . rz NAIR ee SA se, ‘alae a) ales iae sigs) aahe. © OL F5 ra See. Se oe) at eve ei iegasieinel e 0" i) .« a[Bpuo1j—a][TAos[0q + hLd iain ©). 0ln win: ie eiMtogheliet Le eaieuce ie AINgsyeg puz a] [TAOS[OG 
 
 ZO . 6 @jeh Wi Tet 6) 6 Eee cel Bae Pee tal Jacek «te GZ . OL S_S -Bplel 6.18, '0) We ie, 6 eh Gel m cay Oop @ er e141 ere Oe te oe Ae 8, Ae 
 -punog [vuoljyeuseyuy—uorpounr ouO0[eyy | YOVpuolIpy pues voUGIMBT 4S 
 EOL tec te C6: BULL bine ne ee es adspny—umpiwyg je weyyeyO pur uospnyy 
 8% . 12 o\ [wi (on.e 1m: le GZ . £S G8 . 18 G8 . 1g S, 3, Tele) fel tena w ene) fe Tacit en ewes Iaevessusay~—oul] 94819 Pewee) CN euiain wie eae), He Lowd eed ate a waeel om Aueqry pue woyso, 
 jae . SZ Oe ee eof eh ee te ta eh eee le enie a,c) el Bane iawecie) is Ia,soyooy ‘sollamMoIg-—oul| urIvul 76) ak NI OMCs ae Gc tO tie gro Oe ST[e geseuery 
 86 . Il ap le) aie igs eet ie Ng belce #6 9¢ . c 9¢ . ec CG IAT CCM Tes RC CC hs AOLJT,—A09B[OSsuoyy bp Olek Ceswn, eo yeniend Suteytoitete: oa/eoes ysnqueetty puz AOL], 
 6h . L Pies a mime “fe ete) ooo CEM he ss.defie © is 88 . Ze oe eee @) OF See 6, dl) © 0) © AIVUIOS}UO TA —U0SBUrLyT 20 a eehie O91 OR, O24, NS! 6) ONS ay eitewionte “sie Aay[eA TENE 
 
 < 
 
 OOOOOS AAFARAEANA 
 Oo 
 
218 
 
 P 
 
 Paper 6 
 
 1076 
 
 eT Seah 7 
 og te Pee 
 ene Otte foe 
 OF'9 eet foc 
 02°6 ge-p ofc 
 680% ar 
 16°86 zee. of ccc 
 0S 671 yeh eae | Bedale 
 ose foc pce 
 Tez [ccc pcre 
 98 RT iG Sea ee 
 69°96 ak pare a ate dec 
 £6 FT rage | Se eee 
 CLI Ong fot 
 Eves 10° ¢3° 
 6F II ei pee eee 
 asi cor fcc 
 8e°8 wT fcc 
 sary Son WW sen 
 "049 
 SHV} | tggurpis | 1% 
 re ‘yowa} ureur 
 1®10,L pre 19q10 
 
 Re Meee | Op ase e = S.A alee ras 
 
 #6°9 ae 
 estas 00°Z £0°Z 
 en he ee aes 70'S 
 Sr essa Peeters ze'g 
 Renae test 0S LT 
 Se gor cl OL ¥E 
 i tad 86 92 VL vS 
 Fe ere of" 
 Ae | ney See 1e°Z 
 ey eee beer ee ee CECT 
 sick ice] eee OF SI 
 siya pike eietcae ae $9'TI 
 mn rere) ae oe oF OL 
 cs" cs" cS" 
 
 = sand Pat 89°Z OT'Z 
 Roesch 2 See 2201 
 ge Fee 169 
 nw son Ww Son W 
 yowsy yous} ie 
 ureul ureur 4819 
 
 > «0 ene Sega SSS Se ST APOOL FO: Ata uary 
 
 packs Naar Weta teun ogee quaosa1g— a] [tAoTUR Yay 
 PTR Jat a ee a et SC an Se Sia ee a WY AOLI, jo Ay10 ut 
 ** -9uT] 04840—]JUOUIIO A —UOT}JOUN(*? YOTSOO FT 
 2 aS a][LAropAnyoS—uorjounr rJayAnyog 
 ee SSULIACG BVSOLBIVG—O][TADIUBYII JAY 
 S718. 0140) 19) 9) O™0) 108 us LO ene oul] 97%49—-UOULIO A—AOLT, 
 dul] 938}Q—JUOMIIO A —UOTJOUNL WIBPI9}}0Y 
 
 eee UMOJO[PPIP—UOTJouNL PIOFMBID) 
 ‘moTpoUNnL sUTT 99849—uOT}JoUuNL JIOdYANOG 
 Pergo eran SLOT WUNOPY—uoAy 
 SEEN ENE DA eee. fo5 RG Bo I9}s9y0oY—uoAy 
 nis Bee ee eee ea pus] sutg—ueysor 
 O36 0) eeieia) fo Y9) to. 48 0. e028 2 AIOWIOS}UWO [Ay —Usysor) 
 eae aoe og uldyNG—oul] 0}3¥4S FIO MON 
 Welebee ewae e yovA N}—0ul][ 9989S YIO X MON 
 sree esse scusng eulg—uoryounf pIOfJMBID) 
 ea Tob Oca ei Rute ice RE gd or Boe oe aut] 
 
 23819 YIOX MON ul uorziod jo tummiay, 
 
 a enla: fetle.- 5] wien a aria aes ae 6 \a.6| 4Sa am [eure J, Ioqiey 
 
 [UI9ISOAA PUL VUULMEYIV’] ‘oIVMeVped 
 a 66s eo tere @ whee eis et /6 wospn yy pure OIBMBIOC 
 etemenie ee (ert sense” 8 uew? ae ve ere te de eta) ote uoluy AOL, 
 Bie. (0) 6%ei 6s “Same tw gee) ee teers uojsuluvEg pue AOL], 
 
 give lenend =e teen ee ca ee ie! Web) st ar) © youeiq sInqguyo yy 
 Slee Ye. 0 ene elletete ie: fale? o) lelrelane| ® yqoueiq SINqGyoy 
 Se...» ete e) oe © 5el.9. "bo eee ene e~ie 6 20 ene hee 68 Ssinqyoywy 
  etEe a ee 6a Xe ce a ee ge e- eel ie) 6 ie eta wre la” © sinquo WA 
 
 > ouleyy, pue uojysog 
 Bea Dei ulo}se A PUB OLIVJUGH ‘YIOK MON 
 oe 86 oe <erte a Vole ee Se eta 8) ne ee ee [e1yU989g UIOYZLO NT 
 ae STIIO TAT JUTLOPAT pues OoseUuer) ‘UOAW 
 “ies Se eed ATIBA 99seuor) pue IOJSIYoo yy 
 0, Whe cee. SMe tae tee teeta UMO41OI9C pues UsYsor) 
 Sala: le tantor/are lie) “anieitei=p Sorpynt 6 oli”, pue A19WI054U0 W 
 Seiya wlan se: wilt om wile, ep arse eis) Aptos teunte Mmrmaaie acs uoluy) 
 Save Walls Maeno MENS cee Pe md eM ett U194}10 N pus yovAN 
 8.) fe, Butea) te ieltbw telat P1OJMBID pus UMOJO(PPIPL 
 
 Ee Cee ae ee ee at erat RT pr CIO ae he our'y 984849 BATU 
 Spanuryuo yy — olag 
 
 O DOVOODDDDODEA OODDOREA << 
 
 poyeiedo peor puv uoryesod100 Jo oweN | ssBiO 
 
 93819 YIOX MON Ur UoTZIOd Jo Y}sUe'T 
 
 EEE 
 
 ‘SPUSU osvyous, Japun pozyesedo oury 
 
 (q) {UOT}VIEPIsUOD JOY}O IO SSUTUIVS UO JUISUT}UOD SI JUL 94} IOYM IO ‘YUOUIVEISB IO JOBIJUOD JopuN poyesodo oury (qj) :4ued [enuuUe oyIUyOp B IO} osvo] 
 
 gepun pozeiedo oury (9) ‘uoresodi00 Suryesedo ay} Aq pjey st yoo4}s [eyIdvo esoym Jo [je uorye10d109 Aq peuMo ourT (q) ‘sands puv sayousviq (q) ‘oul, 
 ureur (8) :u0tyBi0dioo Zutye10do ay} Aq pouMO oUTT (VY) :SMOT[OJ SB Sossefo OJUT UOTZeIOdIOO SuTyV1odo ay} Jo eMUBvU oY} JopuNn pednois 918 spvor ot J, 
 
 SNOLL 
 
 -VUOdUOO AVOUTIVU NVALS ONILVUAdO ‘MHYOA MAN AO ALVIS FHL NINLIM CALVYAdO GVOU AO HLONAT GNV NOLLVOO'T 
 
 on 
 
 | ag 
 
 =) 
 hema 
 
 1077 
 1078 
 1080 
 
219 
 
 as) 8) 
 
 €90' TFL 9E 
 
 —d 
 (e@) 
 > 
 re 
 821° && 
 S83 FI 
 90°89 
 €9°€% 
 69 €T 
 7g SOT 
 og 1 
 OT” 
 G38 
 FILS 
 GZ 6G 
 VE" 
 SI'§ 
 G9 GT 
 — S892 E91 
 © . 
 ~ Lyre 
 i) 
 a 
 3 
 Ay 
 €0° 
 66'S 
 0d" 
 ol’ 6 
 66° LET 
 6F VE 
 86° OF 
 Go’ r9 
 6G 6€9 
 92°61 
 62° ELT 
 
 eo 8 6 Fe 
 
 «ote oe 
 
 oe enw 
 
 see eee 
 
 ee ar) 
 
 eee eee 
 
 see eee 
 
 ste eee 
 
 eA ee 
 
 eC at a) 
 
 a 6 epee 
 
 Cees 66 
 
 Wi eiiei 6-6) ie) 
 
 o phe Te 
 
 se 
 
 sae 
 
 Ce ial 
 
 soe 
 
 GT FI 
 89°6 
 89° 9¢ 
 18°81 
 82°21 
 €6°Z11 
 OL: 
 CZ'8 
 tI 'Z 
 96° FT 
 v8 
 86'S. 
 1€°S11 
 69 OT 
 OFF 
 OF Zh 
 PL 6ST 
 £601 
 9¢ OL 
 80‘ 6Z 
 Sh 62 
 6F' 6S 
 aa 
 
 GA DLT 
 89° 
 0 
 O1'8 
 Th 26 
 OL‘II 
 18 VE 
 86‘ FE 
 90° 802 
 1°81 
 2608 
 
 oD ww uw 
 28) ie) oO 
 =) =) = 
 — eS re 
 Ce OCC Jest ee ak Se eat ea) uosuvjsq—Apeyeusyog ele v6 (6) sessile) e. we. 01 (WP) Pie ‘wospny pus OIVMBIOC 
 Pear aoe ra yo coe su0oj—ortauapy |--°+° "0677 suOSpnyy pus oremejaq 
 FOES ER YooID YAON—Ssulidg wesoyeieg | --*- uOSpnyy pus o1eMvjod 
 Saad cae SyIOW sqesny—uorjounr yyNoG f° SWOSpNyT puv sivMepeqd 
 aul] VPpeuBD—YIO X MON[—wUoryounf BpeuBD foc uOSspnyy pus vivMejod 
 Sere ei ome). olnaee nce sags age worounr 
 quiog sasnoy—jeyoyiyAA ‘WOTZeIG OyeT [cc uOSspny, pus oIVeMeloq 
 sucspny pue sVeMvlog 
 W 6, “ele, ee wise, eb ae) &. Be Oe, OO) OE RON ES BS o OLe ATIOABAA TV Bp al a CE  i  a LE ape aae cae a ee OS 
 Breed! @.0.0 wneke Ce 8 Seas «6 e-6 uorjoune uBafsAg 1 #, ese le to~ se, iene U199S9 MA pues o1lleqUQ “yIo X MON 
 2S eEpUs MEO Telvou UolUaG = JooUe [to UC Aya |e scenery cease alee [e1}U9D YIOK MON 
 oe a eet bw 0.4er @, 6a Og Oe © (6! 9) € S -6 Sy oma a BONABD 4V a) Wiseene. p20 a a Le mr Or ee WLS: “‘yerVUI_D yso x MON 
 ‘aeplig uoIsuedsng—uol}ounr epuBMEUOT Jo [e1queD YOK May 
 Sopa aedagtes  s oreyng jo Ayo uy |°° “-erueAlAsuusg puBv YIOX MON U194S9 
 Casa ee at ae PILI[LAA—S19UIOD 8jABAA | °° pABl[IAA PUB PLAC SIOUIOD S,4ATT 
 tice) 6 wie. ere |e F \e (8-6) “eel ee <6 aspug uotsuedsng WW O8) Win Qeieele Wier Ivete ee ees sews *[B1qUE_) yO A MON 
 SSepiteg SORES Ge eer ox rer Soe our] 
 a7e}Q-vIUBA[ASUUOgG—UdACFT Tey YWON [occ yIOK MIN puev ystyo'T 
 * AU YOR MON Ul 4oor}s YLG 7B prVR po f'N J0 OD "We AcTBA YSIyOT 
 So wuoTjouns VADUI)\—UOTIOUNF "A TT [oc oueiq syj@yq Booueg 
 aves mene eg.enle wien as fees esnAey—uorjouns esnAey Sp S a RE 0s Op iayies 6) (4 eens ya: ome ante “youeiq BSNACD) 
 Rn Ree role eo OT ae eovyyy—umany |-+° °° °° youResq voRyI] pus unqny 
 patos Othe Cie b aoa uepures — vat foo youeIq puvpyoD pur wATUATAT 
 ages WIT WLL 0} uooune wey IIT, |. qouBaq slIGT oYBT pus Yotyo'yT 
 WOTJOUNL BPUBMBUOT, OF UOTPOUNG BVIESVIN [°° YouBvld S[[By BIVSeINy 
 Seine Seuss | oss Yoorwayy 04 Jaysoyooy [oo yoUBIG JoysoqOoY 
 oh.e, 18,10) @, iWy 6i/6, OL 9) _aizerie! eee) by een sotde nN 04 BAQUOL) eRe Soro ach “el chal “Rae SP eee aeRT OLE LC] solden 
 “-yorouns vaouer 0} uOT}OUNG WAI UBA Jo youraq woryiy 
 See, MUP Le, A aw ee ea eaig en Lele aIABG Ieou oul'y 93849 sitehiagianis ae Shione mi eiehie Clete iene Seinen, « “qouviq A[LOAB A 
 lee) [eter BY ae CL oul aes eae Ae Le es ojeyng 04 oulr'yT 987849 ae is i ek ee ee “ABM ITE Y AOTIBA ystyo'] 
 Caw 9. Bo BLi9 Le, wl Ow 18, oO 16 lee iaeun, oyeyng jo Aqto ul 2), WSs S50) © di0g “AY [Bulut J, ojeyng—ysiyeT 
 sAaeA YSTYoT 
 euval © (a) (9) @, sce lNe) (bY one iailvi bile; \e' bie) Bee e011) jo AY uy sile/res hse. U109S9 MM pue OlleqUO ‘yI0 X MON 
 Puiet Scape) a) te Tee 8! fe Mie osu eusdIFj— SH 10 WF osuevusyy) elie: ef teuish queen Si ©, by.q aie a) (6luec 6. 6. o neh e) “eIap ame eibslanae. “QUudaIy) 
 pie eee ssulidg ppeayoIy—vo}9—ouselry |AoT[VA BuuBYeNbsng pus osuvuey_ “BdT}/) 
 wipaiie oul] 94%19Q—e1ueB.A [ASU J — TOFU BY Sul of 206, 6 8) oO 1 Oe 0 © eehems Oh keene, © Oia *. ene ene ATTRA 
 Ses ne Bovyy[—oalty euuvyonbsng {--"* "+" "+" *** “ewuuByenbsng pues vondABD 
 Se Wie @ Vi pe ¢ Be S wus Mani te Ae OSIMSQ—OSNIBIAG whe A6. Bi, Oto) heey © 6.0, caer aie asnoBIAG pue OZOMSQC) 
 ee ae ae ojeyNng—uojywVeyoulg |°** “uI0JsSoAA PUB VUUBMBAIVT ‘YIOX MON 
 sree sss snqaeuUuloulj—uorjouns puBlz}IOD "ss" s""IOK MON [BIJUID PUB OLIGT 
 eset eae OS esnoviAQ—uo}uIBysuTg |'*'"yIOX MON pus UoJUIBYySUIg ‘osnoBIAG 
 
 ODOVOOVOVVOH NOOUOOVOOOVOONVND CARRERA 
 
220 
 
 Paper 6 
 
 1086 
 
 66°86 Gee Bp egy ee Dp ee €z'09 joulloyeIg—HaTyUNG :yeetD saapIo—opeyng poo aur] UIe | ey 
 :sMoT WS pue oseayoO ‘yIOX MON 
 te 4 F 6e e See Fare | Seer eer tee BP Sargaryccias 26 PN ce MTN, to at Det ee tar | eso1opuooly—uorjounsr ‘eSOLIOPUOOLT, Cee NB j80 Se eh ey Oe bee aw (sf i PY Od ANE elses ae SAS BSOIOPUODL I, a 
 69 . (rd Gaal 6 ne ed COE at ee ie een ewer GS . OL CCN fot et et ee ee B1loulouUue qi —}Ulo g peacutes eineva. wits. seise'e Te ‘alye: eloulsuuBed pue ysingsyel gq a 
 Ig" 16 299 Sscreuse tare OE | eee tL samen t Ce ysis yess 61 "e9 $<: kes ONES sels ial Pp tov oye] —eiowouur(d a a aE SCC “‘ploe[g oye] pue AVBNVIYVYO rat 
 26 3 cé6e 00 . SCL Re «| le ORDO ee ee . C6 6S . SPL a 52 AF 6 Ese d OMS a es .be, nel SURAT uoJUIBYysulg—Aurq Ty S00) far (ea (eh 16: iw) 58i 30! Tote, euuvyonbsng pur Aueqry: 9 
 08°Z COLO I a cee ecard We ata 90° T Cal ee ae PURIST WoeIy)—UOTIOUNL JOTTAIOYWAA PO e301VIVG PUB IOBlesSsuOzy 6) 
 LY ZE TO ‘SI Tmpeynce biel lalate! (0a GS ei eneiaens OF° FL & sah 6 8-0 ce D) 6 tit 20 “9B.1004) ayey—piempy 4104 S ‘eal yg Se ails al aan Page o-4) SBO}VIBS pus Joejessusyy re) 
 LEAT soa Ee Ce peace ll eg eee taaa |e Saleem. tl a get ae C9 ZE | OUT] o789Q-4UOUIIe A —osplig ojseq f°. BBOYVICA PUB IOBlASSUszT 9 
 el ina 6 ae Le ie ee CF 09'S bi ‘a, a eueh ee) 46) a pte eae AOLT—uorqounr PIOFII}T MA i Ce a ee ON ay Mea en “BSOYBIVS pus Jaevlossuay a 
 EE hs. Cer Pe Cc Sa Sa 99° $ ZL . FI 9:18 98 10) S67 ke he Nance) Eke Vena Nie seas “U0}S|[B—_ Apeqoousyog ara te, yale! hve. esses) eu iware “Apepouwsyog pues BBOYVIBD 6) 
 Semen. | des ae 0268 OG7PP [oct these eee eens 28 ont agg 
 —JUOW Ja A—]]VyopyIVM—SsuLIdg ~esoywreg po BSOUBIVG PUB IOB[ISSudzy e) 
 CG FE GECET RAL semen | ete 89°9 am gc a ae ea ssu1idg eZoyereg—uoisyeg [°c Apeyousyog pus BSOYBIVS 2) 
 Se LOR pe pec rE Spt te pee gt GG . 61 Je . ST et OG ese foie si uo ys] {Vg_—uorzpoun sl» ps0 f1998 AA ale) We) ES eule we Te yee hal “BSOLEIBS pu IOB[OSSU9Y ‘) 
 CC We Yt fell Cay ST . ZL Il aa ge ee worjoune pa1oyz10}¥ MA —Aueqry O18) Ni SS ie we op Torte, Spe) mhiepte JUOULIO A pue Aueq ry 9 
 OF . ¢ CS, ie eet viel bce Lema peels) (ci eges/® Lege okt eine ie: 8) 0 bs. |S: OF ri € 1S a) fey a ere Mone: £6niq) esa a) ms Ysinqsusls1e MA —UBULINY J, ete 7 eee) Tele fe) Te Aw, <a.) eM ee wospnyy pue dIVMBIOC qv 
 LE . F Se Eee uie 8 86 I He, [Oe Dee Se One OA Re (e De. . ¥ o deena ST[@ suey) yynog—uorjpoun ¢* NVOIO TT BO Oe el ee” fans elcaicte IO IaT tea uospn yy pue SIVMBIIC ay 
 €0 . T TI €8 ee Berit Cee a) MO ee ee, ee earn 02 . OT ear ie ee fae ee Se Ts San yormMuses—uorzounsr WeIVg ese! Tee Beta, ele) 0: a Te eee ee uospnyy pus dIVMBIOC qv 
 80 . 9 gS J T sileke gee ge - of yeneisiuemetes i “lelcs lege, ye LL . - m iente a1) ie Yelie eye ee UIMp[eq—surpue’y wWyBo UO JAI Bie: Set 6 6) 0 8) Wao eS War tel wospn yy pue aIVMVOC qv 
 1¢ . oe GL bs 8 Rabtsise le et a Slss at ele Jo . $ c9 . ma. 1 ei ens| ignve) a} ja) a -a: tar (y. ediagel-o isi je"™ oul] 24”%1.9—ya ASUIN, rate, fe) “ay far) fe Aim lay W-- 6-8) a Sere uospnyT pus oICMBIIC BV 
 98 . VAG GS s 1 Fuge) xe) teak,” [0 ears eye's (8) 10) ge ue ies oe 520) . eZ “-. ASTIBA ALIeyO—uorpoun Lf AoTTeA AIIBUD ade! fe, @L ye: 6) Ww) STN) ee Se, ee We oi ucspnyT pue oIVMBIIC By 
 savy SED sayLyy sanLyy sony san yy ipanuyuoy) — wospny, pue sieMelegd 
 040 
 Syoel} Sri eede SYOVl} yovsy} yow rl} ae 
 lle ‘yowr} uUIeUL uIvUL UleUul Sry 
 TH0L | piex | HO | PAUL | PUPS | Jo peoy 
 07819 YIOX MON ur worz20d Jo tutus], poeyeiedo pvol puv uotzes0d109 jo suUIBN | S8BID 
 
 a 
 
 2781G YIOKX MON url uorsod jo yysueT 
 
 ooo eo lllllEelloaoaSaSaSalaiaI!S=——"*' 
 ‘sq SII esVxoVIy Jopun poyesodo oury 
 (q) {UOIPBIOPISUOD JaY}O JO SFUTUIVS TO JUIZUTZUOD SI JUL OY} DIOYA JO ‘JUETIBEITB IO YowsyUOD JopuNn pezssedo oury (qq) +JUeI [enuUe oJIUyYEp B IO} osvo] 
 Jepun pezesedo oury (OQ) ‘uoryes0di09 Suryeiedo oy} Aq pjey St yoo}s [eydvo esoyM jo [|B uorjezodioo Aq peusdo oury (q) ‘sands puv soyouesq (q) ‘euT] 
 ureur (8) :uoTye10di00 Surye1edo 94} Aq poumMo our] (V¥) ‘:SMO[[O} SB SessBlO OFUT uolyeiodioo Zuryzesedo oy} Jo suIvU 94} Jopun podnois o1¥ SspBol oy], 
 
 SNOLL 
 -VUOdUOO GVYOUTIVY NWVALS DONILVUAdO ‘MUOA MUN JO ALVIS AHL NIHLIM GALVEYAdIO GVOU JO HLONAT UNV NOILVOO'T 
 
 ©O “ es S 
 SS (==) => fo) 
 ba rm be! re 
 
221 
 
 1091 
 
 Paper 6 
 
 0o'T 
 LS fi 
 Zo°S 
 ZE'S 
 06° FZ 
 tr IF 
 82° 6E 
 e1°¢ 
 88°¢ 
 98°Z 
 6E°9Z 
 89°Te 
 28'S 
 99°Z 
 Z9°2S 
 €8 °F 
 10°91 
 TZ's 
 0¢° 
 #0'8 
 eh 6 
 6% FZ 
 68'S 
 9¢°6 
 OL'9 
 68° 82 
 28°Z 
 Zh OL 
 08° S6I 
 £E'Z9Z 
 09°T 
 89°ST 
 
 mo 
 ~~ 
 OOmN Mor 
 
 + Wl eup, vis 
 
 sha eas ce 
 
 oe th 20s. 6. 
 
 © lwyiv iia, vise) 
 
 @ 6,0 Fone 
 
 Vi eae) hone, 
 
 see ee 
 
 Vite, Ter wos 
 
 piel ene: ems 
 
 i=) 
 a 
 sal SSID SiO} Rasy Pu 
 
 ine) Lie) 
 2 S S 
 al —— 
 
 =) 
 = 
 hae ee y1eg su0zQ—uorjounr usABYpOOM [°° °° °° “Govog AvMByOOY pus YIOX MON 
 RL APO DATE Oe Stns ok cn oaontee Sem eae qovog 
 UByeyUR—uonoune yoweg uvyeyu [oc yorog 
 ueyeyueyyY pues uApjoolg ‘yIOX MON 
 *** + "990198 UOSIBOf(—sUISSOIN OpIg YINOG J JOAIY ISBVY pus s[Bpue[y 
 S60, SF 6 es te eee meieny Sime uA]yWOoIg Jo A410 UT See ee Omer Ceors ae tae) 
 ar ar rg WO goreurep—onuearw ysnayepg Joo cenueas onuepy 
 BVENSS eer BS 8SPIYy Avgq—uorjounsr puog ysor iy na ones eee eae ee ene ee ne ee wee) inte we Sere at yovog 
 usyyeyueyyY pues uAjTyoo1g ‘yIOXK MON 
 ees IOALY SUIPVA—Uorjounr JIOdYIION, |° °° °° °° “YouBIg s1oyg UWON ‘puvysy suoT 
 ar cmeaae es TS yormysng—uoroune yormysng |o--° oo  Sqouerq yormysng 
 7 oe ett ec eT uorpunye qiodysey-—o] [LA IOUR JA eet ew a aay fourel ai tw Wb) al aren ete ee omheweles bos ‘youriq OUR 
 olie: spe Welsev(e) 5) 3) s: osedyyoq—uorjoune osedyyoqd Se eet eile et eae) ia: hye eine eee er aie “yqouBiq esedyieg 
 abs rai al <alen(eh oN 6) #1 all eyes qiody}i0 N PIO TMS OtH aEelte: wifen's/,v\twerjo" o Sette, slataremalten ts * youRsq q10dy}.10 N 
 SV ie) Orie) te wie eme) “i! ee ne 14) 6 elle AE 194sAQ—B][09Ul]\y VEC e eae. aie) af we) wie Leis. elielis \e “youesq Aeg 104SAQ, 
 pe a ON oe proysdureyJ—ejooulpy | *  qouviq peeysdure xy 
 b Gace iheonbey Daa uoac arowmpeaIg—yreg yeroyg foo YouRsg eroupesID 
 bo ace eae uorjounr JuoupPg—yreg wesopg | qowerq yeayued 
 Shore a vee e.. 6 teliete see dow yIvg yuowjeq—susen() Be Sree eC yea a Se Ne wae “ouBsq yleg quOUlo | 
 OY, & pla. (e, #, euvalnermale worjoun pyeysurc G—opris] [ty Slot oh «ete Ve Nelle te ps ob she sues) et 6 “qouBiq preusuisdg 
 + ie ee “ouBry esanog sutjj01[—_odeq1y A faet ote Srratietg O70 LD ene eerie he Ver ereNs yo-3ng a[epueyy 
 OFS, dy 6. 6d e tee Sy & 0 ee svielie she © e) eHatienm se ws sulysnpiy 
 -{O919S “COUT Ca — UOT OUD fae 2 OO. Ni ae) CON alae tee eee eres eas youviq Surysnp yy 
 0 Pe Oe Be BEES ee, a) Sh Oe OAT OL 0s ce euiet ye eye eo Cee oS ow tard Sul 
 -pue’] eu0}sezIyA—UoTjouUNLG SuOJBoRIGM [oo youviq 9u04se7Ty MA 
 SBA Chie udp oa eRe Shrew eb nel UOJSUTYSE A 410 J—p]oygutm Re en nc eee es OU BIG epIg Y}ION 
 6 TE, €p'6, 18) O) OF O5,Bp 0) e041 OF BT OTB O@PISPOO AA —JOATY 4seq Cit Peete Ce rare se) ta eS “youelq ZY SIOIy 31049 YON 
 0 Wy 9a webs eeunuep ial ie IOqIe FT seQ—uojduvyesplig 8 Jeiturria/Me Ne ee Verte evel ste Me "eis ie ts “youeiq Ioqivy SBS 
 © [vitale|. o~= 6 Kew Maun se 9/1 ier ie yoved suo T—yoo1quéyT elven ie lege es ele, Ye) e)Ce" ote:n0.76) sie “youRiq yovoq suo’, 
 BS ee els ssolg oyvy AtgunoDj—urveng AeA jo gouBaiq wee14G ATTe A 
 By rh or Gner a ern Det asa og et Worjoune yorog 
 ABMBYIOY PUB YIOX MON'—uIBIIIG ABBA fo youviq ABMBYNOY IBZ 
 San Ce SU oe rod AT OE oth WOISTAIp 
 yNneyuop(—youvig e10y9 YWON worjpoune je yo-yng yne,uopy 
 do piiolier'ekd faire, Wo jay ovaui ata oe, wiralls eg al tmoreatee cence aT anat PENA Sein | AB be Se SPECHT eee eT See anuaAY ouUepyy 
 CHOC One cuter =.) qyrodus01j— AID purysy suo] See SEN FONSI Noth HONS oars OUT PULL TAN 
 Vie LO Met er eo et ee et es Je yneyUopy—AyD puvy[s] su0'T ee ore’ ee VC) [0 858 eee Me eG (ee ee “UOISTATp NVYUO PAT 
 spurs] suo] 
 UD. 19:0 yates es Ole OCC w ian web) wi eee ay One ojeyng jo A410 uy SS Sipe am Ca aii inl AC AAI AEN GL tN. ators SY A 
 © “e:%6'ls, ie Te: "ew oe 6's Je Meer ve YATYUN I —Yvo1g IVATIG = Aaa ei ise iis 1410 TG yO ZX MONT 
 er s 
 
 o6 
 
222 
 
 iA 
 
 90 . 8 IZ . I Bie & OO ee Oye ona S . cs * 9 # sh0 eee. 2.10 eee ew eee uo soUIpyA—urtfleg MON Paar te eee Me ee Cat eS ie @ ¢. @ wee @ ole AQTIVA U0VIVY MA My 
 cE - 5 Gg eee Peewee A —& oe ee, P serere: © oe (eyA . < Sw oe ow ie se se ae SISUIOD sopty M—Hodsyoog Bed 6, ON ORL Ow al Rate, Le, Ao suryouu0d 4y10dsyoeg a 
 09°¢z Ge ee pos ot ees pes GF ee ulyieg MeN—uorjouns uyJeg MeN | qoueiq ulyieg MeN | GV 
 19°02 eg ie REE ee Ge ee ae eae BeOOL Soot ee eS ets Oe avai Ga ne ee eet qoursq tyeq | av 
 ZE'6 a ee ae Se a SC Pe fa ea oe aenemeg ere oyrAuera—epeaqrurummage |“ sot eer rnc ese youesq eytaueya | qv 
 62° 1S¢ It PLT awe (00 6. Fh ie 6 rs «co OI “GOL lel Gs a ag atigt ee se 0 en 6" ke oo We oe, OSOMSO—|[BMUIOD e616 6 6 bw 6 me ep Oe we. Wie eee ecge 18 2) KO pe eS oul UIBI[ Cy 
 SUIJOISOAA PUL OLILIUGC ‘YIOK MONT 
 ee cee are ee eee ee ae ez I Spt ae a ee te opeyng—oreyng yseq [oc [eryUaD 410K MON aq 
 80° I Sa daee ts aN, eae a hes Ce ae yk Aad bf OREO yaeg 
 ujooury ‘syIOA4 JO[pNsjq YJIM WoTpoouuOD j° "°° °° eluvA[Asuueg i | 
 £6 Phiewaars. ol lp a 'airauer’s, wo If Perera ye -e'e 96'°T 26°T arene” ee ieyiat ia) emi) 6: ojeyng 4seqy—yooln ojeyng ECE omeinene a ypuels (wp io:jer\@..9 sifmisige em uelime 8) 0% eluvAlAsuueg Gi 
 ot Pe Ot oe ee eee oe ee Meo a 62°F sy Se Sa oe ee casa ls Rg DIeENG= Needy Ofeniiiey [- 0 ee ee ee yeoig oreyng ai 
 88°F a a Cee a ee a Cea erg ape eouvurepeg—vouemreeg seg foo cc youriq woueurereg | qy 
 GE . Il G) . e One emer ebiel |p emenema@e) <)- iit mete nana s- 9 09 . I eMeriaite- ie are-e Me eye, ve A119 q—uorjoune aye] IOATIG a aNerel a-jeha oe vee «#0 s sms uno ie 16 yqoueiq aye] I@ATIC av 
 #9°2 BT g. Lib ep eerie een es cs ee ee oe yoo eesouery—uonounr yooq | qouesq yooq | qv 
 £9°CT Seng). pon fee ee a Big sae Sioned savg ajoauty [oO a ouly Yog sJoysoyooy | qv 
 LI 8ST Ore Eat Gee ee ee 921 °SS 26°02 =| ‘9ul, 993899—vIUBA[ASUUOg—Yo01 o[eyng |* "°°" **” ysingsi}ig pus Joysoyooy ‘ojeyng | BV 
 ive) LY ani 89 . 99 Ce Kedexe, ofp” se etaitelta, 60 . 21 02 . 26 & ye "0s! "00 <e)-4, "0 a3 4s) 6) 6 es) e- 1y 6 ployysy—e}soyooy oa. ee taelie ysings}yid pue Io4ysoyooy ‘ojeyng By 
 :ysIMqs}id pus Jojsoyooy ‘ojegng 
 3 ORL ee Naas ope |S. oe pip. GSE GCSEs “* “101ZB1G VIluBvA[ASUUSGJ—ONUOAB pfOlVeFy |" [euluLIey, pus [euUNY, vluvslAsuUeg Ci 
 = 9 '¢ OG eet oe OT L9ET Ow ar asa uorpunt ‘gq ‘YW pue “A -N—jemuey | yoveg ABmMByooy puv ylOR MON d 
 q, 8'1e z0'S 61° 9¢°€ 96'6 Le a yivg AVmeyooy—uorjounr aepue[pH |i" yoveg Avmexyooy puv YIOX MON | 
 san | sappy | seem | sammy | sem | sew :panuijuog — pues] su0Ty 
 ‘049 yovs} 
 Syovly | ‘SsurpiIs | syovsy yovsy yovsy uleul 
 Il? ‘yoe1y ureul uUIeUl ulevul 4sig 
 1230,.L prez 110 piyy | puoveg | 10 pvory 
 93819 YIOX MON Ul UOTJIOd Jo tuTUIay, pezyeiedo pvoi pu’ uolzesodioo9 jo ouIeN | SsBID 
 
 07819 YIOX MON Ul uoTZI0d jo yysuaT 
 
 ee 
 ‘S}YSLI OSVYOVI} JopuN pozeiedo oury 
 
 (q) ‘UOTZVIOpIsuUOD JoYy}O JO SSUTUIvE UO JUSSUT}UOD ST JU VY} O1OYM JO ‘JUSTIOGISB IO JOVIJUOD JopuN poyeiedo oury (qj) ‘yUueL [eNnuUB o}IUYEp B 41Of VSvoT] 
 
 Jepun pozesedo sury (O) ‘uores0dioo Suryesedo ey} Aq pyey St yoo3s [eydevo esoym jo [[w uores1odi09 Aq pouMo oury (q) ‘simds puw seyouviq (q) ‘ouly 
 
 urew (8) :uoryerodi09 sutze19do 94} Aq pouMO OUTT (VY) :SMOT[O} SB Sassv[O OFUT Uo01zB10di09 Sutyei1edo 9y} Jo ouIvU 9Y} JopuN poednois o1v¥ spol oY], 
 
 SNOLL 
 -VUOdUOO CVOULIVU WVALS ODONILVUAdO ‘MUOA MUN JO ALVIS AHL NIHLIM GALVYAdO GYOU AO HLONAT UNV NOILVOOT 
 
 1096 
 1097 
 1098 
 1099 
 1100 
 
223 
 
 Paper 6 
 
 vO 9LT 
 
 ri 
 
 3 3S 
 = 
 aes. re 
 
 Saw) strav te tute, 1,6, 8, ate) -81 tay Ware) ee POLIO ets UvITQO—IOSSOIg 
 Moro on pee eury 94e}9—uorjouNL puBlAR AA 
 
 “so TePT yoqdursg—uorjouner pues] suig 
 Giscae pe Nerey ceugeee ais sotUUng ourdurr-—eqry 
 fn ig ei poomus,j—uorjounr poomueyy 
 “+ UOTpUNG puB[s] oUIG—sSIOUIOD AyIegi'T 
 
 ** QUT] 07BI1G—JUOULII A —BSOIOpUOdT], 4105 
 ape sshge nefeus OUT] 038I9—JUOUIO A —sSINqsuspsO 
 Speer stirs: w:seleae A oul] 93819—3U0ULI9 A —UIB YB 
 
 248YQG—-JNo|Yoouu0D-—uorjoun er fonedoe 
 
 STE Sd Loti Stet 8 BS ucoveag—uorounr eadooly 
 ends epee IPeulyY—sS19ul0y uoyog 
 See paaE SP SIIULOD U0JSOg—sury 97k79 
 Dee a Re nan SEES ia tas = Foe Od m0} 
 
 Wey 
 [e1yUID YIOX MIN—youviq [eydsoy “sg “g 
 DUE SW 92, Oi) er 0, 2 Tee a ate WS ae enlae Ss [eqidso FR 9481g 
 
 JIATY WOspN_T—uworpoouu09 “|g pue “gg 
 ‘** "gorounr sedoor~q—orjoune SuIsst}9 
 
 1105 
 
 U101S9 AA PUB VUUBMEYOVT ‘OIBMETSC 
 BUUBMBYSVT] PUB [[OULOF] ‘Ioysoyooy 
 “" 7" "Wey VION pus JNUIMBYS “sInqsiig 
 “css WIOgyION pus yntaMeuy “amqseiig 
 
 : (SUOIZBIOGO 8 IOATOO 
 
 -03) UlsyION] DUR JnUTMEYS ‘sings 
 Pn Arec nS magh is sist a oes oocbc ch olay 
 
 age aioe Tastee ath), Wha s BERS, alanis ees molealbet ieee oie yonyoog 
 + Cee OCC eer aoe G sutpeuu0D eH Teqdueyg 
 
 :puRlsuy Moy] Pus YSRoT 
 
 spuepny 
 
 “**"plojjIVpT PUB UOALTT MON ‘HIOX MON 
 ‘** "projzyieET pue uoaep] MON ‘YOK MONT 
 UI94YSIAA JNOTPOSUUOD puv PIO}WIVT 
 U19}S9 A JNOTPOOUNOD PU PL0;VIB_y 
 
 B) paw) wager ie, 6" TPisncirele, (ida le Ryne) ele wae your. Amnqueqg 
 ee, 0) 0! ca: Ie 9 elope, Wh Reh en iae aan te bas. yoursq Yrpeurgy 
 
 "+ ““gouBiq WOIJVUTOD [B1}UID YOR MON 
 
 Races a Sree tee Vy en ae ea eee yoursq 
 
 uorjounf ynoryoouTED 
 pue ssoygojndg ‘ys Ing M9 \}—oury 34819 ASS! oS) 0,0 See, we 6.8. 6 whe 9) ef eee (eter aes ene youvlq 
 ynotyosuuOT, ~puB seeyoInq ‘YsinqmoNy 
 Ae) ce: O° 1p" fel 18, 0 *s1dU10Q u0jsog—][*®¥H Teqdurey alte eb, si.0) eerie s. 0 verse) eel ew Sa6 puvpsuq MON [va}zu99 
 :puejsuy MON [eWED 
 BORO Ce ug Se ee SEAR PIO Wye ot ton ge eee eereoesey 
 co rR oenbentny: on, sie cher a [reauiogj—eury opeyg | tperqueg yIOX MON 
 nt belo che oe Ocean an amoy—uoqwyg | oot MO qUTD puw ou0y 
 Caso © a Seah oe wava ea ewe 8 e013. 7 —O][ LAS epuey eile) ©) awe 16 meconbeed:ip privates pure econ aeast@) ‘B91 
 © e~-Syeltet (0: eno jeCewns ere) & ue, o) /P 628 WOYSSUTY{— 9] [TA UIT, Wesel W mL joy avig) (Phin te” Rye fetteiie sl WOISSULY] pus eTtTAue] [A 
 Seve. wi lar ettetate cede uorpoune Aal][e@A—eT[IA}IUIUWING | ‘s[[IAJIWIUING puUsB O;eoTJUOPY ‘STAIOL JIOg 
 Sees or ae ena oes O][99T}WOFAI—STAIOL JIOg | ‘O][TAVIUIUING puB OffeoT} UOT ‘STAIO£ JI0g 
 aiuatrwinwike sire foetal ketta cee eee ee ‘Oul] oyBIG—vISOpRD POT a “u0JUBION pue 3[Bpuoqie,) ‘ormeqUg 
 
 Ba 
 << 
 
 4<40 AAAA 
 
 oOo0AA 
 
 CRAARARARR 
 
224 
 
 Paper 6 
 
 Ze'Z Pe 
 PPT a 6 ae 
 OL’ ae i err ae 
 29°F a 
 wT Of ct pte 
 26°SI a ce 
 T6°9S Sa Cet eee ea 
 oorg ofc fre 
 06°&1 Is, loc 
 ars ee oc 
 OL Zz a 
 0d LET Lal Shue mee nena a 
 ZR °ZI we joc 
 ZT ZI gogo c 
 SP CP RGe 2 ee lies 
 Sat Sa Son 
 SyoeI} ‘aupo SyOBI} 
 lle ‘yobay uUleul 
 1830, pie k 1230 
 
 Sid ko Af SOU 
 
 yorry 
 uleUl 
 
 PIGL 
 
 . oF . "6 oe" 0 es) 0 © (0,4 -0%6) 6 0) kare 0) ® AQUIBA. sutidgQ—jonue NY 
 Beare a “00'T “SHIOM JULIG O[TASIOUIVXH—yoo1IA) SIOUL\[ 
 CO Toot A "os MBIIIOABT]T—uolyounr JUIOg AU0ZG 
 3. 68 0) See 62°F Sise sites SeoetieGs Cras GPSS AE ON == OMLEL ENT 
 Bie ea be F0'T “'+ +" quIog Auwoyg—uoTpoUNG yuTIOg AU0ZG 
 De, 8) oueag) GG . Il Oe ye an ‘morjoune yulog 4u0i9—ouryT 384819 
 Bw 8 60 (ee: £0 °SZ “racing yt scape i eayeGe olevess Isa eRea reer es LRA 
 
 que[g s,Aueduiog [9239 BUUBMBYOVT uy 
 peeriine: 90°Z reste sees ese ss  BUTRMByOe]—oregng 
 T° T6Q | [reece tees eUUBAMBYe]—oTeyNg 
 RN to: 99°Z teres sees + -yoqUMpT—uorjoune [[PySI97 yy 
 ee eat oe 6161 itt rererese ess yygi09ey—eorme0yg 
 Te GEO°2OL |occc tcc equoeUQ—4uTOg uO ssUTyy 
 ges ye Il OL “+++ guy 07849—vIueA[ASUUOgG—9]ITAST[A MA 
 tatetetics: Y €1°6 "co * +++ QUT] 07849—BIuBA[ASUUeg—UOSIppy 
 CS ae 0Z'GZ «| °C auly 972e49—Aosior MO N—yoomg AB Py 
 
 savvy 
 
 yovry 
 
 ae | awn 
 
 puoseg ee 
 
 93819 YIOX MON Ul uoTZIOd jo turUTIAT, 
 
 24819 YIOX MON UT UOTLIO Jo yySuIT 
 
 SCS CSRS Cec reieS RPI S Sa OME ROE ouiy ch 
 SHOPS OGA or aaa te(-yare sue ages WY opiasreurey ‘ai 
 Sica! re: ele) @ (el wiae: Terie aglene AO (Be, (4 nie |e youelq qyuIog Au049 @) 
 Bue Sy NSS yI0X MON pus Aosiof MONT | GV 
 eae a le yIOX MON pus AvsIof MONT | GV 
 Seok Rian a yIOK MON pus Aosio¢ MON | BY 
 :yIOX MoN pues AvSlof MON 
 Bie Seine rake 2S eas esve] Joapun peyeiedo oury e) 
 SEA Poo cleo an 6S a ca opegng yanog | qy 
 SE ic sora com ors Giri: ors hasan ojeyng yynog | ey 
 sojeyNE YINoS 
 So oniaes 2 Sarolo. cs Fs aremepeq pue sais{Q | qv 
 HAC oa SaT SOS IEC oeMEloC] pus Jeistq | qv 
 Sw GES CIO ROMER louae o tue arvmepad pus ieys Q | By 
 
 :o1VMelag Pu I3js1Q 
 ““yooIQ eulg pus JAOdsiepnoy ‘a[LAST[OM 9 
 So tae St gu oes suusyenbsng puv uosIppy 9 
 suones0d 
 -109 peolrey evuueyenbsng pue cjeyng 
 
 Beaders SOR ET JOATY wospnyy pue ystyoy | vy 
 :IoAIY VOSpny pue ysnmo'yT 
 pozeiedo pol pus uoryei0di09 jo suVN | SsBiD 
 
 ‘SPYSII 9svYyoVIy Jopun pezeiodo oury 
 
 (q) {WOIZBIEpIsuUOdD I9Y}O IO SBuTMIve UO JUISUTZUOD SI JUaI OY} SIOYM IO ‘YUSTIGEISE 10 JoVIJUOD JopuN psyesedo ouTy (qq) ‘}JUeI [eNuU e}UYep B IOJ VsBo] 
 
 Jepun pozeiedo aury (dO) 
 
 ‘uorje1od1io0o Surzesedo oy} Aq pjey St Yoo3s [eyIdvo ssoyM jo [[B uolze10d100 Aq pouMO oUTT (q) 
 
 ‘sinds puew seyoueiq (q) ‘out 
 
 ure (8) :u01}eI0d100 Surye19do oy} Aq psuMO UT] (V) ‘:SMOT[O] SB Sass¥{O CJUT UOIZVIOdIOD Surye1edo 9y} Jo owWeU oY} JepuN pednois ov spol OY, 
 
 SNOLL 
 
 -VUOdUOD GCVOUTVU WVALS DNILVUAdO ‘WHOA MAN JO ALVLS AHL NIHLIM GALVYAdIO GVYOU JO HLONAT GNV NOILVOOT 
 
 1106 
 
 1107 
 
 1108 
 1109 
 
 1110 
 
1111 
 
 225 
 Paper 6 
 
 * os 
 
 N ioc) = ts) 
 
 = m= re rat 
 
 re re io re 
 
 = ce pod rt 
 oi ORO ane ab ane oe ee 60° 9T “** ‘qorpounr uMOJSIEdooj—uMOYsIsdooyD |° ~*AaT[eA BuuBYyenbsng pus uMO%SI9d00D 
 sAoTIVA sHoplVeyO pue umojysisad00g 
 Pan bs Soares oe oe ee Ce oo'¢ ttt sojoyvouryg—uorjoune sopaywouvyg [ooo sajayeoueyg 
 :SolajVoueyS 
 62 . iT we “eo etre 6 ee) it wiier et ene EOS AUIe: 656: FI . 61 aie) ee a) alee) Be (0 ere-te Uulj1eg MON —J0} BMOSPIIG #10 oe a, 6 © 61.6. a, ate! even ee spene: S016 1616 56 ATTRA elipeuy 
 sAOHVA BIPPeUQ 
 (eee | oerarg pected ot ee Of PT fo aul oyeig—umojorpprpy foo Q[{IAUOTUQ pus UMOPTPPIPL 
 > S[PAUCTU/) PUB UMOJO[PPIAT 
 axe) . T ote errata: Geos, |p melee et mw] wre ose erie), we ZO . ST aire ele fer im,@. elie, talie, ‘el e4erena W0}SUIPP AA —POOM.I0 NV piiat ete tele) @ 06! seine) (o's: DOUDIME'T "49 pue poomioN 
 [QDUdIMET JG Puv PCOMION 
 f oleiifo sale ko pie) -<, eles SUINP 6) talkie Teter oiler se ate so109Q—oury 27819 <6! ¢ Weve neuie. ee /e Hie) elusA[Asuudg pue YzO XK MON 
 00 a c Ss Saeew en hw ae) eles) * bee see ee QZ . 1Z \ © 6. eee letxeyell fea) (emo) woe aul] 272} G—09}S1UBy) we ,6) SY ayie ik? 161.6" ol eee eluBA[ASUUOg pus YIO Xx MON 
 :BleA[ASUUod pue YIOX MaN 
 Reh Kexcee Pu ehereaee ete f= ae lene |) “endless eet Sieh al io rel gavr ore, fates! (ee “‘eoey}{[—uorjouns YOIMueyy op ener (aig ioe sia “u0r1yB10d10c) UOTz}OVIY, BoVByiy] 
 area Maces of Ff om staan a> iow) 8 eter. |B bis Sevraves, meine, CT . BF wii fe).iief ye) Yeirie: se! <4) is) (4 6 “W01}84S uinqny—uorjoun . “di0g WY u1ayyNog yo x MON [eiyueg 
 5 Saceeetiste| Pe eel See PE WP iets Seo it FSS SRS TNS yusjd 1Iamog—oul ureypy |°  di0g “YY UseyyNOG YIOX Moy [vI}ZUeD 
 SiGe, motes ome, Cowes” Sp, ae Se tise: | “tices: eee 6F° wy re epee vey 4. IOGIe Ty] §,onsoy—sulsueyT yynog od d10g ‘Wey useyINos Yio X MON [e13U99 
 Cee st ee can ae se ‘ca *-og edoy viquinjoO—uuinqny ‘eur, ureyy |*°  di0g ‘YY UseyNoG YAO X MON] [V1}zUI) 
 aid § DS e ceca faa ae Paes ese tral OW Ga): al aaPala nt). NGA Re uoTjouNnf¢ YoImMuey—uinqny |° diog ‘Wy uUsoyyNog YIOX MON [Ba}UID 
 
 :uoneiod 
 -109 proliey UlsyNog YIOX Mey [eyed 
 Co eee ee Pe ee Cie eae oa o[[TAroTANYoOQ—otAuosuyor Joe a][TAwOSUYyOL puv YOIMUVaID 
 :e]fAucsuyor pue YsIMuUussID 
 oo: dtp seer’ | ygege [ieee erase fos sopmy——uotounp sapmy boo ee een teat aut] youesg 
 coe foc fcr pte: BG pe fae es ee aiTAyIy—youbig Jeum |-> 8s 8 ee eee rae UT] UTBTAY 
 SUJOUNON pue oieMelog 
 rp ieee | UR ches aaa ee AL en Cote eee Ch ine epeproaoj—ayeH [occ UY}ION pus opeH 
 Dr cee 6° NL 1S o a) wAw, a, ire ier eS eo, ee hoe e 8 swe 50° Cel ey Ose! oP 8 0) ye, 6) 9 10 ea ie olin” ei O[[TASSTIO1L— J08} 937 Ree, CP ela dae wpe ceney le. *SULUIOA AA pue dessuer) 
 Ricepeel feriaiie! si 0 ew er ae RK ee Sean ee er Sam, “ere Cr mecjumaly ysyo'y pus ysings}}ig—josjoy oop) bielé “0 4) Sia ems) oem aael *SUTUIOL AA pue 9eseuery) 
 e9 ea a Bivue 8 ens Eee en © (8) je-. p06” "2 ee) el) 6 oe ce . T agg ke 6 © © thle: 1s! 5 ial le Whe wienel le OT [TASSTIOINjN—JOS} OY oy 18 vi ele: 6. (6, we 16 Ce 8 8p Bae SUIUIOA MA pue 9esoudr) 
 cc Zz o. iotte, lw. Tonle iit ey tev elt! (eer [liane jecie nes ayo 26° T Fs iqice le NeCMPe wie « let else uoTpoUne josyoyY—Josyoy Were I6 ei ele! 6.4) 0! 10, ©) "@) 19} (8).1o/el78 SuIwIOA AA pus eesouey) 
 Fe Aaa SAME lca Bindi | Seta cc OT “moTjouNns ystua'y pues YSINGS}}TG—JOspoy, i Sa eee SUTUIOL MA (crores siecle #. 
 :SUTMIOA AA. PUB BBSsUdy 
 ee cers Peete Mes 6 SCC eg ee gn I ee aaa uospny] put aemeyeq 
 OL ° SI He Pa Dice Ce i a aOR Fea NC wR Bet Se 00 . 2 ei lenteh il ielcé "ee (a cecil ws) gee o[[LAourypyy— Aro Fy yO g ioe mb) Ja) (6; isis: wey e YBLuloy pue urejduvyy) dye] 
 :YVLoy] pure ulelawueyyg oye] 
 GG ee ies oe ee CeO |e uIq;epvoig-——uoTjoUNs UIq(epBolg |" UIG[Vpvoig PUB ds][LASIOAOTY) 
 PP . 8 OCR PCeIOMe DBs SOs ere ws. wh. Ore UC 6 L¥ . GZ we Se 0s) Ore pero a a. Oy «ae, Oo] [tAG}IO N—Bpuo FT Mee ate KML O[[TASIOAOTY) pue uMoysuyor ‘epuo yy 
 2@[PIASIBAOLH pue uMmojsuyor ‘epuog 
 <lerieiwi(e: c= Se svat ere ene ies revelers HOE re ecm) so C6" SESS Ren eto, re eu tagess "A ORBAN: 1 ORATEO: Uy een ee ah, eee Oe MELT 
 89ST 6° 8F'S 13°F 01'S San "al hse er ta a6 hee ew Teh cwle wie pen ere oyeygng jo A410 ul Cer CCI fase Mic lat On net) Cm wc va gen On ie ar cc Yoolg oreyng 
 | sHoolg ojeyng 
 ~- a a5 Ss -~ 
 
 ot 
 
226 
 
 Paper 6 
 
 rr see ene Pinecone Oh wel cele elite fe) m8) Geer fe. sie. wma Pr Om 8. @.-Srite, CO! e188) Sine! (a) 1s) oi eld eh aale uinqny jo Ayo uy 
 og - it ee ee . . 64.8 ee NS” we Blane. aE weele lO) te Me lig! Co. og . T Se! bie) oF e 9 0 s eine te 00! iS) ae rd uinqny jo Ayto uj 
 18 . 0¢ es 2 ee ee ele Hi ok eee ae RT ee wae le ee 8 oe ee i Be a Pe ee le ummqny jo A410 ul 
 Oy egg frotteteetee: UOIBYS OUA—StIOPA, JUNOP 
 8Z a en ae Cre Se. oe ¢ 6 @e = 2 he ek 6 my Cet © awe te oe Q6 en an She eee 1) eee A Se WY etusA[Asuueg: eaAuog 
 86 FI yy ae cee ee eee CSS ft Sop, JUNO PY—epLAsueq 
 09 . 8 00 . ii re aur Yet Yi Vey baat! Vier may Deer ter ta Go Near Were! Gamat Yau et amt, fats 09 . ep O) B. 0y. Spgs) Si) 0) ey a ieg a No.2) sho OT] [TAY Be T—Uo0} Sul 10}9 
 6% . OL 90 . I FUT ICNCAae Te wl or wa at Tent at farce’ (Bore Pat seit Yet Ce . 6 Ss, 10reite. on miliathe.je! Sue: a, Benes yrodspuowwe F— 418 q 
 $S ‘ZS SS Ce irate ot an ae a ee as SI'2o. =«|Ssutidg vuosseyyy—Aiepunog [vuol}eurezUy 
 €9' I 61 ae ‘ord 0:69" owe oe Ooo 7e ng) Ci) oe tee St mer at Sr FP OL So 0) 9. 8 10 @ 9ne. “9.88.08, 8\ 0) pla, O) ete UBYSOI)—S]TAMO'T 
 “Niles 2” ee, Sera feo ee See a ee ee JOVBQ—uIeYD U0 
 ec . IZ OF . g ek a ee owe oe) (ie er we Yen eet et Ya) ms. ae Ta eee oy 9 eT . ST oO ee eo BVO SS io 9.28 e eis oyey 93jeNnbeyY{—1941BD 
 SII (et A ee -legg frocccct aye] oosiyQ—oostqiB FA] 
 oy ee ee Ge ale Sees es GGT. [ocr ree tees epwory ty fio es ee 
 6S LZ Oot fcc pte fe ||: Bre mere GZ OS [octets apwory—eornty 
 San WW ul 3 Sen W iad Oot a's SOIL SOTA 
 syoeiy. | , Sant g | SYoRs} yovsy yowsy 5 baa 
 112 yor sy uleul Ureul UIBUL 4siq 
 T30L | prex | UIO | PAL | P¥g | jo peoy 
 94819 YOK MON Ul uoTIOd Jo ruruie 7, 
 94819 YIOX MON Ul worzs0d Jo yysueT 
 SS FR RS EB TSA FR SR TR RSE PR A ET ER PER a SRE SET PR A REA LS ARSE ST SEW RT RS EF SRE OTS Pe EE STE 
 (W]) ‘WOIYVIEpIsuodD JoY}O IO SSUTUIVS WO JUIZUTJUOD ST JUL VY} VISYM IO ‘JUOMIIEISV 10 JOVIJUOD JapuN pozyviodo oury (qq) ‘4U9L [BNuUe 9JIULEp B IOJ osvoT 
 Jepun pezeiedo sury (DQ) ‘uon4vsodios Suiyeiedo oy} Aq pyey Si 4903S [V}Idvo ssoyM fo [[B uoMBs0d100 Aq pouMo ouryT (q) 
 uilvul (8) :aoizeiodi09 suryeiedo oy Aq pouMO our] (VY) :SMOT[OJ SB SessBylO OJUT LOTYeIOdI00 SuTyeIedO 94} JO VUIBA 9Y} IspuN pocdnois oie spvor oy], 
 SNOLL 
 “VaOdedOO GVOUTIVA WVELLS ONILVURdO ‘TUOA MAN HO ALVLS AHL NIHLIM CULVEddO GVOd FO HLONAT GNV NOLLVOOT 
 o t= co oO 
 = md = re 
 bas me rm = 
 om, m m= rT 
 
 [B1qU9_) YIOX MON 
 
 3. 4.95 eta pout Apiceriolis diog Id4SOAIC FT [BU01} VU 194UT 
 Diss s ©.e0 peal mab eueis le lee -ershie, ois! eine ws Ml TOAIY OISBMO 
 
 LIOALQT COSEMO 
 
 Bas AEN Oa SIOP, JUNOPY pus oesauay ‘uoAW 
 Z. aiat Sule" a 8 .@ 4 sdnls, del eee, Bn ome (An, youssq ea Auog 
 BS ee ee SILIOPY JUNOPY pu oyTAsuvq 
 
 ISiLIOY JUNOP] Pue ojPasuvg 
 
 ULVJUNO FY SUT{IOI9 
 TUIVPUNOR] SUujss3s 
 
 Oa wt te er eT Yas em Tire? ‘yiodspuoulMae Fy pue yyeg 
 PIOdSpuCcUluiVyeY pues ye 
 
 Prarie Mahe see gpvuey pue se}eig peyuy 
 2(YUNLE puviy) epeued pue sozeig powuy 
 pati iS Apart: SD gt JOATY JOAGIG PUB I]{[IAMO'T 
 IDA AJOAVIG PUB VIpAMOT 
 
 [B1}UID FIO X MIN 
 
 OS #6 © @. 0 Sm wiist eee oe 00 aera. ae oye] eqjenbey 
 
 :3yey opionbey 
 
 ayETT O9s4O puR snowy 
 
 2SYVY OHO puv snijeoiey 
 ce ects MCAT ee IE hee act 
 M0 <6 ie Oke (Ons ome. emis epRoly pue BOTY ‘oyeyng 
 
 :BIY PUB opesly 
 
 pe7,e1edo pvol pus UOTYVIOdI00 Jo oUIVNy 
 
 AR 
 
 3O 
 “<0 < 
 
 40 <4 <Q ¢ « < < 
 
 SsBiO 
 
 ‘SPYSII oSVyOVIY Ispun poezyeiedo sury 
 
 1120 
 
 ‘sinds pu’ seyouBiq (q) ‘eur, 
 
a > ea a ce 
 re re re rm Ta 
 re re ri r= = 
 
 ‘ulejduivyO oye] pues wiseyyD sjqevsny ‘ajjtaeseeyy ‘uotugQ AOIy, ‘ary OOSeMO 
 :AOTTVA 9990PIBYO pus uMOJSIBdOOD ‘yeoig ojyeyng ‘ojeyng YyNog —:4sT[ ‘OD ‘OH ‘J Ul pepNfpoul Jou ors oAOQe JST] UL UMOYS SPBOT[IVI SUTMOT[OF OU], 
 aATY Isoq ‘urezUNOP [[FsIVO —:dn usyey pues pouopuvqe useq sAvY AST] ‘O “OD “J Ul UMOYS SPOTICI SULMO][OF OT, 
 ‘OINO ® sIOWNIY]V ‘eqonbavyy o1og ‘[esjUED) UBSTYOIPY—:0}81Q YIOK MON UL ATWO SIYSII oSVYOVI} OAVY SPVOTIVI SUIMOTIOJ 94 J, —:9}0N 
 
 Ms Ee ee ee Lee eee 00°1 “9UV] 83819 “A ‘N-JUOUIEA—4q sosnoy fo quUoULIEA [BI}UID ¥ 
 CZ * I we Neeustiel ol. el erresene « MI eeatiete) sce se Gf suerte @s.ae)e CZ 3 r oe ‘<repunog [euorjeusIEJU,T—jUIOg sesnoy Sat wire 7) (3 (ei cel bciente aniel els, ee one uorpoune oTftarerde NY Vv 
 98 . 7 o-oo 6, er IL aien 6. (er tote. (ee AB eo ec teuel\wlte, 18 WOT Sa © 167s, 98 . P o. © jn enere. -osplig wotsuedsng—s]]B 7 BIVSEINT Soc KS Ce 6) ene ww ie es ule wl ew) ers. wuorjpoune BIVSBINT Vv 
 62 . T LLC eee ei oo me TC ln et ee 62 . T 3 19 Sar te, ete, aie sqhelgene: aBI004) ‘499 woTjpouNn Lr woyyD ‘allie).je1,0 ls) @) 4) 6) 8) 0.6) 0-0 ® 16 8 qIsuBLy, puvys] 194819 a 
 08° 2 a te eee e3°IT 7 ae g[tauey}0;—uonounp uoyp) [octet ttt PURIST W2IeI¢ ¥ 
 og . 6 oslo ce item, fl Mecee we te) i  ejeuiet «iene GO°TP cere) . P Ce a @AOUOStL) jo 489 AA—9PIspoo AA Mi () e's, acess) wee, 8 6; oflenoyie= a suryoouuo,) yO XK MON Vv 
 pee OL’ 6 dr eo) a) ed) euler tel els te) arg) eee een leno j eave Ter se esses s+ -OFIOT plQoO—uleyy woyny Pave. 6 eee Mies e: Cw wee phe een wa enw rrs uleyy uoyNy V 
 suieyD wong” 
 20 are) CF ge oll [eC OR a SORT ea | eka SC RC eel Meare ca aC $9 . c ereLelenenee: 16. (6 ares ema qudyy 410 J—9][TA9S090 3T Bi sue" Sie ie. "elie -ele 8) 6 Iwi Silerie erie emails s oe urejdurey 
 ayeVyT pue wseyg ysqusny ‘oj[iAesseyyT V 
 suepdarey) 
 eyey pue wuseyg aoqesny ‘oj[fAessey 
 ay 1¢°¢ FCO'T Seen e Clee twits ene, wei 00°Z €0'°% © 0 -s wp elle (eB owe os -Shetevekena s © =IKO RE jo Ayo UT CP Te. Walia Se Eb Ol eter ie let ere ice) le" eterno ce - 0 ah wou AO, Vv 
 — = suotUug AOLy, 
 A S 00 Zz ele a elles, e AG OAA/S Gull PASTOR DL 0: elif) W Pnie aeilerisany 00 . Z Wiis, 8) sos Fexitue) 6 igmiers worpoune 19}X9qQ—J9}x9q oe esee 09D rodeg pue ding eqryding 10}x9(] a 
 CA g& [WUJOUVION pues Jo}xoq 
 Ry 00°ZT 9¢° Soo, J eeaciaes ses oa s BRIT |occccee rea Fats Benger qearewuomEsy [oe tose te ste ie ysingsy}eig Vy 
 sysimgsyeig 
 0 . a €8 . Z fe eee se lip less oC eleh ne Sree wet IZ . qi aie ‘Arepunog [vuorTyeu1eyUy;—jUI0g sosnoy see we Si lelreytetete. ‘90d IMT 490 pure ulejdureyo Vv 
 2 (quay, 
 puery) suUeIMey ys pus urejdurvyD 
 €e . 9 00 . ik of preers © | Si Nemererels 6. a8 waere. 6 lane! ee . fe) Ombre er eC eR BCT oe s1eyoyog—ySINge[ppiyyy ic wherelaie\.e) wile! ee ol 18 alIeyoyog » Ys.Mqo[ppryyy V 
 soHeVyoyIS FP Ysimqgeoi[PPiAL 
 86 . OI 86 0 Roles eete me Pecaiey eua sé. eh ke! vl Sie wo 00 . OL o) ‘ehetsen’n OAV] AIIBQUBIQ—UOTIEIG plomprigg iO ele a) ore, Mao tal be. Sw) 6 OW tae anes JOATY assBIry V 
 Prolfivy Isai ssseiy 
 98° 0Z TP Tale ee eee a ae gjooyuopy—ppeguepy |°°°°*° teeeeee ess -r9q80 44 PUB PlETUEps) Vy 
 tUlsIsaM PUB P[eUo[y) 
 10°Z 60° Ae hs Cooaceeah Soe 0) a 5 ROG oes euossepy gy [ioe c chee [euTUIIey, Buosse py y 
 :[VUIUIoy, BUSSSse yA] 
 00 . ie see eee eee eee | wee nee . 00 . TE see eee *[BULUTIO4 YIBMO N—UOT} YS yIVMIN CeCe CI a et Jie eruvAyAsuueg a 
 00°6 18° Pere: Go ic cate beets 61'8 ORG. sirae chores woe —yeuruney, yremeny foes eaedsiie epee s BMaLat seeks ate WOTIBI\l ey 
 SUOle yl 
 8L’e 08° Ce Onde AE” leiehte. oS et — bee 6. te ei Se'F soe "e*9* -orreyoyog—uorpouns a1reyoyog ee * AOTTBA etmeyoyos Vv 
 sASTIVA BUByoyIS 
 20° Lv'T ae 4 ee CLO |G Teeseeees sss -cOMoune q[syeq—uoulleyT |**'** "°° * “ODUBIMBT “YQ puw’ YoepuoIIpy Vv 
 S9DUDIMBT “YG pue Youpuolpy 
 ? " ” al a. Qe 
 
1126 
 
 IN THE 
 
 DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED 
 STATES — 
 
 127 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. 
 
 Tue State oF New York and 
 Cuarues D. Newton, Personally 
 and as Attorney-General of the 
 State of New York, 
 
 1128 Plantrf's, 
 agamst 
 
 Tur Unirep States and Epaar EH. 
 CuarK, CuHartes C. McCuorp, 
 BattrHasar H. Mryrr, Henry C. 
 Hatt, Wintrurop M. Danrmts, 
 Ciryp—E B. AcHxrson, Ropert KE. 
 
 1129 Wouisey, Josepo B. Hastman, 
 Henry J. Forp and Mark W. 
 
 . Porrnr, Constituting The Inter- 
 
 state Commerce Commission, 
 Defendants. 
 
 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. 
 
 Whereas in the above entitled suit it has been 
 made to appear upon the verified bill of complaint 
 filed herein, a copy of which this day has been 
 produced before the undersigned, Judge of this 
 Court, that on the fact of said bill of complaint, 
 the plaintiffs herein are entitled to an interlocu- 
 
 228 
 
 1130 
 
229 
 
 tory injunction restraining the defendants herein 1181 
 
 from the commission of the acts complained of 
 and threatened to be committed by the defendants, 
 and that the plaintiffs herein are threatened with 
 irreparable damage and a multiplicity of suits, 
 now on motion of said plaintiffs it is, 
 
 Ordered, That the defendants herein, The 
 
 United States and the Interstate Commerce Com- 1132 
 
 mission, appear before the District Court of the 
 United States for the Northern District of New 
 York at the Chambers of the undersigned, the 
 Judge thereof, in the City of Norwich, New York, 
 on the 22d day of January, 1921, at eleven o’clock 
 in the morning of that day, or as soon thereafter 
 as counsel can be heard, and then and there show 
 
 cause before the undersigned, and Hon. Martin T. 133 
 
 Manton, Circuit Judge and Hore John ‘R. Hazel, 
 aye erick Judge, convoked as a court by the under- 
 signed in accordance with the statute as made 
 and provided, why the interlocutory injunction 
 prayed for in said bill of complaint should not 
 issue and it is 
 
 Further Ordered, That a copy of this order with 1134 
 
 the bill of complaint attached thereto be served 
 upon the Attorney General of the United States 
 and upon the Secretary of the Interstate Com- 
 merce Commission at least five days before the 
 22d day of January, 1921, as by the statute made 
 and provided. 
 GEORGE W. RAY, 
 United States District Judge. 
 
 Dated, Norwich, N. Y., Northern District of New 
 
 York this —-——— day of January, 1921. 
 
 58 
 
ven xi MLR tA oul Abed tal ‘t 
 1 OO, Pa 9) URS es Co 2M 8 uehpnith 
 71h ADAG i oF a ey ok 
 
 MAYS t i ra oe 
 ‘ 7 § : oo ™ a 
 i. ihe] Dy) ‘ Hawiot, oa WR pea (aR) Hit a 
 ee ifs tiie 3h ARE 
 ' ; . ee 4 
 pap td 
 | Seti * 
 ; + 
 r 
 4 
 “821 
 i 4) Ei 
 at Bi 
 f i vi + 
 fey bio 
 } Gri eh 
 an CPOEL eit 
 i 4 f 
 1 ° 
 \ 
 ‘ 
 PMT i 
 mis ¥ 
 i 
 1 oe) 
 iu 
 . tee 
 
 ntl 
 
 W i Hootins 
 
 mei pe ki 
 
~ UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA 
 
 mane 
 
 INA