• w&& : 2Z& & THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY 3 86" m. [«fe m %i . L*>\ /•' fjf/' #•- m W&f: E&?-: :® \*'& wm m <$v m< w m Vi« ** FREIGHT RATES WESTERN TERRITORY PART 1 WESTERN TRUNK LINE TERRITORY H. H. CHURCHILL Chief of Tariff Bureau Chicago Great Western Railway Chicago LASALLE EXTENSION UNIVERSITY (Non-Resident Instruction) CHICAGO Copyright, 1914 LaSALLE EXTENSION UNIVERSITY r-» L,*>Z CONTENTS I. Intrastate Rates State Kates in Illinois 1 State Rates in Iowa 5 State Rates in Missouri 7 State Rates in Wisconsin 8 State Rates in Michigan 10 State Rates in Minnesota 10 State Rates in South Dakota 12 State Rates in North Dakota 13 II. To Missouri River Rate Territory rt- Interstate Rates to and From States within West- ern Trunk Line Territory 19 Rates to and From Central Freight Association Territory 30 Rates to and From Atlantic Seaboard Territory 32 III. Rates To and From Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin Development 33 Duluth and St. Paul Rate Points 34 Grouping of Territory 34 Rates to St. Paul 36 Rates to Duluth 36 Rates from and to Points East of Illinois-Indiana State Line 38 Proportional Rates 39 IV. Rates Between Stations in Minnesota and Wis- consin and Stations in Iowa and Missouri Description of Northern Groups — St. Paul-Iowa Territory 42 iii OIOIJ iv CONTENTS Description of Northern Groups — Fox River-Iowa Territory 47 Description of Northern Groups — La Crosse-Iowa Territory 48 Description of Southern Groups 48 . V. Interstate Rates to Interior Iowa Cities Class Rates 51 Commodity Rates 58 VI. Interstate Rates to Interior Iowa Cities (Con- tinued) Bases for Rates from or to Chicago, Peoria, and St. Louis Groups 70 Bases for Rates from or to Groups Other than Chicago, Peoria, and St. Louis Groups 81 VII. To Trans-Missouri Territory Description of East End Groups 92 Description of West End Groups 104 Adjustment Ill Application of Rates 113 Local Rates US VIII. Rates to and from Colorado Common Points Development 120 Eastbound Rates 12:J All-Rail Rates from and to Central Freight Asso- ciation and Trunk Line Territories 121 Rates from New Orleans 124 Rates from Trunk Line Territory via Rail-and- Water Routes 125 Rates to Points Made with Relation to Colorado Common Points 127 IX. Rates to and from Utah Common Points Development 120 CONTENTS v All-Rail Rates from Central Freight Association and Trunk Line Territories 131 Differential Rates from Atlantic Seaboard Terri- tory 131 Rates to Points Taking Differentials over Utah Common Points 132 RATES IN WESTERN TRUNK LINE TERRITORY CHAPTER I intrastate rates 1. State Rates in Illinois Western Trunk Line Territory is shown on Map l 1 as embracing the eight following states: Illinois, Iowa, Missouri (north of the Missouri River), Wisconsin, Michigan (Northern Peninsula), Minnesota, South Da- kota, and North Dakota. While the territory covered by these states could hardly be said to include all of Western Trunk Line Territory or to exclude all that is not Western Trunk Line Territory, there is a degree of similarity in the regulation of rates by these eight states. The railroad and public service commissions of six of the states named above prescribe rates for both classes and commodities moving within each of the states, and the carriers of Wisconsin and Michigan (Northern Pen- insula) publish distance rates under the approval of the state commissions. These intrastate rates are quite important also as the basis for interstate rates. In some cases the state rates of one state are applied between points in that state and points in a neighboring state. In other cases the interstate rates are based, to some extent at least, on a combination of the state rates in i Railway Traffic Maps. 2 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY the two states. For these reasons it is important to get a general understanding of the state rates before at- tempting a study of the interstate rates. The state of Illinois was one of the first common- wealths of the United States to assume control of rail- ways, and the commission of that state has seen more than forty years of service. The commission has pre- scribed both class and commodity rates on a mileage basis and also a state classification, which governs all freight classification within the state. The Bailroad and Warehouse Commission of Illinois was succeeded by the Public Service Commission of Illinois in January, 1914. The decisions and opinions of the Railroad and Warehouse Commission of Illinois are a valuable con- tribution to the literature on railway rate control. 2 Table 1 shows the maximum freight rates on classe ;s in Illinois prescribed by the Railroad and Warehouse Commission for certain selected distances only. In studying the rates prescribed by the various commis- sions it is easier to compare the rates of the different states by presenting only skeleton tables for various dis- tances. For this reason the distances selected and shown in the tables are made uniform so far as the area of the states will permit. The rates shown in Table 1 were made effective in July, 1906, and have not been changed to the present date. These rates are applied over all "Class (A)" roads within the state. "Class (A)" includes the more important railway systems and the main lines of some of the less important railways. Railroads of "Class (B)" may add 10 per cent to the 2 Decisions and opinions of the Eailroad and Warehouse Commission of Illinois, 1S89-1912, Vol. Ill (1912). INTRASTATE RATES 3 rates shown in Table 1 for Classes 1 to 5, inclusive, and 5 per cent to the rates for Classes 6 to 10, inclusive. These rates are quite low and were reduced in 1906 from a higher schedule. The chief reason for this reduc- tion was the competition between Indianapolis, Detroit, and other cities east of the Illinois-Indiana State Line and Chicago and other Illinois cities over rates between the cities mentioned and St. Louis, Mo., Quincy, 111., and other cities in southwestern Illinois. The cities east of the Illinois-Indiana State Line were subject to the Cen- tral Freight Association Scale of class rates to St. Louis. The C. F. A. Scale was materially lower than the Illinois distance rates that were in effect at that time, 3 and since the Illinois rates were applied between Chicago and Illinois points, the rates between Chicago and St. Louis were materially higher than the rates between Indianap- olis and St. Louis. Chicago shippers brought the matter before the Illinois Commission and succeeded in having the Illinois distance rates reduced to their present basis. TABLE 1* Maximum Freight Rates on Classes in Illinois Kates in Cents per 100 Pounds i Classes Miles 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 5 ri~ 9 8 6 5 4 4 4 3 3 20 1-3 14 11 S 7 6 5 4 4 40 21 17 14 11 8 8 8 7 5 5 100 31 25 20 15 12 12 11 9 7 6 200 39 32 24 20 16 15 11 12 9 9 100 48 40 32 25 20 19 16 15 13 11 500 50 41 34 26 21 2] 19 17 14 13 1 Governed by the Illinois Classification. Fractions of more than one-half are written as units, and fractions of one-half or less are disregarded in the tables of this treatise. 3 Table 45 of the treatise on "Freight Rates: Official Classification Terri- tory" shows the distance rates of the C. F. A. Scale. / 4 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Table 2 shows the commodity rates prescribed on freight by the Commission of Illinois. There are only 11 commodities on which the commission prescribes com- modity rates. All other commodities moving within the state are governed by the class rates. The commodity rates are quite low and apply only on roads in "Class (A)." On roads in "Class (B) " the carriers may add 5 per cent to the rates shown in Table 2. In the tables of this treatise, fractions of one half and less are disre- garded, and those of more than one half are written as an additional unit. The level surface and the relatively similar traffic con- ditions within the state make a uniform scale of rates, both class and commodity, practicable in Illinois. The level area and the heavy traffic movement in the state also make it possible to apply a very low scale of rates and yet allow sufficient remuneration to capital invested in Illinois railways. Probably for these reasons the rate regulation of the state of Illinois is perhaps more com- plete and subject to fewer exceptions than that of any" other state. A state classification is prescribed, a dis- tance scale of rates is applied to special commodities, and other articles are shipped under the class distance table. There are no exceptions to the classification, nor are spe- cial commodity rates recognized by the commission, ex- cept those prescribed by the commission. Moreover, the rates on "Class (B)" roads are a uniform scale higher than those on "Class (A) " roads. The commission pre- scribes a complete and uniform system of rates, except for "Class (B) " roads, and the rates prescribed are ap- plicable on both local and interline business. In a num- INTRASTATE RATES 5 ber of states the distance rates are based on the combina- tions of the mileages of the different carriers in a joint through rate. This is not true in Illinois. 2. State Rates in Iowa TABLE 2 Maximum Freight Rates Prescribed by the Commission of ■ Illinois on Commodities Rates in Gents pee 100 Pounds, C. L. a 3 a ^ "J 2 a p, d fe O K te- 02 go =, C £ o o S Ml 02 &J S 3 to H a « o > j a 3 5 4 6 3 4 o 5 5 5 6 4 1 20 5 4 4 5 2 7 6 7 8 5 1 40 6 5 5 6 3 8 7 8 10 6 1 100 8 7 8 8 4 10 9 12 14 9 2 200 10 9 10 10 5 13 12 15 18 12 5 400 13 12 12 12 7 IS 16 18 22 15 8 500 14 13 13 12 7 20 18 20 24 16 8 TABLE 3 Maximum Freight Rates on Classes in Iowa Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds i Classes Miles 1 2 3 4 5ABCDE 5 14 12 9 7 5 5 5 4 3 3 20 16 14 11 8 6 6 6 5 4 3 40 19 16 12 9 7 7 7 6 5 4 100 24 20 16 12 8 9 8 7 6 5 200 40 30 23 19 14 16 13 11 9 8 400 61 45 35 30 25 28 23 20 17 16 500 66 50 40 35 30 32 27 25 22 21 1 Governed by the Iowa Classification. The rates given apply on shipments moved over only one line. The rates for joint hauls are 80 per cent of the sums of the local rates on two or more lines. 6 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Table 3 shows the maximum freight rates on classes in Iowa for certain distances. While these rates are gov erned by the Iowa Classification and, for that reason, no! entirely comparable to Table 1, the rates in Iowa are gen- erally higher than those within the state of Illinois. This condition is as it should be, perhaps. The average freight traffic density 4 within the state of Iowa is materially lower than that in Illinois. The traffic in coal and in manu- factures is much heavier in Illinois than in Iowa, and the peculiar location of the state of Illinois forces a very heavy traffic between the east and the west to pass across that state. The larger part of the traffic crossing the Mississippi River above Memphis and south of St. Paul must pass through the state of Illinois. This is due largely to the location of Lake Michigan and the Mis- sissippi River bridges. In view of the heavy traffic in Illinois it is to be expected that the rates would be lower than those in Iowa. When the exact distance of a particular shipment is not shown in the distance table prescribed by the Iowa Com- mission, the rate for the next higher mileage applies. The rates on a shipment of freight passing over two or more railroads within the state are 80 per cent of the sum of the local charges for the distance each railroad hauls the freight. For example, the rate for 50 miles on the lines of a certain company at Class-E rate is 4 cents, and the rate for 75 miles on another railway at Class-E rate is 4.4 cents. The sum of the rates is 8.4 cents. Eighty per cent of 8.4 cents is 6.72 cents, the joint rate. In case the application of 80 per cent of the sum of the local rates makes the rate less than the continuous-mileage rate, the * Freight traffic density is the number of tons of freight carried over a mile of ! ' INTRASTATE RATES 7 latter rate governs. For example, the rate for a distance of 5 miles for first-class freight is 14 cents ; for 320 miles, 57 cents. The total rate is 71 cents and 80 per cent of that is 56.8 cents, whereas the rate for 320 miles is 57.5 cents, a higher rate than the combination rates. In this case the higher rate applies. The reason for this regulation is that the carrier that handles the freight for the 320 miles should not be forced to accept a less rate for the joint haul than he would for a local haul of 320 miles and still be forced to divide this smaller rate with the carrier that transports the freight for the short distance. The regulations stated concerning the continuous haul do not apply, however, on distances of less than 25 miles. For hauls less than 25 miles the joint rates are 80 per cent of the local charges. In addition to the class rates the commission of Iowa prescribes commodity rates on 27 articles. These rates are prescribed for the same distances as class rates, and the rules concerning joint hauls are the same in the case of commodity rates as stated in Gonnection with class rates. It should be noted here that the Iowa Commis- sion prescribes a much longer list of commodity rates than the Illinois Commission does. 3. State Rates in Missouri The maximum freight rates on classes applying in Missouri on and north of the main line of the Missouri Pacific Railway, between St. Louis and Kansas City, Mo., are shown in Table 4. These rates are governed by the Western Classification as are the rates in all Western Trunk Line states except Illinois and Iowa. The class rates in northern Missouri shown in Table 4 are higher 8 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY than the class rates in Illinois, and on an average are higher than those in Iowa. The maximum class rates applying in Missouri south of the main line of the Missouri Pacific Railway, between St. Louis and Kansas City, Mo., are shown in Table 5. These rates are slightly higher than those shown in Table 4 for short distances and materially so for longer dis- tances. They are also materially higher than the rates within both Illinois and Iowa. 4. State Rates in Wisconsin The maximum rates for classes in Wisconsin, pro- mulgated by the Chicago & North- Western Railway and approved by the Wisconsin Commission, are shown in Table 6. These rates are very low for the shorter dis- tances and especially for the lower classes. On other classes, however, and for longer distances the Wis- consin rates are even higher than the rates in southern Missouri and much higher than the rates in Illinois, Iowa, and northern Missouri. The railways in Wisconsin also prescribe rates for TABLE 4 Maximum Freigut Rates ox Classes Applying in Missouri, on and North of the Main Line of the Missouri Pacific Railway Between St. Louis and Kansas City. Mo. Bates in Cents per 100 Pounds i C lasses Miles 12 345ABCDE 5 15 12 10 7 6 7 5 4 4 3 20 22 17 14 11 7 9 7 6 5 4 40 28 23 18 14 9 12 8 8 7 5 100 40 33 26 20 15 17 15 12 10 8 200 60 47 36 27 22 25 19 17 14 11 400 68 52 41 31 26 33 26 23 18 15 1 Governed by the Western Classification and exceptions. 4 3 6 4 7 5 11 8 16 12 23 17 INTRASTATE RATES 9 TABLE 5 Maximum Freight Rates on Classes Applying in Missouri South op the Main Line of the Missouri Pacific Rail- way Between St. Louis and Kansas City, Mo. Kates in Cents per 100 Pounds i Classes Miles 12 345ABCDE 5 15 13 10 9 7 8 7 5 20 22 19 15 13 11 12 10 7 40 28 24 20 17 14 15 13 10 100 40 34 28 24 20 22 18 14 200 60 51 42 36 30 33 27 21 400 83 72 59 51 42 47 38 29 1 Governed by the Western Classification and exceptions. TABLE 6 Maximum Freight Rates on Classes in Wisconsin Kates in Cents per 100 Pounds i Classes * Miles 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E 5 9 8 7 6 4 4 3 3 3 2 20 18 15 12 10 7 7 5 4 4 4 40 26 21 18 13 10 10 7 6 5 4 100 38 31 25 19 15 15 11 9 7 6 200 50 42 33 24 19 23 18 15 12 11 400 80 68 55 39 29 35 29 26 22 17 1 Governed by the Western Classification and exceptions. certain commodities on a distance basis. The state of Wisconsin is not so level or the traffic so dense as in Illi- nois. For this reason it is natural that the rates should be somewhat higher. The various traffic districts also make a uniform system, such as has been adopted in Illinois and Iowa, less feasible. 10 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 5. State Rates in Michigan Class rates within the state of Michigan (Northern Peninsula) published by the Chicago & North -Western Railway are shown in Table 7. For 5 miles the rates are almost the same as the class rates in Wisconsin. For 40 miles and higher distances the rates are materially higher in the Northern Peninsula of Michigan than in the state of Wisconsin. It may be recalled here that the rates within the Southern Peninsula of Michigan are shown in Table 46 of the treatise on " Freight Rates: Official Classification Territory." The class rates shown in that table are somewhat lower than those for the Northern Peninsula ; the rates are not easily comparable on account of the application of the Official Classification in the Southern Peninsula and the Western Classification in the Northern. The Northern Peninsula of Michigan is rather sparsely settled and the movement of merchan- dise, except on the main lines, is very light. For this reason, it is not unnatural that the merchandise rates should be comparatively high. There is, of course, an important movement of ore over certain lines in North- ern Michigan at a low rate, and this movement enables the carriers to pay dividends at lower rates than could be maintained were this traffic not present. 6. State Rates in Minnesota The class rates prescribed by the Railroad and Warehouse Commission of Minnesota are governed by the Western Classification and by exceptions and changes made by the Railroad and Warehouse Commission of Minnesota. These rates are shown in Table 8. They are INTRASTATE RATES 11 materially lower than the rates in Michigan, except for the shorter distances, but higher than the Illinois and Iowa rates. Here again the conditions are as they might be expected to be. The traffic is not so dense in Min- TABLE 7 Maximum Freight Rati-.-', on Classes in Michigan (Northern Peninsula) Rates in Cents pee 100 Pounds i Classes Miles 12 345 ABODE 5 9 8 7 6~~ 5 4 3 3 3 2 20 IS 15 12 11 9 7 5 4 4 3 40 30 26 20 16 13 10 7 6 6 5 100 53 43 35 31 25 20 15 12 11 9 200 70 60 50 40 32 30 20 16 15 12 400 104 87 70 60 48 40 30 26 24 19 460 110 90 75 60 48 40 33 29 27 22 1 Governed by the Western Classification and exceptions. TABLE 8 Maximum Freight Rates on Classes in Minnesota Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds 1 Classes Miles 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E 5 13 10 8 6 5 6 4 4 3 20 16 13 10 8 6 7 5 5 4 3 40 19 16 13 10 8 9 7 6 5 4 100 32 27 21 16 13 14 11 10 8 6 200 53 44 35 26 21 24 18 16 13 10 400.' 73 61 49 37 29 33 36 22 18 15 1 Governed by the Western Classification and exceptions and changes made by the Railroad and Warehouse Commission of Minnesota. nesota as in Illinois and Iowa, nor is the merchandise traffic so light as in the Northern Peninsula of Michigan. In 1906 the commission made material reductions in the intrastate rates. The case was finally brought before 12 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY the Supreme Court, where the state-prescribed rates were upheld and declared to be neither unreasonable nor con- fiscatory except in the case of a few of the weaker car- riers within the state. This decision was not rendered until in 1913. During the seven years in which the con- troversy was carried on, the old rates, which were materially higher than the rates finally declared reason- able, were applied. However, the Railroad and Ware- house Commission required the carriers to keep an account of all traffic and make refund after the decision was handed down. In addition to the maximum class rates prescribed by the commission, there are within the state of Minnesota what are termed jobbers' rates. They are materially lower than the distance rates between certain important centers. 7. State Rates in South Dakota The maximum class rates in South Dakota east of the Missouri River are shown in Table 9. These rates are approximately the same as the Illinois rates for 5 miles, but for greater distances they are materially higher than either the Illinois or the Iowa rates. For the longer distances they are even higher than the Minnesota rates. The maximum class rates in South Dakota west of the Missouri River are shown in Table 10. These rates are materially higher than those shown in Table 9. The traffic conditions west of the Missouri River are not so highly developed as they are east of the river. The country west of the Missouri River is new and the traffic light. This is perhaps the chief reason for higher rates west of the river than apply in the older part of the INTRASTATE RATES 13 state. In addition to the class rates there are also a number of commodity tariffs prescribed by the Commis- sion of South Dakota. TABLE 9 Maximum Freight Rates on Classes in South Dakota East of the Missouri River Kates in Cents per 100 Pounds i Classes Miles 1 2 3 4 5ABCDE 5 lT~ 9 75444332 20 18 15 12 9 7 7 6 5 4 4 40 26 22 18 13 10 10 9 8 7 5 100 37 31 24 18 15 15 13 11 9 7 200 55 46 37 27 22 22 19 17 14 11 400 82 68 55 41 33 33 29 25 21 17 1 Governed by the Western Classification and exceptions. Authority, South Dakota Distance Tariff No. 1. TABLE 10 Maximum Freight Rates on Classes in South Dakota West of the Missouri River Rates in Cents pee 100 Pounds l Classes Miles 1 2 3 4 5ABCDE 5 13~ 11 9 7 6 6 5 4 3 2 20 20 17 14 12 9 9 7 6 4 4 40 29 25 21 18 14 13 11 9 7 5 100 53 47 41 33 30 26 21 17 13 8 200 84 71 59 50 42 38 29 26 20 13 400 119 107 90 76 62 53 44 37 30 21 500 134 116 100 81 67 59 49 30 33 24 1 Governed by the Western Classification and exceptions. Authority. South Dakota Distance Tariff Xo. 2. 8. State Rates in North Dakota The maximum class rates prescribed by the Commis- sion of North Dakota are shown in Table 11. They are neither so low as the class rates east of the Missouri 14 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Kiver in South Dakota nor so high as those west of that river, but they are higher than the rates within the state of Minnesota. It would seem that this intermediate scale of distance rates is as it should be. The Commission of North Dakota, which state is west of Minnesota and where traffic density is lighter, may properly prescribe rates higher than in a state where the traffic density is higher. The preceding brief comparative study of intrastate rates in the states within Western Trunk Line Territory is necessary to give a proper basis for the consideration of interstate rates. The basis for the more important interstate rates within Western Trunk Line Territory and to and from that territory is given in the succeeding chapters of this treatise. TABLE 11 Maximum Freight Rates on Classes in North Dakota Bates in Cents per 100 Pounds 1 Classes Miles 1 2 3 4 5ABCDE 5 12 10 8 6 5 5 4 3 20 21 18 14 11 8 8 7 6 40 30 26 20 15 12 12 11 9 100 42 36 27 21 17 17 15 13 200 72 61 47 36 29 29 25 22 400 110 94 72 55 44 44 39 33 500 120 102 78 60 48 48 42 36 1 Governed by the Western Classification. 3 2 5 4 8 6 11 8 18 14 28 22 30 24 INTRASTATE RATES TABLE 12 Distance Class Rates Applicable Between Points in Iowa and Points in Kansas and Nebraska Bates IN < ^ENTS 1 per 100 Pounds i Classes Ai ii.es 1 2 O 4 5 A B C D E 13 11 9 7 5 5 5 4 n •J 3 •'0 22 18 15 11 9 9 8 7 4 40 30 25 20 15 12 , 12 11 9 8 6 100 42 35 28 21 17 17 15 13 11 8 200 62 52 41 31 25 25 22 19 16 12 400 92 77 61 46 37 37 32 28 23 18 500 . 107 90 71 54 43 43 37 32 27 21 600 12° 102 81 61 49 49 43 37 31 24 700 . 137 115 91 69 55 55 48 41 34 27 800 152 128 101 76 61 61 53 46 38 30 1 Governed by the Western Classification and exceptions. Authority, 28 I. C. C. Rep., 204. CHAPTER II TO MISSOURI RIVER RATE TERRITORY There is, in all probability, no rate adjustment that has been given more consideration or that has been investigated by the Commission more thoroughly than that used in establishing rates from eastern points to Missouri River Crossings. The boundaries of this territory are formed by the Mississippi and Missouri rivers and at a number of the more important places there have been built bridges over which the carriers cross into the adjoining states to reach their termini or to connect with other carriers. From East St. Louis, 111., to East Dubuque, 111., on the Mississippi River, there are thirteen points at which the railroads cross the river, while from Kansas City, Mo., to Sioux City, la., eight bridges span the Missouri River. The immense volume of traffic handled via these routes and the strong competition of markets for commercial supremacy in this trade have led to the designing of a peculiar rate adjustment. While distance is always a factor in the construction of rates, and frequently a controlling factor, the ele- ments of competition between the carriers for a portion of the traffic or between the markets of production for the supremacy of trade frequently lead to the making of adjustments in which distance is to a large extent 16 TO MISSOURI RIVER RATE TERRITORY 17 disregarded. In no adjustment in the country, perhaps, is this fact illustrated to better advantage than in the so-called Missouri River rate situation. The traffic that originates in the states in the Central West which lie west of the Mississippi River is confined largely to the products of agriculture, the products of mines, and the products of animals. Manufacturing is not engaged in to an appreciable extent, and thus the people in this section are forced to look to other sections of the country for manufactured articles. While the traffic moving between points located within this territory is of a negligible quantity as contrasted with the whole, the immense volume of traffic originating at or destined to other sections of the country forces the rates via all carriers to a common level and compels the more circuitous routes to disregard the factor of distance. The controlling factor in the adjustment is the short- line distance between points on the Mississippi River and points on the Missouri River, the shortest being that between Hannibal, Mo., and St. Joseph, Mo., via the Wabash Railroad. The distance between these points is 195 miles. For this distance a scale of rates as follows is provided. Classes . ...1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Rates . . ..60 45 35 27 22 24 y 2 19% 17 131/2 11 From the map on page 18, it may be easily seen that the distance to Kansas City from other Mississippi River Crossings is greatly in excess of the distance via the short line. The distance, in fact, via some of the more circuitous routes is over 700 miles, and it neces- sarily follows that, unless the circuitous routes were to 18 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY » hv flu/ fc — fit™. &*l* _ . ILLINOIS ^U?Adi$ov W"H KfcotaW. \\ \ <\ ou; NCY .. W^l J-OOiiflN/l U ^ • - &0 <0 » The distances shown on this map are the short-line distances between the Mississippi River Crossings and New York. Only the more important routes between the Mississippi River and the Missouri River are shown. TO MISSOURI RIVER RATE TERRITORY 19 equalize the rates of the direct lines, the traffic to Kan- sas City, for example, would be forwarded via the route via which the lowest scale of rates was in effect. In the construction of rates from Trunk Line and New England territories, it will be recalled that the rate applying from such points of origin to East St. Louis was extended to apply to all Mississippi River Crossings on traffic destined beyond, thereby placing all river crossings on an equality. The rates to the Mississippi River Crossings being equal, it follows with equal force that such a line as the Illinois Central, which operates from Chicago to Omaha, where it connects with some Missouri River lines in gaining an entrance to Kansas City, must of necessity place its rates via this route on a parity with those via the more direct lines in order to participate in the traffic to such Missouri River points. Inasmuch as this procedure is followed via all routes between all Mississippi and Missouri river crossings, there is established the following Scale of rates : Classes . .. .1 o 3 4 5 A B c D E Rates . . ..CO 4.~, 35 27 22 24 % 10 V-2 17 13 y 2 11 These rates are applied as local rates between all Mississippi and Missouri river crossings. 1. interstate rates to and fkom states within Western Trunk Line Territory The foregoing illustrates the adjustment employed within Western Trunk Line Territory as applied to Mis- souri River traffic. This rate so established is used as a factor in establishing rates to and from other terri- 20 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY tories under what is known as a differential basis; and before going further, it is quite proper that this term be thoroughly understood. Usually, in such adjustments, adjoining territories are divided into groups or zones, the through rates from each zone increasing slightly as the distance from the point of destination increases. Reference to Map 12 1 will show that the greater portion of the State of Illinois is divided into three irregular zones or groups, which are designated as the St. Louis rate group, the Peoria rate group, and the Chicago rate group; similarly the terri- tory lying north of the Illinois-Wisconsin and the Iowa Minnesota state lines is divided into groups. A comparison of the rates from these several groups will develop slight differences in all classes. For exam- ple, the rates from Peoria are the following figures higher on the first five classes than the rates from St. Louis : 10, 10, 5, 2%, 2y 2 . The rates from Chicago are the following figures higher on the first five classes than the rates shown from St. Louis : 20, 10, 10, 5, 5. These figures are known as differentials and must not be confused with local rates, for in many instances the rates from any point in these groups to the Mississippi River would greatly exceed these differentials. For example, the rates from Chicago to St. Louis are as follows : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Rates 43.3 35.2 27.5 22 17.6 16.6 15.1 13.5 10.7 9.6 The above rates are the highest rates from Chicago to any of the Mississippi River Crossings, while the lowest i Atlas of Traffic Maps. TO MISSOURI RIVER RATE TERRITORY 21 rates from Chicago are those to Savanna, 111., which are as follows : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Kates 35.3 27.S 21.7 17.4 14 13.3 12.4 10.3 8.2 7.4 These rates are in all cases much higher than the differences existing between the through rates assigned to the various groups. An adjustment such as this places the markets of the surrounding territory on a relative equality and elim- inates in a great measure the disability of location of some of the important manufacturing centers. Jobbers and manufacturers in St. Louis would, by reason of the adjustment used in establishing rates within the terri- tory, have an overwhelming advantage over those located at more distant points from the river crossings, were the adjustment not to be neutralized in some way. Ship- ments of first-class freight from Chicago to Kansas City, Mo., via St. Louis, for example, would be charged on the basis of the local rate, 43.3 cents, to St. Louis and 60 cents beyond, or a total of $1,033, and the cheapest route would be through Savanna, 111., via which the through rate would be 95.3 cents. In either case, the St. Louis merchants would have a substantial advantage and while St. Louis has the advantage of location, the benefits of which it is entitled to, the difference in the rates from St. Louis and those from other natural competing markets should not be such as to restrict the consumer to the St. Louis market alone, but, on the contrary, such as to afford him as wide a field as is possible. Such relief is afforded by extending (blanketing) the application of the St. Louis rates (Mississippi River 22 FREIGHT KATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Crossings) over into Illinois, by establishing rates from other large producing centers on a relative basis, and by using the rate so established as a blanket rate applicable from a large territory or zone. Grouping of Territory The following shows the authorized boundaries of some of these groups or zones. In actual practice, how- ever, the tariff or territorial directory should be con- sulted for this information. OMAHA TO KANSAS CITY, INCLUSIVE Chicago Rate Territory The eastern boundary line is the line of the Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad, Chicago to Danville ; thence to Tuscola; thence via the Illinois Central Railroad through Mattoon and Neoga to Effingham; and thence via the Vandalia Railroad to but not including East St. Louis. Chicago rates apply west of and including Hammond and Whiting, Ind., on the Chicago Terminal Transfer Railroad, Chicago Junction Railway, Michigan Central Railroad, and Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad on all traffic to or from Missouri River points, Omaha to Kan- sas City, both inclusive, and beyond. The western boundary line is the eastern boundary line of Peoria rate territorv. Peoria Rate Territory The eastern boundary line is the line of the Chicago & North- Western Railway, from Gait, 111., to Sterling; thence via the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to TO MISSOURI RIVER RATE TERRITORY 23 Amboy; thence via the Illinois Central Railroad, through Mendota, LaSalle, Wenona, El Paso, Bloomington, Clin- ton, and Decatur, to Pana ; thence via the Cleveland, Cin- cinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway to Litchfield; and thence via the Chicago & Alton Railroad through Alhani- bra to but not including Glen Carbon; also including Ancona, on the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway. The western boundary line is the eastern boundary line of the Mississippi River rate territory. Exceptions. — Peoria rates also apply from Ottawa, LaSalle, Streator, Marseilles, Rockford, Dixon, Free- port, Oregon, Sycamore, and DeKalb, 111., on the follow- ing commodities (which are manufactured at those points) only: Agricultural implements, bottles, brick, buckwheat flour, building tile, clothing, ditch cleaners, glass (all kinds), harness (boxed), hay machinery, lamp chimneys, organs, pianos, post hole diggers, pumps, roofing tile, sand, sewer pipe, stoneware, strawboard, strawboard egg case fillers, straw wrapping paper, vehicles, well-boring machinery, and windmills. Peoria rates' also apply from Beloit, Wis., and Rock- ton, 111., on wrapping paper and strawboard. The above commodity rate basis applies to all points west of the Mississippi River, on and south of a line drawn from Sabula via Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to Tama, Iowa, and thence via Chicago & North- Western Railway to Omaha, also including Missouri River points south thereof. Mississippi River Rate Territory The eastern boundary line is from Dubuque, Iowa, thence via the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad, to Savanna, 111. ; and thence via the Chicago, Burlington 24 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY & Quincy Bailroad, through Fulton (including points on the Chicago & North- Western Railway, from Morrison to East Clinton), Denrock, Barstow, Rio, Galesburg, Abing- don, and Bushnell, to East St. Louis, 111., including also Edwardsville and Glen Carbon; it is understood that in case the use of these rates enables parties to reduce established through rates, the said rates shall be restricted to local business. Exceptions. — Mississippi River rates apply from Kewanee, 111., on the following commodities manufac- tured at that point : Boilers, heating material, castings, wrought-iron pipe, and shoveling boards, C. L. and L. C. L. ; scrap iron, slag, and cinders, C. L. Mississippi River rates apply on iron and steel products from Springfield, 111., westbound only. Mississippi River rates apply on scrap iron to Kewanee, 111., brick from Herman, London Mills, and Wataga, 111., drain tile from Wataga, 111., agricultural implements, pumps, and shoveling boards from Galva, 111., and wheat for milling purposes to Litchfield, Jack- sonville, Springfield, and Carlinville, 111. SIOUX CITY Chicago Rate Territory The southern and eastern boundary line is the line of the Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad, Chicago to Dan- ville; thence to Tuscola; thence via the Illinois Central Railroad, through Mattoon and Neoga to Effingham ; and thence via the Vandalia Railroad to and including East St. Louis and St. Louis. Chicago rates apply west of and including Hammond and Whiting, Ind., on the Chicago Terminal Transfer TO MISSOURI RIVER RATE TERRITORY 25 Railroad, Chicago Junction Railway, Michigan Central Railroad, and Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad. The western boundary line is the west bank of the Mississippi River, St. Louis to but not including Burling- ton, Iowa, and the eastern boundary line of the Missis- sippi River rate territory described below. 2 Mississippi River Rate Territory The eastern boundary line is the east bank of the Mis- sissippi River, East Burlington to East Dubuque, both inclusive. Exception. — A commodity rate of 26*4 is authorized on the following commodities only: Agricultural imple- ments classified as Class A, Western Classification; farm and common spring wagons (not pleasure or passenger vehicles), shoveling boards, pumps, and windmills, C. L., from Ottawa, Streator, Marseilles, Rockford, Dixon, Freeport, Oregon, Sycamore, DeKalb, Canton, Gales- burg, Monmouth, Abingdon, Galva, and Dallas, 111. MISSOURI RIVER POINTS Table 13 shows certain points located on or adjacent to the Missouri River which are accorded the benefit of the Missouri River rates under the tariffs of the Western Trunk Line Committee. It should be understood, how- ever, that if other committees or roads publish rates to this territory, the number of points to which the rates are applied, may be restricted or extended. For example, in the Traffic Glossary 3 will be found a description of 2 See exception under Mississippi River rate territory above.. 3 In the first edition, tlrs was published as Part 4 of "Freight Classification." 26 FREIGHT EATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Missouri River crossings by the Trans-Missouri Freight Bureau and Central Freight Association which differs from that shown in Table 13. TABLE 13 List of Missouri River Stations from and to Which Rates Apply Name Group i Name Group Argentine, Mo A Leavenworth, Kan A Annourdale (Kansas City), Leeds, Iowa G Kan A Level Siding, S. D D Armstrong, Kan A Nebraska City, Neb B Atchison, Kan A Omaha, Neb B Big Blue Jet., Mo A Sheffield, Mo A Congo, Mo A Sioux City, Iowa C Council Bluffs, Iowa B Sioux Falls, S. D D Fort Leavenworth, Kan A South Omaha, Neb B Kansas City, Kan A St. Joseph, Mo A Kansas City, Mo A Sugar Creek, Mo A 1 The group letters refer to those used in connection with the rates shown in Table 15. Through rates to the Missouri River Crossings from points in adjoining territories are constructed on the differential adjustment; that is, to establish through rates to and from Missouri River points, the differen- tials indicated in the footnotes of Table 14 are to be added to the rates shown in Table 15. These differen- tials are agreed upon by the interested carriers and in a great degree indicate the measure of competition be- tween the various localities. TO MISSOURI RIVER RATE TERRITORY 27 TABLE 14 Differentials Used in Making Through Rates to and from Missouri River Points \ And BetweenX Gboups \ Armourdale, Kan. Armstrong, Kan. Argentine, Kan. Atchison, Kan. Kansas City, Mo. Kansas City, Kan. Ft. Leavenworth, Kan. Leavenworth, Kan. St. Joseph, Mo. Sugar Creek. Mo. Counci. Bluffs. Iowa. Nebraska City, Neb. Omaha, Neb. l'acilic Jet., Iowa. Suuth Omaha, Neb. o . « O « 1 1 02 M si fc 53 a; ^ Peoria See Note 1 See Note 1 See Note 2 * See Note S * Chicago See Note 2 See Note 2 See Note 2 See Note 8 St. Paul See Note 3 See Note 2 See Note 2 See Note 9 Duluth See Note 4 See Note 2 See Note 2 See Note Memphis See Note 2 See Note .". See Note 10 See Note 10 Eau Claire See Note See Note G See Note 7 See Note 7 *Also applies from St. Louis Territory. Classes 12 34 5 ABCDE Note 1. Add to St. Louis rates 10 10 5 2% 2y 2 3% 3% 2V 2 2% 2y 2 Note 2. Add to St. Louis rates 20 20 10 5 5 7% 7y 2 5 5 Note 3. Add to St. Paul- Omaha rates 5 4 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 % 1 Note 4. Add to Dulut h- Omaha rates 14 11 8 5 4 5 4 3 3% 3 Note 5. Add to Memphis- Kansas City rates 22 2222 2344 Note 6. Add to Chicago-Kan- sas City rates 10 9 87 6 6 5 5 5 4 Note 7. Add to St. Taul- Sioux City rates 20 15 10 5 5 5 5 5' 3% 3% Note 8. 104% of Chicago- Sioux City rates 83 67 y 2 47 33 V 2 28 33% 28 23 19 % 16% Note 9. Same as St. Paul- Sioux City or St. Paul- Omaha rates, whichever are lower. Note 10. No through rates published. Apply lowest combination through any gateway. 28 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY The following illustration shows how to use the table. Suppose it is desired to construct the class rates from Bloomington, 111., to Omaha, Neb. By referring to Map 12 of the Atlas of Eailway Traffic Maps, it is found that Bloomington, 111., is in the Peoria group. Referring to Table 14 and following the figures shown opposite the Peoria group, Note number 1 is shown in the Omaha column. The Notes referred to in this part of the table are below the table. Following these directions it is found that the class rates from Bloomington to Omaha are obtained by adding to the St. Louis rates the differen- tials given. Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E St. Louis Rates... CO 45 35 27 22 24% 19% 17 13% 11 Differentials to be added 10 10 5 2% 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% Rates from Bloom- ington to Omaha 70 55 40 29% 24% 2S% 23% 19% 16 13% Table 15 shows the above rates as the published rates from Bloomington (Peoria group) to Omaha. Likewise, the rates from any other point of origin to any other point of destination is similarily obtained. First ascertain the group to which the point of origin is assigned and the differentials for that group; then add the differentials to the base rates from the Missis- sippi River to destination. TO MISSOURI RIVER RATE TERRITORY 29 TABLE 15 Extract from Western Trunk Line Tariff No. 1-H Showing the Class Rates Applying Between the Various Groups and Missouri River Points Shown as Taking the Above Lettered Groups in Table No. 1 AND MISSOURI RIVER Rates in Cents pee . 100 Pounds Clas ;es Between GROUPS 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E A 60 45 35 27 22 241/2 19 1/2 17 I31/2 11 St. Louis... B 60 45 35 27 22 24i/ 2 191/2 17 13% 11 C 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18% 10 D 83 67% 47 33i/ 2 28 33 y 2 28 23 19 1/2 ioy 2 A 70 55 40 29i/o 24 ? 2 28% 23i/ 4 191/2 16 I31/2 B 70 55 40 291/2 24% 2sy 4 23% 19% 16 131/2 Peoria .... C 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18% 10 D 83 67% 47 001 / 00 72 28 *>72 2S 23 19i/ 2 i 6 y 2 A 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18% 16 B 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 i8y 2 16 Chicago C 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18% 16 D 83 67i/ 2 47 331/2 28 33 % 28 23 19% 16% A So 69 4S 34 2S 34 2S 23 20 17 B 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18% 16 St. TauL... C 60 50 35 27 20 24 20 17 15 12 D 57 47% 34 25 > j 20 22% 19 17 15 12 A 04 76 53 37 31 37 31 2~> 22 19 B 80 65 45 32 27 27 • 10 18% 16 Duluth C 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 00 18% 16 D 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18% 16 A 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18y 2 16 B S2 67 47 34 29 34 29 25 22% 20 Memphis . . C No published through rates. D No published throi i.uh rates. A 90 74 53 39 33 38 99 27 2f]i/2 20 B 90 74 53 39 33 38 00 27 23% 20 Eau Claire. C 80 65 45 32 25 29 25 22 18% 15% D SO 65 45 32 25 29 25 22 1S% 15% 30 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 2. Rates to and from Central Freight Association Territory The preceding pages have illustrated how, by the use of differential rates in connection with the blanket rates established between the Mississippi and Missouri river crossings, the markets of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, Duluth, etc., are enabled to compete with each other and with other markets more advantageously located. This adjustment is restricted to Western Trunk Line Territory and with one or two exceptions is not used in establishing through rates from points located outside thereof. It becomes necessary to establish rates from points located in other territories which in some degree will overcome the advantage that is accorded those located in Western Trunk Line Territory. Formerly through rates from points east of the Illi- nois-Indiana State Line were made on the full local com- bination on the Mississippi River, using the East St. Louis rate to the river crossings and the 60-cent scale west. This adjustment was attacked before the Inter- state Commerce Commission and after much deliberation the following scale of rates was ordered established be- tween the Mississippi River Crossings and the Missouri River Crossings (Kansas City to Sioux City) as propor- tional rates to apply on traffic originating at or destined to points beyond. .... 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Rates .... 55 41 32 24 20 22 18 15 12 10 Proportional rates between the Mississippi River and Sioux Falls are made the same differentials under the TO MISSOURI RIVER RATE TERRITORY 31 Chicago-Sioux Falls local rates, as the East Mississippi River-Sioux City proportional rates are less than the Chicago-Sioux City local rates. For example : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Chicago-Sioux City 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18% 16 Mississippi River-Sioux City 55 41 32 24 20 22 18 15 12 10 Differentials 25 24 13 S 7 10 9 7 6% 6 Chicago-Sioux Falls ....83 67% 47 33% 28 33% 28 23 19% 16% Differentials 25 24 13 8 7 10 9 7 6% 6 58 43% 34 25% 21 23% 19 16 13 10% Taking Indianapolis, Ind., as a representative compet- ing market in Central Freight Association Territory and contrasting the rates through to Missouri River points under the above proportional basis with the rate in effect from Chicago, clearly shows how the adjustment equal- izes the disparity which would exist under the combina- tion of locals. The class rates 4 from Indianapolis, Ind., to East St. Louis, 111., are : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 6 Rates 38 32% 24 16% 13% 10% Taking a carload of machinery, which commodity is usually rated in carloads at fifth class in the Official and at Class A in the Western, the following rate is obtained : Indianapolis to East St. Louis 13% per 100 lbs. East St. Louis to Missouri River 22 per 100 lbs. Through 35% per 100 lbs. * Governed by the Official Classification. 32 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY This rate compares favorably, considering the distance and the elements of competition, with the rate of 32 cents from Chicago. If these proportional rates were not established, the through rates would be made on full combination of local rates to and from the Mississippi River. This would result in a rate 5 cents higher on this commodity from Indianapolis, Ind., than from Chi- cago, 111. In connection with these proportional rates, it should be understood that when published by the carriers the extent of their use is specifically indicated in the issues in which they are contained, and it must not be under- stood that they can be used to defeat such through rates as are published from certain territories. For example, the proportional rates from the river would not be applied on shipments originating at Chicago, Milwaukee, Duluth, or any other points from which differential rates are applied, but only from such points as are located beyond the limits of Western Trunk Line Territory. 3. Rates to and from Atlantic Seaboaed Territory The rates from Trunk Line and New England terri- tories are established in the same manner as are the rates from Central Freight Association Territory. A different scale of differentials has been established by the Interstate Commerce Commission, the rates for the first five classes being 51, 38, 30, 23, 19. Tariffs are published via all lines and routes, including the water lines operating through gulf ports based on the rates to the Mississippi River plus these figures. CHAPTER III rates to and from minnesota, michigan, and wisconsin 1. Development In analyzing this rate structure the short-line distance between some of the more important points will be found of interest. For example, the distance from St. Paul, Minn., to Duluth, Minn., is 153 miles ; to Milwaukee, Wis., 325 miles ; to Chicago, 111., 409 miles ; to Indianapolis, Ind., 592 miles ; to Cincinnati, Ohio, 695 miles ; to Buffalo, N. Y., 924 miles ; and to New York, N. Y., 1,312 miles. The adjustment employed in establishing rates to and from the more important points in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and the upper peninsula of Michigan reflects the effect of water competition f rom various territories ; in fact, it is contended by the carriers that the key to this low ad- justment is the abnormally low rates made by the boat lines plying the Mississippi River from St. Louis to St. Paul. Rates have been established on a scale as low as 40 cents per 100 pounds for first class, the other classes being adjusted on approximately two thirds of the all- rail routes. Again, during the season of lake navigation, Chicago rates are applied to Duluth from various points in Trunk Line Territory. The rates via the rail-and-lake lines from New York to Chicago are as follows : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 6 Rates 62 54 41 30 25 21 33 34 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Rates to interior cities in Wisconsin and Minnesota are established on the basis of certain abitraries over the rates to Duluth and other cities. For example, the rates to St. Paul are made by adding arbitraries to the rates to Duluth as follows : Glasses 1 2 3 4 5 6 Rates to Duluth 62 54 41 30 25 21 Arbitraries 21 IS 13 8 7 5 Rates to St. Paul 83 72 54 3S 32 26 2. Duluth and St. Paul Rate Points The fact that the group to which a point may be as- signed varies greatly according to where the traffic origi- nates or is destined, makes it impracticable to lay down any general grouping which would be adapted to all territories. The Western Trunk Line Committee, in Tariff No. 5-F, which names rates between stations in Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, and Wisconsin on the one hand and this ter- ritory on the other hand, assigns points to either the Duluth Group or the St. Paul Group, while in Tariff No. 51, which applies to Central Freight Association Territory east of the Indiana-Illinois State Line, four groups are established to cover practically the same points, viz., Wi- nona, Duluth, St. Paul, Marquette, Michigamme, Hough- ton, and Hancock. 3. Grouping of Territory (a) Chicago, Peoria, and Mississippi River Rate Territories The descriptions of the Chicago, Peoria, and Missis- sippi River rate territories are identical with those used TO AND FROM THE NORTH AND WEST 35 in connection with the establishing of rates between these points and Missouri River territory, which is set forth in Chapter II. Between Peoria and Peoria rate points and St. Paul, Chicago rates apply. (b) St. Louis Rate Territory On and north of the Vandalia Line, east of St. Louis to St. Elmo, and thence via the Chicago & Eastern Illi- nois Railroad to Altamont ; thence via the Wabash Rail- road to Sullivan; and thence via the Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad, through Arthur, Tuscola, Sidell, and Danville, to but not including Momence, 111. Between St. Louis and points in that group, the rates are made 105 per cent of the rates from Chicago to St. Paul. Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Rates 63 52y 2 42 26 21 26 21 18 15 lSy 2 (c) Points in Southern Illinois Between points in southern Illinois lying south of the St. Louis, Peoria, and Chicago groups and St. Paul, Minn., various percentages are used in establishing rates, as is illustrated by Table 16, which gives the basis em- ployed in making rates from stations on the Illinois Central Railroad. 4. Rates to St. Paul To meet competition, the carriers of the Western Trunk Line have arbitrarily established the following scale of rates between Chicago and Chicago rate points on the one hand and St. Paul on the other hand : 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 36 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 16 Basis for Rates from Illinois Central Stations South of St. Louis Territory Caulton and Areola 102% of St, Louis rate Humboldt, Dorans Crossing, and Mattoon.104% of St. Louis rate Magnet, Neoga, and Aetna 106% of St. Louis rate Sigel and Effingham 110% of St. Louis rate Watson, Clio, and Edgewood 112% of St. Louis rate Laclede and Farina 114% of St. Louis rate Kinmundy and Alma 116% of St. Louis rate Tonti and Odin 118% of St. Louis rate Central City and Centralia 120% of St. Louis rate Irvington and Richview 122% of St. Louis rate Ashley and Radom 124% of St. Louis rate Wallace, Siding, and Shobonier 106% of St. Louis rate Vernon and Patoka 112% of St. Louis rate Fairman and Sandoval 118% of St. Louis rate Points on the St. Louis Division south of Radom take Cairo rates. 5. Rates to Duluth The rates so fixed to St. Paul are used as a basis in establishing rates to Duluth. From Chicago and Peoria rate territories to Duluth rate territory, rates are made by adding differentials as follows : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E St. Paul rates... 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 Differentials ....5 5 4 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 Rates to Duluth G5 55 44 28 22 2S 22 19 17 16 From St. Louis rate territory to Duluth rate ter- ritory, rates are made by adding the following differ- entials to the St. Louis-St. Paul rates : TO AND FROM THE NORTH AND WEST 37 Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E St. Louis-St. Paul rates 63 52y 2 42 26 21 26 21 IS 15 13^. Differentials 15 13y 2 11 8 5 8 5 5 5 5% Rates to Duluth 78 66 53 34 26 34 26 23 20 19 Table 17 shows the rates between some of the more important groups in the state of Illinois on the one hand and both St. Paul and Duluth groups on the other hand. These rates are made in conformity with the basis just set forth. TABLE 17 Class Rates Between Groups in Illinois and Bordering Territory on One Hand and St. Paul and Duluth Groups on the Other 1 Between Gkoups Chicago Peoria St. Louis Cairo Dubuque Charleston Shobonier Toledo Vernon Lacledo Kinmundy Sandoval Centralia Irvington Mt. Vernon And Groups St. Paul) Duluth) St. Paul) Duluth) St. Paul) Duluth ) St. Paul) Duluth) St. Paul i St. Paul) Duluth) St. Paul. Duluth) St. Paul) Duluth) St. Paul) Duluth ) . St. Paul) Duluth) St. Paul) Duluth) , St. Paul) Duluth) St. Paul) Duluth) St. Paul) Duluth) St. raul) Duluth) Rates in Cents Per 100 Pounds CI asses 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 65 55 44 28 22 28 22 19 17 16 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 65 55 44 2S 22 28 22 19 17 16 63 78 52 66 42 53 26 34 21 26 20 34 21 26 18 23 15 13 20 19 80 80 65 66 52 53 o.:> 34 26 33 26 34 26 26 19 17 20 19 55 45 35 221 17 20 171 15 12 10 65 J 80 54J 66 431 53 27 34 26 27 34 22 26 181 23 151 20 14 19 67 80 551 66 44| 53 271 34 221 26 271 34 22i 26 19 23 16 20 141 19 691 80 571 66 46 53 281 34 23 26 281 34 23 26 20 23 161 20 15 19 701 80 59 66 47 53 29 34 23£ 26 29 34 231 26 20 23 17 20 15 19 72 80 60 66 48 53 291 34 24 26 291 34 24 26 201 23 17 20 15 19 73 80 61 66 481 53 30 34 24 26 30 34 24 26 21 23 17 20 15 19 74 80 62 66 49 53 30 34 25 26 30 34 25 26 21 23 17 20 16 19 75 i SO 63 66 501 53 31 34 25 26 31 34 25 26 21 23 18 20 16 19 77 80 64 66 51 53 31 34 25 26 31 34 25 26 22 23 18 20 16 19 78 80 65 66 52 53 32 34 26 32 26 34 26 26 22 23 18 16 20 19 1 Freight Tariff No. 5-P of the Western Trunk Lines. 2 Governed by the Western Classification. 38 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 6. Rates from and to Points East of Illinois-Indiana State Line The rates between St. Paul and Duluth and points in Central Freight Association Territory are not made upon any general basis. Combinations of local rates through various junctions are sometimes employed and in other instances the rates are arbitrarily made by the interested carriers. Table 18 shows the rates to some of the more impor- tant points in Central Freight Association Territory. TABLE 18 Class Rates from the Winona, Duluth, Marquette, and Houghton Groups to Points in C. F. A. Territory East of the Illinois-Indiana State Line From Groups Winona Duluth Marquette Houghton To Indianapolis, Ind. Columbus, Ohio Youngstown, Ohio Pittsburgh, Pa. Indianapolis, Ind. Columbus, Ohio Youngstown, Ohio Pittsburgh, Pa. Indianapolis, Ind. Columbus, Ohio Youngstown, Ohio Pittsburgh, Pa. Indianapolis, Ind. Columbus, Ohio Youngstown, Ohio Pittsburgh, Pa. Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Classes * 1 2 3 4 5 6 76 05 48 32 26 21 86 71 53 36 30 24 87 72 54 37 31 25 89 74 56 39 33 27 81 69 51 35 29 23 91 75 56 39 33 26 93 77 58 40 34 27 95 79 60 42 36 29 75 65 48 32 26 23 75 63 45 30 26 22 77 64 47 31 26 23 79 66 49 33 28 25 81 69 51 35 29 23 91 75 56 39 33 26 93 77 58 40 34 27 95 79 00 42 36 29 i Governed by the Official Classification and exceptions, Freight Tariff No. 51 of the Western Trunk Lines. TO AND FROM THE NORTH AND WEST 39 7. Proportional Rates Table 19 shows certain proportional rates applying from the St. Paul and Duluth groups to the Ohio River Crossings and lower Mississippi River points. These rates are established to enable the markets to compete for trade with the more advantageously located markets of St. Louis and Chicago. This they would be unable to do were the combination of local rates to and from Chi- cago or St. Louis to be applied. TABLE 19 Class Rates from the St. Paul and Duluth Groups to Ohio River Crossings, Memphis, New Orleans, Jackson, Miss., and Meridian, Miss. St. Paul Duluth St. Paul Duluth Ohio River Crossings 2 Ohio River Crossings 2 Memphis, Tenn. New Orleans, La.* Jackson-Meri- dian. Miss. Rates in Cents Per 100 Polnds Classes 1 1 2 o O 4 SAB C D E 80 65 52 33 26 33 26 22 19 17 80 60 53 34 26 34 26 23 20 19 Per Classes * Bbl. 1 2 3 4 5 6 A B C D E H F 115 90 78 Gl 51 44 31 43 ( 3 ) ( 3 ) 42 67 ( 3 ) 137 111 87 70 54 49 39 51 ( 3 ) ( 3 ) 42 .. ( 3 ) 148 124 103 85 70 62 51 53 ( 3 ) ( 3 ) 56 71 ( 3 ) i The Western Classification governs the Ohio River rates and the Southern Classification governs through rates from St. Paul to Mississippi Valley points named in the table. 2 To Columbus and Paducah, Ky., add 2 cents to the rates given to other Ohio River Crossings. 3 These classes include grain products but the rates on grain products are carried In commodity tariffs. 4 And other points south of Memphis in the New Orleans group. CHAPTER IV RATES BETWEEN STATIONS IN MINNESOTA AND WISCON- SIN AND STATIONS IN IOWA AND MISSOURI For rate-making purposes this territory is usually divided into five groups on the one hand and eleven groups on the other. The five groups on the St. Paul end are St. Paul Group, Winona Group, New Ulni Group, Duluth Group, and Eau Claire Group. The other eleven groups are Moberly Group, Mexico Group, Manning Group, Jefferson City Group, Maquoketa Group, Des Moines Group, Centerville Group, Cedar Rap- ids Group, Sheldon Group, Mason City Group, and Ft. Dodge Group. The latter groups, for the most part, are directly south of St. Paul and in the states of Iowa and Missouri. The rates now in effect between points in these groups, as published in Western Trunk Line Tariff No. 13-G, are shown in Table 20. The following pages of this chapter will be devoted to a discussion of their construction. As is the case with regard to the construction of rates to and from the Missouri River Crossings, the adjoin- ing territories are subdivided, into groups as zones and blanket rates are established therefrom: the destination groups, however, instead of being restricted to a com- paratively few points, take in quite a large area. 40 TABLE 20 Rates from Points in "Wisconsin and Minnesota to Points in Iowa and Missouri Between 1 Points And ' IN THE Points in the Following Groups Ratus in Cents Per 100 ] Pounds FOLLOW- ING IN IOWA Classes • Groups 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E 1 (Moberly) 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 2 (Mexico) 63 52 y 2 42 26 21 26 21 18 15 13% 3 (Manning) 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 is y 3 16 4 (Jefferson City) 85 69 48 34 28 34 28 23 20 17 5 (Maquoketa) 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 St. Paul 6 (Des Moines) 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 7 (Centerville) 63 52% 42 26 21 26 21 18 15 13% 8 (Cedar Rapids) 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 9 (Sheldon) 55 47 34 25% 20 22 19 17 14 10 10 (Mason City) 43 35 28 21 17 19 15 12% 11 9 11 (Fort Dodge) 55 42 32 22 18 22 17 14 13 10 Winona 1 ( Moberly i 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 2 (Mexico) 63 52% 42 26 21 26 21 18 15 13% 3 (Manning) 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18% 16 4 (Jefferson City) 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18% 16 5 (Maquoketa) 55 46 35 25 18 25 18 15 12 11 6 (Des Moines) 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 7 (Centerville) 63 52% 42 26 21 26 21 18 15 13% 8 (Cedar Rapids) 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 9 (Sheldon) 55 47 34 25% 20 22 19 17 14 10 10 (Mason City) 43 35 28 21 17 19 15 12% 11 9 11 (Fort Dodge) 55 42 32 22 IS 22 17 14 13 10 2 (Mexico) 72 56 43 30 24 28 24 20 17 15 3 (Manning) 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18% 16 4 (Jefferson City) 85 69 48 34 28 34 28 23 20 17 6 (Des Moines) 63 52% 42 26 21 25% 21 18 15 13 New Ulm 7 (Centerville) 65 55 43 27 22 25% 22 19 15 14 8 (Cedar Rapids) 63 52% 42 26 21 25% 21 18 15 13 9 (Sheldon) 60 50 35 27 20 24 20 17 15 12 10 (Mason City) 53 42 33 24 19 20 17 15 13% 10 11 (Fort Dodge) 03 52% 42 26 21 25% 21 18 15 13 1 (Moberly) 78 66 53 34 26 34 26 23 20 19 2 (Mexico) 78 66 53 34 26 34 26 23 20 19 3 (Manning) 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18 16 5 (Maquoketa) 65 55 44 28 22 28 22 19 17 16 Duluth 6 (Des Moines) 78 62 44 31 26 31 26 21 18 16 7 (Centerville) 78 65 45 32 26 32 26 22 18 16 8 (Cedar Rapids) 65 55 44 28 22 28 22 19 17 16 9 (Sheldon) 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18 16 10 (Mason City) 65 55 43 28 22 28 oo 19 17 16 11 (Fort Dodge) 78 62 44 31 26 31 26 21 18 16 1 (Moberly) 65 55 44 28 22 28 oo 19 17 16 2 (Mexico) 73 61% 50 33 26 32 26 23 20 17% 3 (Manning) 80 65 45 32 27 32 27 22 18% 16 4 (Jefferson City) 95 78 56 41 34 40 33 28 25 21 Eau 5 (Maquoketa) 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 Claire 6 (Des Moines) 65 55 44 28 22 28 22 19 17 16 7 (Centerville) 73 61% 50 33 27 32 26 23 20 17% 8 (Cedar Rapids) 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 9 (Sheldon) 80 65 45 32 25 29 25 22 18% 15% 10 (Mason City) 60 50 40 25 20 25 20 17 14 13 11 (Fort Dodge) 60 43 23 27 22 26 20 18 17 14 1 Governed by the Western Classification. 42 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 1. Description of Northern Groups — St. Paul-Iowa Territory (a) St. Paul Group Rates between St. Paul Group and Group 1 (Moberly) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates. Rates between St. Paul Group and Group 2 (Mexico) are made the same as St. Paul-St. Louis rates. Rates between St. Paul Group and Group 3 (Manning) are made the same as St. Paul-Omaha rates. Rates between St. Paul Group and Group 4 (Jefferson City) are made the same as St. Paul-Kansas City rates. Rates between St. Paul Group and Group 5 (Maquo- keta) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates. Rates between St. Paul Group and Group 6 (Des Moines) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates or Omaha rates, whichever are lower, observing Cedar Rap- ids rates as maxima. Rates between St. Paul Group and Group 7 (Center- ville) are made the same as St. Paul-St. Louis rates or Omaha rates, whichever are lower. Rates between St. Paul Group and Group 8 (Cedar Rapids) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates or Omaha rates, whichever are lower. Rates between St. Paul Group and Group 9 (Sheldon) are made the same as St. Paul-Sioux City rates or Omaha rates, whichever are lower. Rates between St. Paul Group and Group 10 (Mason City) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates, Sioux City rates, or Omaha rates, whichever are lowest, but not to exceed Des Moines rates. Rates between St. Paul Group and Group 11 (Ft. Dodge) are made the same as St. Paul-St. Louis rates, TO AND FROM THE NORTH AND "WEST 43 Sioux City rates, or Omaha rates, whichever are lowest, but not to exceed Des Moines rates. (b) Winona Group Rates between Winona Group and Group 1 (Moberly) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates. Eates between Winona Group and Group 2 (Mexico) are made the same as St. Paul-St. Louis rates. Rates between Winona Group and Group 3 (Manning) are made the same as St. Paul-Omaha rates. Rates between Winona Group and Group 4 (Jefferson City) are made the same as St. Paul-Kansas City rates or Chicago-Kansas City rates, whichever are lower. Rates between Yv T inona Group and Group 5 (Maquo- keta) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates. Rates between Winona Group and Group 6 (Des Moines) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates or St. Paul-Omaha rates, whichever are lower. Rates between Winona Group and Group 7 (Center- ville) are made the same as St. Paul-St. Louis rates or St. Paul-Omaha rates, whichever are lower. Rates between Winona Group and Group 8 (Cedar Rapids) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates or St. Paul-Omaha rates, whichever are lower. Rates between Winona Group and Group 9 (Sheldon) are made the same as St. Paul-Sioux City rates or St. Paul-Omaha rates, whichever are lower. Rates between Winona Group and Group 10 (Mason City) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates, St. Paul-Sioux City rates, or St. Paul-Omaha rates, which- ever are lowest, but not to exceed Des Moines rates. Rates between Winona Group and Group 11 (Ft. 44 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Dodge) are made the same as St. Panl-St. Louis rates, St. Paul-Sioux City rates, or St. Paul-Omaha rates, which- ever are lowest, but not to exceed Des Moines rates. (c) New Ulm Group Eates between New Ulm Group and Group 3 (Manning) are made the same as St. Paul-Omaha rates. Eates between New Ulm Group and Group 4 (Jefferson City) are made the same as St. Paul-Kansas City rates. Eates between New Ulm Group and Group 9 (Sheldon) are made the same as St. Paul-Sioux City rates or St. Paul-Omaha rates, whichever are lower. (d) Duluth Group Eates between Duluth Group and Group 1 (Moberly) are made the same as Duluth-Chicago rates. Eates between Duluth Group and Group 2 (Mexico) are made the same as Duluth-St. Louis rates. Eates between Duluth Group and Group 3 (Manning) are made the same as Duluth-Omaha rates. Eates between Duluth Group and Group 4 (Jefferson City) are made the same as Duluth-Kansas City rates. Eates between Duluth Group and Group 5 (Maquoketa) are made the same as Duluth-Chicago rates. Eates between Duluth Group and Group 6 (Des Moines) are made the same as Duluth-Chicago rates or Duluth- Omaha rates, whichever are lower, but not to exceed the Cedar Eapids rates. Eates between Duluth Group and Group 7 (Center- ville) are made the same as Duluth-St. Louis rates or Duluth-Omaha rates, whichever are lower. TO AND FROM THE NORTH AND WEST 45 Eates between Dulutli Group and Group 8 (Cedar Rap- ids) are made the same as Duluth-Chicago rates or Du- lutli-Omaha rates, whichever are lower. Rates between Duluth Group and Group 9 (Sheldon) are made the same as Duluth-Sioux City rates or Duluth- Omaha rates, whichever are lower. Rates between Duluth Group and Group 10 (Mason City) are made the same as Duluth-Sioux City rates or Duluth-Omaha rates, whichever are lower, but not to exceed Des Moines rates. Rates between Duluth Group and Group 11 (Ft. Dodge) are made the same as Duluth-St. Louis rates, Duluth- Sioux City rates, or Duluth-Omaha rates, whichever are lowest, but not to exceed Des Moines rates. (e) Eau Claire Group Rates between Eau Claire Group and Group 1 (Mo- berly) are made the following arbitraries over St. Paul- Chicago rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Arbitraries (in cents) 10 9S7665554 Rates between Eau Claire Group and Group 2 (Mexico) :ema rates : are made the following arbitraries over St. Paul-St. Louis . . 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Arbitraries (in cents) . . ..10 9 S 7 6 6 5 5 5 4 Rates between Eau Claire Group and Group 3 (Man- ning) are made the following arbitraries over St. Paul- Omaha rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Arbitraries (in cents) 10 987 665554 46 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Rates between Eau Claire Group and Group 4 (Jeffer- son City) are made the following arbitraries over St. Paul- Kansas City rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Arbitraries (in cents) 10 9S7G 65554 Rates between Eau Claire Group and Group 5 (Maquo- keta) are made the same as St. Paul- Chicago rates. Rates between Eau Claire Group and Group 6 (Des Moines) are made the following arbitraries over St. Paul- Ottumwa rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Arbitraries (in cents) 10 9S7GG5 554 Rates between Eau Claire Group and Group 7 (Center- ville) are made the following arbitraries over St. Paul- Des Moines rates : ( lasses 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Arbitraries (in cents) 10 9S7665554 Rates between Eau Claire Group and Group 8 (Cedar Rapids) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates. Rates between Eau Claire Group and Group 9 (Shel- don) are made the following arbitraries over St. Paul- Sioux City rates, but not to exceed Eau Claire-Omaha rates ■: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Arbitraries (in cents) .20 15 10 5 5 5 5 5 3% 3y 2 Rates between Eau Claire Group and Group 10 (Mason City) are made the same as St. Paul-Chicago rates, but TO AND FROM THE NORTH AND WEST 47 not to exceed Eau Claire-Sioux City rates or Des Moines rates. Rates between Eau Claire Group and Group 11 (Ft. Dodge) are made the following arbitraries over St. Paul- Ft. Dodge rates, but not to exceed Eau Claire-Sioux City rates or Eau Claire-Des Moines rates : 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Arbitraries (in cents).. ..10 9 8 7 6 6 5 5 5 4 Duluth rates are the maximum rates from Eau Claire Group to all groups above-mentioned, except Group 7 (Centerville) and Group 9 (Sheldon). 2. Description op Northern Groups — Fox River- Iowa Territory This territory is usually divided into three groups : the Oshkosh Group, Eau Claire Group, and Marinette Group. (a) Oshkosh Group Rates between Chicago territory and Oshkosh Group points are made the same as Chicago-St. Paul rates. Rates between Peoria territory and Oshkosh Group points are made the same as Peoria-St. Paul rates. Rates between St. Louis territory and Oshkosh Group points are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates. Rates between Cairo territory and Oshkosh Group points are made the same as Cairo-St. Paul rates. (h) Eau Claire Group Rates between Chicago territory and Eau Claire Group points are made the same as Chicago-St. Paul rates. 48 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Eates between Peoria territory and Eau Claire Group points are made the same as Peoria-St. Paul rates. Eates between St. Louis territory and Eau Claire Group points are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates. Eates between Cairo territory and Eau Claire Group points are made the same as Cairo-St. Paul rates. (c) Marinette Group Eates between Chicago territory and Marinette Group points are made the same as Chicago-Duluth rates. Eates between Peoria territory and Marinette Group points are made the same as Peoria-Duluth rates. Eates between St. Louis territory and Marinette Group points are made the same as St. Louis-Duluth rates. Eates between Cairo territory and Marinette Group points are made the same as Cairo-Duluth rates. 3. Description of Northern Groups — La Crosse-Iowa Territory Eates between Chicago and La Crosse territories are made the same as Chicago-St. Paul rates. Eates between Springfield and La Crosse territories are made the same as Peoria-St. Paul rates. Eates between St. Louis and La Crosse territories are made the same as Chicago-La Crosse rates. Bate's between Danville and La Crosse territories are made the same as East St. Louis-St. Paul rates. 4. Description of Southern Groups The following is a partial description of the groups out- lined under St. Paul-Iowa Territory, or Territory No. 5. TO AND FROM THE NORTH AND WEST 49 Group 1 All points on and east of the line of the Chicago & North- Western Railway, from Scarville to Mason City; thence via the Iowa Central Railway through Oskaloosa to Albia ; thence via the Albia and Centerville Railway to Moravia ; thence via the Wabash Railroad to Moberly; and thence via the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway to Hannibal. Group 2 All points west or south of Group 1 and on and east of the line of the Chicago & North- Western Railway, from Elmore to Luverne; thence via the Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad through Angus to Des Moines ; thence via the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to Indianola ; thence via the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to but not including Albia ; thence south of Moravia on the Albia & Centerville Railway to Centerville ; thence on and north of the Chicago, -Burlington & Quincy Railroad to but not including Glenwood Junction; thence commenc- ing at the first station east of Moberly via the Wabash Railroad to St. Louis, Mo., including the Columbia branch of the Wabash Railroad; and thence following the west bank of the Mississippi River to but not including Hanni- bal, Mo. Group 3 Stations west of Group 2 and south of the Iowa-Minne- sota state line to its intersection with the Illinois Central Railroad ; thence via the Illinois Central Railroad to and including Hills, Minn.; thence via the Great Northern 50 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Railway to and including Sherman, S. D. ; thence on and east of the Great Northern Railway to Sioux Falls, S. D. ; thence via the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway through Canton, S. D., Hawarden, Iowa, and Elk Point, S. D., to Sioux City, Iowa ; and thence on and north of the Illinois Central Railroad to but not including Ft. Dodge, Iowa. Group 4 Stations west of Group 2 and south of Group 3, thence on and east of the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway, from a point south of Sioux City, Iowa, to Omaha, Neb. ; thence via the Missouri Pacific Railway to Nebraska City, Neb. ; thence on and north of the line of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad, via Hamburg, Iowa, to Shenandoah, Iowa; thence via the Wabash Rail- road to Burlington Junction, Mo. ; thence via the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad through Clarinda and Di- agonal, Iowa, to Corydon, Iowa ; thence via an imaginary line to Seymour, Iowa, on the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway ; and thence via the Chicago, Rock Islan 1 & Pacific Railway to but not including Centerville, Iowa. Group 5 Stations south and west of the foregoing described groups, on and east of the Missouri River, and on and north of the St. Louis, Kansas City & Colorado Railroad from Kansas City to St. Louis, Mo. CHAPTER V interstate rates to interior iowa cities 1. Class Rates In an earlier chapter of this treatise it was explained how competition had forced an unusually low scale of rates to be established between Mississippi River Cross- ings and Missouri River Crossings. The adjustment now taken up is that dealing with the establishment of rates to interior points within the state of Iowa, which are fixed in a measure by the Mississippi River-Missouri River rates. The local rates on traffic moving between points in Iowa including points on the west bank of the Mississippi River and points on the east bank of the Missouri River are those established by the state of Iowa, and are shown in Chapter I. Rates from Central Freight Association and Trunk Line territories to the Mississippi River are as a proportional proposition (that is, on traffic destined be- yond) and are applied to all east and west bank points on the Mississippi River from St. Louis, Mo., to Dubuque, Iowa. It follows that in some cases the Iowa scale is used in certain combinations on interstate traffic. Under the local tariff, however, the rates to interior Iowa points from the several river crossings vary as the distance in- creases ; that is to say, the same rate would not be obtained from Davenport, Iowa, to Ottumwa, Iowa, as would be obtained from Burlington, for the reason that the dis- tance from the latter point is considerably less. 51 52 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY In so far as the construction of through rates from the Chicago, Peoria, and St. Louis groups are concerned, it may be stated that Table 21 shows the rates between sta- tions in these groups and certain stations in Iowa on the Illinois Central Railroad west of Dubuque towards Omaha, Neb. TABLE 21 Through Rates Between Points in Iowa and Stations in Illinois in the Chicago, Peoria, and St. Louis Groups Between And Groups Rates in Cents Per 100 Pounds Classes l D E Julien, la. Chicago 43 34 26 20 16 17 14.5 12 10 9 Peoria 43 34 26 20.5 16 5 17 14.5 12.5 10. 9 St. Louis 48. 5 39.5 31.5 24 19 19.5 16 14 12 10.5 Peosta, la. Chicago 45 36 27 20 16 18 15 12 10 9 Peoria 45 36 27 20.5 16 5 18 15 12.5 10 9 St. Louis 49 39% 31.5 24 19 19.5 16 14 12 10.5 Epworth, Chicago 45 36 27 20 16 18 15 12 10 9 la. Peoria 45 36 27 20.5 16 5 18 15 12% 10 9 St. Louis 49. 5 39.5 31.5 24 19 19% 16 14 12 10.5 Farley, la. Chicago 45 36 27 20 16 18 15 12 10 9 Peoria 45 36 27 20.5 16. 5 18 15 12% 10 9 St. Louis 50 40 31.5 24 19 19.5 16 14 12 10.5 Dyersville, Chicago 48 38 29 22 17 19 16 13 11 10 la. Peoria 48 38 29 22 17 19 16 13 11 10 St. Louis 52 41.5 31.5 24 19 19% 16% 14 12 10% Earlville, Chicago 50 40 30 23 18 20 16 14 11 10 la. Peoria 50 40 30 23 18 20 16 14 11 10 St. Louis 54 43 % 32V 2 24 19 22 17% 15 12% 10.5 Manchester, la. Masonville, la. Chicago Peoria St. Louis Chicago Peoria St. Louis 52 oo 42 42 44% 31 31 33 23 23 24 18 18 19 21 21 22% 17 17 18 14 14 15 54 54 58% 43 43 47.5 32 32 35.5 24 24 25 19 19 19 22 22 24 12 12 13 ~18 IK IT i : 12 lb% 15.5 13 10 10 1 *" /2 if 11 11.5 Winthrop, Chicago 54 43 32 24 19 22 18 15 12 11 la. Peoria 54 43 32 24 19 22 18 15 12 11 St. Louis 58% 47. 5 35. 5 25 19 24 18. 5 15.5 13 11.5 Independ- Chicago 54 43 32 24 19 22 18 15 12 11 ence, la. Peoria 54 43 32 24 19 22 18 15 12 11 St. Louis 60.5 50 37 25.5 21 24.5 20 17 14 12% Waterloo, Chicago 56 45 34 25 20 22 18 15 13 11 la. Peoria 56 45 34 25 20 22 18 15 13 11 St. Louis 61 50 37 26 21 24% 20 17 14 12V 2 TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 53 i rABLE 21- Continued Between AND Groups Rates > IN Cents Per Classes 100 . 1 Pounds 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Cedar Falls, la. Chicago Peoria St. Louis 57 57 61 4ti 40 50 % 34 34 37 25 25 26 20 20 21 23 25 19 19 20 10 16 17 13 13 14 11 11 12 % Aplington, la. Chicago Teoria St. Louis 59 59 61 47 47 51 35 35 37. 5 26 26 26 21 21 21 24 24 25 19 19 20 16 16 17 13 13 14 12 12 13 Alden, la. Chicago Peoria St. Louis 02 62 63. 50 50 5 51.5 37 37 39. 5 28 28 28 22 22 22.5 25 25 26. 20 20 5 21. 17 17 5 17.5 14 14 15.5 12 12 13 Webster City, la. Chicago Peoria St. Louis 64 64 68 51 51 52.5 38 38 40 29 29 29 22 22 22.5 26 26 27. 21 21 5 22 18 18 18 14 14 15% 13 13 13% Tara, la. Chicago Peoria St. Louis 68 68 70 54 54 54 41 41 41. 5 31 31 31 24 24 24.5 27 27 28 22 22 23 19 19 19% 15 15 16 14 14 14 Sherwood, la. Chicago Peoria St. Louis 73 73 75. 58 58 5 59 44 44 44 32 32 32 26 26 26 29 29 30 24 24 25 20 20 20.5 16 16 17 15 15 15.5 Brogan, la. Chicago Peoria St. Louis 78 78 79 62 62 63.5 45 45 45 32 32 32 27 27 27 31 31 31. 25 25 5 26 22 22 22 18 18 18.5 16 16 16 Dow City, la. Chicago Peoria St. Louis Missouri River rates 2 1 Governed by the Western Classification. 2 See Chapter II. The Interstate Commerce Commission, in dealing with these rates, stated as follows : The principal carriers in the state of Iowa have their own rails to Chicago and the rates here dealt with are therefore for the most part local rates of individual carriers. But all the rates are specific rates and are not made by a combination on the river as is the case with the rates applicable on through traffic from points east of the Indiana-Illinois state line. 1 In reviewing the adjustment applied on traffic from points east of the Illinois state line the Interstate Com- merce Commission stated : * * * The most important traffic involved on the record in this proceeding is to and from the east, and for convenience the 1 28 I. C. C, Rep., 77. 54 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY above-entitled complaints are referred to as the interior Iowa case. * * * The reductions that we have required in the preceding case in the local rates to the upper Mississippi River crossings, will result necessarily in reductions in the through freight charges of the interior towns; such a readjustment must follow in order to avoid through charges in excess of the sum of the intermediate rates on the river. Nevertheless these lower rates of the interior toAvns will not satisfy the shippers on whose behalf the com- plaints now before us were filed. The record indicates the exist- ence of a substantial contest for commercial supremacy between the river towns and points in the interior, and under the present rate adjustment the latter are at something of a disadvantage, which will be increased by the reductions in the rates to the river up- less the adjustment is relieved by material reductions herein in the rates to and from the interior. The interior towns have no joint through class rates to and from the territory east of the Indiana-Illinois state line ; on such traffic the through charges are based on the lowest available com- bination of intermediate rates, and this usually makes on the Mississippi River. But the through charges are made up and published in an unusual form which must be fully understood in order to arrive at intelligent conclusions with respect to the various questions here before us. With that end in view it may be well first to make a brief reference to the construction and recent history of the rates from the east to the Missouri River : As we have seen, the upper Mississippi River towns take higher rates from the east than the lower crossings. In this respect the Missouri River towns stand on a different basis. All points on that river, from Kansas City on the south to Omaha and Sioux City on the north, have been on a parity of rates for many years with respect to traffic to and from the east. Traffic to those points may be said to be competitive in the sense that a number of the carriers serve both Kansas City and Omaha ; but the gen- eral conditions are such as to require us to regard the through charges in effect at this time to the Missouri River as normal and reasonable through rates, unaffected by any transportation con- ditions tending to depress their general level. * * * The Mississippi River from St. Louis on the south to Dubuque at the TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 55 north, a distance of about 350 miles, is crossed at a number of different points known as the upper and lower river crossings. While the northern and southern routes are on a parity at the Missouri River, as just stated, the through charges are, and for many years have been, made up on a different basis. To St. Louis and the other lower crossings, as we have seen in the pre- vious case, class rates are applied from New York City on an 88- eent scale. Besides being the local rates to St. Louis this scale of rates applies as proportional rates on through traffic to the Mis- souri River. From the lower crossings to all points on the Mis- souri River there is a local 60-cent scale of class rates, which was . applied also to through movements until, in Burnham-Hanna- Munger Co. v. C, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 11 I. C. C, 299, we held that the through charges ought to be somewhat less than the sum of the intermediate rates and thereupon required the carriers to establish between the rivers proportional rates on through traffic on a scale of 51 cents per 100 pounds. At that time the first-elas^ rate to East St. Louis was 87 cents and, with the local 60-cent rate, beyond, the through charge to the Missouri River was $1.47 Subsequently St. Louis was given an 88-cent scale of class rates, which, together with the proportional scale of 51 cents, required under our order in. the case cited, made a through charge on first-class traffic over the lower routes of $1.39 per 100 pounds. The present through charges to Missouri River points over the lower routes are on a scale of $1.43 as hereinafter explained. The local rates to the northern Mississippi River crossings have been and now are fixed on a 97-cent scale, and the same 60-cent scale of local rates between the rivers has been and now is in effect. In order therefore that the northern routes might be on a parity with the southern routes on through traffic to the Missouri River, it was necessary for the carriers to the upper crossings, at the time the case last cited was under consideration, to shrink their 97-cent local scale to the Mississippi River to a proportional scale of 87 cents. 2 Ill complying with this suggestion of the Commission, the interested carriers rechecked the entire state of Iowa on a mileage basis and published rates based on short-line 2 28 I. C. C. Rep., 65. 56 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY distances from Mississippi River Crossings to destina- tion. A representative line of rates to points in Iowa is shown in Table 22. TABLE 22 Proportional Class Rates from East Dubuque, III., ox Traffic Origixatixg East of the Ixdiaxa-Illixois State Lixe to Poixts ix Iowa ox the Illixois Cextral Railroad From East Du- buque, III., To Kates ix Cents I'er Classes i 1U0 Pounds Miles 1 2 3 4 5 A B c D E Julien 10 16.8 14.6 11.1 8.4 6.2 6.3 6.2 5.4 4.7 4 Peosta 15 17.6 15.3 11.4 8.8 6.4 6.6 6.4 5.7 4.9 4.1 Epworth 19 18.4 15.9 11.9 9.2 6.7 6.8 6.7 5.9 5.1 4.2 Farley 23 19 16.5 12.3 9.5 6.9 7 6.9 6.1 5.2 4.4 D.versville 29 19.6 17 12.7 9.8 7.2 7.2 7.2 6.3 5.4 4.5 Earlville 37 20.8 18 13.5 10.4 7.6 7.6 7.6 6.6 5.7 4.8 Delaware 41 21.4 18.5 14 10.7 7.8 7.8 7.8 6.8 5.9 4.9 Manchester 47 22 10 14.3 11 8 8 8 7 6 5 Masonville 53 22.4 19.3 14.6 11.2 8.1 8.2 8.1 7.1 6.1 5.1 Winthrop Gl 23.2 20 15.1 11.6 8.4 8.6 S.4 7.4 6.3 5.3 Independence 93 23.6 20.4 15.4 11.8 8.6 8.8 8.6 7.5 6.4 5.3 Waterloo 69 25.6 22 16.7 12.S 9.3 9.8 9.2 8.1 6.9 5.7 Cedar Falls 9 » 26 22.4 17 13 9.4 10 9.4 8.2 7 5.8 Arlington 123 30 25.8 1S.8 14.6 10.8 11.8 10.5 9.2 7.8 6.6 Alden 140 34 27.3 20.5 16.3 12.3 13.5 11.7 10.2 8.7 7.4 Webster City 172 3S 29.7 22.3 18 13.7 15.2 12.S 11.2 9.5 8.2 Tara 198 42 32.2 24 10.6 15.2 16.9 14 12.1 10.4 9 Sherwood 222 46.8 .35.1 26.1 21.5 16.9 18.9 15.4 13.3 11.4 9.9 Brogan 240 50 37.1 27.5 22.S 18.1 20.2 irs.2 14 12 10 Dow City 275 54.8 40.4 29.6 24 19.S 22 17.6 15 12 10 Dunlap 282 55 41 30.3 24 20 22 IS 15 12 10 Grable 314 55 41 32 24 20 22 IS 15 12 10 1 Governed bv the Western Classification. It may be seen that as the distance from Chicago, Peo- ria, or St. Louis increases, the rates likewise increase until at Dow City, Iowa, the Missouri Eiver rate is TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 57 reached and this is held as a maximum to all stations from there west to Omaha. In many cases at points served by two or more carriers, one or more of the carriers, owing to their circuitous routes, may forego the traffic and concede it to the direct line. Taking Cedar Rapids, Iowa, as an example, the short-line distance is via Muscatine, Iowa, and the Chi- cago, Eock Island & Pacific Railway, and is 59 miles, whereas via Clinton, Iowa, and the Chicago & North- western Railway the distance is 83 miles. Likewise, to Carnforth, Iowa, the distance via the same routes and junctions is 82 and 129 miles, respectively. Were the Chicago & North- Western Railway to meet the rates of the direct line (Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway) it would be necessary for them to reduce such points via their route between Clinton, Iowa, and Des Moines, Iowa, or Carnforth, to the basis in effect via the short line. As quite a number of stations are involved, they prefer to concede the traffic for such short-line points to the direct lines in order that the basis to the points on their lines may be held up to the normal basis. In establishing rates from Central Freight Association and Trunk Line territories to stations in Iowa, the through rates are made on combinations on the Missis- sippi River, using the local rates up to the river and add- ing to that amount the proportional rate shown. Usually all tariffs which name rates to the Mississippi River have a clause in them reading to the effect that the rates pub- lished to St. Louis are applied to all Mississippi River Crossings on traffic destined to points beyond. 58 FREI.CHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 2. Commodity Rates (a) Points of Origin In the construction of commodity rates between interior points in Iowa and adjoining states in "Western Trunk Line Territory, the adjoining territory is divided into twelve groups: Group A (Chicago), Group B (Peoria), Group C (Springfield), Group D (Litchfield), Group E (Danville), Group F (St. Louis), Group G (Beardstown), Group H (Galesburg), Group I (Fulton), Group J (Prai- rie du Chien), Group K (East Mississippi River Propor- tional Group), and Group L (Champaign). Group A (Chicago). — Beginning at Chicago, 111., and thence north via the west bank of Lake Michigan to and including Sturgeon Bay, "Wis.; thence south to a point just north of Green Bay, W r is. ; thence northwest via an imaginary line north of Shawno and Antigo, "Wis., to a point just north of Merrill, Wis. ; thence west of the Chi- cago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Eailway to Wausau, Wis.; thence north of the Chicago & North-"We stern Eailway to Mann, "Wis. ; thence north of the Chicago, St. Paul, Minne- apolis & Omaha Eailway (including Eomadka, Wis., on the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Eailway) to but not including Granton, Wis. ; thence southwest via an imag- inary line to a point just north of Hatfield, Wis., on the Green Bay & Western Railroad; thence north of the Green Bay & "Western Railroad to but not including Marshland, Wis.; thence east of the Chicago & North- Western Eailway to but not including La Crosse, Wis. ; thence east of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to but not including Thompson, 111.; thence east of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to but not includ- TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 59 ing Fulton, 111.; thence north of the Chicago & North- western Railway to a point just north of Nelson, 111.; thence eastwardly crossing the Chicago & North- Western Railway north of Nelson, 111., and the Illinois Central Rail- road north of Amboy, 111. ; thence east of the Illinois Cen- tral Railroad to but not including Wenona, 111.; thence east of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway to but not including Ancona, 111. ; thence south of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway to but not including Minonk, 111. ; thence east of the Illinois Central Railroad to but not including Decatur, 111. ; thence east and north of the Wa- bash Railroad to Bement, 111. ; thence on and west of the Wabash Railroad to Gibson, 111. ; thence on and west of the Illinois Central Railroad to Kankakee, 111. ; thence on and north of the Chicago, Indiana & Southern Railroad to the Illinois-Indiana State Line ; and thence north to the point of beginning, including Chicago suburban points in Indiana. Group B (Peoria). — Beginning at the western boundary line of Group A at a point northeast of Morrison, III; thence south via an imaginary line east of Morrison, 111., to a point just east of Denrock, 111. ; thence south of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to but not includ- ing Barstow, 111. ; thence east of the line of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad through Colona, Orion, Alpha, and Galesburg, 111., to but not including Bushnell, 111. ; thence south of the Toledo, Peoria & Western Rail- way to Hollis, 111.; thence south of the Peoria Railway Terminal Company to and including Pekin, 111.; thence east of the Peoria & Pekin Union Railway to and including Peoria, 111. ; and thence north via the Illinois River to the western boundary line of Group A, including Oglesby, 111. Group C (Springfield). — Beginning at the southwestern 60 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY corner of Group A at a point just south of Danville, 111. ; thence south of the Wabash Railroad to but not including Chapin, 111. ; and thence east of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to the southern boundary of Group B. Group D (Litchfield). — Beginning at the southeastern corner of Group C at a point just southeast of Decatur, 111.; thence east of the Illinois Central Railroad through Pana, 111. ; thence south of the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chi- cago & St. Louis Railway to Litchfield, 111. ; thence east and south of the Illinois Central Railroad to but not in- cluding Glenn Carbon, 111. ; thence east of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad to but not including Edwardsville, 111. ; thence north of the Illinois Terminal Railroad to but not including Alton, 111. ; and thence east of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to the southern boundary line of Group C. Group E (Danville). — Territory south and east of Groups A, E, D, and L, and on, north, and west of the fol- lowing line : Vandalia Railroad from a point just east of East St. Louis, 111., to Effingham, 111. ; thence via the Illi- nois Central Railroad to Neoga, 111. ; thence via the Toledo, St. Louis & Western Railroad to Humrick, 111.; thence via the Chicago, Indiana & Southern Railroad to Danville, 111. ; thence via the Chicago, Indiana & Southern Railroad to and including Lake Village, Ind. ; and thence west to the Illinois-Indiana State Line. Group F (St. Louis). — Beginning at the southwestern corner of Group D at a point southeast of Glenn Carbon, 111.; thence south of the Illinois Central Railroad and Louisville & Nashville Railroad to and including East St. Louis, 111., and St. Louis, Mo. ; thence on and east of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to but not includ- TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 61 ing Hannibal, Mo. ; and thence south of the Wabash Rail- road to the western boundary line of Group D. Group G (Beardstown). — Territory west of Group C and south of the line of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad from Bushnell, 111., to Quincy, 111.; and thence east of the line of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Rail- road through Fall Creek, 111., to but not including Han- nibal, Mo. Group H (Galesburg). — Territory west of Group B, north of Group G, and on and east of the Chicago, Burling- ton & Quincy Railroad from Hannibal, Mo., to Burlington, Iowa (including West Burlington, Iowa) ; thence on and east of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to and including Morning Sun, Iowa ; thence on and south of the Iowa Central Railway to and including Cameron, 111. ; and thence on and south of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway to and including Galesburg, 111. Group I (Fulton). — Territory west of Groups A and B, north of Group H, and on and east of the Mississippi River, including west bank Mississippi River points from Wapello, Iowa, to Dubuque, Iowa, inclusive. Group J (Prairie du Chien). — Points on both banks of the Mississippi River north of Dubuque, Iowa, to and in- cluding Victory, Wis., and New Albin, Iowa. Group K (East Mississippi River Proportional). — East bank Mississippi River points (East St. Louis, 111., to East Dubuque, 111., inclusive) on traffic originating at or des- tined to points east of the Indiana-Illinois State Line. Group L (Champaign). — Territory east of Group A, and on and north of the Wabash Railroad, from a point just east of Bement, 111., to and including Sidney, 111.; thence on and west of the Wabash Railroad to and includ- ing Champaign, 111. ; and thence on and west of the Illinois Central Railroad to but not including Gilman, 111. 62 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY ( b) Points of Destination The state of Iowa is divided into twenty-seven groups designated as follows : (1) Manchester Group, (2) Cedar Rapids Group, (3) Iowa City Group, (4) Oskaloosa Group, (5) Ottumwa Group, (6) Cedar Falls Group, (7) Eeinbeck Group, (8) Marshalltown Group, (9) Monte- zuma Group, (10) Waverly Group, (11) Mason City Group, (12) Ackley Group, (13) Iowa Falls Group, (14) Boone Group, (15) Ft. Dodge Group, (16) Cambridge Group, (17) Des Moines Group, (18) Albert Lea Group, (19) Faribault Group, (20) Mankato Group, (21) Mexico Group, (22) Chillicothe Group, (23) Shenandoah Group, (24) Manning Group, (25) Lake City Group, (26) Sioux City or Sheldon Group, and (27) Sioux Falls or Hawarden Group. The class rates to these groups from Chicago are reproduced in Table 20, and the proportional rates apply- ing from the Mississippi River are reproduced in Table 21. Group 1 (Manchester). — Territory west of the west bank of the Mississippi River, and on and south of the Chicago Great Western Railroad, from a point just west of Dubuque, Iowa, to Oneida Junction, Iowa; thence on and east of the Manchester & Oneida Railway to and in- cluding Manchester, Iowa ; thence on and east of the Illi- nois Central Railroad to but not including Cedar Rapids, Iowa ; and thence north of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to but not including Green Island, Iowa, on the Mississippi River. Group 2 (Cedar Rapids). — Territory south of Group J, west of the west bank of the Mississippi River, and Siorth of the main line of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pa- cific Railway, from Davenport, Iowa, to a point just north TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 63 of Oxford, Iowa ; thence north via an imaginary line to a point just west of Fairfax, Iowa ; and thence on and east of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to and including Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Group 3 (Iowa City). — Territory south of Group 2, west of the west bank of the Mississippi River, and on and north of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway, from Muscatine, Iowa, to Iowa Junction, Iowa ; and thence on and east of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to and including Iowa City, Iowa. Group 4 (Oshaloosa). — Beginning at the southwestern corner of Group 3 at a point just south of Iowa Junction, Iowa ; thence south of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to but not including Thornburg, Iowa; thence east of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to but not including What Cheer, Iowa ; thence west of an imag- inary line crossing the Iowa Central Railway south of Lacy, Iowa ; thence west of the Iowa Central Railway to and including Oskaloosa, Iowa ; thence south of the line of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad through Stark and Hedrick, Iowa, to Brighton, Iowa ; thence south of the Iowa Central Railway to Windfield, Iowa ; thence south of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to but not including Mediapolis, Iowa ; and thence west of the lines of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway through Morning Sun, Wapello, Columbus Junction, and Lotts, Iowa, to the southern boundary of Group 3. Group 5 (Ottumwa). — Territory west of the west bank of the Mississippi River, south of Group 4, and on and north of the Wabash Railroad, from a point just west of Hannibal, Mo., to and including Moberly, Mo.; thence on and east of the lines of the Wabash Railroad through Macon, Moulton, and Bloomfield, Mo., to and including 64 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Ottumwa, Iowa ; and thence northwest via an imaginary line to the southern boundary line of Group 4 at a point just south of Cedar, Iowa. Group 6 (Cedar Falls). — Beginning at the northwest corner of Group 1 at a point just northwest of Oneida Junction, Iowa ; thence on and south of the Chicago Great Western Eailroad through Oelwein, Iowa, to and includ- ing Waterloo, Iowa; thence on and south of the Illinois Central Railroad to and including Cedar Falls, Iowa; thence on and east of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to and including Wilson Junction, Iowa; and thence on and east of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to but not including Cedar Rapids. Group 7 (Reinbeck). — Beginning at the western bound- ary line of Group 6 at a point just northwest of Vinton, Iowa; thence on and south of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to and including Reinbeck, Iowa ; thence on and east of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to and including Gladbrook, Iowa ; thence on and east of the Chi- cago & North- Western Railway to but not including Tama, Iowa ; and thence north of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to but not including Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Group 8 (Marshalltown). — Territory south of Group 7, and on and east of the line of the Chicago Great Western Railroad, from a point just west of Gladbrook, Iowa, to and including Marshalltown, Iowa ; thence on and east of the Iowa Central Railway to but not including Grinnell, Iowa; and thence north of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to the southwestern corner of Group 2. Group 9 (Montezuma). — Territory south of Group 8, west of Group 3, north of Group 4, and on and east of the Iowa Central Railway, from Grinnell to Lacy, Iowa, both included. TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 65 Group 10 (Waverly). — Territory north of Groups 1 and 6, west of the west bank of the Mississippi River, and on and south of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Rail- way to Castalia, Iowa ; thence on and west of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to and including Decorah, Iowa; thence on and south of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway through Conover, Calmar, New Hamp- ton, and Charles City, Iowa, to and including Portland, Iowa ; and thence on and east of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to but not including Cedar Falls, Iowa. Group 11 (Mason City). — Beginning at the northern boundary of Group 10 at a point just west of Nora Springs Junction, Iowa ; thence south of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to but not including Manly, Iowa; thence on and east of the Iowa Central Railway through Mason City and Hampton, Iowa, to but not including Ack- ley, Iowa ; and thence north of the Illinois Central Rail- road to but not including Cedar Falls, Iowa. Group 12 (Ackley). — Territory south of Group 11, west of Group 6, and on and east of the Iowa Central Railway, from Ackley, Iowa, to but not including Marshalltown, Iowa; and thence north and west of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to the western boundary line of Group 7. Group 13 (Iowa Falls). — Territory west of Group 12, and on and south of the Illinois Central Railroad, from a point just west of Ackley, Iowa, to and including Iowa Falls, Iowa; thence on and east of the St. Paul & Des Moines Railroad (including Radcliffe and Ellsworth, Iowa, on the Chicago & North- Western Railway and Roland, Iowa, on the Iowa Central Railway) to but not including Nevada, Iowa ; and thence north of the Chicago 66 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY & North- Western Railway to but not including Marshall- town, Iowa. Group 14 (Boone). — Beginning at a point northwest of Ames, Iowa, and thence on and south of the Chi- cago & North-Western Railway to and including Grand Junction, IoAva ; thence on and east of the Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad to but not including Des Moines, Iowa ; thence west of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Rail- way to but not including Madrid, Iowa ; thence north of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to but not including Slater, Iowa ; and thence west of the Chicago & North- Western Railway to the point of beginning. Group 15 (Fort Dodge). — Beginning at the northwest- ern corner of Group 11 at a point just west of Manly, Iowa; thence west of the Iowa Central Railway to but not including Albert Lea, Minn. ; thence on and east of the Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad to and including Fort Dodge, Iowa ; thence on and south of the Illinois Central Railroad to and including Tara, Iowa ; thence on and east of the Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad to but not includ- ing Grand Junction, Iowa ; and thence north of the Chi- cago & North- Western Railway to but not including Ne- vada, Iowa. Group 16 (Cambridge). — Territory west of Groups 8 and 9, south of Groups 13 and 15, east of Group 14, and north of the line of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway, from a point just west of Oskaloosa, Iowa, through Pella, Monroe, and Altoona, Iowa, to but not in- cluding Des Moines, Iowa. Group 17 (Des Moines). — Territory south of Group 16, west of Groups 4 and 5, and on and east of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad, from a point just west of Glenwood Junction, Mo., to and including Centerville, TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 67 Iowa; thence on and east of the Iowa Central Railway to and including Albia, Iowa; thence on, north, and east of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to and in- cluding Indianola, Iowa; and thence on and east of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway through Summer- set Junction and Carlisle, Iowa, to and including Des Moines, Iowa. Group 18 (Albert Lea). — Territory north of Group 10, east of Group 15, and on, south, and west of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway, from a point just west of Conover, Iowa, to and including Taopi, Minn.; thence west of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to but not including Hayfield, Minn. ; thence on and east of the Chi- cago Great Western Railroad to and including Austin, Minn. ; and thence on and south of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to and including Albert Lea, Minn. Group 19 (Faribault). — Territory north of Groups 10 and 18, west of the west bank of the Mississippi River, and on and east of the Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad, from a point just west of Albert Lea, Minn., to but not including Hopkins, Minn. Group 20 (Mankato). — Territory west of Group 19, and on, north, and east of the following line : Chicago, Milwau- kee & St. Paul Railway, from a point just west of Albert Lea, Minn., through Mapleton, Minn., to and including Mankato, Minn. ; and thence via the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to but not including Jordan, Minn. Group 21 (Mexico). — Territory south of Group 5, west of the west bank of the Mississippi River, and on and north of the Wabash Railroad, from a point just west of St. Louis, Mo., through Mexico and Centralia (including Columbia branch) to but not including Moberly, Mo. Group 22 (Chillicothe). — Territory west of Groups 5, 68 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 17, and 21, and on and north of the St. Louis, Kansas City & Colorado Railroad, from a point just east of Kansas City, Mo., to but not including St. Louis, Mo., (including the Bagnell and "Warsaw branches of the Missouri Pacific Railway) and east of the Missouri River from Kansas City to St. Joseph, Mo. ; thence on and east of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad through Maryville, Mo., and Cretin, Iowa, to and including Alf ton Junction, Iowa ; and thence on and east of the Chicago Great Western Rail- road to but not including Des Moines, Iowa. Group 23 (Shenandoah). — Territory east of the Mis- souri River, north and west of Group 22, and on and south of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway, from a point just east of Council Bluffs, Iowa, to but not includ- ing Des Moines, Iowa. Group 24 (Manning). — Territory north of Group 23, west of Group 14, and on, south, and east of the following line : Chicago & North-Western Railway, from a point just west of Grand Junction, Iowa, to but not including Coun- cil Bluffs, Iowa. Group 25 (Lake City). — Territory north of Group 24, west of Group 15, and on, south, and east of the Illinois Central Railroad, from a point just west of Tara, Iowa, to but not including Denison, Iowa. Group 26 (Sioux City or Sheldon). — Territory north of Groups 24 and 25, west of Group 15, and on and south of the line of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway, from a point just west of Forrest City, Iowa, through Estherville and Spirit Lake, Iowa, to and including Worthington, Minn. ; thence on, south, and east of the Chi- cago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway through Luverne, Minn., to and including Rock Rapids, Iowa; thence on and south of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 69 Railway to and including Lester, Iowa ; thence on and east of the Great Northern Railway to and including Sioux City, Iowa ; and thence on and east of the Chicago & North- western Railway to but not including California Junc- tion, Iowa. Group 27 (Sioux Falls or Haivarden). — Territory west of Group 26, and on, north, and east of the line of the Chi- cago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway, from a point just west of Sioux City, Iowa, through Elk Point, S. D., Hawarden, Iowa, Canton and Tea, S. D., to and including Sioux Falls and South Sioux Falls, S. D. ; thence on and east of the Great Northern Railway to and including Gar- retson, S. D. ; and thence eastwardly crossing via an imaginary line to the northwestern corner of Group 26 at a point just north of Luverne, Minn. CHAPTER VI INTERSTATE RATES TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES (Continued) 1. Bases for Rates from or to Chicago, Peoria, anb St. Louis Groups The following sets forth the basis used in the construc- tion of commodity rates between Chicago, Peoria, and St. Louis groups on the one hand and the groups in Iowa on the other. Manchester Rates between Group 1 (Manchester) and Groups A (Chicago), B (Peoria), and F (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Cedar Rapids rates. Cedar Rapids Rates between Group 2 (Cedar Rapids) and Group A (Chicago) are made the same as Chicago-St. Paul or Chi- cago-Missouri River rates, whichever are lower, observ- ing Chicago-Des Moines, Chicago-Marshalltown, or Chi- cago-Ottumwa rates as maximum rates. Rates between Group 2 (Cedar Rapids) and Group B (Peoria) are made the following differentials below Chi- cago rates : Classes 1 23 4 5 A B C D E Differentials (in cents) 10 10 5 2y 2 2y 2 3% 3% 2y 2 2y 2 2# 70 TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 71 Rates between Group 2 (Cedar Rapids) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Cedar Rapids rates. Iowa City Rates between Group 3 (Iowa City) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the same as Chicago-Cedar Rapids rates. Rates between Group 3 (Iowa City) and Group B (Peoria) are made the same as Peoria-Cedar Rapids rates. Rates between Group 3 (Iowa City) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-Cedar Rapids rates. Oskaloosa Rates between Group 4 (Oskaloosa) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates, ob- serving the Chicago-Des Moines rates as maximum rates. Rates between Group 4 (Oskaloosa) and Group B (Peoria) are made the following differentials below Chicago : Classes 1 23 4 5 A B C D E Differentials (in cents) 10 10 5 2y 2 2y 2 3% 3% 2y 2 2y 2 2% Rates between Group 4 (Oskaloosa) and Group F (St, Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Oskaloosa rates, subject to St. Louis-Des Moines rates, but not less than Peoria-Oskaloosa rates as maximum rates. Ottumwa Rates between Group 5 (Ottumwa) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the following differentials above St. Louis- Ottumwa rates : 72 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Classes 1 2 3 4 5 AB C D E Differentials (in cents) S 853344 2% 2 iy 2 These rates are subject to Chicago-Omaha or Chicago- Kansas rates as maximum rates. Rates between Group 5 (Ottumwa) and Group B (Pe- oria) are made the following differentials less than the Chicago rates : Classes 1 23 4 5 A B C D E Differentials (in cents) 10 10 5 2y 2 2y 2 3% 3% 2y 2 2y 2 2y 2 Rates between Group 5 (Ottumwa) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-St. Paul or St. Louis-Omaha rates, whichever are lower, subject to the Chicago-Cedar Rapids rates as maximum rates. On traffic destined to or originating at points east of the Indiana-Illinois State Line, St. Louis-Kansas rates apply as maximum rates. Cedar Falls Rates between Group 6 (Cedar Falls) and Group A (Chicago) are made the same as Chicago-St. Paul or Chi- cago-Missouri River rates, whichever are lower. Rates between Group 6 (Cedar Falls) and Group B (Peoria) are made the same as Chicago-St. Paul or Chi- cago-Missouri River rates, whichever are lower. Both Chicago-Cedar Falls and Peoria-Cedar Falls rates are subject to the Chicago-Marshalltown rates as maxi- mum rates. Rates between Group 6 (Cedar Falls) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates, sub- ject to the St. Louis-Ft. Dodge rates as maximum rates. TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 73 Reinbeck Rates between Group 7 (Reinbeck) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates, sub- ject to the Chicago-Mar shalltown rates as maximum rates. Rates between Group 7 (Reinbeck) and Group B (Pe- oria) are made the same as Chicago-Reinbeck rates. Rates between Group 7 (Reinbeck) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Reinbeck rates. Mar shalltown Rates between Group 8 (Mar shalltown) and Group A (Chicago) are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates, subject to the Chicago-Des Moines rates as maxi- mum rates. Rates between Group 8 (Mar shalltown) and Group B (Peoria) are made the following differentials below Chi- cago-Marshalltown rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials (in cents) 10 10 5 2y 2 2% 3% 3% 2% 2y 2 2y 2 Rates between Group 8 (Mar shalltown) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Marshalltown rates. Montezuma Rates between Group 9 (Montezuma) and Group A (Chicago) are made the same as Chicago-Marshalltown rates. Rates between Group 9 (Montezuma) and Group B (Peoria) are made the same as Peoria-Mar shalltown rates. 74 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Rates between Group 9 (Montezuma) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-Marslialltown rates. Waverly Rates between Group 10 (Waverly) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the same as Chicago-Mason City or Chi- cago-Albert Lea rates, whichever are lower. Rates between Group 10 (Waverly) and Group B (Pe- oria) are made the same as Peoria-Mason City or Peoria- Albert Lea rates, whichever are lower. Rates between Group 10 (Waverly) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-Mason City or St. Louis-Albert Lea rates, whichever are lower. Mason City Rates between Group 11 (Mason City) and Group A (Chicago) are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates, subject to Chicago-Ft. Dodge rates as maximum rates. Rates between Group 11 (Mason City) and Group B (Peoria) are made the same as Chicago-Mason City rates. Between Mason City, Iowa, and points on the Iowa Central Railway taking the same rates on the one hand and Peoria and Pekin, 111., proper, on the other hand, Peoria-St. Paul rates apply as maximum rates. Rates between Group 11 (Mason City) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates, subject to St. Louis-Ft. Dodge rates as maximum rates. Ackley Rates between Group 12 (Ackley) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates, sub- ject to the Chicago-Des Moines rates as maximum rate*. TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 75 Eates between Group 12 (Ackley) and Group B (Pe- oria) are made the same as Chicago- Ackley rates. Between Ackley, Iowa, and points on the Iowa Central Railway taking the same rates on the one hand and Peoria and Pekin, 111., proper, on the other hand, Peoria-St. Paul rates apply as maximum rates. Rates between Group 12 (Ackley) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates, subject to the St. Louis-Ft. Dodge rates as maximum rates. Iowa Falls Rates between Group 13 (Iowa Falls) and Group A (Chicago) are made the same as Chicago-Des Moines rates. Rates between Group 13 (Iowa Falls) and Group B (Pe- oria) are made the same as Chicago-Iowa Falls rates. Rates between Group 13 (Iowa Falls) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-Ft. Dodge rates. Boone Rates between Group 14 (Boone) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the same as Chicago-Ft. Dodge rates. Rates between Group 14 (Boone) and Group B (Peoria) are made the following differentials below Chicago rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials (in cents) 10 10 5 2% 2y 2 3% 3% 2% 2% 2y 2 Rates between Group 14 (Boone) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Boone rates. 76 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Fort Dodge Rates between Group 15 (Ft. Dodge) and Group A (Chicago) are made the following differentials above Des Moines rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials (in cents) 5 531111111 These rates are subject to the Chicago-Omaha rates or Chicago-Sioux City rates as maximum rates. Rates between Group 15 (Ft. Dodge) and Group B (Pe- oria) are made the same as Chicago-Ft. Dodge rates. Rates between Group 15 (Ft. Dodge) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Ft. Dodge rates. Cambridge Rates between Group 16 (Cambridge) and Group A (Chicago) are made the same as Chicago-Des Moines rates. Rates between Group 16 (Cambridge) and Group B (Peoria) are made the same as Peoria-Des Moines rates. Rates between Group 16 (Cambridge) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Cambridge rates. Des Moines Rates between Group 17 (Des Moines) and Group A (Chicago) are made the following differentials above the St. Louis-Des Moines rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials (in cents) 8 553344 2% 2 iy 2 TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 77 These rates are subject to the Chicago- Omaha and Chi- cago-Kansas City rates as maximum rates. In the event Chicago-Omaha or Chicago-Kansas City rates apply as maximum rates between Chicago and Des Moines, rates to or from Peoria and St. Louis are the reg- ular differentials less than the Chicago rates. Rates between Group 17 (Des Moines) and Group B (Peoria) are made the following differentials less than the Chicago rates : Classes 1 23 4 5 A B C D E Differentials (in cents) 10 10 5 2% 2% 3% 3% 2y 2 2y 2 2y 2 Rates between Group 17 (Des Moines) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates or St. Louis-Omaha rates, whichever are lower. On traffic destined to or originating at points east of the Indiana-Illinois State Line, St. Louis-Kansas City rates apply as maximum rates. Albert Lea Rates between Group 18 (Albert Lea) and Group A (Chicago) are made the same as Chicago-St. Paul rates. Rates between Group 18 (Albert Lea) and Group B (Peoria) are made the same as Peoria-St. Paul rates. Rates between Group 18 (Albert Lea) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates. Faribault Rates between Group 19 (Faribault) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the same as Chicago-St. Paul rates. Rates between Group 19 (Faribault) and Group B (Pe- oria) are made the same as Peoria-St. Paul rates. 78 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Bates between Group 19 (Faribault) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-St. Paul rates. Mankato Rates between Group 20 (Mankato) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the following differentials above the Fari- bault-Chicago rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials (in cents) 5 532222211 Rates between Group 20 (Mankato) and Group B (Pe- oria) are made the following differentials over the Fari- bault-Peoria rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials (in cents) 5 532222211 Rates between Group 20 (Mankato) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the following differentials over the Fari- bault-St. Louis rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials (in cents) 5 5 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 In connection with rates to Mankato, a special commod- ity basis is provided for a few commodities that are less than the regular class differentials. Mexico Rates between Group 21 (Mexico) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the same as Chicago-Ottumwa rates. To and from stations taking Chicago rates located TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 79 north of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway, from Milwaukee to Prairie du Chien, through Waterloo, Wis., Chicago-Missouri River rates apply except on a few com- modities such as agricultural implements, furniture, ve- hicles, etc. Rates between Group 21 (Mexico) and Group B (Pe- oria) are made the same as Peoria-Ottumwa rates, but not to be less than St. Louis-Mexico rates. Rates between Group 21 (Mexico) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-Ottumwa rates. Chillicothe Rates between Group 22 (Chillicothe) and Group A (Chicago) are made the same as Chicago-Kansas City rates. Rates between Group 22 (Chillicothe) and Group B (Peoria) are made the same as Peoria-Kansas City rates. Rates between Group 22 (Chillicothe) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-Kansas City rates. Shenandoah Rates between Group 23 (Shenandoah) and Group A (Chicago) are made the same as Chicago-Omaha rates. Rates between Group 23 (Shenandoah) and Group B (Peoria) are made the same as Peoria-Omaha rates. Rates between Group 23 (Shenandoah) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as St. Louis-Omaha rates. Manning Rates between Group 24 (Manning) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the same as Chicago-Omaha rates. 80 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Rates between Group 24 (Manning) and Group B (Pe- oria) are made the same as Peoria-Omaha rates. Eates between Group 24 (Manning) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Manning rates. Lake City Rates between Group 25 (Lake City) and Group A (Chi- cago) are made the same as Chicago-Sioux City or Chi- cago-Omaha rates, whichever are lower. Rates between Group 25 (Lake City) and Group B (Pe- oria) are made the same as Chicago-Lake City rates. Rates between Group 25 (Lake City) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Lake City rates. Sioux City Rates between Group 26 (Sioux City) and Group A (Chicago) are made the same as Chicago-Omaha rates. Rates between Group 26 (Sioux City) and Group B (Peoria) are made the same as Chicago-Sioux City rates. Rates between Group 26 (Sioux City) and Group F (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Sioux City rates. Sioux Falls Rates between Group 27 (Sioux Falls) and Group A (Chicago) are made 104 per cent of the Chicago-Sioux City rates. Rates between Group 27 (Sioux Falls) and Group B (Peoria) are made the same as Chicago-Sioux Falls rates. Rates between Group 27 (Sioux Falls) and Group F TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES 81 (St. Louis) are made the same as Chicago-Sioux Falls rates. This basis has reference only to that part of Sioux Falls territory described on page 69 and does not conflict with the Sioux Falls rates outlined under the Missouri River territory. 2. Bases for Rates from or to Groups Other than Chicago, Peoria, and St. Louis Groups In Tables 23 to 31, inclusive, is shown the basis to em- ploy in establishing commodity rates between stations in Illinois and Wisconsin on the one hand and stations in Iowa on the other hand. It will be noted that there is an individual table for each point of origin and care should be taken to see that the proper table is employed. At the same time no at- tempt should be made to memorize the information con- tained in the various tables but rather to fix in your mind the fact that there is a table covering a particular adjustment so that when the occasion arises reference to that table may be made for the basis of rates to employ. 82 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 23 Basis for Rates Between Springfield (Group C) and Groups Indicated Between the Following Group And Points in the Following Groups Rate Basis Applicable 1 (Manchester) Chicago rates 2 (Cedar Rapids) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 3 (Iowa City) 4 (Oskaloosa) 5 (Ottumwa) Peoria rates 6 (Cedar Falls) 7 (Reinbeck) Chicago rates 8 (Marshalltown) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 9 (Montezuma) Peoria rates Springfield (Group C) 10 (Waverly) 11 (Mason City) 12 (Ackley) 13 (Iowa Falls) Chicago rates 14 (Boone) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 15 (Ft. Dodge) Chicago rates 16 (Cambridge) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 17 (Des Moines) Peoria rates 18 (Albert Lea) 19 (Faribault) 20 (Mankato) Chicago rates 21 (Mexico) 22 (Chillicothe) 23 (Shenandoah) Peoria rates 24 (Manning) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 25 (Lake City) 26 (Sioux City) 27 (Sioux Falls) Chicago rates TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES TABLE 24 83 Basis for Rates Between Litchfield (Group D) and Groups Indicated Between the Following Group And Points in the Following Groups Rate Basis Applicable 1 (Manchester) 2 (Cedar Rapids) St. Louis rates 3 (Iowa City) 4 (Oskaloosa) St. Louis rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 5 (Ottumwa) Peoria rates, but not to be less than St. Louis rates 6 (Cedar Falls) 7 (Reinbeck) St. Louis rates 8 (Mar shall town) St. Louis rates, but not to be less than Chicago rates i 9 (Montezuma) St. Louis rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates Litchfield (Group D) 10 (Waverly) 11 (Mason City) 12 (Ackley) 13 (Iowa Falls) St. Louis rates 14 (Boone) St. Louis rates, but not to be less than Chicago rates 15 (Ft. Dodge) St. Louis rates 1G (Cambridge) Chicago rates 17 (Des Moines) Peoria rates, but not to be less than St. Louis rates 18 (Albert Lea) 19 (Faribault) 20 (Mankato) St. Louis rates 21 (Mexico) Peoria rates, but not to be less than St. Louis rates 22 (Chillicothe) 23 (Shenandoah) Peoria rates 24 (Manning) 25 (Lake City) 26 (Sioux City) 27 (Sioux Falls) Chicago rates 84 FREIGHT RATES— "WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 25 Basis for Rates Between Danville (Group E) and Groups Indicated Between the Following Group And Points in the Following Groups Rate Basis Applicable 1 i 2 Manchester) Cedar Rapids) St. Louis rates 3 1 Iowa City) 4 1 5 Oskaloosa) [ Ottumwa) Chicago rates 6 1 Cedar Falls) 7 ( Reinbeck) 8 k Marshall town) 9 (Montezuma) Danville 10 1 11 Waverly) (Mason City) St. Louis rates (Group E) 12 13 1 Ackley) Iowa Falls) 14 1 Boone) 15 1 Ft. Dodge) 16 1 17 Cambridge) Des Moines) Chicago rates 18 1 Albert Lea) 19 Faribault) St. Louis rates 20 1 Mankato) 21 1 Mexico) 22 < Ohillicothe) 23 1 Shenandoah) 24 Manning) Chicago rates 25 l Lake City) 26 (Sioux City) 27 (Sioux Falls) TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES TABLE 26 85 Basis for Rates Between Beardstown (Group G) and Groups Indicated Between the Following Gboup And Points in the Following Groups Rate Basis Applicable 1 (Manchester) Chicago rates 2 (Cedar Rapids) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 3 (Iowa City) 4 (Oskaloosa) Peoria rates, but not to exceed Mississippi River- Missouri River rates 5 (Ottunrwa) Peoria or St. Louis-Ottumwa rates, whichever are lower, hut not to exceed Mississippi River-Missouri River rates 6 (Cedar Falls) 7 (Reinbeek) Chicago rates Beardstown (Group G) 8 (Marshalltown) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 9 (Montezuma) Peoria rates, but not to exceed Mississippi River - Missouri River rates 10 (Waverly) 11 (Mason City) 12 (Aekley) 13 (Iowa Falls) Chicago rates 14 (Boone) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 15 (Ft. Dodge) Chicago rates 16 (Cambridge) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 17 (Des Moines) Peoria or St. Louis rates, whichever are lower, but not to exceed Mississippi River-Missouri River rates 86 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 26— Continued Basis for Rates Between Beardstown (Group G) and Groups Indicated Between the Following Group And Points in the Following Geoups Rate Basis Applicable 18 (Albert Lea) 19 (Faribault) 20 (Mankato) Chicago rates 21 (Mexico) Peoria or St. Louis rates, whichever are lower, but not to exceed Missouri River rates Beardstown (Group G) 22 (OMllicothe) 23 (Shenandoah) St. Louis rates 24 (Manning) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 25 (Lake City) 26 (Sioux City) 27 (Sioux Falls) Chicago rates TABLE 27 Basis for Rates Between Galesburg (Group H) and Groups Indicated Between the Following Group Galesburg (Group H) And Points in the Following Groups 1 (Manchester) 2 (Cedar Rapids) 3 (Iowa City) 4 (Oskaloosa) 5 (Ottumwa) t> (Cedar Falls) 7 (Reinbeck) Rate Basis Applicable Chicago rates Peoria rate*, but not to ex- ceed Mississippi River-Mis- souri River rates Peoria or St Louis rates, whichever are lower, but not to exceed Mississippi River- Missouri Rive~ rates Chicago rates TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES TABLE 27— Continued 17 Basis for Rates Between Galesburg (Group H) and Groups Indicated Between the Following Group Galesburg (Group H) And Potnts in the Following Groups 8 (Marshall town) 9 (Montezuma) 10 (Waverly) 11 (Mason City) 12 (Ackley) 13 (Iowa Falls) 14 (Boone) 15 (Ft. Dodge) 16 (Cambridge) 17 (Des Moines) 18 (Albert Lea) 19 (Faribault) 20 (Mankato) 21 (Mexico) 22 (Chillicothe) 23 (Shenandoah) 24 (Manning) 25 (Lake City) 26 (Sioux City) 27 (Sioux Falls) Rate Basis Applicable Peoria rates, but not to ex- ceed Mississippi River-Mis- souri River rates Chicago rates Peoria rates, but not to ex- ceed Mississippi River-Mis- souri River rates Chicago rates Peoria rates, but not to ex- ceed Mississippi River-Mis- souri River rates Peoria or St. Louis rates, whichever are lower, but not to exceed Mississippi River- Missouri River rates Chicago rates Peoria or St. Louis rates, whichever are lower, but not to exceed Mississippi River- Missouri River rates St. Louis rates Peoria rates, but not to exceed Mississippi River - Missouri River rates Chicago rates 88 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 28 Basis for Rates Between Fulton (Group I) and Groups Indicated Between the Following Gboup And Points in the Following Groups Rate Basis Applicable 1 (Manchester) Chicago rates 2 (Cedar Rapids) 3 (Iowa City) 4 (Oskaloosa) 5 (Ottumwa) Peoria rates, but not to ex- ceed Mississippi River-Mis- souri River rates 6 (Cedar Falls) 7 (Reinbeck) Chicago rates - 8 (Marshall town) 9 (Montezuma) Peoria rates, but not to ex- ceed Mississippi River-Mis- souri River rates 10 (Waverly) 11 (Mason City) 12 (Ackley) 13 (Iowa Falls) Chicago rates Fulton (Group I) 14 (Boone) Peoria rates, but not to ex- ceed Mississippi River-Mis- souri River rates 15 (Ft. Dodge 1, Chicago rates 1G (Cambridge) 17 (Des Moines) Peoria rates, but not to- ex- ceed Mississippi River-Mis- souri River rates 18 (Albert Lea) 19 (Faribault) 20 (Mankato) Chicago rates 21 (Mexico) Peoria rates, but not to ex- ceed Mississippi River-Mis- souri River rates 22 (Chillicothe) 23 (Shenandoah) St. Louis rates 24 (Manning) Peoria rates, but not to ex- ceed Mississippi River-Mis- souri River rates 25 (Lake City) 26 (Sioux City) 27 (Sioux Falls) Chicago rates TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES TABLE 29 89 Basis for Rates Between Prairie du Chien (Group J) and Groups Indicated Between the Following Group And Points in the Following Groups Rate Basis Applicable 1 (Manchester) Chicago rates 2 (Cedar Rapids) 3 (Iowa City) 4 (Oskaloosa) 5 (Ottumwa) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 6 (Cedar Falls) 7 (Reinbeck) Chicago rates 8 (Marshalltown) 9 (Montezuma) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 10 (Waverly) 11 (Mason City) 12 (Ackley) 13 (Iowa Falls) Chicago rates Prairie du Chien (Group J) 14 (Boone) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 15 (Ft. Dodge) Chicago rates 16 (Cambridge) 17 (Des Moines) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 18 (Albert Lea) 19 (Faribault) 20 (Mankato) Chicago rates 21 (Mexico) Chicago rates, but not to ex- ceed Peoria-Missouri River rates 22 (Chillicothe) 23 (Shenandoah) 24 (Manning) Peoria rates 25 (Lake City) 26 (Sioux City) 27 (Sioux Falls) Chicago rates 90 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 30 Basis for Rates Between East Mississippi River Propor- tional (Group K) and Groups Indicated Between the Following Group And Points in the Following Groups Rate Basis Applicable 1 (Manchester) Peoria rates as maximum 2 (Cedar Rapids) rates, but not to exceed Mis- 3 (Iowa City) sissippi River-Omaha rates 4 5 (Oskaloosa) (Ottumwa) Peoria rates as maximum rates, but not to exceed St. Louis-Kansas City rates - 6 (Cedar Falls) 7 (Reinbeck) 8 (Marshalltown) 9 (Montezuma) 10 (Waverly) Peoria rates as maximum 11 (Mason City) rates, but not to exceed Mis- East Mississippi 12 (Ackley) sissippi River-Omaha rates River Propor- 13 (Iowa Falls) tional 14 (Boone) (Group K) 15 (Ft. Dodge) 16 (Cambridge) 17 21 (Des Moines) (Mexico) Peoria rates as maximum rates, but not to exceed St. Louis-Kansas City rates 22 (CMllicothe) St. Louis-Kansas City rates 23 (Shenandoah) 24 25 ( Manning) (Lake City) Mississippi River-Omaha rates 26 (Sioux City) Same differentials under Chi- cago-Sioux Falls rates as 27 (Sioux Falls) East Mississippi River-Sioux City proportional rates are less than Chicago-Sioux City rates TO INTERIOR IOWA CITIES TABLE 31 91 Basis for Rates Between Champaign (Group L) and Groups Indicated Between the Following Gboup And Points in the Following Groups Rate Basis Applicable 1 (Manchester) 2 (Cedar Rapids) 3 (Iowa City) 4 (Oskaloosa) 5 (Ottumwa) 6 (Cedar Falls) 7 (Reinbeck) 8 (Marshall town) 9 10 (Montezuma) (Waverly) Chicago rates 11 (Mason City) 12 (Ackley) 13 (Iowa Falls) Champaign 14 (Boone) (Group L) 15 (Ft. Dodge) 16 (Cambridge) 17 (Des Moines) 18 (Albert Lea) 19 20 (Faribault) ( Mankato ) St. Louis rates 21 (Mexico) 22 (Chillicothe) 23 (Shenandoah) 24 (Manning) Chicago rates 25 (Lake City) 26 (Sioux City) 27 (Sioux Falls) CHAPTER VII TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY This chapter deals with the construction of rates to and from what is generally known as Trans-Missouri Terri- tory, embracing the states of Kansas and Nebraska and part of the states of Colorado and Missouri. 1. Description of East End Groups The states of Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and that part of Missouri lying in Western Trunk Line Ter- ritory are divided into twenty-five groups. The borders of these groups are as follows, some of the points located in each group being also shown for convenience in locating them. Group 1 The borders of the Mississippi River Group are the same as on Missouri River traffic. Group 2 The borders of the Peoria Group are the same as on Missouri River traffic. Group 3 The borders of the Chicago Group are the same as on Missouri River traffic. 92 TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY 93 Group 4 The borders of the St. Paul Group are the same as on Missouri River traffic. Group 5 Beginning at a point just west of Moody, Mo., and thence west of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to but not including Burlington, Iowa; thence west of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to a point just west of Columbus Junction, Iowa ; thence north of the Chi- cago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to a point just north of Muscatine, Iowa ; thence north of the Chicago, Milwau- kee & St. Paul Railway to a point just north of Davenport, Iowa; thence west of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to Clinton, Iowa; thence west of the Chicago & North-Western Railway to a point just west of Almont, Iowa ; thence west of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to a point northwest of Dubuque, Iowa ; thence north of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to a point west of Oneida Junction, Iowa ; thence north of the Man- chester & Oneida Railway to but not including Man- chester, Iowa ; thence east of the Illinois Central Railroad to a point just east of Cedar Rapids, Iowa (but not in- cluding Marion, Iowa) ; thence east of the Chicago, Mil- waukee & St. Paul Railway to but not including Sigour- ney, Iowa; thence north of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to but not including Washington, Iowa; thence west of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to a point just west of Brighton ; thence east of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to a point just east of Belknap; thence east of the Wabash 94 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Railroad to a point just east of Bloomfield, Iowa ; thence east of the Wabash Railroad to a point just east of Clark, Mo. ; thence following an imaginary line south to a point north of McBaine, Mo. ; and thence north of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway to the boundary line of Group 25. Some of the representative points in this group are sta- tions on the Illinois Central Railroad from Julien to Peosta, Iowa. Group 6 Beginning at a point just west of Dubuque, Iowa, and thence west of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to the Minnesota state line; thence west via the Minne- sota state line to a point just east of Huntington, Iowa ; thence east of the Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad to but not including Estherville, Iowa; thence east of the Chi- cago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to a point just east of Emmetsburg, Iowa ; thence north of the Chicago, Mil- waukee & St. Paul Railway to a point just east of Mason City, Iowa ; thence east of the Iowa Central Railway to a point just east of Hampton, Iowa ; and thence north of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to the point of beginning. Some of the representative points in this group are stations on the Illinois Central Railroad from Irma to St. Ansgar, Iowa. Group 7 Beginning at a point just west of Oelwein, Iowa, and thence west of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to a point just east of Des Moines, Iowa ; thence west of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to a point just TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY 95 south of Carlisle, Iowa ; thence east of the Chicago, Bur- lington & Quincy Railroad to a point east of Humeston, Iowa; thence south to the Missouri state line, west of Lineville; and thence east via the Missouri state line to the western boundary line of Group 5. Some of the representative points in this group are sta- tions on the Illinois Central Railroad from Manchester to Robins, Iowa. Group 8 Beginning at a point northeast of Hampton, Iowa, and thence north of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to a point northeast of Ft. Dodge, Iowa; thence east of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to a point east of Bor- der Plains, Iowa ; thence east of the Des Moines River to a point north of Boone, Iowa ; thence north of the Chicago & North- Western Railway to a point east of Ames, Iowa ; and thence east of the Chicago & North- Western Railway to but not including Des Moines, Iowa. Some of the representative points in this group are stations on the Illinois Central Railroad from Cedar Falls to Judd, Iowa. Group 9 Beginning at the southeast corner of Group 7 and thence northwest via an imaginary line to a point just east of Leon, Iowa ; thence east of the line of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad through Lamoni, Iowa, to a point just east of Bethany, Mo. ; thence south via an imaginary line to a point just north of Cypress; thence east of the Wabash Railroad to a point just east of Gal- 96 FREIGHT RATES—WESTERN TERRITORY latin, Mo.; thence north of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Eailroad to a point east of Chillicothe, Mo. ; thence south via an imaginary line west of Bogard and east of Carrollton, Mo., to the Missouri River; thence east via the Missouri River to but not including Booneville, Mo. ; thence west of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway to a point north of Franklin Junction, Mo. ; and thence north of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway to the western boundary line of Group 5. Some of the representative points in this group are sta- tions on the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway from Mo- berly to Estill, Mo. Group 10 Beginning at the southwest corner of Group 9 and thence west via the Missouri River to a point southwest of Myrick, Mo. ; thence south of the Missouri Pacific Rail- way to a point east of Sedalia, Mo. ; thence east of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway to a point just south of Windsor, Mo. ; and thence south of the St. Louis, Kan- sas City & Colorado Railroad (including the "Warsaw branches of the Missouri Pacific Railway) to the western boundary line of Group 25. Some of the representative points in this group are sta- tions on the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway from Portland to Wainwright, Mo. Group 11 Beginning at a point southwest of Myrick, Mo., and thence west via the Missouri River to but not including Kansas City, Mo. ; and thence south of the St. Louis, Kan- TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY 97 sas City & Colorado Railroad to the western boundary line of Group 10. Some of the representative points in this group are stations on the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway from Sutherland to Holden, Mo. Group 12 Beginning at the western boundary line of Group 8, at a point just north of Cypress, Mo. ; thence north of the Wabash Railroad to a point west of Pattonsburg, Mo. ; thence west of the Quincy, Omaha & Kansas City Railroad to a point just west of Plattsburg; thence north of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway to a point just east of Gower, Mo. ; thence east of the Quincy, Omaha & Kan- sas City Railroad to a point just east of Trimble, Mo. ; and thence southeast via an imaginary line east of Lib- erty and South Liberty to the Missouri River. Some of the representative points in this group are sta- tions on the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad from Keystone to Chandler, Mo. Group 13 Beginning at the western boundary line of Group 11 at a point just east of Gower, Mo.; thence northwest via an imaginary line crossing the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad east of Easton, Mo., the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway east of Stockbridge, Mo., the Chi- cago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad north of Clair, Mo., and the Chicago Great Western Railroad north of Savan- nah, Mo. ; thence west to a point north of Nodaway, Mo. ; and thence east of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Rail- 98 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY road to a point on the Missouri River just east of Kansas City. Some of the representative points in this group are sta- tions on the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad from Liberty to Randolph, Mo. Group 14 Beginning at the northwest corner of Group 8, at a point just east of Leon, Iowa ; thence north of Leon, Iowa, and the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to a point north of Mt. Ayr, Iowa; thence north via an imaginary line through a point east of Diagonal, Iowa, to a point northeast of Creston, Iowa ; thence crossing the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad north of Creston, Iowa, and east of Burns, Iowa; thence south of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to a point west of Noda- way, Iowa; thence north of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to a point northwest of Red Oak, Iowa ; thence south of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Rail- road to but not including Hastings, Iowa; thence north of Hastings, Iowa, and east of the Wabash Railroad to a point just east of Council Bluffs, Iowa ; and thence east of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to the northern boundary line of Group 13. Some of the representative points in this group are sta- tions on the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad from Mound City to Quitman, Mo. Group 15 Beginning at the northern boundary line of Group 13 at a point northeast of Creston, Iowa ; thence via an imag- TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY 99 inary line west of Winterset, Iowa, to a point south of De Soto, Iowa; thence south of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to but not including Des Moines, Iowa; thence north, crossing the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway and the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to a point just north of Des Moines, Iowa ; thence east of the Chicago & North- Western Railway to a point north of Ames, Iowa; thence north of the Chicago & North- Western Railway to a point east of Carroll, Iowa ; thence east of the Chicago & North- Western Railway to a point just east of Manning, Iowa ; thence west of the Chicago & North- Western Railway to a point just east of Atlantic, Iowa; and thence east of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to the northern boundary line of Group 14. Some of the representative points in this group are sta- tions on the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad from Cromwell to Nodaway, Iowa. Group 16 Comprising territory bounded by Groups 7, 9, 14, and 15. A representative point in this group is Des Moines, Iowa. Group 17 Beginning at the northern boundary line of Group 14, at a point just north of Boone, Iowa ; thence north via the Des Moines River to a point south of Border Plains, Iowa ; thence east of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to a point north of Ft. Dodge, Iowa ; thence north of the Illi- 100 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY nois Central Railroad to "Wall Lake, Iowa ; thence west of the Chicago & North- Western Railway to but not includ- ing Denison, Iowa; thence south of the Chicago & North- western Railway to a point just east of Maple River Junction; and thence north of the Chicago & North- western Railway to the point of beginning. Some of the representative points in this group are sta- tions on the Illinois Central Railroad from Gypsum to Deloit, Iowa. Group 18 Beginning at a point north of Tara, Iowa, and thence north of the Illinois Central Railroad to a point just west of Le Mars ; thence west of the Chicago, St. Paul, Minne- apolis & Omaha Railway to but not including Sioux City, Iowa; thence via the Missouri River to a point west of Onawa, Iowa ; thence north of the Chicago & North- West- ern Railway to a point north of Mapleton ; thence east to a point north of Boyer; and thence north of the Illinois Central Railroad to the point of beginning. Some of the representative points in this group are stations on the Illinois Central Railroad from Barnum to Sulphur Springs, Iowa. Group 19 Beginning at the northwest corner of Group 6 and thence west via the Iowa-Minnesota state line to a point southeast of Round Lake, Minn. ; thence east of the Chi- cago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to a point north of Worthington, Minn. ; and thence west of the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway to the northern boundary line of Group 18. TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY 101 Some of the representative points in this group are sta- tions on the Illinois Central Railroad from Larrabee to Sheldon, Iowa. Group 20 Territory bounded by Groups 14, 15, 17, and 18 on the southeast and north, and by the Missouri River on the west. Some of the representative points in this group are stations on the Illinois Central Railroad from Arion to Council Bluffs, Iowa. Group 21 Beginning at a point just north of Bluff Siding, Wis., and thence north of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to a point north of St. Charles, Minn. ; thence north of the Chicago & North- Western Railway to a point just east of Mason, Minn. ; thence east of the Chicago Great West- ern Railroad to a point just north of Randolph, Minn.; thence west of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to a point just west of Faribault, Minn. ; thence north of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to a point northwest of Waterville, Minn. ; thence west of the Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad to a point just north of Albert Lea, Minn. ; thence north of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to a point east of Ramsey, Minn. ; thence east of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to a point just east of Lyle, Minn. ; thence following the Iowa state line to a point east of LeRoy, Minn. ; thence east of the Chicago Great Western Railroad to a point southeast of Spring Valley, Minn. ; thence south of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to a point just east of La Crosse, Wis. ; 102 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY and thence east of the Chicago & North-Western Railway to the point of beginning. Some of the representative points in this group are Winona, Waterville, New Richland, and Manchester, Minn. Group 22 Same as on Missouri River adjustment. Group 23 Beginning at a point northwest of Waterville, Minn., and following an imaginary line to a point north of St. Peter, Minn. ; thence south of the Chicago & North- West- ern Railway to a point north of Sleepy Eye, Minn. ; thence south of the Chicago & North- Western Railway to a point just east of Rowena, Minn. ; thence northwest to a point just south of Hanley Falls, Minn. ; thence east of the Great Northern Railway to a point just south of Wilmar, Minn. ; thence west of the Great Northern Railway to a point just south of Jasper, Minn.; thence following an imaginary line to a point south of Hardwick, Minn. ; thence north of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway to a point west of Prairie Junction ; thence north of the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway to a point north of Man- kato, Minn. ; and thence north of the Chicago Great West- ern Railroad to the point of beginning. Some of the representative points in this group are sta^ tions on the Chicago & North- Western Railway from Rowena to Burchards, Minn. Group 24 Beginning at a point just northwest of Waterville, Minn., and thence north of the Chicago Great Western TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY 103 Railroad to a point north of Mankato Junction; thence north of the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Rail- way to a point just west of Prairie Junction, Minn. ; thence following an imaginary line south of the Chicago, Milwau- kee & St. Paul Railway to the Iowa state line ; thence east to a point just east of Lyle, Minn. ; thence east of the Chi- cago Great Western Railroad to a point north of Austin, Minn. ; thence north of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway to a point just north of Albert Lea, Minn. ; and thence west of the Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad to the point of beginning. Representative points in this group are Mankato and Albert Lea, Minn. Group 25 Beginning at a point just west of Moody, Mo., and thence west of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to but not including Cuivre Junction, Mo. ; thence south of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to but not including West Alton, Mo. ; thence west of the line of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to but not includ- ing St. Louis, Mo.; thence west of the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway to a point south of Nurs- ery, Mo. ; thence south of the Missouri Pacific Railway to a point just south of Valley Park, Mo. ; thence south of the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad to a point just south of Pacific, Mo. ; thence south of the Missouri Pacific Rail- way to a point just south of Labadie, Mo. ; thence south of the St. Louis, Kansas City & Colorado Railroad to a point just west of Bland, Mo. ; thence following an imaginary line directly north to a point north of Bluff ton, Mo. ; thence north of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway 104 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY to a point just north of Defiance, Mo. ; thence north via an imaginary line to a point just west of Gilmore, Mo. ; thence west of the St. Louis & Hannibal Railway to Bear Creek, Mo. ; and thence west of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad (but not including Palmyra, Mo.) to the point of beginning. Some of the representative points in this group are sta- tions on the Missouri Pacific Railway from Mentor to Creve Coeur, Mo. 2. Description of West End Groups Similarly, the states in Trans-Missouri Territory are grouped. These groups are known as the West End Groups. Group E Beginning at a point just south of Pleasant Hill, Mo., and thence east of the Missouri Pacific Railway to a point just east of Carbon Center, Mo. ; thence east of the Mis- souri Pacific Railway through Nevada, Lamar, Carthage, W T ebb City, and Granby, Mo. ; thence east of the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad to Neosho, Mo. ; thence west of the Kansas City Southern Railway to the Missouri-Ar- kansas state line ; thence east on the Missouri- Arkansas state line to a point just east of the place where the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad crosses the state line; thence east of the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad to a point just east of Springfield, Mo. ; thence east of the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad to a point just east of North Clinton, Mo. ; thence east of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway to a point just south of Windsor, Mo. ; TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY 105 and thence south of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Rail- way to the point of beginning. Some of the representative points in this group are Anderson and Washburn, Mo., Walnut Grove, Neb., and Seligman, Mo. Group F Beginning at a point just north of Nevada, Mo., and thence westwardly just north of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway to the Kansas state line, just east of Fort Scott, Kan. ; thence north on the state line to but not in- cluding Kansas City, Kan. ; thence following an imaginary line south of Leeds, Mo., to a point west of Little Blue, Mo., on the Missouri Pacific Railway; and thence west of the Missouri Pacific Railway to the boundary line of Group E. Representative points in this group are Barton and Raymore, Mo. Group G Beginning at a point just south of Kansas City, Kan., and thence south of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway to a point just east of Lawrence, Kan. ; thence west of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway to a point west of Vinland, Kan. ; thence following an imag- inary line south of Vinland, Kan., and east of Wellsville, Kan. ; thence south to a point west of Osawatomie, Kan. ; thence west of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway to a point just west of Chanute, Kan. ; thence west of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway to a point southwest of Chetopa, Kan. ; and thence east to the western bound- ary line of Groups E and F to the point of beginning. 106 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Representative points in this group are Badger, Colum- bus, Rollin, and Radley, Kan. Group H Beginning at a point just west of Kansas City, Mo., and following the Missouri River to the Nebraska state line ; thence west to a point just west of the Missouri Pacific Railway ; thence west of the Missouri Pacific Railway to a point south of Shannon, Kan. ; thence following an im- aginary line to a point southwest of Lee, Kan. ; thence south of the Leavenworth, Kansas & Western Railway to a point west of Leavenworth, Kan. ; and thence west of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway to the northern boundary line of Group G, just west of Holliday, Kan. Representative points in this group are Hiawatha, Quindaro, and Pomeroy, Kan. Group I Beginning at a point just west of Lawrence, Kan., and following an imaginary line to a point just west of Oska- loosa, Kan. ; thence west of the Missouri Pacific Railway (Kansas City North-Western Division) to the Nebraska state line ; and thence east to the northwestern boundary of Group H. Representative points in this group are Ontario and McLouth, Kan. Group J Beginning at a point just southwest of Lawrence, Kan., and thence west of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY 107 Railway to a point just west of Ottawa, Kan.; thence south of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway to a point just east of Emporia, Kan.; thence following an imaginary line to a point north of Emporia, Kan. ; thence west of Emporia, Kan., to a point just north of Potwin, Kan. ; thence south of the Missouri Pacific Railway to a point just west of Newton, Kan. ; thence following an imaginary line to a point northwest of Medora, Kan. ; thence west of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Rail- way to a point southwest of Hutchinson, Kan.; thence south of the Missouri Pacific Railway to a point west of Wichita, Kan. ; thence west of the Kansas City, Mexico & Orient Railway to a point west of Harper ; thence south of the southern boundary line of Kansas ; and thence east to the western boundary line of Group G. Representative points in this group are Anthony, Cof- feyville, and Riverdale, Kan. Group K All territory west of the western boundary lines of Groups G, I, J, 0, and R, to which rates are published. Representative points in this group are Grand Island and Riverdale, Neb. Group L Beginning at a point just northwest of Beatrice, Neb., and thence west of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to a point just south of Armour, Neb.; thence west of the Kansas City North-western Division of the Missouri Pacific Railway to the Kansas state line ; thence following the northern boundary line of Group I to a point just south of Falls City, Neb. ; thence east of Falls 108 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY City, Neb., and north of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to a point just north of Table Eock, Neb. ; and thence north of the Chicago, Eock Island & Pacific Eailway to the point of beginning. Eepresentative points in this group are Beatrice and Mayberry, Neb. Group M Beginning at the Kansas state line just south of Eulo, Neb., and following the Missouri Elver to a point just east of Omaha Junction, Neb. ; thence west to a point west of the Missouri Pacific Eailway and north of Omaha Junc- tion, Neb. ; thence west of the Missouri Pacific Eailway to a point just north of Salem, Neb. ; thence north of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Eailroad to a point east of Falls City, Neb.; and thence south to the Kansas state line and east to the point of beginning. Eepresentative points in this group are Union and Paul, Neb. Group N Beginning at a point northwest of Omaha Junction, Neb., and thence north and east of the Missouri Pacific Eailway to a point south of Louisville, Neb. ; thence west of the Platte Eiver to a point west of Yutan, Neb. ; thence following an imaginary line to a point just east of Arling- ton, Neb. ; thence north of the Union Pacific Eailroad to a point west of Sand Pit, Neb. ; thence west of the Chi- cago & North- Western Eailway to a point just west of Wahoo, Neb. ; thence west of the Union Pacific Eailroad to a point west of Lincoln, Neb. ; thence west of the Chi- TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY 109 cago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to the northwestern boundary of Group L ; and thence following the northern boundary of Group L and the eastern boundary of Group M to the point of beginning. Representative points in this group are Lincoln, Fre- mont, and Walton, Neb. Group Beginning at a point on the southwestern boundary of Group L and following the Kansas state line to a point just west of Chester, Neb.; thence west of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to a point west of Geneva, Neb.; thence west of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to a point just west of David City, Neb. ; thence north to a point just west of Schuyler, Neb. ; thence north of the Union Pacific Railroad to a point just west of Sand Pit, Neb.; and thence following the western boundary lines of Groups N and L to the point of beginning. Representative points in this group are Ames, Steele City, and North Bend, Neb. Group P Beginning at a point on the Missouri River just north of Omaha, Neb., and thence west to a point east of West Side, Neb. ; thence following an imaginary line to a point just northwest of Omaha Junction; thence east to the Missouri River; and thence north of the Missouri River to the point of beginning. A representative point in this group is West Side Junction, Neb. 110 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Group Q Beginning at a point on the Missouri Eiver west of Little Sioux, Iowa; thence west to a point northwest of Eureka, Neb. ; thence south to a point northwest of Ar- lington, Neb.; thence following the east boundary of Group N and the west boundary of Group P to the Mis- souri River; and thence north on the Missouri Eiver to the point of beginning. Representative points in this group are Meadow, Waterloo, and Millard, Neb. Group R Beginning at a point just north of Arlington, Neb., and following the northern boundary of Groups N and to a point northwest of Schuyler, Neb.; thence following an imaginary line north to a point west of Clarkson, Neb. ; thence northeast to a point north of Beemer, Neb. ; thence east to the northeast border of Group M ; thence follow- ing the west boundary of Group Q to the point of be- ginning. Representative points in this group are Howell, Kan., and Dodge, Neb. Group S Beginning at a point just north of Beemer, Neb., and following an imaginary line east of Winside, Neb., to a point south of Plain View, Neb. ; thence south of the Chi- cago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad to a point west of O'Neill, Neb.; thence following an imaginary line to a point on the Missouri River north of Niobrara, Neb.; TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY 111 thence following the Missouri River to the northeast boundary line of Group Q; and thence west along the northern boundary line of Groups Q and R to the point of beginning. A representative point in this group is Niobrara, Neb. 3. Adjustment The basing factor in this adjustment, as in the case of the Missouri River rates, is the rate from St. Louis which is first arrived at, rates from other territories being made with relation to these rates under a differential adjust- ment. Table 32 shows the rates applying between points located on the Union Pacific Railway from Kansas City, Mo., to Denver, Colo., and St. Louis and other groups. This is taken as a representative line of rates in this territory. Rates to stations on other lines are similarily established and the treatment of one should suffice for the others. As far as possible the rates are constructed on the dis- tance principles, the short line distance between various points being taken as maximum. 112 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 32 Class Rates Applying Between Certain Stations on the Union Pacific Railway West of Kansas City and St. Louis, Chicago, and Other Groups ■J. Between AND GROUPS Rates in Cents Per 100 Pounds M Classes 2 %i 1 o G 4 5 A B C D E IT Bonner Springs. Kan 13 00 45 35 27 22 24* 19* 17 13*. 11 39 Lawrence, Kan. . 1 74 58 45 36 25 30 25 22 18 14 69 Topeka, Kan. . . . 1 SO 62 49 38 28 32 26 22 18 15 119 Manhattan, Kan. 1 90 73 60 46 36 38*. 31* 26 21 10*. 130 Junction C i t y. Kan 1 1 100 106 SI 86 66*. 71 51 42 54*. 44*. 43 46*. 35 37*. 28 30*. 22 16*. 172 Solomon, Kan 23*. 18 i 1 107 88 72 55 45 47 38 31 24 19 377 1 141 118 98 78 61 66 53 44 36 29 44 162 127 101 80* 63 74 56 50 42 35 30b 1 141 118 98 78 61 66 53 44 36 29 25 162 127 1(11 80*. 63 74 56 50 42 35 1 162 127 101 80* 63 74 56 50 42 36 550 2 171 130 105* 83| 65 77]- 59*. 52 44* 3S 36 180 145 110 85 67 8*4 03 54 47 40 4 162 127 101 80*. 63 74 56 50 42 30 1 162 127 101 80*. 63 74 56 50 42 3(1 618 Watkins, Colo.... o 171 136 105* 82f 65 T7J 59* 52 44 \ 38 o ISO 145 110 85 67 80* 63 54 47 40 4 162 127 101 804, 63 74 50 50 42 36 1 162 127 101 80*. 63 74 56 50 41* 33 470 2 171 136 105£ 82^ 65 77| 59* 52 44 35*. o O ISO 145 110 85 67 so* 63 54 46* 3S 4 162 127 101 SO* 63 74 50 50 42 36 1 From Kansas City. Mo. - Governed by the Western Classification. s St. Louis Group. * St. Paul Group. 5 Peoria Group. 6 Chicago Group. TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY 113 The figures shown in the first column indicate the actual distances that the points shown are from Kansas City, Mo. Note particularly that the increase in rates from the St. Louis Group is gradual until Ascalon, Colo., is reached, and that from there west to Walkins, Colo., which is but a short distance from Denver, the same scale of rates is applied. This is the St. Louis-Denver (Colo- rado Common Point) rate and is held as a maximum and not exceeded at intermediate points. The same principle involves the rates from St. Paul, except that in the case of these rates the blanketing of the Denver rate is begun much nearer the Missouri River than in the case of St. Louis. This is due, however, to the greater distance in- volved in the haul from the St. Paul Group to points located in these groups. The number of exceptions made to the following basis prohibits its use except where specific rates are not pub- lished from these groups. 4. Application of Rates To make through rates from or to Group 2 (Peoria), Group 3 (Chicago), and Group 4 (St. Paul), add the dif- ferentials shown in Table 33 to Group 1 (St. Louis) rates. TABLE 33 Differentials Used in Constructing Through Rates from or to Peoria, Chicago, and St. Paul Groups From OR >UPS Differentials in Cents Per 100 Pounds to Grc Classes i 1 2 3 4 5 A B c D E Remarks 2 10 10 5 2J 2i 3J 3| -i 2i 2i Over St. 3 20 20 10 5 5 7£ U 5 5 5 Louis 4 25 24 13 7 6 m Si 6 6£ 6 Rates i Governed by the Western Classification. 114 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY For example, if it were desired to construct a rate from Peoria, 111., to Salina, Kan., by referring to Table 32 it will be seen that no rates are published from Peoria (Group 2). The basis shown in Table 33 may therefore be used, which would result in the following through rates : Classes 123 4 5 A B C D E St. Louis to Salina, Kan 107 88 72 55 45 47 38 31 24 19 Differentials ... 10 10 5 2% 2% 3% 3% 2V 2 2V 2 2% Through rates ..117 9S 77 57y 2 47% 50% 41% 33y 2 26% 21 y 2 It should be borne in mind that this adjustment is not applied when through rates are published and that through rates are published in many instances wherein this basis is disregarded, as is shown by the rates from Groups 2, 3, and 4 to the points shown in Table 32. The basis for the construction of rates from other east end groups is set forth in Table 34. This table shows both lettered and numbered groups and care should be observed that the proper combination of lettered and numbered groups is employed when establishing rates. TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY TABLE 34 115 Basis for Construction of Rates Between Stations East and West of the Missouri River Between AND Groups Groups Classes E F G H I J K L M N O P Q These numbers refer to notes following the table 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 8 4 4 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 9 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 o 1 1 10 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 11 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 12 1 2 2 — 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 13 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 14 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 9 15 4 4 4 1 1 <> 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 17 4 4 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 18 5 5 5 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 o 2 2 19 5 5 5 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 20 4 4 4 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 21 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 G 22 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 23 8 8 8 S 8 8 9 8 8 S 2 8 S 24 6 6 6 6 6 6 10 8 S 8 2 8 8 25 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Note 1. Apply Mississippi River rates. Note 2. No through class rates are authorized ; some few commodity rates are published but these are on no general basis. Note 3. Apply Group 2 (Peoria) rates or Group 4 (St. Paul) rates, which- ever are lower. Note 4. Apply Peoria rates. Note 5. Apply Chicago rates. Note 6. Apply Group 3 (Chicago) rates or Group 4 (St. Paul) rates, which- ever are lower. Note 7. To stations in Group K in Colorado and Nebraska apply Chicago rates. No through rates are in effect to points in Group K in Kansas. Note 8. Apply St. Paul rates. Note 9. To stations in Group K in Colorado and Kansas apply St. Paul rates. To stations in Group K in Nebraska no through rates are in effect. Note 10. To stations in Group K in Colorado and Kansas apply Group 3 (Chicago) rates or Group 4 (St. Paul) rates, whichever are lower. 116 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY The basis set forth in Table 34 is used in the following manner : Suppose, for example, it is desired to construct rates between Anthony, Kan., and Winona, Minn. Anthony, Kan., is shown in Group J (west end) and Wi- nona, Minn., is shown in Group 21 (east end). Follow down the numbered groups shown on the left of the above table until Group 21 is reached and then follow the figures across until the figure under the lettered group "J" is reached. This figure is 6 and refers to note 6 at the foot of the table, which states that between points located in Groups 21 and "J" rates are made the same as the Chi- cago or St. Paul rates, whichever are lower. Referring to Table 35, it will be found that no rates are published from either Chicago or St. Paul and it becomes necessary to construct those rates in accordance with the basis pre- viously set forth in Table 33, using the Mississippi River rate shown in Table 35 as the basing factor. The follow- ing is an illustration : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 AB CDE Mississippi River to Anthony, Kan.... 124 102 S6 70 54 57 43 38 31 24 Chicago differentials 20 20 10 5 5 7% 7V 2 5 5 5 Through rates ....144 122 96 75 59 G4y 2 50y 2 43 36 29 As it may be easily seen that the Chicago differentials are in all cases less than those applying from St. Paul, there is no occasion to apply those in connection with the above St. Louis rates, because they would result in higher rates than those from Chicago. As the lower of the two is to be applied, it is seen that the scale from Winona, Minn., to Anthony, Kan., would be the Chicago scale above shown. TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY TABLE 35 117 Class Rates from Mississippi River Group to West End Groups BetweenMississippi River Gkoup and Groups E (Anderson, Mo.) .. F (Barton, Mo.) . .. G (Peacock, Kan.). H (Quindaro, Kan.) I (Ontario, Kan.). J (Anthony, Kan.) K (Grand Island, Neb.) L (Beatrice, Neb.) .< M (Union, Neb.)... N (Lincoln, Neb.) . . O (Ames, Neb.) Q (Meadow, Neb.). Rates in Cents Per 100 Pounds Classes i 5 A B C D E 68 52 65 45 57 124 102 87 62 77 60 7:2 58 40 52 35 41 S6 41 % 331/2 37 32 25 23 31 22 27 54 40 27 34 70 28 21% 18 17 231/2 18 15 13 35y 2 271/2 211/2 17 15 241/2 191/2 17 13% 11 291/2 231/2 21 17% 14 57 43 38 31 24 111 72 60 65 70 65 90% 73 57 43 57 48 491/2 37% 321/2 241/2 I81/2 45 50 55 50 35 39 44 39 35 27 31 35 31 28 22 25 28 95 30% 25 y 2 23 24y 2 191/2 17 27y 2 22% 20 30% 25% 22 27% 22% 20 19% 16 I.31/2 11 16% 14 18% 15 16% 14 1 Governed by the Western Classification. It must be understood, however, that these rates do not apply to all points in the same groups ; that is, different rates are applied to points in the same groups, and the tariff should always be consulted to determine the rates from the Mississippi River, etc. In Table 35 are reproduced rates to all of the groups shown under this basis which are published by the Western Trunk Line Committee in Tariff No. 18-H. Note that from some of the groups on the west end, such as R and S, no through rates are published. Rates are not shown for the reason that the lines on which points in these groups are located have not author- ized the Western Trunk Line Committee to publish these rates for them, but continue to publish the rates in their 118 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY individual issues. The rates so published, however, are in conformity with the basis set forth, which is agreed to by all lines in this territory. 5. Local Rates In Tables 36 and 37 are some of the class distance rates of the Chicago & North-Western and Wyoming & North- western railroads, which are used in constructing rates between points in Nebraska, South Dakota, and Wyoming. These rates are used generally on local traffic and are applied from all points which may not be affected by some through adjustment. Note particularly that the rates for some of the distances are not the same. This is due to the fact that these rates are established by the indi- vidual carriers without regard to the action taken by competing lines, except that when deemed advisable the longer line may elect to meet the short-line rates, if less, at some junction points. If this is done, it becomes neces- sary to reduce to the junction-point basis all points up to the junction. TABLE 36 Class Distance Rates Applying Between Stations on the Chicago & North-Western Railway in Nebraska Rates i in Cents Per 100 Pounds Miles 1 2 3 4 Classes 1 5 A B C D E 5 13 20 28 52 73 110 160 184 11 17 25 45 65 102 152 173 9 15 22 40 5S 88 126 156 7 13 19 35 46 76 106 136 6 6 9 9 14 14 30 24 41 34 71 64 101 94 130 115 5 8 30 16 26 50 74 94 4 7 8 14 22 40 60 76 4 5 6 10 16 31 43 53 3 20 3.5 40 4 100 7 200 10 400 22 500 27 600 32 i Governed by the Nebraska Classification. TO TRANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY TABLE 37 119 Class Distance Rates Applying Between Stations on the Wyoming & North-Western Railway and Chicago & North-Western Railway in Wyoming, Nebraska, and South Dakota (West op the Missouri River) Miles Rates in Cents Pee 100 Pounds 1 2 3 Classes i 4 5 A B C D E 5 13 24 34 62 88 126 266 11 9 20 18 30 26 54 46 78 67 116 98 215 191 7 6 6 5 4 16 12 11 10 8 23 18 17 12 10 41 36 29 19 17 55 50 41 31 26 84 79 70 56 44 170 165 146 124 106 4 6 7 12 20 36 81 3 20 4 40 6 100 8 200 13 400 22 750 39 y 2 l Governed l>y the Western Classification. CHAPTER VIII rates to and from colorado common points 1. Development In applying the basis used in the construction of rates to points in this territory, Denver, Pueblo, and Trinidad, Colo., Cheyenne, Wyo., Eoyce, N. M., and several hun- dred other stations which are intermediate or adjacent thereto are grouped and given the territorial designation of Colorado Common Points. The list varies somewhat according to where the traffic originates and the direction of movement, thus necessitating reference to the tariff: or territorial directories of the carriers for information as to what points are included in the term in actual practice. Within recent years the basis for rates to and from this territory has been before the Interstate Commerce Com- mission for consideration as to the reasonableness of the rates so established and in one of the hearings the Com- mission stated the early rate-construction practice em- ployed in this territory in the following language : As railroads were constructed into the undeveloped west and, for a time at least, had their western termini at the east bank of the Mississippi River, it seems natural that when the river was crossed, and rates were established to points beyond, they should be constructed by adding certain sums to the rates already estab- lished to the river, and as additional lines were built and addi- tional railroad crossings over the Mississippi River were con- 120 TO AND FROM COLORADO COMMON POINTS 121 strueted, competition between carriers and localities naturally established common rates to the Mississippi River crossings, especially when applied to traffic going beyond. As the west was further developed, this same condition and like results followed at the several crossings of the Missouri River. * * •» This has been fully explained in so far as the rates from Official Classification Territory to Mississippi River Crossings are concerned in the treatise devoted to that subject. As to the rates from Official Classification Ter- ritory to Missouri River Crossings, Chapter II of this work gives an explanation. Following this practice, the rates to the Mississippi River were combined with those from the Mississippi River to the Missouri River and with those from the Missouri River to Denver, Colo., or Colorado Common Points, in establishing through rates. The following figures show the rates applying from the Missouri River to Denver, Colo., from 1886 up to the time that the Commission reviewed the adjustment : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A BC D E 1S86 210 170 140 115 100 100 75 65 40 50 1894 160 130 110 90 75 85 65 55 45 40 1895 to 1907.125 100 80 65 50 60 45 40 35 30 As was said in the preceding chapter, rates between Missouri River Points and points east of Colorado Com- mon Points are made on the distance principle, i. e., in- creased as the distance increases, until the Colorado Common Point basis is reached ; from there on this rate is blanketed or extended to cover all intermediate stations, the Colorado Common Points fixing a maximum scale of rates above which intermediate points are not held. 1 15 I. C, C. Rep., 559. 122 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY The following will show the method employed in con- structing through rates from adjoining territories to Colorado Common Points under the old adjustment, taking New York as the point of origin : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 Rates i from New York to Mississippi River S8 76 59 41 35 Rates 2 from Mississippi River to Mis- souri River 60 45 35 27 22 Rates 2 from Missouri River to Denver, Colo 125 100 SO 65 50 Through rates 273 221 174 133 107 1 Governed by the Official Classification. 2 Governed by the Western Classification. The Interstate Commerce Commission, in this investi- gation, held that this basis was unduly discriminatory in favor of the Missouri Eiver cities and as against Den- ver, and prescribed the following rates to apply from Chicago and from the Mississippi Eiver to Colorado Com- mon Points : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A BC D E Chicago 180 145 110 85 67 80% 63 54 47 40 Mississippi River. 162 129 101 80% 63 74 56 50 42 36 Subsequently the rates from the Missouri Eiver Cross- ings to Denver were readjusted, the rates being reduced from and to the figures shown below : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Former rates 125 100 bO 65 50 60 45 40 35 30 Reduced rates 115 92 74 00 47 56 42 37 33 29 In this adjustment, as in others in Western Territory, much consideration must be given in regard to placing the markets of production and the jobbing centers on a TO AND FROM COLORADO COMMON POINTS 123 relative basis of equality. Indeed, in this investigation the Interstate Commerce Commission stated : * * * Jobbers buying their goods at a common source of supply and selling them in a common market of consumption should be able to do so on a relatively fair, if not equal, aggregate of inbound and outbound transportation charges. As applied to this case the theory is that the carload rate from Chicago or from the Mississippi River to Denver plus the less-than-carload rate from Denver to Grand Junction or other consuming points ought not to exceed by more than a reasonable margin the similar combination on the Missouri River, and also ought not to exceed the through less-than-carload charge direct to Grand Junction. 2 2. Eastbound Rates The order of the Commission affected only westbound rates. The eastbound rates which were not included in this investigation were somewhat higher. Subsequently these rates were also made the subject of a complaint before the Interstate Commerce Commission and the re- sult was that they were ordered to be reduced to the St. Louis and Chicago rates, not to exceed those applicable on westbound traffic. The rates currently in effect between Colorado Common Points and eastern points of origin and destination are shown in Table 38. 2 28 I. C. C. Rep., 82-86. 124 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 38 Class Rates Between Colorado Common Points and Groups Named Between Rates in Cents Per 100 Pounds Colorado Common Points Classes and 12 3 4 5 A B C D E Chicago, Ill.i 180 145 110 So 07 S2y 2 63 54 47 40 Duluth, Miim.i 107 157 124 97% 73 88 68 60 51 44 Memphis, Tenn.i Local ISO 145 110 85 67 soy 2 63 54 47 40 Proportional 162 127 101 79 62 74 56 50 42 36 Peoria, Ill.i 171 136 105 y 2 S2% 65 77 y 4 59% 52 44% 38 Mississippi River i 162 127 101 80% 63 74 56 50 42 36 St. Paul. Minn.i 162 127 101 soy 2 63 74 56 50 42 36 Missouri River i 115 92 74 60 47 56 42 37 33 29 New Orleans, Mobile, Baton Rouge, Vickstrarg 2 205 165 125 97 77 92 72 62 53 y 2 46 1 Governed by the Western Classification. Trans-Missouri Freight Tariff No. 11-1. 2 Governed by the Western Classification. Trans-Missouri Freight Tariff No. 12-H. 3. All-Rail Eates prom and to Central Freight Associ- ation and Trunk Line Territories No through rates are published via all-rail routes from Central Freight Association and Trunk Line territories, or from points in the southeast, rates being made on a combination based on either the Mississippi River or the Chicago rates, whichever afford the lower basis. 4. Rates from New Orleans From New Orleans, La., the Illinois Central Railroad has, for a number of years, applied as a basis for through TO AND FROM COLORADO COMMON POINTS 125 rates the scale which was in effect between Chicago and Denver prior to the time that the Interstate Commerce Commission ordered the above reductions. These rates were included in the investigation and the Commission sustained the carriers in the application of this basis, which is also applied from Mobile, Ala., Baton Rouge, La., and Vicksburg, Miss. 5. Rates from Tbtjnk Lixe Tebeitory via Rail- axd-Water Routes In competing for a share of this traffic the water lines operating from eastern ports to South Atlantic ports, such as Charleston, S. C, Wilmington, N. C, and Sa- vannah and Brunswick, Ga., and the Mexican Gulf ports of New Orleans, Texas City, and Galveston, and their rail affiliations use the all-rail rates from Trunk Line Territory as the basis by which to construct rates via their routes. (a) From Atlantic Seaboard Territory The competition of these routes is strong and aggres- sive and while the nature of the competition is entered into more fully in the construction of rates to South- western Territory, it may be stated that the service via these routes compares favorably both as to time and efficiency with that of the all-rail lines and in addition thereto affords an opportunity to effect quite a saving in freight charges by reason of the lower scale of rates in effect. The rates via the all-rail lines, as previously stated, are made on combinations on Chicago or Mississippi 126 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY River rates, whichever are less. The water lines taking these rates as the basis adjust their rates, using a scale of differentials under the rail rates. Thus, under the old adjustment, the all-rail rates from New York to Denver would be constructed in the following manner : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B CD E All-rail rates 273 221 174 133 107 119% 93% 86 77y 2 70 Differentials 39 30 26 16 14 11 11 11 11 11 Through rates 234 191 148 117 93 108% 82% 75 66% 59 The rates via the water lines are continued in effect as they were not included in the Commission's order. Seaboard Territory may be roughly described as that territory lying east of the Western Termini of the Trunk Lines and on and north of the line of the Norfolk & West- ern Railway to the Atlantic Ocean. Since the reduced rates ordered by the Interstate Com- merce Commission have been published from Chicago and Mississippi River Points to Colorado Common Points, the application, via the water line, of rates on any fixed differential basis has been held in abeyance. The differences existing in the present class rates from New York to Colorado Common Points via the all-rail lines as contrasted with the Gulf routes, develop that the Gulf rates are the following figures in cents per hundred weight less than the all-rail rates : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differences (in cents) .. .16 12 12 4 4 % 2% 4 4% 6 These differences result from the differences in class rates west of Chicago and the Mississippi River, and from the fact that the Gulf lines maintain the through TO AND FROM COLORADO COMMON POINTS 127 class rates which were in effect prior to the reductions authorized by the Commission. In Table 39 are shown the current class rates from Atlantic Seaboard Territory to Colorado Common Points. In Table 40 are shown certain proportional water-and-rail class rates applying to the Mississippi River, applicable on traffic destined beyond, and also the proportional all- rail class rates to the Mississippi River, which are used in combination with the rates applying from Mississippi River Points in constructing through rates via all-rail lines to these destinations. 6. Rates to Points Made with Relation to Colorado Common Points Rates to some other points which may be closely related or situated to points taking the Colorado Common Point basis are made by adding to the Colorado Common Point rates certain arbitraries or differentials, which are usually less than the local rates between the same points. Rates to the stations located on the St. Louis, Rocky Mountain & Pacific Railway, west of Des Moines, N. M., to and including Ute Park, N. M., a distance of almost 100 miles, are made by adding differentials to the Trini- dad (Colorado Common Point) rates as follows: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A BC D E Chicago to Trinidad rates ISO 145 110 85 67 82^63 54 47 40 Differentials 20 18 17 15 5 7 5 5 5 5 Through rates 200 163 127 10 72 89y 2 68 59 52 45 128 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 39 Class Rates from Atlantic Seaboard Territory to the Mis- sissippi River and Groups Specified West Thereof From Atlantic Seaboard Territory to Groups Colorado Coinruon Points? Raton, N. M.2 Mississippi River Crossings 3 Memphis, Tenn.3 Proportional rates from Mississippi River to Missouri River 4 Rates in Cents Per 100 Pounds 1 2 Classes i 3 4 5 A BCD E 234 191 148 no 93 108% 82% 75 66% 254 209 105 131 98 1151/2 S7i/o 80 711/2 72 04 47 37 31 34 26 25 24 72 04 47 35 30 34 26 25 24 55 41 32 24 20 22 18 15 12 59 64 23 23 10 1 Governed by the Western Classification. 2 Via steamship to Galveston and New Orleans. Wm. J. Sedgeman's (Agent) Freight Tariff No. 6. 3 Applies only on traffic destined to Colorado Common Points. Wm. J. Sedge- man's (Agent) Freight Tariff No. 7. 4 Governed by the Western Classification. Wm. J. Sedgeman's and W. H. Hosmer's (Agents) Freight Tariff No. 3-B. TABLE 40 Proportional Rates Proportional Wateb-and- Proportional All-Rail Rail Rates to Mississippi Kates to , Mississippi From River River 1 Classes 2 Classes 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 Boston s S3 72 56 38 33 2S 88 76 59 41 35 29 New York 78 68 53 37 31 26 88 76 59 41 34 29 Philadelphia 72 62 51 35 29 24 S2 70 57 39 33 27 Baltimore 70 60 50 34 28 23 80 68 56 38 32 26 Richmond 02 54 46 31 26 21 72 62 52 35 30 24 1 These are the East St. Louis rates authorized to the upper Mississippi River Crossings, with the standard westbound differentials applied. 2 Governed by the Official Classification. 3 Proportional rates applicable on traffic via South Atlantic and Gulf ports destined to points on and west of the Missouri River. CHAPTER IX rates to and from utah common points 1. Development In this adjustment, used in constructing rates to points in the Far West and Southwest, the influences of water competition are felt to a great extent. The carriers' contention is that rates from Atlantic Seaboard to Pacific Coast points are forced to an excep- tionally low level in order to meet the water competition between the coasts. This competition is due to the low scale of rates established by the carriers operating around Cape Horn, through the Strait of Magellan, and by way of the Isthmus of Panama. Also, the cities on the Pacific slope receive supplies by water from different countries of the globe at exceedingly low water rates. While a rate forced by water competition cannot be used as a standard of reasonableness by which to measure other rates, the Interstate Commerce Commission has held that the fact that there is a water route from a given point to a certain destination affording a low and reason- able rate does not justify the Commission in permitting the rail carriers to charge a high and unreasonable rate on traffic between these points. Likewise, as will be illustrated in the treatise devoted to the construction of rates in Southwestern Committee Territory, the coastwise lines operating between points 129 130 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY located on the eastern seaboard and gulf ports also tend to depress the natural level of the rates to and from these territories and points adjacent thereto. As stated in the Traffic Glossary, Ogden and Salt Lake City are the two common points, but there is, as is the case with the Colorado Common Points, a varying list of points located in Utah and adjoining states to which this basis is applied. These rates have also been subject to complaint before the Interstate Commerce Commission, a reduced basis having been established by it. Under a complaint sub- mitted by the Commercial Club and Traffic Bureau of Salt Lake City, Utah, December 16, 1909, the class rates in both directions between Chicago, Mississippi River, and Missouri River rate territories on the one hand and the Utah Common Points on the other hand were stated to be unreasonable and discriminatory in so far as Salt Lake City was concerned. The rates in existence at that time from the following points were : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B CD E Chicago 2S5 240 198 160 133 138 110 97 69 58 Mississippi River. 265 220 188 155 128 130% 102y 3 92 64 53 Missouri River. . .205 175 153 128 106 106 83 75 50 V£ 42 After reviewing the evidence, the Commission pre- scribed the following rates as reasonable rates for the future : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C DE Chicago 245 207 172 139 115 115 95 84 62 52 Mississippi River 227 189 163 134 111 111 88 80 57 48 Missouri River 190 162 142 119 98 98 77 70 50 42 TO AND FROM UTAH COMMON POINTS 131 2. All-Rail Rates from Central Freight Association and Trunk Line Territories All-rail rates from Central Freight Association Terri- tory and Trunk Line Territory are constructed on the basis of the lowest combination based on Chicago, Missis- sippi River, or Missouri River rates set forth. 3. Differential Rates from Atlantic Sea- board Territory Specific through rates from Atlantic Seaboard Terri- tory to Utah Common Points were formerly published by the water carriers serving the South Atlantic and Gulf ports. These rates were considerably less than the all- rail rates, the differential on first-class traffic being 35 cents per hundred weight under the all-rail figure. Since the reductions were ordered by the Commission, this fixed differential basis has been abandoned and through rates are no longer published, except on some few com- modities on which through rates are published from At- lantic Seaboard Territory to Spokane, Wash., which rates are applied as maxima to Salt Lake City and other Utah Common Points. The class rates and rates on other commodities are provided for under the factor methods, that is, the tariff shows, in various sections, rates ap- plicable east and west of the Mississippi River, which when combined with stated factors east or west produce the charge to be applied. The factors which apply east of the Mississippi River from Boston, Mass., New York, N. Y,. Philadelphia, Pa., and Baltimore, Md., are : Classes ..1 2 3 4 5 6 R25 R26 R28 Rates 72 64 47 Co 30 26 54 38 40 132 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY These rates are governed by the Official Classification. The factors applying west of the Mississippi River to the Utah Common Points are : Classes. ..1 2345A BODE Rates 227 1S9 1G3 134 111 111 88 SO 57 48 These rates are governed by the Western Classification. Observe, particularly in the instance of the factors applying east of the Mississippi River, how much less the rates are than those applying via the all-rail routes. As an illustration of the working of this basis, assume that an article was classified as taking the fifth-class rate in the Official Classification and as taking the Class A rate in the Western and that the shipment was being made from Boston, Mass. The through rate applicable via these differential routes would be obtained by taking the fifth-class rate applicable to the Mississippi River, viz., 30 cents, and adding it to the rate applying west of the Mississippi River, which is $1.11. This would produce a through rate of $1.31, which would be applied in this instance. These rates apply via either the water lines through the South Atlantic ports or via the lines serving the Mexi- can Gulf ports of Galveston or New Orleans. 4. Rates to Points Taking Differentials over Utah Common Points As is the case in regard to the application of the Colo- rado Common Point basis, certain differentials have been established by the carriers for the construction of rates to points adjacent to the Utah Common Points, which TO AND FROM UTAH COMMON POINTS 133 when added to the Utah Common Point rates make the through rates to be applied. To make through class rates from and to Utah points named, add the differentials set forth in Table 41 to Utah Common Point rates. TABLE 41 Utah Differential Group Stations on Differentials in Cents Per 100 Pounds Over Utah Common Point Rates S. P. L. A. & S. L. R. R.i Classes 2 12 3 45 ABODE Garfield 18 1G 14 12 10 10 8 7 5 5 Riter 3 15 13 11 9 8 8 6 5 4 4 Mammoth 46 42 37 31 25 22 18 14 11 9 46 42 37 31 25 22 18 14 11 9 Silver City 46 42 37 31 25 22 18 14 11 9 46 42 37 31 25 22 18 14 11 9 Nephi 25 21 18 15 13 13 10 9 6 5 1 San Pedro, Los Angeles & Salt Lake Railroad. 2 Governed by the Western Classification. 3 Non-agency station. TEST QUESTIONS These questions are for the student to use in testing his knowledge of the assignment. The answers should be written out, but are not to be sent to the University. 1. What states are embraced, as a whole or in part, by Western Trunk Line Territory? 2. Are interstate rates based to some extent on rates pre- scribed by state commissions ? 3. What are " Class (A) " railroads? 4. To what extent may rates on "Class (B) " railroads exceed the rates on "Class (A) " railroads? 5. What was the primary cause for the reduction of the Illinois class rates in 1906? 6. How does the topography of Illinois affect the rates within the state ? 7. How do the class rates in Iowa compare with those in Illinois ? 8. On what basis is the difference justified? 9. On what basis are joint rates constructed in the State of Iowa? 10. Which of the states, Illinois or Iowa, is the more liberal with respect to the establishment of commodity rates ? 11. What state commissions in Western Trunk Line Territory prescribe individual classifications? 12. Is the basis for class rates prescribed by the Missouri Railway Commission applied to the entire state ? How do these rates compare with those in effect in Illinois ? In Iowa ? 13. Why are the rates in Wisconsin less uniform than the rates in Illinois and Iowa? 14. By whom are the rates in Wisconsin and Michigan (North- ern Peninsula) published? 15. How is the State of Michigan divided between the Official and Western classifications ? 134 TEST QUESTIONS 135 16. How do the Michigan rates governed by the Official Classi- fication compare with those governed by the Western Classifica- tion ? 17. How do the class rates in Minnesota compare with those in Michigan and Illinois? 18. How do jobbers' rates compare with the regular distance rates ? 19. What are some of the general conditions that affect the measure of rates in any territory? 20. What rivers form the boundaries of the Missouri River rate territory? 21. Why is the factor of distance largely disregarded in the rate adjustment in this territory? 22. What is the controlling factor in this case ? 23. Name several of the principal points in the Chicago, Peoria, and St. Louis groups on traffic destined to this territory. 24. What is a differential rate ? 25. Is Chicago rate territory the same for shipments to Omaha as for shipments to Sioux City ? 26. Is the list of Missouri River stations shown in Table 13 subject to alteration ? How ? 27. Construct the class rates from Joliet, 111., to Omaha, Neb. 28. How are through rates from points east of the Illinois- Indiana State Line constructed? 29. What effect does water competition in general exert on the freight rates of the rail lines? 30. How are rates between Chicago and Chicago rate points on the one hand and St. Paul, Minn., on the other determined? 31. How do these rates affect the rates between Duluth and the same points ? Between St. Louis and the same points ? 32. Are the rates shown in Table 18 constructed on any general basis ? 33. In the point of construction, how do the rates for the Eau Claire Group differ from the rates for the other groups shown in Table 20 ? 34. On what basis did the interested carriers recheck the state of Iowa in compliance with the suggestion of the Interstate Commerce Commission? 136 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 35. On what rate is the maximum class rate within the state of Iowa based ? 36. Into how many groups is adjoining Western Trunk Line Territory divided for the construction of commodity rates on shipments originating at or destined to points in Iowa ? 37. Into how many groups is the state of Iowa divided for the construction of commodity rates on shipments originating at or destined to points within the state ? 38. How are the rates between Group 5 and Group A con- structed? Between Group 10 and Group A? Between Group 20 and Group B ? Between Group 25 and Group A ? 39. How are the rates between Group D and Group 9 con- structed ? Between Group H and Group 17 ? 40. What territory do the East End Groups cover? How many groups are there in this division? What are the West End Groups, and how many of them are there ? 41. What are the basing factors in this adjustment? 42. How are the through rates from Groups 2, 3, and 4 made ? 43. When a through rate is published, does it take precedence over this adjustment? 44. What rate applies between Group 11 and Group F ? Be- tween Group 10 and Group K ? 45. How is the Chicago rate constructed ? The St. Paul rate ? 46. Do the rates shown in Table 35 apply to all points in the same group ? How may the rates from the Mississippi River be determined ? 47. On what shipments do the rates shown in Tables 36 and 37 apply? 48. Does the term "Colorado Common Point" designate a fixed territorial grouping? 49. How were the rates to these points first established ? 50. How did the first-class rate between the Missouri River and Denver change between the years 1886 and 1895? What was the decision of the Interstate Commerce Commission relative to the rates under the old adjustment? 51. How great a reduction did the Interstate Commerce Com- mission prescribe on rates from the Mississippi River to Denver ? From the Missouri River 1 TEST QUESTIONS 137 52. On what ground did the Interstate Commerce Commission justify this change in rate ? 53. Did this decision affect eastbound rates as well as west- bound rates? 54. How are through rates between Central Freight Associa- tion Territory and Colorado Common Points constructed? 55. What through rates are in effect from New Orleans, La.? 56. In what way does the all-rail rate between New York and Denver contrast with the rate via the differential routes operat- ing to Gulf ports ? 57. Did the recent decision of the Interstate Commerce Com- mission apply to the rates via the water lines ? 58. How are rates to territory adjacent to Colorado Common Points constructed? 59. How does water competition affect the all-rail rates to the Far "West and the Southwest ? 60. What two cities are known as Utah Common Points ? Are the common-point rates applied to any points outside of the State of Utah? 61. How did the decision of the Interstate Commerce Com- mission affect Utah common-point rates ? 62. How are all-rail rates from Central Freight Association Territory and Trunk Line Territory constructed ? 63. Do the water carriers publish through rates from Atlantic Seaboard Territory to LTtah Common Points? 64. How are factor methods employed in constructing these rates ? 65. What would be the rate applicable on an article taking Rule 25 in the Official Classification and Class B in the Western Classification, from New York to Utah Common Points via all- rail routes ? 66. How are rates to Silver City, Utah, constructed ? V > / FREIGHT RATES WESTERN TERRITORY PART 2 SOUTHWESTERN TERRITORY E. BROOKER Chief of Tariff Bureau Erie Railroad LASALLE EXTENSION UNIVERSITY (Non-Resident Instruction) CHICAGO Copyright, 1914 LaSALLE extension university CONTENTS I. Development of Rate Structure State Legislation 1 Distance Principle 5 Principles of Competition 5 Competition of Transportation Routes 7 Competition of Carriers 8 Competition of Foreign Markets 10 II. Texas Intrastate Rates Common Point Territory 13 Distances 14 Local Rates 18 Joint Rates 20 Maximum Rates 21 Specific Rates 21 Exceptions to Application of General Basis .... 23 III. Texas Intrastate Rates (Continued) Differential Territory 25 Basis for Rates 25 Exceptions to General Basis 26 Construction of Rates 29 Commodity Rates 31 Basis for the Construction of Rates on Live Stock 39 IV. All-Rail Interstate Rates to and prom Texas Development 41 Rates to and from Defined Territories 42 Differentials 63 Rates 65 Exceptions to General Basis : 66 Northbound Rates 69 To Points in Texas Differential Territory 71 All-Rail Rates to Texas from Seaboard Territory 72 CONTENTS V. Rates Via Water Carriers Established Lines 73 Equipment 73 Service 74 Competitive Territory 75 Jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Com- mission 76 Competition 77 All- Water Rates 77 Interstate Rates 79 Texas Differential Territory 84 Commodity Rates . . A 85 VI. Rates to and prom Arkansas Junction Points Intrastate Rates 86 Interstate Rates '. 89 Rates to Hot Springs 92 Rates From Denned Territories 92 Rates From Seaboard Territory 93 Rates Via South Atlantic and Gulf-Port Lines. . . 93 VII. Rates to and prom Points in Oklahoma Intrastate Rates 95 Interstate Rates 99 VIII. Summary SOUTHWESTERN TERRITORY CHAPTER I development of rate structure 1. State Legislation The rate structure of Southwestern Tariff Committee Territory J may be said to be partially the result of an aggressive railroad policy enforced by the State of Texas. This policy was believed to be best adapted to foster the interests of the people of that state, as it enabled them to compete on equal terms with each other and with those outside the state. The following expression as to the policy of the Rail- road Commission of Texas is found in its fifth annual report. • To Texas as a whole it is of the most vital concern that there should be'within her limits at proper places jobbing and manu- facturing establishments. Besides adding to the citizenship of the state a desirable population and furnishing employment to persons already in our midst and enhancing the taxable values of the state, and, as a consequence, under wisely administered government, aiding in ultimately reducing the rate of taxation, and besides the home market they afford to the tiller of the soil and other producers, including manufacturers, for their prod- i This territory is outlined and defined on Map 6 of the Atlas of Traflic Maps. 1 2 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY nets, if men, in Texas, having the capital to engage in a wholesale business or in a manufacturing enterprise, for the success of which natural conditions are favorable, they have as much right to invest their means in such business or enterprise as a man in Illinois or Missouri has to embark in such business or enterprise in his state. Some of the Texas lines of railway, constituting parts of interstate systems of railway interested in long hauls, appear to be hostile to a policy which would foster Texas job- bing and manufacturing interests, while other lines manifestly favor such a policy. Outside cities bring to bear every pressure they can to coerce all Texas lines into a course favorable to their interests and adverse to the interests of Texas cities with respect to jobbing and manufacturing. * * * This commission has always had in mind the securing of relatively just state and interstate rates, with a view of enabling Texas merchants and manufacturers to do business in competition with outsiders. The interstate rate structure of this territory rests largely upon the state rates prescribed by the Railroad Commission of Texas. It is separate and distinct from the structures in other territories, although its applica- tion is somewhat similar to the extension of the Boston rate to the greater part of New England on traffic destined to points in Central Freight Association Territory. 2 In promulgating rates, this commission has divided the State of Texas into two groups, one of which is designated as Common Point Territory and the other as Differential Territory. 3 In Common Point Territory rates are scaled or increased as the distance increases from 10 miles to 245 miles, but for distances over 245 miles, but still within the state, the rates are the same whether the distance be 246 miles or 346 miles. The object of this maximum rate is to enable the various jobbing centers of the state 2 See Map 9, Atlas of Traffic Maps. 3 These territories are described in a subsequent chapter of this work. DEVELOPMENT OF RATE STRUCTURE 3 to compete with each other for trade at points more distantly located. Take Dallas and Fort Worth as an illustration. On short-haul points the gradual increase in the scale preserves to each point the advantage of location that it has over the other point, but when the maximum distance is reached they both have the same rate and consequently compete on an equal basis. To enable merchants and others at the jobbing cen- ters to obtain their shipments on an equal basis, it seemed desirable that all points in Common Point Territory should have equal terms for transportation. The following extract from the report for 1896 of the Railroad Commission of Texas illustrates the view of that body as to this procedure. * * * In making the demand there was no injustice to the railroads, for, viewed simply as roads operating in the state, it is to their interest to favor our policy of bringing goods from abroad into Texas cities in carload quantities and in distributing them from the jobbing houses in such cities in less-than-carload quantities among the retailers. As the freight charges they receive on local less-than-carload shipments "in the state added to what they receive in the division of through rates on carload shipments to the Texas jobber usually amount to more than they receive in the division of through rates on less-than-carload ship- ments from a jobber outside the state to a retailer in the state ; and it can be shown to be to their advantage to pursue a policy favorable to the development of manufacturing in Texas. "While by pursuing, along the lines indicated, a course favorable to the upbuilding of Texas jobbing and manufacturing enterprises, the interests of Texas roads considered as such would be subserved, yet, constituting, as some of the Texas roads do, parts of inter- state systems, the interests of the systems rather than the interest of the Texas lines are too often regarded. Here lies the main difficulty, in our opinion, in securing a just arrangement of interstate rates. It can be met either by those lines which are 4 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY not dominated by outside influences taking a firm, stand and cooperating with, this commission to compel the other lines to act justly toward Texas interests, or, if adjustments can not be made by consent, by the Interstate Commerce Commission, with an intelligent grasp of the situation, when appealed to, making the proper adjustment. It is quite unlikely that articles would move in carload quantities to the smaller points in Texas. The Texas jobbers, therefore, who buy in carload quantities, pay freight charges on that basis, and distribute in less-than- carload quantities on the less-than-carload rates, are able to compete with the jobbing houses in other sections of the country, which would, in all probability, have to pay, in such an instance as the following, on the less-than- carload basis through from a more distant point. Suppose, for illustration, that a farmer at Gates, Tex., which is but five miles from Dallas, desires to buy a mowing machine. The current tariffs show that the freight charges would be $1.04 per 100 pounds through from St. Louis, on the less-than-carload basis, while the Dallas jobber, who presumably buys in carload lots, pays as follows : From St. Louis to Dallas on C. L. basis 76c From Dallas to Gates on L. C. L. basis 10c Through rate S6c This indicates a very substantial advantage in favor of the Dallas jobber. If, on the other hand, the consumer was in a position to buy in carload quantities, this advan- tage to the Dallas jobber would be nullified, because the consumer could buy in St. Louis as cheaply as the Dallas jobber, the same rate applying from St. Louis to Gates as applies from St. Louis to Dallas. It may be stated that in no adjustment in the country DEVELOPMENT OF RATE STRUCTURE 5 are so many different elements of competition felt as in the Southwestern rate structure. Indeed, competition may be said to be the key to the entire basis. The area of the territory, its vast agricultural and mineral resources, and the development of the early jobbing cen- ters into thriving municipalities, have brought about, between the various producing centers, strong compe- tition for the supremacy of trade, which was naturally followed by keen rivalry between the carriers. 2. Distance Principle Rates made on the distance principle or mileage scale cannot stand the test of competition, for as the distance between points increases or decreases the rates increase or decrease, thus giving to each point a fixed and con- stant relation to every other point and preserving nat- ural advantages. But this principle has its disadvantages when applied to cheap and bulky articles which, on account of the source of raw material or location of manufacturing centers, must move long distances to mar- kets of consumption. In the words of the Interstate Commerce Commission, rates constructed on a ton-mile basis would give to distance an exaggerated influence, resulting in relatively prohibitive rates beyond certain distances and the elimination of competition. 3. Principles of Competition In adjusting interstate rates for the transportation of property from the various producing centers to common and competitive points in Southwestern Territory, the method employed has been to accept such rates from the 6 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY various producing and shipping points as the competi- tion of rival carriers, competitive routes, and producing markets require to move the traffic from each produc- ing, manufacturing, and shipping point in competition with each other point or origin. In so far as it is possible, the differentials established by the carriers from the various groups when applied to the base rates adjust the degree of competition as reflected by the competitive influences of carriers, routes, commodities, and markets. It should be understood that these differentials are rates which are considerably less than the local rates ap- plying between the same points. For instance, the first- class rate from Chicago to St. Louis, Mo., on local traffic or traffic destined to St. Louis proper is 43.3 cents per 100 pounds, while the first-class differential between the same points on traffic destined to Texas is 20 cents. The Interstate Commerce Commission, in treating the subject of differentials, stated as follows : Nothing is more certain concerning transportation in this country, either as to cost of service to the carrier, or value of service to the shipper, than that as the mileage increases the total cost increases, hut the cost per ton per mile decreases. It follows, and with particular force as applied to grouped points of origin and grouped points of destination, that differentials either above or below the rates from any given point become less and less important as distance of ultimate destination increases. Stated in other words, differentials diminish with increasing distance and vanish when the mileage on which the differential is based becomes inconsiderable in proportion to the total mileage from basing point to destination. 4 Thus, while the differential from Chicago to St. Louis as contrasted with the local rate shows a great difference, * 16 I. C. C. Rep., 482, 487. DEVELOPMENT OF RATE STRUCTURE 7 the differential applied from Pittsburgh, Pa., closely approximates the local rate, while on traffic from points in Trunk Line Territory a combination of local rates is all that is available. The differential (see Table 5) either over or under the base point measures the extent of the competition ex- pressed in a freight rate as between markets of produc- tion or shipping points. The competition of markets is of two kinds, direct and indirect. Direct competition is that of markets situated in close proximity to each other. Paper manufacturers located in Fox River Territory are in direct competition with manufacturers located in Cincinnati Territory, while both of these districts feel the indirect competition of manufacturers located in New England who compete with them via the Gulf routes. 4. Competition of Transportation Routes The competition of rival transportation routes and carriers is likewise direct and indirect. The direct competition of rival transportation routes, whether rail, water, or rail-and-water, is exemplified in the rates from Cincinnati Territory, 5 as a choice of all- rail or rail-and-water carriage is available and shipments may move as follows : (1) All rail via railroads operating therefrom. (2) Rail and water via the Ohio River to Louisville or Cairo; thence via rail. (3) Via the Ohio and Mississippi rivers to East St. Louis, Memphis, Vicksburg, or New Orleans; thence via rail. 5 See Map 14, Atlas of Traffic Maps. 8 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY (4) Via the Ohio and Mississippi rivers and the Gulf of Mexico ; thence via rail. Water-and-rail routes form rival routes to the many all-rail routes. Indirect competition of rival transportation routes is illustrated in the rates from Fox River Territory 6 to Texas Common Points (see page 10) with the rates from Cincinnati Territory to the same destinations. The com- petition between the routes from Fox River Territory and the route in connection with the water carriers on the Ohio River is indirect but not so remote as to fail to exert some influence, for the traffic from Cincinnati, partly water borne and partly rail borne, cannot be set down in Texas at a rate unreasonably discriminatory to like traffic from Fox River Territory. 5. Competition of Carriees The competition of rival carriers, by which is meant carriers of one kind, either rail, water, or rail-and-water, is at all times direct, although the districts which they serve in competition with each other may be separated 1,000 miles or more. It is apparent that it is to the advantage of each carrier, whether all-rail, all-water, or rail-and-water, to place its producing or shipping markets in active and aggressive competition with markets located elsewhere for trade in the Southwest, because by so doing it is assured of the haul on a portion of the traffic. In some cases, however, particularly with regard to points located on the Gulf of Mexico or adjacent thereto, 6 See Map 14, Atlas of Traffic Maps. DEVELOPMENT OF RATE STRUCTURE 9 the rail lines or the across-country rail-and-water routes are forced to concede the traffic to the water carriers serving such ports as Galveston and Texas City, Tex., and New Orleans, La. This is due to the fact that these points are so located that they secure all-water rates, which are much less than those that could be profitably established by the rail or rail-and-water lines. Adjustments in commodity rates to Gulf of Mexico points from inland points are made with regard to the rates established by the water carriers. While there may be no water competition affecting traffic from the points concerned, the rates established by this indirect water competition are regarded as necessary, in order to place the communities or the commodities in competition with other sections of the country, and' like traffic, where there is direct competition. The rates to points on the Gulf of Mexico and to points basing thereon indicate in a high degree the effects of direct and indirect competition. The rates on such traffic as paper from points in Fox River Territory are made to meet the rates on paper from points in Seaboard Terri- tory via New York and the Gulf routes. Likewise, many of the commodity rates from points located on the Ohio and Mississippi rivers are made on combination rates based on the lower Mississippi River Crossings (Mem- phis, Vicksburg, and New Orleans). The rates to the base points are made to meet the direct competition of the carriers on the said rivers, and the rates from the base points in Southeast Texas adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico are made to meet the direct steamship competi- tion on the Gulf. 10 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 6. Competition of Foeeign Markets Competition with foreign markets, consumption at cer- tain points, and general business and commercial con- ditions, along with competition of the carriers, whether direct or indirect, are factors not to be overlooked or passed over lightly in the construction or adjustment of rates. In the illustration of adjustments given in the rates from Fox River Territory as compared with the rates from Cincinnati Territory to Texas Common Points, the origin and destination points from Fox River to Texas are all inland points, whereas Cincinnati has the Ohio River at its service and would therefore not be classed as an inland city, although the term "inland city" is customarily applied to all cities not located on the seaboard. The destinations and stations in Texas are strictly inland cities. The indirect competition of the carriers is noted in the following differentials, Fox River over St. Louis: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B CD E Differentials 40 31 24 20 15 16% 14 12 11 10 Indirect competition is also noted in the following differentials, Cincinnati 3ver St. Louis: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials 20 16 12 10 7 9 8 7 G 5 or the following differentials in favor of Cincinnati as against Fox River: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials 20 15 12 10 S 7^6 5 5 5 This represents the necessary increase in freight rates from Fox River over Cincinnati to maintain a parity between the localities. It would be decidedly unwise as DEVELOPMENT OP RATE STRUCTURE 11 an economic proposition to lay aside the question of the value of transportation service. It is admitted by the best authorities that the cost of the service should not govern when competitive influences, both direct and indi- rect, are considered in the establishment of rates. The railroad service is worth more when away from the com- petition of the water carriers and should be charged for accordingly. The value of the service must be measured at the inland point. The illustration given of direct competition in the rates from Seaboard Territory where the across-country lines do not compete by meeting the rates of the steamship lines, is conclusive evidence of the wisdom of the carriers in not meeting this competition. In this instance, the value of the service to the shipper would be no more if his goods were shipped across country, for the reason that the voyage by steamship takes little or no more time than the journey by rail or by rail and water. For this reason, the traffic should go to the more cheaply operated water carriers. In the illustration of the adjustment in the commodity rates on paper from Fox River Territory as compared with the rates from Atlantic Seaboard Territory, it is observed that while the competition between the carriers is indirect and remote, nevertheless the manufacturers located in these districts are in competition for the trade in Texas, and the rail lines from Fox River Territory can charge for the value of the service only, this value be- ing based on the competition of commodities and carriers in other localities. If the carriers from Fox River Terri- tory did not meet the competition of the Gulf routes, the cheaply operated Gulf routes would not only take the traffic of Seaboard Territory to Gulf points from the 12 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY across-country routes, but they would also decrease the competition between the manufacturers located in Sea- board Territory and the manufacturers in Fox River Territory, in proportion to the difference in freight rates. CHAPTER II texas intrastate rates 1. Common Point Territory In the Atlas of Traffic Maps, Map 6 roughly indicates the boundaries of Texas Common Point Territory, which is specifically defined by the Railroad Commission of Texas as follows: The term ' ' common point territory ' ' designates that portion of Texas lying south of the Amarillo Division of the Chicago, Rock Island & Gulf Railway, but including Amarillo, and east of and including points on a line drawn from Amarillo to Fuller (run- ning east of Floydada) on the Pecos & Northern Texas Railway; Fluvanna on the Roscoe, Snyder & Pacific Railway ; Midland on the Texas & Pacific Railway ; thence (running east of the Sterling City Extension of the Concho, San Saba & Llano Valley Rail- way) to San Angelo on the Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway and Kansas City, Mexico & Orient Railway of Texas; thence to Menard on the Fort "Worth & Rio Grande Railway; thence to Llano on the Houston & Texas Central Railroad; thence (run- ning east of the Kerrville Branch of the San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway) to San Antonio on the San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway and Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway ; thence via the International & Great Northern Railway to Laredo ; thence to Alice and Corpus Christi on the San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway ; provided, that no part of the Wichita Valley Railway west of Sagerton, the Quanah, Acme & Pacific Railway west of Quanah, the Crosbyton-Southplains Railroad, the Texas Mexican Railway, the St. Louis, Brownsville & Mexico Railway south of Sinton or west of Corpus Christi, or the San 13 14 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Antonio, Uvalde & Gulf Railway south of Uvalde and west of Fowlerton, shall be included in common point territory. 2. Distances All class and commodity rates applicable on traffic moving between points in Texas are promulgated by the railroad commission and are made on a mileage basis, the rates increasing as the distance increases until the maximum rate is reached, after which the rates are the same, irrespective of the distance. The distances between most of the junction points and all local points on lines within the State of Texas are also promulgated by the commission and these are the dis- tances that must be used in constructing the rates An extract from the issue is given on pages 15 and 16. It conveys a good idea as to the manner in which the information is set forth. In applying rates which are based on mileage, it is of considerable importance that a uniform basis be em- ployed at all times. In transportation circles, passenger fares are frequently computed on a different mileage basis from that on which freight rates are based, and for the purpose of establishing a uniform basis all mileages within the state of Texas are announced by the commission. OFFICE OF THE RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS MILEAGE TABLE JNO. 6 Tables of Mileage Between Railroad Stations in Texas 1FFECTIVE NOVEMBER 15, 1913 Austin, Texas, November 1, 1913 It is hereby ordered that the following tables of mileage between stations on Railroads in Texas, and rules pertaining there be adopted for use in determining rates for the transportation of passengers and freight between such stations in all cas.es wh the said rates depend upon mileage. k EXPLANATION. All railroad stations in Texas are embraced in the left margin of the tables; all points common to two or more lines, witl few exceptions, appear in the headings. At stations where, there are both passenger and freight depots, and the distance between them is less than two-tenths (0 )f a mile, the freight depot is not in a'l. cases shown, and where not shown the distances given in the tables relate to both. At stations where there is no depot or passenger platform, the distances given relate to the center of the siding or head blc af spur. All points common to two or more lines are regarded as "Junction Points." Where the distance is shown in the tab :eparately to the passenger and freight depots at any "Junction Point" the passenger depot is to be regarded as properly t 'unction. The mileage shown from the stations embraced in the headings, i. e., junction points, is the passenger depot milea In the list of stations on the left hand margin, alt "junction points" are indicated by black type, and are to be treated 'junctions" whether shown' in the headings or not. Rule 1. — For the determination of passenger rates between points on the same line employ the actual distances betwc heir respective passenger depots. For the determination of joint passenger rates between points on intersecting lines, empl he sum of the actual distances from the passenger depots at such points to the respective passenger depots at the point unction, selecting that passenger depot common to both lines when given in the tables. Rule 2. — For the determination of freight rates between points on the same line employ the actual distances betwe heir respective, depots. For the determination of joint freight rates between points on intersecting lines, employ the sum of t ictual distances from the freight depots at such points to the respective passenger depots at the point of junction, selecting tl >assenger depot common to both lines when given in the tables. Rule 3. — All distances are given in the tables to the nearest tenth of a mile. When calculating the mileage for determ; rig either local or joint passenger or freight rates, the fractions of miles must be retained and employed at their value. Rule 4. — When the distance between two stations, neither of which appears in the headings, is desired, employ the d erence between the distance from a point named in the headings to such points, provided that the mileage shall in- both cai ie that of the same route ,it being understood that the actual short-line mileage shall govern in all cases. It is further ordered that all mileage heretofore published by this Commission in Mileage Table No. 5 and amendmei hereto that Is in conflict with the mileage of these tables be hereby canceled. Note. — Attention is hereby called to Circular No. 4026, which provides that this Commission must be advised at once he establishment of any new station, siding or spur; and that the permission of the Commission must be obtained before a: tation, siding or spur is abolished or discontinued for use. Allison Mayfield, Chairman. Attest: William D. Williams. E. R. McLean, Earle B. Mayf/eld. Secretary. Commissioners. FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 1 Distances Between Texas Junction Points and Stations on the Galveston, Habrisburg & San Antonio Railway Miles Between! 1 a .2 a o ft a Q < a a =3 W di w 01 c3 a> a o «■ ai > o a O) a 0, S d 3 2 rt a P O d o a o> m o ft a; fJ Q B 05 t- 03 o £< E o . & a a> 1 s ■2 a d M o m o G. H. & S. A. Ry. Main Line. Ivy Luling Sullivan Sand Pit Kingsbury Ilka Seguin Nolte Blumberg Spur. . . Hilda Marion Cibolo Valley Schertz Converse Kirby Gulf Junction . . 681 676 669 668 664 659 655 651 650 649 644 639 636 632 627 624 S. Ant'o, P. Dep. 620 S. Ant'o, Fr. Dep. 619 Union Stock Yds.. 616 Alazan 1615 Withers 1610 Macdona |602 Uvalde Junction. . 1527 Noonan Dunlay Quihi Hondo D'Hania Seco Sabinal Yucca Knippa Ange Uvalde Uvalde Junction. Hacienda , Obi Cline Odlaw Pavo Anacacbo Spofford 588 580 575 570 562 557 549 545 538 533 528 527 521 516 509 504 500 495 487, 61 56 49 48 44 39 35 31 30 29 24 19 16 12 7 4 3 4 9 17 92 31 39 45 49 57 62 70 74 81 87 91 92 98 104 110 115 120 124 1132. 185. 191. 197. 198. 202. 208 212 216 217 218 222 228. 230. 234. 239. 243 247. 247. 250. oso 256 264 339 278 286 292 296 305 309 317 321 328 334 339 339 345 351 357 362 367 371 4|379. 196 201 208 209 213 218 222 226 227 228 233 238 241 245 250 253 257 258 261 202 267 275 350 2S9 297 302 307 315 320 328 332 339 344 349 150 356 361 368 373 377 382 519 9 524 4 5 1 .9 6 8 9 7 r> 8 5 3 1 .7 9 2 1 7 1 2 .0 4 3 1 6 5 1 5 7 (i 2 4 9 2 531 532 535 541 545 549 550 551 556 561 564 567 572 576 580 580 583 585 589 597 672 612 619 625 629 638 643 650 655 661 667 672 672 678 684 690 696 700 704 230 236 242 243 247 253 256 261 262 262 267 273 275 279 284 287 292 292 295 296 301 309 384 323 m 337 341 349 354 362 366 373 379 383 384 390 396 402 407 412 8 416 71390.31712.91423. 252 258 264 265 270 275 278 282 284 284 289 294 297 301 306 309 314 314 317 318 323 331 406 345 353 359, 363 371 376. 384. 388, 395. 401, 405. 406, 412. 418. 424, 429. 434. 438. 5|446. 147 152 159 160 163 169 173 177 178 179 184 189 192 196 200 204 208 209 211 213 217 226 300 240, 248, 253, 257, 266, 271. 278, 283, 289. 95. 300. 300. 307. 312. 318. 324. 328. 333. 341. Vt .7 1 .2 .3 .9 .7 .4 .6 .7 .5 .3 .6 .3 .1 .9 .5 .7 .0 .9 .5 .9 .0 .8 . ^ 159. 160. 164. 170. 174. 147. .2 • 3 .1 • 8 i3.3 .8 9 5 3 78. 79. 180. 184.9 190.2 192.9 196.7 201.5 05.1 209.3 209.6 212.5 214.1 218.5 226.6 301.4 240.8 248.7 2'54 . 3 1>58.5 4 267.0 3 271.9 9 279.5 3 283.9 8 290.4 7 296.3 5 301.1 8 301.4 307.6 7 313.3 8 319.4 2 324.8 7 329.3 0333.6 11341.7 TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES 17 (a) Short-Line Distance as Maximum When two or more routes are in operation between points, the rate applicable via the shortest line is adopted by the other lines accepting freight between such points. Taking Houston, Tex., as a representative point of origin and San Antonio, Tex., as the destination, the dis- tance is shown as 210 miles and the scale for this distance, it being over a line under a common manage- ment, would be as shown in Table 2. To make the rates to the same points from Galveston, the arbitraries shown on page 22 are added to the Hous- ton rates as constructed above. (b) Combination of Local Distances Assuming that the distance between two points is 100 miles via a route consisting of two lines not under the same control and that one line hauls the traffic 60 miles and the other line 40 miles, the rates would be made by adding the joint arbitraries given below to the scale shown for 100 miles, viz. : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B O D E Single-line rates 44 41 38 35 26 27 24 21 16 13 Joint arbitraries 8 7 6 5 4 4 4 3 2 2 Through rates 52 48 44 40 30 31 28 24 18 15 Occasionally the application of the single-line rates for each line's proportion of the through haul will produce a lower rate than is obtained by applying the scale for continuous mileage. For illustration, the joint rates for 18 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY a haul of 20 miles, 10 miles of which is over each line, would be as follows : Classes 12345ABCDE Single-line rates 17 15 13 11 9 10 8 6 6 5 Joint-haul arbitraries. . S765444322 Through joint rates... 25 22 19 16 13 14 12 9 8 7 The combination of the single-line rates would be: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E 10 miles and less 13 12 10 8676554 " " " " 13 12 10 8 6 7 6 5 5 4 Through rates 26 24 20 16 12 14 12 10 10 8 A lower rate on fifth class is obtained in this manner than is obtained under the joint scale; therefore, this lower rate would be applied. 3. Local Rates Class rates between points located in this territory are made in accordance with the distance rates announced by the Railroad Commission of Texas. The current rates for single-line hauls are reproduced in Table 2, this basis having been in effect for some time. Although this basis is considerably higher than the basis employed in Central Freight Association Territory, the Texas lines contend that they do not afford sufficient remuneration, and a movement is on foot to secure an advance in these rates. Well-informed authorities, however, do not con- sider that this increase will be granted, inasmuch as public sentiment is strongly opposed to it, i TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES 19 TABLE 2 Single-Line Rates op the Railroad Commission op Texas Distances — -Miles 10 and 12 and 15 and 18 and 21 and 24 and 27 and 30 and 33 and 36 and 39 and 42 and 45 and 48 and 51 and 54 and 57 and 60 and 63 and 66 and 69 and 72 and 75 and 78 and 81 and 84 and 87 and 90 and 93 and 96 and 99 and 102 and 105 and 108 and 111 and 114 and 117 and 120 and 124 and 128 and 132 and 136 and 140 and less over 10 over 12 ... . over 15. . . . over 18. ... over 21 over 24 over 27 over 30 over 33 over 36 over 39 over 42. . . . over 45 over 48. ... , over 51 over 54 ... . over 57 over 60. over 63 over 66 over 69 over 72 over 75 over 78 over 81 over 84 over 87 over 90 over 93 over 96 over 99 ... . over 102 over 105. . . . over 108 over 111. over 114 over 117. over 120 over 124 over 128. . .. over 132 over 136 Kates in Cents per 100 Pounds Classes L 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D B Less than Carloads Carloads 13 12 10 8 6 7 6 5 5 4 14 12 11 9 6 7 6 5 5 4 15 13 12 10 7 8 6 5 5 4 16 14 12 10 8 9 7 6 5 5 17 15 13 11 9 10 8 6 6 5 18 16 14 12 10 11 9 7 6 5 19 17 15 13 11 12 10 8 7 6 20 18 16 14 12 13 11 9 7 6 21 19 17 15 13 14 12 10 8 6 ••>o 20 18 16 14 15 13 10 8 7 23 21 19 17 15 16 14 11 9 7 24 22 20 18 16 17 14 11 9 7 21 19 17 18 15 12 10 8 26 24 22 20 17 18 15 12 10 8 27 25 23 21 18 19 16 13 11 8 28 26 24 22 18 19 16 13 11 9 29 27 25 23 19 20 17 14 12 9 30 28 26 24 19 20 17 14 12 9 31 28 26 24 20 21 18 15 13 10 32 29 27 25 20 21 18 15 13 10 33 30 28 26 21 22 19 16 13 10 34 31 29 27 21 22 19 16 13 10 35 32 30 28 22 23 20 17 14 11 36 33 o'l 29 22 23 20 17 14 11 37 .!4 32 30 23 24 21 18 14 11 38 35 S3 30 23 24 21 18 14 11 39 36 34 31 24 25 22 19 15 12 40 37 35 32 24 25 22 19 15 12 41 38 35 32 25 26 23 20 16 13 42 39 36 33 25 26 23 20 16 13 43 40 37 34 26 27 24 21 16 13 44 41 38 35 26 27 24 21 16 13 45 42 39 36 27 28 25 22 17 14 46 43 40 37 27 28 25 22 17 14 47 44 40 38 28 29 26 23 17 14 48 45 41 39 28 29 26 23 17 14 49 46 42 40 29 30 27 24 18 15 50 47 43 41 29 30 27 24 18 15 51 47 43 41 30 31 28 25 18- 15 52 48 44 42 30 31 28 25 18 15 53 49 45 43 31 32 29 25 18 15 54 50 45 43 31 32 29 26 19 16 55 51 46 44 32 33 30 26 19 16 i Governed toy the Texas Classification. 20 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 2— Continued Distances — Miles 144 and over 148 and over 152 and over 156 and over 160 and over 164 and over 168 and over 172 and over 176 and over 180 and over 184 and over 188 and over 192 and over 196 and over 200 and over 205 and over 210 and over 215 and over 220 and over 225 and over 230 and over 235 and over 240 and over 245 and over Over 245 140. 144. 148. 152. 156. 160. 164. 168. 172. 176. 180. 184. 188. 192. 196. 200. 205. 210.. 215. 220.. 225. 230. . 235. . 240. , Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Classes 1 1 o 3 4 5 A B C D E Less than Carloads Carloads 56 52 47 45 32 33 30 26 19 16 57 53 48 46 33 34 31 27 19 16 58 54 49 47 33 34 31 27 19 16 59 55 50 48 34 35 32 27 20 16 60 56 51 49 34 35 32 28 20 16 61 56 51 49 35 36 33 28 20 16 62 57 51 49 35 36 33 28 20 16 63 58 52 50 36 37 34 29 20 16 64 59 53 51 36 37 34 29 21 16 65 60 54 52 37 38 35 29 21 16 66 61 55 53 37 38 35 30 21 16 67 62 56 54 38 39 36 30 21 16 68 63 57 55 38 39 36 30 21 16 69 64 58 56 39 40 37 31 22 17 70 65 58 56 39 40 37 31 22 17 71 65 58 56 40 41 37 31 22 17 72 66 59 57 40 41 38 32 22 17 73 67 59 57 41 42 38 32 22 17 74 68 59 57 41 42 38 32 22 17 75 69 59 57 42 43 39 33 23 17 76 70 60 58 42 43 39 33 23 17 77 70 60 58 43 44 39 33 23 17 78 71 60 58 43 44 40 34 23 17 79 71 60 58 44 45 40 34 23 17 80 72 60 58 44 46 40 34 23 17 1 Governed by tlie Texas Classification. In this table observe that the rates from 12 to 120 miles increase with every third mile; from 121 to 200 miles with every fourth mile; and from 201 to 245 miles with every fifth mile. 4. Joint Rates For the transportation of shipments over two or more railroads which are not under the same management or control, rates, in general, are made by the addition of the following scale of differentials (in cents per 100 pounds and governed by the Texas Classification) to the single-line rates shown in Table 2, with the proviso that when the sum of rates prescribed for local application is TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES 21 less than a joint rate made in accordance with the above instructions, such sum of rates shall be used as the joint rate: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials 8 7 6 5 4 4 4 3 2 2 5. Maximum Rates In the case of either single-line or joint-line hauls the rates between points in Common Point Territory are not to exceed the following figures, except in cases like Gal- veston and other cities where rates are constructed by the addition of differentials, and in cases where a higher basis of rates is shown under the exceptions given on page 23. Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Rates 80 72 60 5S 44 46 40 34 23 17 For illustration, while the rates from Houston to any point in Common Point Territory, over 245 miles distant, are fixed at the maximum scale, the rates from Galveston are made in the following manner : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Common-point rates... SO 72 60 58 44 46 40 34 23 17 Differentials 7 653333222 Through rates S7 78 65 61 47 49 43 36 25 19 6. Specific Rates The basis authorized for the construction of rates from the Gulf ports of Galveston and Texas City is not in conformity with that for the local and joint rates just given. 22 FEEIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY The rates from these ports to all points are made by constructing the rate from Houston, Tex., to final desti- nation and there adding the following scale of arbitraries (in cents per 100 pounds and governed by the Texas Classification) to the rates so constructed. Classes . . . Arbitraries 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E 7 6 5 3 3 3 3 2 2 — i On local traffic between Houston and Galveston, Hous- ton and Texas City, Houston and Velasco, Velasco and Galveston, Velasco and Texas City, Galveston and Texas City, and Galveston and North Galveston, the following scale of rates will be applied, except where the actual mileage makes less, in which event the mileage basis is applied : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Rates 20 IS 10 15 12 12 11 9 S 5 Between Port Arthur or Sabine Pass to Texas Common Points rates are made the same differentials over Beau- mont, Tex., as Galveston is over Houston. (a) To Points Affected by Water Competition To meet water competition, the Texas commission fre- quently establishes between points involved specific rates which disregard to a great extent the long-and-short-haul principle. Thus the carriers are enabled to compete to some extent for traffic with the water carriers. The rates between Houston or Galveston and Texas points are shown in Table 3. TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES TABLE 3 23 Water Ra'ies Between Houston or Galveston and Coast Points * Rates in Cents per 100 1 'OUNDS Between Houston ok Galveston Classes 1 ANDT 1 o o O 4 5 A B C D B Less than Carloads Carloads Port Lavaca and Hawkinsville . . . 30 30 30 24 30 20 30 2S 28 22 28 18 30 20 20 20 20 16 30 20 20 18 20 15 20 15 15 15 15 12 20 15 15 15 15 12 20 15 15 14 15 11 20 15 15 11 15 9 20 15 14 9 15 8 16 14 11 7 Sabine, Sabine Pass, Port Arthur, West Port Arthur, and Port 13 Between Orange and Sabine, Sabine Pass, Port Arthur, West Port 5 1 Governed by the Texas Classification. 2 All class rates applicable to shipments transported between Galveston and Beaumont shall be observed and applied to shipments of the same class trans- ported between Galveston and Orange. All class rates applicable to shipments transported from Galveston to Orange shall be observed as maxima on shipments of the same class transported from Port Arthur to Orange. 7. Exceptions to Application of General Basis As may be inferred, traffic peculiarities such as scarcity of traffic, cost of operation, and so forth, fre- quently enter into a wholesale adjustment of rates of this character and compel a disregard of the general basis. Eepresentative exceptions to the general basis set forth in the preceding pages of this chapter are given in Table 4. It has not been deemed expedient to indicate the mileage scales applicable to the various lines shown therein, as the reproduction of a number of scales would tend to confuse the reader rather than to enlighten him (page 23). 24 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 4 Exceptions to the General Application of Rates Stations on the Chicago, Rock Island & Gulf Kail- way. Fort Worth & Denver City Rail- way (Hodge to Bowie). Texas Central Railroad (Dublin to DeLeon ; also Cisco and Rising Star). San Antonio & Aransas Pass Rail- way. Quanah, Acme & Pacific Railroad. Pecos Valley Southern Railway. St. Louis, Brownsville & Mexico Railway. San Benito & Rio Grande Valley Railway. Remarks Special mileage scale. Special mileage scale. Special mileage scale. South of Alice, rates are made by adding to the distance rates shown in Table 2 the differential rates named in Table 5. Special mileage scale. Special mileage scale. Between stations on the line of the San Antonio & Rio Grande Rail- way and other points in Texas, rates are made by adding to the rates applying between San Juan and other points in Texas the following rates : Classes. 1 2 3 4 5ABCDE Rates... 18 16 14 12 1011 9 7 6 5 These rates are governed by the Texas Classification. Rates are constructed on a special scale of differentials. CHAPTER III TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES (Continued) 1. Differential Territory A different basis is provided for the construction of rates to, from, and between points located in Differential Territory, which territory is described as embracing all that portion of the State of Texas not embraced in Common Point Territory, as previously described (see page 13). 2. Basis for Rates The rates to or from points in this territory (with some exceptions which are enumerated) on shipments moving more than 245 miles are made by adding to the maximum common-point rates the rates shown in Table 5, applying continuous mileage for the distance over the common point. Probably the most striking feature in this territory is the few lines that serve it. The service is afforded by a comparatively few lines as contrasted with Common Point Territory. The absence of competition, therefore, must have some bearing on the higher basis of rates which is applied from this section of the state. 25 26 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 5 Differential Rates Distances — Miles 20 and less. 30 and over 40 and over 50 and over 60 and over 70 and over 80 and over 90 and over 100 and over 110 and over 120 and over 130 and over 140 and over 150 and over 160 and over 170 and over 180 and over 190 and over 200 and over 215 and over 230 and over 245 and over 260 and over Over 260 20. 30. 40. 50. 60. 70. 80. 90. 100. 110. 120. 130. 140. 150. 160. 170. 180. 190. 200. 215. 230. 245. Rates in Cents per 100 Podnds Classes 1 A B D E Less than Carloads Carloads o 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1 1 o 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 18 20 19 21 22 23 23 20 20 21 21 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 19 20 20 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13 13 14 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 12 10 12 10 13 11 13 11 14 12 14 12 15 13 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 1 Governed by the Texas Classification. The rates so made on shipments between points on the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway (San Antonio and west) or between points on the Texas & Pacific Railway (Sherman or Dallas and west) shall not exceed the following figures : Classes Rates . .1234 5ABCDE .100 93 SI 78 5S 61 53 44 32 24 3. Exceptions to General Basis Some of the exceptions to this basis made by the Texas Commission are as follows : TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES 27 1. Rio Grande Railroad: Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Between Classes i 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Less than Carloads Carloads Brownsville and end of track 30 2G 22 19 IS 20 19 10 14 11 Brownsville and Point Isabel and intermediate points. . . . 28 21 17 15 12 14 13 11 9 6 Point Isabel and end of track Laguna Madre 10 8 G 5 4 4 4 4 3 o 1 Governed by the Texas Classification. 2. St. Louis, Brownsville & Mexico Railway, south of Robs- town, and San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway south of Alice : (a) The rates on all classes and commodities moving between points on the San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway south of Alice and other points in Texas shall be made by employing, for such mileage south of Alice traversed by the shipments, the differential rates as prescribed in the various tariffs adopted or approved by this commission regardless of the distance such shipments may move in excess of such mileage south of Alice,. (b) The rates on all classes and commodities moving between points on the St. Louis, Brownsville & Mexico Railway south of Robstown and points on other lines in Texas (other than St. L., B. & M. junctions), shall be made by employing, for the mileage south of Robstown traversed by the shipments, the differential rates as prescribed in the various tariffs adopted or approved by this commission regardless of the distance such shipments may move in excess of such mileage south of Robstown. 3. Wichita Valley Railway: The line of the Wichita Valley Railway west of Sagerton shall be treated as in differential territory, and the following differential figures shall be observed, under the rules governing the application of differentials, for the distance west of Stamford on shipments moving to or from the points named below : 28 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Stations Classesi 12 3 4 5 ABODE Less than Carloads Carloads 3 2 11 4 3 2 1 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 6 5 4 3 6 5 4 3 7 6 5 4 8 7 6 5 S 7 G 5 111111 Oriana 111111 111111 12 1111 2 3 2 2 2 2 Jayton 2 3 2 2 2 2 Girard Sterlev 3 4 2 2 2 2 4 5 3 2 2 2 Spur 4 5 3 2 2 2 1 Governed by the Texas Classification. 4. Quanah, Acme & Pacific Railway : The line of the Quanah, Acme & Pacific Railway west of Quanah shall be treated as in differential territory, and the following differential figures shall be observed, under the rules governing the application of differ- entials, for the distance west of Quanah on shipments moving to or from the points named below : Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Stations Classes 1 12 3 4 5 A B C D E Less than Carloads Carloads Lazare 3 2 11 3 2 11 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 G 5 4 3 11 1 1 1 1 Somiuer 111111 Baker 111111 Swearingen 12 1111 Paducah 2 3 2 2 2 2 1 Governed by the Texas Classification. 5. Pecos Valley Southern Railway : Class rates applicable to shipments moving between points on the Pecos Valley Southern Railway and points on other lines in Texas shall be made by employing, for the distance moved by the Pecos Valley Southern TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES 29 Railway, the regularly prescribed differential rates regardless of the distance such shipments may move in excess of such Pecos Valley Southern Railway mileage actually traversed; that is, the provision that shipments must move more than 245 miles before differentials are added will be waived and differentials will be employed in all cases of joint shipments to or from points on that line. 6. Crosbyton-Southplains Railroad : Joint rates on all carload and less-than-carload shipments of freight moving between points on the Crosbyton-Southplains Railroad and points on other lines of railway in Texas shall be made by employing, for the distance moved by the Crosbj'ton-Southplains Railroad, the regular pre- scribed differential rates regardless of the distance such shipments may move in excess of such Crosbyton-Southplains Railroad mileage actually traversed; that is, the line of said Crosbyton- Southplains Railroad will be considered as in differential territory, and the provisions that shipments must move more than certain prescribed maximum tariff distances before differ- entials are added will be waived and differentials will be employed in all cases of joint shipments to or from points on that line. 4. Construction of Rates Rates between points located in Texas Common Point Territory on the one hand and Texas Differential Ter- ritory on the other involve the combination basis; that is, the rates applicable for the haul in Common Point Territory are combined with those applying in Differ- ential Territory. To illustrate the construction of rates in Common Point and Differential territories and between them, in Table 6 are shown certain rates applying between Houston, Tex., and points on the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway, west of Houston to and including El Paso, Tex. 30 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 6 Class Rates Applicable Between Houston, Texas, and Stations on the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway West of Houston Between Miles Houston. Texas, and 2 15 20 36 42V 2 52 74 99 125 144% 209 22G 234 241 248 258 272 301 341 104 170 50S 515 599 660 708 749 799 829 Chaney Jet., Texas. . Lotus, Texas Stafford, Texas Rosenberg, Texas... Randon, Texas East Bernard, Texas Ramsey, Texas Weimar, Texas Janice, Texas Harwood, Texas. . . . San Antonio, Texas. Maedona, Texas Lacoste, Texas Noonan. Texas Dunlay, Texas Hondo, Texas Seco, Texas Uvalde. Texas Spofford, Texas Feeley, Texas Lozier, Texas Feodora, Texas Sanderson, Texas... Strobel, Texas Quebec, Texas Dablberg, Texas Torcer, Texas Fa bens, Texas.... El Paso, Texas. . . . Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Classes 1 1 o 3 4 5 A B C D E 13 12 10 8 6 7 6 5 5 4 15 13 12 10 7 8 6 5 5 4 17 15 13 11 9 10 8 6 6 5 22 20 18 16 14 15 13 10 8 8 25 23 21 19 17 IS 15 12 9 8 28 26 23 21 18 19 16 13 11 9 35 32 30 2S 22 23 20 17 14 11 44 21 3S 35 26 27 24 21 16 13 52 48 44 42 30 31 28 25 18 15 57 53 4S 46 33 34 31 27 19 16 72 66 59 57 40 41 38 32 22 17 76 71 60 58 42 43 39 33 22 17 77 70 60 58 43 44 39 33 23 17 79 71 60 58 44 45 40 34 23 17 80 72 60 58 44 46 40 34 23 17 82 74 61 59 45 47 41 35 24 IS 82 74 61 59 45 47 41 35 24 IS 85 76 63 60 45 48 41 35 24 IS 89 80 67 64 49 52 14 37 2(i 19 96 S7 74 61 53 56 48 41 29 22 102 93 SO 77 56 59 51 44 32 25 104 95 82 78 57 60 52 45 33 26 105 95 SI 78 58 61 53 46 34 27 92 85 78 78 45 56 51 39 28 22 1 Governed by the Texas classification. Common Point Territory on this line terminates shortly west of Dunlay, Tex. ? at approximately 252 miles from TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES 31 Houston. Beyond that point all stations are in Differen- tial Territory. The rates to the stations up to and including Dunlay, Tex., are in strict accordance with the rate basis set forth in Table 2, while to points in Differential Territory, i. e., west of Dunlay, if 252 miles are deducted from the figures shown in the left-hand column to obtain the distance from Common Point Territory. If the scale shown in Table 5 is added to the maximum common-point rate, it will be found that the rates are in conformity with the basis set forth for the construction of differential rates. At Sanderson, Tex., it will be observed that the maximum rate is reached, i. e., the combination of the highest rate permitted in Common Point Territory with the highest rate permitted in Differential Territory, and that from that point for 314 miles west the rate is blanketed to all intermediate stations. At El Paso, Tex., owing to the fact that there is a more direct and consequently shorter route, the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway is compelled to meet the short-line rates, under the rule previously explained whereby when two points are served by more than one carrier, the rate applicable via the shortest route is to be met by the competing lines. This has no bearing on the rates to intermediate points and the carriers are per- mitted to exceed the short-line rates at intermediate points, as indicated in Table 6. 5. Commodity Rates There are also quite a number of commodity rates established by the Railroad Commission of the state, which are applicable upon such traffic as cotton and cotton 32 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY seed products, grain and grain products, live stock, pack- ing house products, vegetables and fruit (both fresh and canned), brick, clay, sand, stone, coal, and lignite; also a host of other rates covering practically all the mineral and agricultural products of the state. Within the past two decades, Texas has made vast strides in the development of her natural resources, and with the intensified farming methods now employed, it may reasonably be anticipated that still greater volumes of products of the farm trill be produced and exported to other states. The basis for the construction of rates on live stock is representative of others. The notes, rules, and regula- tions, and other requirements announced tend to show what a great effect the rates prescribed by the Railroad Commission of the State of Texas have exerted on inter- state traffic destined to the Southwest. Live Stock Rates in cents per 100 pounds, to apply on shipments of live stock as specified, in carloads, transported by railroads between points in Texas. Section 1. Explanation Columns headed No. 1 contain rates to apply on shipments transported over a single line of railroad or over two or more lines of railroad which are under the same management and control. Columns headed No. 2 contain rates to apply on shipments transported over two or more lines of railroad which are not under the same management and control. TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES 33 Table No. 1. Rates on Horses and Mules Distances— Miles Rates Rates No. 1 No. 2 10 and less 9 12 15 and over 10 10 13 20 and over 15 10% 13% 25 and over 20 11 14% 30 and over 25 11% 15 35 and over 30 12 15% 40 and over 35 12% 16 45 and over 40 13 16% 50 and over 45 13% 17 60 and over 50 14 17% 70 and over 60 14 18% 80 and over 70 15 19 00 and over 80 15% 19% 100 and over 90 16 20 125 and over 100 17 21% Distances — Miles No. 1 No. 2 150 and over 125 18 22% 175 and over 150 19 23% 200 and over 175 20 25 250 and over 200 21% 26% 300 and over 250 23 27% 350 and over 300 24% 28% 400 and over 350 26 30 450 and over 400 27% 31% 500 and over 450 29 32 % 550 and over 500 30% 33% 600 and over 550 32 35 650 and over 600 33% 36% 700 and over 650 35 37% 750 and over 700 36 38% Over 750 37 40 Table No. 2. — Rates on hogs, sheep, goats, work oxen and beef cattle ; it being understood that ' ' beef cattle ' ' are those shipped to market for slaughter, and not intended for further condi- tioning by regular feed or pasture. Rates Distances — Miles No. 1 No. 2 10 and less 6 8% 15 and over 10 6% 9 20 and over 15 7 9% 25 and over 20 7 % 10 30 and over 25 8 10% 35 and over 30 8% 11% 40 and over 35 9 12 45 and over 40 9% 12% 50 and over 45 10 13 60 and over 50 10% 13% 70 and over 60 11 14% 80 and over 70 11 % 15 90 and over 80 12 15 % 100 and over 90 12% 16% 125 and over 100 13% 17% Rates Distances — Miles No. 1 No. 2 150 and over 125 . . 15 18% 175 and over 150 • • 16% 20 200 and over 175 . . 17% 21% 250 and over 200 • • 18% 22% 300 and over 250 . . 20 23% 350 and over 300 •• 21% 25 400 and over 350 ■ ■ 22% 26 450 and over 400 .. 23% 27 . . 25 28 550 and over 500 ■ ■ 26% 29 600 and over 550 ■ • 27% 30 650 and over 600 • • 28% 31 700 and over 650 .. 30 32 .. 31% 33 • • 32% 34 Table No. 3. — Rates on shipments of cattle, all kinds, except such as are subject to rates in Table No. 2 ; also on cow ponies shipped with and used for herding stock cattle, transported over 34 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY a single line of railroad or over two or more lines of railroad which are under the same management and control. Distances — Miles Rates 20 and less 5 30 and over 20 5% 40 and over 30 6 50 and over 40 7 GO and over 50 8 80 and over 60 8% 100 and over 80 9 120 and over 100 10 140 and over 120 10% 160 and over 140 11 180 and over 160 11% 200 and over 180 12 220 and over 200 12% 240 and over 220 13 260 and over 240 13% 280 and over 260 14 300 and over 280 14 V, Distances — Miles Rates 320 and over 300 15 340 and over 320 15% 360 and over 340 16 380 and over 3G0 17 400 and over 380 18 425 and over 400 19 450 and over 425 19% 475 and over 450 20 500 and over 475 20% 525 and over 500 21 550 and over 525 21 % GOO and over 550 22 650 and over 600 23 700 and over 650 24 750 and over 700 25 800 and over 750 27% Over 800 30 Joint rates to apply on shipments of stock cattle and cow ponies used in herding same, transported over two or more lines of railroad which are not under the same management and control, shall be made by adding two (2) cents per 100 pounds to the rates above prescribed for single line application. Section 2. Minimum Weights Subject to the provisions of the law of the State of Texas affecting the transportation of calves, goats, hogs and sheep, in double-deck cars. Article 6555 and 6556, Revised Statutes of Texas. The minimum weight of shipments transported over railroads of standard gauge shall be in proportion to the internal lengths of the cars employed, as indicated in the following tables : 1. For shipments of horses, mules, beef cattle and work oxen, and for double-deck shipments of calves, goats, hogs and sheep. Minimum weights, Internal length of cars pounds 31 feet and less . . 34 feet and over 31 19,000 20,500 Minimum weights, Internal length of cars pounds 36% feet and over 34 22,000 40 feet and over 36% 24,500 TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES 35 2. For shipments of cattle, all kinds, except those provided for in Items 1 and 3 of this section ; also on shipments of cow ponies provided for in Table No. 3, Section 1, Minimum weights, Internal length of cars pounds 31 feet and less . . . 34 feet and over 31 18,000 19,000 Minimum weights, Internal length of cars pounds 36% feet and over 34 20,000 40 feet and over 36y 2 21,000 3. For shipments of calves, goats, hogs and sheep, each suffi- cient in quantity to load only a single-deck car. Minimum weights, Internal length of cars pounds 31 feet and less . . 34 feet and over 31 15,000 15,500 Minimum weights, Internal length of cars pounds 36% feet and over 34 16,000 40 feet and over 36% 16.500 4. Minimum weight on cars exceeding 40 feet in length shall be on the basis of 3 per cent of the 40-foot minimum for each foot or fraction thereof in excess of 40 feet. Note: — The foregoing regulations shall not be construed as imposing upon railroad companies the obligation to furnish cars of specified dimensions. The minimum weight of shipments transported over railroads of narrow gauge shall be as follows: For horses, mules, beef cattle, stock cattle, oxen and cows, and double-deck shipments of calves, goats, hogs and sheep, 20,000 pounds; for shipments of calves, goats, hogs and sheep, each sufficient to load only a single- deck car, 15,000 pounds per car. Section 3. Transportation of Men in Charge Men in charge of shipments of live stock, in carloads, when belonging to one consignor, shall be passed as follows : 1. Pass one man in charge of one car of live stock, except horses and mules, no return pass. Pass one man each way in charge of one car of horses and mules. 2. Pass one man each way in charge of two to five cars of live stock, all kinds. 36 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 3. Pass two men each way in charge of six to ten cars of live stock, all kinds. 4. Pass three men each way in charge of eleven or more cars of live stock, all kinds, which will be the maximum number of men that Will be passed with any shipment of live stock from one shipper in the same train. 5. The railway company at point of origin may, for the pur- pose of preventing the abuse of the privileges herein provided for, require of the shipper or his agent, a sworn statement to the effect that he, or his principal, is the real owner of the shipment offered, and that the number of men, for which free passage is asked, are actually needed in order to properly care for the same. 6. Return transportation for men in charge of live stock ship- ments shall be good only when presented within twenty-four hours of date of issue and for continuous passage without lay- over, from the destination of the shipment to the shipping points, and shall be limited to fifteen days from date of shipment from original shipping point. 7. Each railroad company shall use proper methods to secure the identification of parties entitled to free transportation under this section. Section 4. Application of Rates The rates and regulations of this tariff apply on shipments of live stock, as described, when transported in ordinary stock cars or stable cars. When in palace stock cars the shipments will be charged the customary rental of the companies owning such cars in addition to the freight rates herein established. A stable car is one having two gates which divide its interior into three compartments, while palace cars have a separate stall for each animal. Section 5. Exceptions 1. The rate between Houston, Galveston and intermediate sta- tions on shipments of live stock subject to this tariff shall be 5 cents per 100 pounds, with minimum charge of $10 per car. TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES 37 5. Texas & Gulf Railway : Shipments of live stock from stations on the Texas & Gulf Railway, destined to Longview Junction, shall be subject to a switching charge of $2.50 per car, in addition to the local freight rates prescribed in this tariff, when such shipments are unloaded at the stock pens of the Texas & Pacific Railway at Longview Junction. 6. Weatherford, Mineral Wells & Northwestern Railway : Rates, in cents per 100 pounds, to apply as indicated in the table below : Fort Worth Dallas Horses Beef Horses Beef Between — AND and cattle, Stock and cattle, Stock mules etc. cattle mules etc. cattle Lemley to Mineral Wells, inclusive 13 9% 7 15 11% 8% Salesville and Oran 15 11% 8% 17 13% 10 16 12% 9 18 15 10% Rates to intermediate points not to be affected. 7. San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway : Rates, in cents per 100 pounds: Horses Beef cat- Between San Antonio and — and tle, oxen Stock mules and cows cattle Van Raub 6 Boerne 7 Waring 8 % Comfort 8% Ganahl 9 Kerrville 9 5% 5 6 5% 7% 7 7% 7 8 7% 8 7% 8. International & Great Northern Railway and San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway : Rate on beef cattle and calves, in car- loads, from Rockdale to Galveston, 17 y 2 cents per 100 pounds. 9. Texas Mexican Railway : Stock cattle, carloads, from Laredo to Bruni and intermediate points, when for grazing purposes, $7.50 per car. 38 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 1214. The Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway (old N. Y., T. & M. and G., W. T. & P. Rys.) is authorized to stop in transit carload shipments of live stock, to load or unload, at a charge of $5.00 per car for the stop, in addition to the through rate from point of origin to destination on shipments originating at or destined to such points. *********** 14. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway of Texas: Beef cattle, in carloads, from Bartlett, Granger, Circleville, Taylor and Coup- land to Galveston, 17!/2 cents per 100 pounds. 15. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway : Live stock, carloads, between Allen Farm and Rogers Ranch, $10.00 per car. 27. Allowance for "Fill." — Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company of Texas ; Fort "Worth & Denver City Railway; Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway; International & Great Northern Railway; Fort Worth & Rio Grande Railway; St. Louis, San Francisco & Texas Railway Company; San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway ; Texas & Pacific Railway ; Trinity & Brazos Valley Railway; Chicago, Rock Island & Gulf Railway; Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway ; Texas & New Orleans Rail- road ; Houston & Texas Central Railroad ; Houston East & West Texas Railway; St. Louis Southwestern Railway of Texas; Wichita Falls & Northwestern Railway of Texas ; Wichita Falls & Southern Railway; Pecos & Northern Texas Railway and Southern Kansas Railway of Texas: Pending the establishment of the necessary scales and other proper facilities at the Fort Worth Stock Yards at North Fort Worth, Texas, for the weigh- ing, before or immediately after unloading, of live stock ship- ments from points in Texas and delivered at such stock yards, an allowance for "fill" will be made by the above named lines of railway, as follows : Cattle and calves 600 pounds per car Hogs in single-deck cars 200 pounds per car Hogs in double-deck cars 400 pounds per car TEXAS INTRASTATE RATES 39 The net weight so obtained to be subject to established and published minimum carload weights governing the transporta- tion of live stock, and no allowance will be made on any other class of live stock. 6. Basis for the Construction of Rates on Live Stock The following is the basis for rates authorized by the state commission for the construction of rates on ship- ments of live stock moving within the state of Texas : 36. Beef Cattle. Reconsigning from Market Points. — The privilege of the Fort Worth, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio and Amarillo markets will be allowed on shipments of beef cattle when consigned through or when consigned locally to the market points above named and reconsigned, thence to any of said points ; provided, the initial and second movements are in direct line of transit ; and provided further that the actual mileage traversed by the shipment is employed in determining the through rate, and that the shipment is reconsigned within 48 hours after reach- ing the first destination, except when Sunday or a legal holiday intervenes 72 hours will be allowed ; and provided further that all shipments reconsigned from the market points named must be by authority of the line bringing the shipment into that point. In case of reconsignment all expense incidental to moving the shipments to and from private stock yards to be added to the through rate. This arrangement to apply on shipments of beef cattle having origin and destination on the lines hereinafter named, or having origin or destination on connecting lines, the lines named herein being intermediate carriers : Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway ; Texas & New Orleans Railroad ; Houston & Texas Central Railroad ; Wichita Valley Railway; Houston, East & West Texas Railway; Fort Worth & Denver City Railway; Pecos & Northern Texas Rail- way; Chicago, Rock Island & Gulf Railway; St. Louis, San 40 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY FraDcisco & Texas Railway ; Southern Kansas Railway of Texas ; Fort Worth & Rio Grande Railway; Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway of Texas; International & Great Northern Railway; Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway; Trinity & Brazos Valley Railway; Texas & Pacific Railway; Galveston, Houston & Henderson Railroad ; Beaumont, Sour Lake & Western Railway ; Orange & Northwestern Railroad ; St. Louis, Brownsville & Mexico Railway ; San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway. General Rules 1. Mixed Carloads. — A shipment composed of two or more kinds of live stock, loaded in the same car, shall be subject to the rate prescribed for that kind of live stock contained in the car, which, in straight carloads, takes a higher rate than the balance of the shipment; provided, that a charge made under this rule shall not exceed the aggregate of charges on the various portions of the shipment, at the rate applicable to each portion, if shipped separately. 2. Dipping-in-Transit. — Shipments of live stock, in carloads, between points in Texas may be stopped-in-transit, at dipping points designated by the State or Federal Government, for the purpose of dipping, at a charge of $5.00 per car in addition to the through rate applicable frow-. origin to destination. CHAPTER IV all-rail interstate rates to and from texas 1. Development The rates in effect from St. Louis to Texas Common Points for the past twenty-eight years are shown in the following : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C DE 1887 120 104 88 77 . . 67 60 55 45 40 1S88 120 104 88 77 63 67 60 55 45 40 1889 133 117 101 90 70 75 67 60 48 40 1891 133 117 102 92 72 76 67 57 46 39 1894 130 113 97 90 70 74 65 54 43 39 1903 137 121 104 96 75 79 70 58 46 39 1908 147 129 112 102 80 85 75 62 50 43 Present 147 125 104 96 75 79 70 5S 46 39 The present scale (which, as may be observed, is the same as that which was in effect in 1903, except for the differences existing in the first-class and second-class rates) was prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Com- mission upon complaint of the Railroad Commission of Texas that the 1908 advance in rates was unreasonable, and became effective May 15, 1911. In prescribing this scale of rates for the future, the Commission stated as follows : The density of the traffic, the physical condition and financial strength of the carriers participating in the traffic from St. Louis to Denver differ materially from the conditions that are charac- teristic of the traffic from St. Louis to Texas and of the carriers participating in it. Under such circumstances comparisons often 41 42 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY lead to unsatisfactory conclusions. Nevertheless, with the full knowledge acquired by the Commission in the case referred to, as well as in other cases, of the conditions that surround the Colorado traffic, we think that to a certain extent the Colorado rates furnish some guide as to what are proper class rates to Texas common points. 1 2. Rates to and From Defined Territories (a) Grouping of Territory The rates from St. Louis to Texas Common Points are the base rates, or adjustment axis, on which the inter- state rates between points in Southwestern Tariff Com- mittee Territory and points in defined territories are con- structed. In much the same manner as in the Colorado and Utah common point adjustment, but on a more comprehensive scale, 2 adjoining territories are divided into groups, for the purpose of assigning relatively fair differentials for use in the construction of through rates from the various sections of the country. These groups are designated and described as follows : Atlantic Seaboard Territory Seaboard Territory includes all points east of the following described boundary line from Toronto, Ont., via the shore of Lake Ontario, and Hamilton to Niagara, Ont. ; thence via the Niagara River including both banks of said river to Buffalo, N. Y. ; thence via the Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Ry. to Salamanca, N. Y. ; thence via the Erie R. R. to Falconer Junction, N. Y. ; thence via the Dunkirk, Allegheny Valley & Pittsburgh R. R. to Warren and Struthers, Pa. ; thence via the Western New York & Pennsylvania R. R. to Oil City, Pa. ; thence via the Allegheny River to Franklin, Pa. ; thence via an imaginary line immediately west of the i 20 I. C. C. Rep., 463-4S5. 2 See Map 14 of Atlas of Traffic Maps. INTERSTATE TEXAS RATES 43 Allegheny River and east of Glenora, Pa., to Butler, Pa. ; thence via the Pittsburgh & Wheeling R. R. to Allegheny, Pa. ; thence to Pittsburgh, Pa„ but exclusive of the following : AH points on Western Pennsylvania Division of Pennsylvania R. R., Allegheny to Edri, Pa., including Butler, Pa., and intermediate points. Points on main line Pennsylvania R. R., Pittsburgh to Latrobe, Pa,, inclusive. Points on McKeesport Connection R. R. (Penna. Co.) Points on Southwest Division Pennsylvania R. R., Greenburg to New Stanton, Pa., including points on main line Radebough Branch. Points on Monongahela Division Pennsylvania R. R., Pittsburgh to Belle Vernon, Pa., inclusive. Points on Turtle Creek Valley R. R. Points on Allegheny Valley R. R., Pittsburgh to Ford City, Pa. Points on Baltimore & Ohio R. R., Pittsburgh to West Newton, Pa., inclusive. Points on Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R. R., Pittsburgh to West Newton, Pa., inclusive, and McKeesport to Belle Vernon, Pa., inclusive. Thence from Pittsburgh, Pa., via the Baltimore & Ohio R. R., through Glen wood, and Washington, Pa., to Wheeling, W. Va. (but not including such points) ; thence south via an air line to Cannelton, W. Va. ; thence via an air line from a point just south of Cannelton to a point just east of Bristol, Tenn. ; thence to the Atlantic Ocean along the northern boundary line of Tennessee and North Carolina ; and thence along the Atlantic Coast, including Port cities, to but not including Key West, Fla. Alphabetical list of points in the foregoing described territory are shown in Territorial Directory No. 1 of Wm. J. Sedgman, Agent. Carolina Territory Carolina Territory includes that territory east of Macon and Nash- ville territories and south of Middlesborough Territory, west of an air line drawn due south from a point just south of Bristol, Tenn., except points on the Southern Ry. between Morristown and Paint Rock to a point east of Tryon, N. C, on the North Carolina-South Carolina state line; thence east on the North Carolina-South Carolina state line to Grover, N. C. ; thence via the Southern Ry. to and including Charlotte, N. 0.; and thence on and south of the Seaboard Air Line to but not including Wilmington, N. C. Carolina Territory does not include Atlantic Coast points in Seaboard Territory. Chicago- Cincinnati Territory Beginning at Chicago, 111.; and thence via the Chicago & North- western Ry. to Des Plaines, 111.; thence via Minneapolis, St. Paul & 44 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Sault Ste. Marie Ry. to Franklin Park, 111.; thence via the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. to Elgin, 111. (including Carpentersville and Dundee, 111., on the Chicago & North-Western Ry. near Elgin) ; thence via the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. to Almora, 111. ; thence via the Chicago & North- Western Ry. through Belvldere and Rockford, 111., to Freeport, 111. ; thence via the Illinois Central R. R. to Portage, 111. ; thence via the Chicago & North- Western Ry. to but not including Council Sumner, Clarion, Fort Dodge, and Lohrville, Iowa, to Carroll, Iowa; thence via the Chicago & North-Western Ry. to but not including Council Bluffs, Iowa ; thence north of the main line of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry. to a point just north of Davenport, Iowa, Rock Island, and Moline, 111. ; thence just north and east of the Chicago, Burlington &. Quincy R. R. (lines east of the Missouri River) east of Moline, Barstow, Rio, Galesburg, Bushnell, and Vermont, 111. (except points on the Chi- cago, Burlington & Quincy R. R., Vermont to Canton, 111., inclusive) , to a point just north and east of Roodhouse, 111. ; thence east of the Chicago & Alton R. R. to a point east of White Hall, 111. ; thence east of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. R. (lines east of the Missouri River) to a point east of Alton, 111. ; thence east of the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry. and Illinois Terminal R. R. to a point just east of Edwardsville ; thence east of the Toledo, St. Louis & Western Ry. to a point just east of East St. Louis, 111. ; thence north of the Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern R. R. north of Salem and Olney, 111., Vincennes, Sey- mour (but not including Rockford, Ind.), and North Vernon, Ind., and east of the Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern R. R. to a point just north and east of Louisville, Ky. ; thence north of the Lexington branch of the Louisville & Nashville R. R. via La Grange, Ky., to a point just north and east of Lexington, Ky. ; thence via the Louisville & Nashville R. R., through Paris and Cynthiana, including Newport and Dayton, Ky. ; thence to and including Cincinnati, Ohio ; thence on and west of the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry. through Hamilton and Eaton, Ohio, and Richmond, Ind.; thence via the Grand Rapids & Indiana R. R. to Ridgeville, Ind. ; thence via the Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry., through Hartford City, Marion, Bunker Hill, Logansport, and La Crosse, Ind., to Kouts. Ind. ; thence via the Chicago & Erie R. R. to Ham- mond, Ind., including Whiting, Ind., on Texas and Mexican business, and Indiana Harbor, Grasselli, and East Chicago, Ind., on Texas business; thence east of the Indiana-Illinois State Line to Lake Michigan; and thence along the shore of Lake Michigan to Chicago, 111. Note. — The term "Chicago Territory," as used in the Agency Tariffs, is understood to include that portion of Chicago-Cincinnati Territory lying west of the Illinois-Indiana State Line. Dayton-South Bend Territory Beginning at a point just east of Chicago, 111., and thence along the ehore of Lake Michigan to a point just east of the Indiana-Illinois State INTERSTATE TEXAS RATES 45 Line ; thence east of the eastern boundary of Chicago-Cincinnati Territory to but not including Hammond, Ind. ; thence east of but not including the Chicago & Erie R. R. to Kouts, Ind., but not including Indiana Harbor, Grasselli, and East Chicago on Texas business, or Whiting, Ind., on Texas or Mexican traffic; thence east of but not including the Pitts- burgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry., east of LaCrosse, Logans- port, Bunker Hill, Marion, and Hartford City to Ridgeville, Ind. ; thence via the Grand Rapids & Indiana R. R. to Richmond, Ind. ; thence via the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry., through Eaton and Hamilton, Ohio, to a point on the Ohio River just east of Cincinnati, Ohio ; thence via the Chesapeake & Ohio Ry., from a point just east of Newport, Ky., to and including Portsmouth, Ohio; thence on and west of the following line: Via the Norfolk & Western Ry., through Waverly to Chillicothe, Ohio ; thence via the Cincinnati, Hamilton & Dayton Ry. to Washington, Ohio ; thence via the Detroit, Toledo & Ironton R. R. to Springfield, Ohio ; thence via the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry., through Urbana and Belief ontaine, to Kenton, Ohio; thence via the Chicago & Erie R. R. to Lima, Ohio; thence via the Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne & Chicago Ry., through Delphos to Van Wert, Ohio ; thence via the Cin- cinnati Northern R. R. to Latty, Ohio; thence via the New York, Chi- cago & St. Louis R. R. to Fort Wayne, Ind. ; thence via the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Ry. to Auburn Junction, Ind., including Auburn. Ind. ; thence via the Baltimore & Ohio R. R. to Avilla, Ind. ; thence via the Grand Rapids & Indiana R. R. to Kendallville, Ind. ; thence via the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Ry. to Goshen, Ind.; thence via the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry. through Elkhart and Granger, Ind., to Niles, Mich. ; thence via the Michigan Central R. R. to Lake Michigan at New Buffalo, Mich. ; and thence via the south shore of Lake Michigan to a point just east of Chicago, 111. Detroit-Cleveland Territory That territory beginning at a point just north of New Buffalo, Mich., and thence north and east of the following line : North of the Michigan Central R. R. to a point just north and east of Niles, Mich. ; thence north and east of the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry., east of Granger and Elkhart, Ind., to a point just east of Goshen, Ind. ; thence via the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Ry. to a point just north and east of Kendallville, Ind. ; thence east of the Grand Rapids & Indiana R. R. to a point just east and north of Avilla, Ind. ; thence north of the Baltimore & Ohio R. R. to a point just north and east of Auburn Junc- tion, Ind. (except Auburn, Ind., which is in Dayton-South Bend Terri- tory) ; thence east of the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Ry. to a point just north and east of Fort Wayne, Ind. ; thence north of the New York, Chicago & St. Louis Ry. to a point just north and east of Latty, 46 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Ohio ; thence east of the Cincinnati Northern Ry. to a point just north and east of Van Wert, Ohio ; thence north of the Pittsburgh, Ft. Wayne & Chicago Ry., east of Delphos, to a point just north of Lima, Ohio; thence north of the Chicago & Erie R. R. to a point just east and north of Kenton, Ohio; thence east of the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry., east of Bellefontaine and Urbana, Ohio, to a point just east of Springfield, Ohio ; thence east of the Ohio Southern R. R. to a point just east of Washington, Ohio; thence east of the Cincinnati, Hamilton & Dayton Ry. to a point east of Chillicothe, Ohio; thence east of the Nor- folk & Western Ry., east of Waverly, Ohio, to a point just east of Ports- mouth, Ohio ; thence on and north of the Chesapeake & Ohio Ry., to and including Ashland, Ky. ; thence north of the north bank of tbe Obio River to and including Pomeroy, Ohio ; thence on and west and south of the following line: From Pomeroy via the Toledo & Ohio Central Ry., through Athens, to New Lexington, Ohio; thence via the Cincinnati & Muskingum Valley R. R. to Zanesville, Ohio ; thence via the Wheeling & Lake Erie R. R. to Coshocton, Ohio ; thence via the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry., through New Comerstown, to Uhriehsville, Ohio ; thence via the Cleveland, Lorain & Wheeling Ry. to Canal Dover, Ohio ; thence via the Pennsylvania Company to Valley Junction, Ohio; thence via the Baltimore & Ohio R. R. to Canton, Ohio ; thence via the Penn- sylvania Company, through Alliance and Ravenna, to a junction with the Wheeling & Lake Erie R. R. just north of Earlville, Ohio; thence via the Wheeling & Lake Erie R. R. to Bedford, Ohio ; thence via the Penn- sylvania Company, through Newburg and Woodland, Ohio, to Cleveland, Ohio, including Collinwood, Ohio ; thence via the south and west shores of Lake Erie and the Detroit River to Detroit, Mich. ; thence via the west shore of Lake St. Clair and the St. Clair River to Port Huron, Mich. ; thence via the line of the Pere Marquette R. R. to and including Vassar; thence north along the line of the Michigan Central R. R., through Reese, to Bay City ; thence south on the Michigan Central R. R., Grand Trunk and Pere Marquette R. R. to Saginaw ; thence west along the Pere Marquette R. R. to Edmore; thence south to Greenville and Sheridan ; thence via the Grand Trunk Ry. to Muskegon, Mich. ; and thence via the eastern shore of Lake Michigan to a point just north of New Buffalo, Mich. Fox River Territory Fox River Territory includes all points north of Milwaukee and Chicago territories (see note under Chicago-Cincinnati description) and on and south of the following lines : Beginning at Sturgeon Bay, Wis., and thence via the Ahnapee & Western Ry. and the Kewaunee, Green Bay & Western R. R. to Green Bay, Wis. ; thence via the Green Bay & Western R. R. to New London, Wis. ; thence via the Chicago & North-Western Ry. to Wausau and Marsh- INTERSTATE TEXAS RATES 47 field, Wis. (including Chicago & North- Western Ry. stations, Antigo, Wis., and south, and Chicago, Milwaukee & St Paul Ry. stations, Merrill, Wis., and south) ; thence via the Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Ry. to Chippewa Falls, including Athens, Wis., on the Abbottsford & North- eastern R. R. ; thence via the Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Ry. to Stillwater, Minn. ; thence via the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Ry., through St. Paul to Minneapolis, Minn. ; thence via the Minneapolis & St. Louis R. R., through Chaska to Merriam Junction, Minn.; thence via the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Ry., through St. Peter, Mankato, Prairie Junction, and Sioux Falls Junction, Minn., Sibley, Sheldon, Alton, and LeMars, to Sioux City, Iowa ; and thence via the Chicago & North-Western Ry., through Onawa and Cali- fornia Junction, Iowa, to a point just west of Missouri Valley, Iowa. Kansas City Territory Points in Missouri south of the Missouri River on and west of the line of the Missouri Pacific Ry., Boonville to Versailles, Mo., inclusive; thence south along S. W. & S. W. division of the Missouri Pacific Ry. and including Warsaw, Mo.; thence via an imaginary line south of War- saw, Mo., to and including Clinton, Mo. ; thence via the St. Louis & San Francisco R. B. to Lowry City; thence via the Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield Ry. to Osceola; thence via the St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. to Springfield ; thence via the St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. (southern division, main line) to the Arkansas State Line; also stations between Kansas City and St. Joseph on the St. Joseph & Grand Island Ry., and between Kansas City and Beverly, Mo., on the Chicago, Burling- ton & Quincy Ry. (Missouri district) and the Chicago Great Western Ry. ; thence from Beverly via the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry., through Edgerton Junction, to Dearborn, Mo. ; thence via the Chicago Great Western Ry. to and including St. Joseph, Mo. ; thence on and east of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry., through Horton and Holton, Kan., to Topeka, Kan. ; thence on and south of the main line of the Union Pacific R. R., through Manhattan, Abilene, and Salina, to and including Ellsworth, Kan. ; thence via the St Louis & San Francisco R. R. to and including Frederic, Kan. ; thence east of the First Guide Meridian west, on and east of a line due south, just west of Dacy, Lyons, Sterling, Abbyville, Langdon, Kingman, and Spivy, to Attica, Kan. ; and thence via the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. to Kiowa, Kan. Kansas City rates will also apply between the following points and Texas points : Points on the St. Louis & San Francisco R. R., Blackwell Ex- tension, including Cale, Middleton, Peckham, and Blackwell, Okla. Points on the Missouri Pacific Ry. in Oklahoma, Wagoner, Okla., and north. 48 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Points on the Santa Fe System, viz. : Except as otherwise pro- vided in Texas Tariff Series 26, Series of Agent Leland, Kansas City rates will apply between Texas points on the one hand and Santa Fe System stations in Oklahoma and Denver, Enid & Gulf R. R. on the other, unless the Kansas City through rate is a ter- minal one. Kansas Groups group no. 1 From points in Kansas east of the "First Guide Meridian west," north and west of the first-named division or territory, west of Omaha-Daven- port Territory, and south of the boundary line between Kansas and Nebraska. GROUP NO. 2 From points in Kansas west of the "First Guide Meridian west," east of the 100th Meridian, and south of the boundary line between Kansas and Nebraska. GROUP NO. 3 From points in Kansas west of the 100th Meridian. Little Rock-Ft. Smith Territory Commencing at Grant, Okla., on the St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. ; thence via that line to and including Poteau, Okla.; thence via the Kansas City Southern Ry. to Westville, Okla. (including points on the St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. west of Westville, Okla., to Muskogee, Okla., inclusive) ; thence via the Kansas City Southern Ry. to Siloam Springs, Ark. ; thence on a direct line to and including Fayette, Ark. ; thence via the St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. to Ft. Smith, Ark. ; thence via the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. to Argenta, Ark.; thence via the St. Louis Southwestern Ry., from Little Rock, Ark., via Altheimer, Ark., to Texarkana, Ark., including the Shreveport branch of that line (except Shreveport Junction, Valley Junction, and Bossier City, Ark.) ; also including the Camden branch of the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry., Camden to Eldorado, Ark., inclusive; thence via the eastern state line of Texas to the Red River ; and thence via said river to the place of beginning. EXCEPTIONS (a) A. T. d S. F. Ry. Rates named above do not apply in connection with the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. INTERSTATE TEXAS RATES 49 (b) Rock Island Lines Rates to or from points on the Hot Springs branch, Hot Springs to Cove Creek, Ark., inclusive, are made on combination of locals through Butterfield, Ark. (c) Mo. Pac. Ry. Rates from points on the Ultima Thule, Arkadelphia & Mississippi Ry. are made sum of locals via Smithton, Ark. Little Rock-Ft. Smith rates do not apply from points on the Green- wood Branch of the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. ; Memphis rates govern. Little Rock rates apply to competitive points only on the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Ry., of Texas. Little Rock-Ft. Smith rates apply from St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. points in Oklahoma, Sallisaw, Okla., and south. Memphis rates apply in connection with the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Ry. (except to competitive points on the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Ry., of Texas), from Little Rock-Ft. Smith Territory. Memphis rates apply from points on the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. located in Little Rock-Ft. Smith Territory to local points on the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Ry., the Texas & New Orleans R. R., and the Houston & Texas Central R. R. (d) St. L. cC- S. F. R. R. Little Rock-Ft. Smith rates apply via the St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. from points on that line only. Memphis rates apply from points on the St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. in Little Rock-Ft. Smith Territory to Texas points on the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Ry. and the Texas & New Orleans R. R. Combination of locals through Paris, Tex., applies as maxima from points in Oklahoma, via the St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. (e) St. L. cf- 8. W. Ry. Little Rock-Ft. Smith rates apply from all points on the St. Louis Southwestern Ry. in Little Rock-Ft. Smith Territory. Memphis rates apply from points on the St. Louis Southwestern Ry. in Little Rock-Ft. Smith Territory, in connection with the Galves- ton, Harrisburg & San Antonio Ry., the Texas & New Orleans R. R., and the Houston & Texas Central R. R. Little Rock-Ft. Smith basis of rates applies between Hope, Ark., and Texas points, in connection with the Louisiana & Arkansas R. R., via Stamps, Ark. Louisville Territory Beginning at Louisville, Ky.. and thence via the Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern R. R. and North Vernon, Ind., to Seymour, Ind. ; thence 50 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY north via the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry. 'to and including Rockford, Ind. ; thence from Seymour, Ind., via the Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern R. R», to but not including East St Louis, 111.; thence via a line just east of the Illinois Central R. R. to but not includ- ing DuQuoin, 111.; thence east of the Illinois Central R. R. to but not including Carbondale, 111. ; thence north and east of the Illinois Central R. R. to a point just north and east of Paducah, Ky. ; thence east of the Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Ry. to a point north of the Kentucky- Tennessee state line ; thence east, just north of said state line, to a point just north and east of Isham, Tenn. ; thence via the Queen & Crescent Route to and including Lexington, Ky., and thence on the Lexington branch of the Louisville & Nashville R. R., Lexington to Louisville, via La Grange, Ky. Macon Territory Macon Territory is the territory east of the eastern boundary line of Nashville Territory (including Columbia, Ala.), on and south- of the Georgia state line and the western state line of South Carolina, to but not including any Atlantic Coast point from which Seaboard Territory rates now apply ; from the Atlantic Coast along the Georgia-Florida state line to the Apalachicola River. Memphis Territory Memphis class rates apply between points east of the Mississippi River located on and west of the Illinois Central R. R., Memphis, via Grenada, to but not including New Orleans, except that Memphis rates in connection with the Illinois Central R. R. System apply only from stations on the Illinois Central R. R. and the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley R. R. south of Memphis, including all branch-line points, except the Aberdeen branch. Further : Current southbound Memphis class rates apply on northbound traffic from points in Texas on the Texas & Pacific Ry. to stations on the Yazoo & Mississippi Yalley R. R., intermediate between Memphis and New Orleans. Current southbound Memphis class rates apply on northbound traffic from points in Texas on the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Ry. of Texas to stations on the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley R. R., intermediate between Memphis and New Orleans when routed via the Vlcksburg, Shreveport & Pacific Ry. and Vicksburg, Miss. Current southbound Memphis class rates apply on northbound traffic from points on the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Ry., the Texas & New Orleans R. R., the Houston & Texas Central R. R., and the Houston. East & West Texas Ry. INTERSTATE TEXAS RATES 51 EXCEPTIONS (a) Chicago, Rock Island cC- Pacific Ry. Choctaw District Stations on the White & Black River Valley Ry. Division, Brinkley, Ark., to Martin, Ark., inclusive. Memphis rates apply from points on the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry. (Choctaw District) east of Little Rock, Ark., via the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Ry., to the points in Texas on Missouri, Kansas & Texas Ry. of Texas, San Antonio & Aransas Pass Ry., Texas Midland R. R., Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Ry.. Texas & New Orleans R. R., Houston & Texas Central R. R., Ft. Worth & Denver City Ry., Texas Central R. R., Ft. Worth & Rio Grande Ry., Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Ry. (Beaumont Line), and Texas Mexican Ry. Memphis rates apply on potatoes, carloads, from points on the Chi- cago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry. (Choctaw District) , between Memphis, Tenn., and Little Rock, Ark., to Texas points via the Missouri Pacific Ry. and the St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Special Notice. — Rates to Texas points from stations on the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry. (Choctaw District), when routed via the St. Louis Southwestern Ry. or the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. (except potatoes, as provided above), are based on locals through junc- tion points. The rates to and from stations on the Arkansas Midland R. R. are based on the Memphis rates plus the rates between stations on said line and point of junction with the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. The rates to and from stations on the Searcy & West Point R. R. are based on the Memphis rates plus the rates between stations on said line and Kensett, Ark., on the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. (b) St. Louis, Iron Mountain d- Southern Ry. (New Orleans & Northwestern Ry.) The Missouri Pacific Ry. applies Memphis, Tenn., rates from points as described below : On classes between Natchez, Miss., and all other points on the New Orleans & Northwestern Ry. on the one hand and points on the Texas & Pacific Ry. and International & Great Northern R. R. on the other hand. On commodities from Natchez, Miss., and all other stations on the New Orleans Northwestern Ry. to points on the Texas & Pacific Ry. and International & Great Northern R. R. Above apply via the Houston & Shreveport R. R. to points on the Houston, East & West Texas Ry., including Galveston, via the Galveston, Houston & Henderson R. R. 52 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY (c) St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. Stations, Memphis, Term., to Jonesboro, Ark., inclusive. (d) St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Stations, Wabasseca, Ark., and north, to and including Jonesboro, Ark. Kates on classes and commodities from and to points on the Stuttgart branch are ten cents per 100 pounds, less carloads, and five cents, car- loads, higher than the Memphis rates. (e) St. Louis, Iron Mountain <£ Southern Ry. (Proper) Stations on the Main Line north of Argenta, Ark., to and including Bald Knob ; also stations on the Memphis branch, Bald Knob to Memphis, inclusive. Stations on the Eudora-Gilbert branch, Indian, Ark., to Calvit, La., inclusive. Stations on the Helena branch, Wynne, Ark., to Helena, Ark., in- clusive. Stations on the L. R. M. R. & T division east of Pine Bluff to and including Arkansas City, Ark. Stations on the Ouachita branch, Trippe, Ark., to Warren, Ark., in- clusive. Stations on the H. C. A. & N. division, Paul's Spur to Pineville Junc- tion, La., inclusive. Stations in Oklahoma on the K. & A. V. division, south of Wagoner, to but not including Sallisaw. Stations on the M. H. & L. line of the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. in Arkansas and Louisiana. Note. — St. Louis rates apply from and to points on the Helena branch, Vandale, Ark., and north. (f) Chicago, Rock Island 3 4 5 A B C D E IS 15 13 10 8 9 7 5 5 4 21 18 15 12 10 10 8 6 5 5 25 21 18 14 11 12 10 7 6 6 26 23 19 15 12 13 11 8 7 6 28 24 20 16 13 14 11 8 7 6 30 26 21 17 14 14 12 9 8 7 32 27 23 18 14 15 13 9 8 7 35 30 25 20 16 17 14 10 9 8 37 32 26 21 17 18 15 11 9 8 39 33 28 22 18 19 15 11 10 9 40 35 29 23 18 20 16 12 10 9 42 36 30 24 19 20 17 12 11 10 44 38 31 25 20 21 18 13 11 10 40 39 33 26 21 22 18 13 12 10 47 41 34 27 22 23 19 14 12 11 49 42 35 28 22 24 20 14 13 11 51 44 36 29 23 25 20 15 13 12 53 45 38 30 24 26 21 15 14 12 54 47 39 31 25 26 22 16 14 12" 56 48 40 32 26 27 22 16 14 13 56 48 42 32 26 27 22 17 14 13 58 50 44 33 26 28 23 17 15 13 61 53 46 35 28 30 25 18 16 14 63 55 48 36 29 31 25 19 16 14 05 57 50 37 30 31 26 20 17 15 67 59 52 38 30 32 27 20 17 15 69 61 54 39 31 33 27 21 18 16 71 63 55 40 32 34 28 21 18 16 73 65 56 41 33 35 29 2'' 18 17 75 67 57 42 34 36 29 22 19 17 77 6S 58 43 34 37 30 23 19 17 79 69 58 43 34 37 30 — U 20 17 81 70 59 44 35 37 31 24 20 IS 83 71 59 44 35 27 31 24 21 IS 85 72 60 45 36 •38 32 25 21 IS 86 73 60 45 36 38 32 25 22 18 87 74 61 46 37 39 32 26 oo 18 88 75 61 46 37 39 32 26 23 18 89 76 62 47 38 40 33 27 23 19 90 77 62 47 38 40 33 27 24 19 92 78 63 48 38 41 34 28 24 19 94 79 64 49 39 42 34 28 24 20 96 80 65 50 40 43 35 29 24 20 OS 81 66 51 41 43 36 29 25 20 LOO 82 07 52 42 44 36 30 25 21 T The ratio of charge per mile decreases as distance increases. '' Governed by the Western Classification. 88 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Class and Commodity Rates — Two Lines (a) Through joint rates for the transportation of shipments over two lines of railroad which are not under the same manage- ment and control, and not otherwise provided for, shall be made by adding to the rates prescribed herein, for single line or con- tinuous mileage, the following figures (differentials) : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials 10 876554433 Maximum Two-Line Rates fb) When the sum of the rates prescribed for local application is less than the through joint rate made in accordance with above instructions, such sum of rates shall be used as the joint rate. (c) The through joint rate for distances 300 miles or less shall not exceed single line rates for 300 miles. The through joint rates for distances greater than 300 miles shall be the single line or continuous mileage rate for the actual distance. Class Rates — Three Lines or More (d) Through joint rates for the transportation of shipments of merchandise by classes, over three or more lines of railroad, which are not under the same management and control, and not otherwise provided for, shall be determined by adding together the charges on the several railroads, or parts of railroads, as prescribed herein for the respective distances such class mer- chandise is carried over each line, and deducting from the sum 10 per cent, provided, that the through rate thus ascertained shall in no cases exceed the following figures : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Rates 102 92 79 53 43 45 37 31 27 22 Table 15 provides local as well as joint rates for routes composed of two or more lines. In actual practice, how- ever, the joint routes are sometimes compelled to meet the local rates when the distance via the single line is less than that of the joint route. ARKANSAS JUNCTION POINT RATES 89 In addition to prescribing the class rates, the Commis- sion of Arkansas likewise established a maximum scale of charges for certain commodities. In Table 16 are shown some of these commodities with the rates applic- able for selected distances. TABLE 16 Commodity Rates Applying in Arkansas ! Miles Apples & Vegetables Canned Goods Com. Oats. Etc. Sugar. Rice. Etc. C. L. L. C. L. C. L. L. C. L. C. L. L. C. L. C. L. l:c. l. 5 5 10 5 10 5 10 8 10 20 8 13 8 13 5 12 9 13 40 10 17 10 18 6 16 10 16 100 16 27 16 28 10 26 14 26 200 22 36 22 36 13 34 20 34 400 and over 30 44 30 52 17 42 29 42 1 Court Tariff, Circuit Court of the United States. 2. Interstate Rates The plan followed in publishing interstate rates to points within the state of Arkansas strongly resembles the basing-point system used in Southeastern Territory, the junction points throughout the state being singled out and rates published to these points from the various basing centers. However, the rates are not blanketed over the entire state, as in the case of the Texas Common Point adjust- ment, but are graded on a mileage basis. The locations of some of the basing centers, such as Memphis, St. Louis, and Kansas City, and the disparity in the distances have resulted in rates from such points which are made without any fixed relation to each other. The rates to the more important Arkansas Junction Points are shown in Table 17. 90 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 17 Class Rates from St. Louis Territory to Arkansas Junction Points From Rates IN < CUSTTS PER 100 Pounds St. Louis Tekritort To 1 2 3 4 Classes 1 5 A B C D F Little Rock 100 110 111 81 100 120 120 100 125 115 130 115 90 135 81 95 81 95 125 116 118 91 81 90 120 120 96 127 120 127 85 95 93 68 85 107 105 85 105 100 111 100 71 116 68 80 68 76 114 97 103 75 68 71 105 105 82 111 102 111 65 73 74 54 65 91 85 65 89 80 93 80 56 93 54 62 54 62 100 78 83 58 54 56 85 85 64 96 86 96 49 59 54 43 49 69 67 49 06 62 71 62 45 71 43 46 43 48 83 56 67 48 43 44 67 67 49 86 64 86 37 44 42 32 37 51 50 37 53 48 53 46 34 54 32 35 32 35 64 44 49 37 32 32 50 50 37 65 52 65 39 46 46 35 39 54 52 39 54 50 56 49 38 57 35 37 35 40 68 48 51 39 35 35 52 52 39 69 54 69 32 39 38 28 32 46 45 32 46 43 48 41 32 45 28 32 28 33 54 40 44 32 28 31 45 45 32 55 44 55 27 34 34 " 24 27 38 40 27 37 38 38 35 27 38 24 27 24 28 45 35 39 26 24 26 40 40 27 47 36 47 23 30 29 20 23 31 36 23 31 34 32 29 23 32 20 23 20 24 40 30 35 21 20 21 36 36 23 41 30 41 IS Pine Bluff Fort Smith 25 2 3 Blvtheville 16 18 27, Centerville 30 18 25 28 El Dorado 27 Forrest City 24 18 2r, Jelks Jonesboro 16 18 16 Lexa McNeil 19 32 24 Mansfield Newport 30 17 16 Parkin 18 30 30 Searcy Stamps Warren 18 34 ?A 34 1 Governed by the Western Classification. The St. Louis Southwestern Railway operates from the northeastern to the southwestern extremity of the state. Taking in their order the more important points located on this railway: Paragould, Jonesboro, Brink- ley, Pine Bluff, Fordyce, Stamps, and Texarkana (the ARKANSAS JUNCTION POINT RATES 91 last point being located on the Arkansas-Texas state line), a gradual increase in rates is observed. With respect to the jobbing centers, Memphis is the most advantageously located, as it has the low basis of rates from the northeastern and southeastern states and its location upon the Mississippi River affords the mer- chants at that point a cheap means of water transporta- tion from such points as Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and New Orleans. The rates from Memphis to stations in Arkansas are made with reference to the rates established by the Rail- road Commission of Arkansas, to which rates are added the bridge tolls assessed by the company controlling the bridge at Memphis, Tenn. Generally speaking, it may be stated that the rates between Memphis, Tenn., and points in Arkansas are certain bridge tolls higher than those for equal distances specified in the Arkansas Com- mission Schedule, although in a few instances rates are higher and in still others are lower than this combination. Specific rates to Arkansas Junction Points are pub- lished from Cairo Territory, Kansas City Territory, Omaha Territory, New Orleans Territory, and Memphis, Tenn. The last named point, by virtue of its location, has the lowest basis of rates to the Arkansas Junction Points. The rates from these territories, however, are made without relation to each other, and considering the differences in the lengths of the hauls involved, it is hard to see how a relative adjustment could be arrived at. Memphis, Tenn., by virtue of its location (being adjacent to the state and but forty-five miles distant from the nearest junction point), has rates that are consider- ably less than those from any of the other territories. The rates from the various territories to Little Rock 92 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY and Pine Bluff illustrate the disparity in the rates from the basing centers and will suffice for the purpose of illustration, These rates, in cents per 100 pounds, are as follows: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B G D E From Memphis 70 60 45 36 27 29 22 18 15 12 From Cairo Terri- tory 90 75 55 44 32 34 27 23 20 15 From New Orleans Territory 100 85 65 49 37 39 32 27 23 18 From Kansas City Territory 110 95 74 56 41 44 36 31 27 21 From Omaha Terri- tory 130 113 89 69 51 55 46 39 34 28 3. Rates to Hot Springs The rates to Hot Springs, Ark., which is a branch line junction point, are made by adding the following scale of arbitraries to the rates shown from the above points. Rates 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Arbitraries 35 31 28 22 17 18 13 11 9 7 The rates from Kansas City Territory to Hot Springs are: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Kates 145 126 102 78 58 62 49 42 36 28 These rates are in cents per 100 pounds and are gov- erned by the Western Classification. 4. Rates from Defined Territories As was the case in the Texas Common Point adjust- ment, adjoining territories are divided into groups, which in the main are the same as the Texas groupings. The names of these groups and the differentials used to establish through rates therefrom are shown in Table 18. ARKANSAS JUNCTION POINT RATES 93 TABLE 18 Differentials to be Added to the St. Louis Rates to .Make Through Rates to Arkansas Junction Points To Arkansas Jct. Points from Fol- lowing Territories Davenport Nashville Des Moines Louisville Macon Cincinnati Chicago Milwaukee St. Paul Esthcrville Dayton-South Bend. Detroit-Cleveland . . Pittsburgh Differentials in Cents per 100 Pounds Classes x 4 5 A C D B 15. 12 6 5 9 7 4 4 3 2 18 14 8 11 11 :> 9 20 10 20 16 20 10 40 31 6 6 12 12 12 o 5 10 10 10 24 20 7 7 7 15 3 10 4 4 9 9 9 4 2 8 3 8 8 8 8 1 o 8 3 7 7 7 7 8 3 6 6 6 50 32 41 27 40 35 33 20 27 19 27 19 10 11 1 o 5 5 5 K 10 13 50 45 32 23 16 19 10% 14 12 11 21% 18 16 15 11 10 10 10 10 16 14 12 12 11 20 16 16 16 15 Remarks Over St. Louis Rates 1 Governed by the Western Classification. In many cases these differentials are the same as those applied in connection with Texas traffic. 5. Rates from Seaboard Territory All-rail rates from Atlantic Seaboard Territory (or Trunk Line and New England territories combined, as it is designated via the all-rail lines), are made on the basis of the lowest combination, that is, through St. Louis, Memphis, or the Northern Gateways. 6. Bates Via South Atlantic and Gulf-Port Lines On traffic from Atlantic Seaboard Territory via the water carriers through the South Atlantic ports or Mexi- can Gulf ports, the rail lines concede a differential under the rates established by the rail lines from Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore. The current rates applying from these cities to some of the more important Arkansas Junction Points via the Atlantic or Gulf porta are reproduced in Table 19. 94 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 19 Class Rates from Baltimore, Bostox, New York, and Philadelphia Via Atlantic axd Gulf Ports to Poixts ix Arkansas TO THE From Rates is Cents feu 100 Pounds Following Points Classes 1 rx Ap.ka.xsas 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Baltimore. . . 137 113 99 76 60 05 57 51 46 41 B ■:. Boston 14S 123 103 79 63 68 60 55 50 47 New York. . . 143 119 100 78 61 66 58 53 48 43 Philadelphia. 120 115 100 77 61 66 58 r2 47 42 Baltimore. . . 141 123 112 Vi 67 71 63 54 47 42 Can. 152 133 116 92 70 74 66 58 51 48 Xevr York . . . 147 129 113 91 68 72 64 56 40 44 Philadelphia . 143 125 113 90 68 72 64 55 48 i 9 Baltimore. . . 146 121 110 86 69 71 63 53 47 42 Cro- Boston 157 131 114 89 72 74 66 57 51 48 Xew York. . . 152 127 111 88 70 72 64 55 40 44 Philadelphia . 14S 123 111 87 70 72 04 54 4S 43 Baltimore. . . 136 116 101 82 64 67 60 54 50 45 Dardanelle Boston 147 126 105 85 67 70 63 58 54 51 Xew York. . . 142 122 102 84 65 68 61 56 52 47 Philadelphia. 138 118 102 83 65 68 61 55 51 46 Baltimore. . . 151 12-« 114 91 69 73 65 54 48 44 Ei Dorado 162 137 118 94 72 76 68 58 52 50 Xe^V York . . . 157 133 115 93 70 74 66 56 50 40 Philadelphia . 1 53 129 115 92 70 74 06 55 49 45 Baltimore. . . 136 116 101 S2 62 66 58 51 45 41 lyee 147 126 105 85 65 69 61 55 49 47 New York. . . 142 122 102 84 63 67 59 53 47 43 Philadelphia. 138 118 102 83 63 67 59 52 46 42 Baltimore. . . 131 111 96 70 60 63 56 50 48 42 Port Smith 142 121 100 82 63 68 59 54 50 48 New York. . . 137 117 97 81 61 64 57 52 48 44 Philadelphia . 133 113 97 80 61 61 57 51 47 43 Baltimore. . . 156 132 114 91 70 74 62 54 48 42 Uot Springs Boston 167 142 118 94 73 77 65 58 52 4S Xew York . . . 162 138 115 93 71 75 63 56 50 44 Philadelphia. 158 134 115 92 71 75 63 55 49 43 1 Governed by tbe Western Classification. CHAPTER VII rates to and from points in oklahoma 1. Intrastate Eat: The conditions that obtain in the adjustment of rates to Arkansas prevail, to a great extent, in the adjustment used in establishing rates from, to, and between point? in the state of Oklahoma, except that rates are published to all stations, whether local or junction point-. Likewise, the Corporation Commission of the State of Oklahoma has prescribed a scale of rates on both class and commodities applicable on traffic moving within the state, these rates being shown in Tables 20 and 21. TABLE 20 sixgle-Lixe Class Rates Miles 1 Rates i.v Ce:«*ts pep. 1 1 trsDS Class 5 A B C D a 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 13.0 15.0 17.0 19.0 2 - 22.0 23.5 25.0 26.5 2S.0 20.5 31.0 32.5 34.0 ! 37.0 40.0 41.5 in. 8 9.1 7.0 6.0 ~ "~ ■"_► . ■_' 2.5 12.4 10.4 8.2 : 6.7 5.7 4.0 2.9 14.0 11.7 9.4 8.0 7.7 0.4 " 4.5 3.3 15.6 13.0 10.6 9.0 7.1 6.0 ' 3.7 16.9 14.3 11.5 9.S 9.4 7.7 6.5 5.5 4.0 18.2 15.0 12.4 10.6 10.1 - 7.0 6.0 4.3 19.5 16.0 13.3 11.4 10.8 - 1 6.3 20.8 17.0 14.2 12.2 11.5 0.5 6.6 4.9 22.1 1S.0 15J 13.0 12.2 10.1 6.9 23.4 19.0 16.0 13.S 12.9 10.7 9.0 ' 24.7 _ 16.9 14.6 13.6 " 3 1 i - 26.0 21.0 17.8 15.4 14.3 11.0 ■ 0.1 27.3 22.0 IS. 7 16.2 15.0 10.5 6.4 23.0 19.6 17.0 15.7 13 J 11.0 " 20.9 24.0 - a 17.S 16.4 13.7 11.5 6.9 ".1.2 _" 21.4 18.6 17.1 14.3 12.it 0.0 7.1 32.5 _ 22.3 19.4 17.S 14.9 12.5 9.3 " 33.8 27.0 _ S 2 ias ir...-. 13.0 9.6 7.5 35.1 . 24.1 21.0 10.2 16.1 13.5 0.0 i .7 95 96 FEEIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 20— Continued Sincle-Line Class Rates Mii.es 1 Rates in Cents ter 100 Pounds Classes 2 5 A B D 100 4.5.0 36.4 29.0 25.0 21.8 19.9 16.7 14.0 105 44.5 37.7 30.0 25.9 22.6 20.6 17.3 14.5 110 46.0 39.0 31.0 26.8 23.4 21.3 17.9 15.0 115 47.0 39.8 32.0 27.4 23.9 21.8 18.3 15.3 120 48.0 40.6 32.7 2S.0 24.4 22.3 18.7 15.6 125 49.0 41.4 33.4 28.6 24.9 22.8 19.1 15.9 130 50.0 42.2 34.1 29.2 25.4 23.3 19.5 16.2 135 51.0 43.0 34.8 29.8 25.9 23.8 19.9 16.5 140 52.0 43.8 35.5 30.4 26.4 24.3 20.3 16.8 145 53.0 44.6 36.2 31.0 26.9 24.8 20.7 17.1 150 54.0 45.4 36.9 31.6 27.4 25.3 21.1 17.4 155 55.0 46.2 37.6 32.2 27.9 25.8 21.5 17.7 160 56.0 47.0 38.3 32.8 28.4 26.3 21.9 1S.0 165 57.0 47.8 39.0 33.4 28.9 26.8 22.3 18.3 170 58.0 48.6 39.7 34.0 29.4 27.3 22.7 18.6 175 59.0 49.4 40.4 34.6 29.9 27.8 23.1 18.9 180 60.0 50.2 41.1 35.2 30.4 28.3 23.5 10.2 1S5 61.0 51.0 41.8 35.8 30.9 28.8 23.9 19.5 190 62.0 51.S 42.5 36.4 31.4 29.3 24.3 19.8 195 63.0 52.6 43.2 37.0 31.9 29.8 24.7 20.1 200 64.0 53.4 43.9 37.6 32.4 30.3 25.1 20.4 210 65.5 54.6 44.9 38.4 33.2 31.0 25.7 21.0 220 67.0 55.8 45.9 39.2 34.0 31.7 26.3 21.5 230 68.5 57.0 46.9 40.0 34.S 32.4 26.9 22.0 240 70.0 58.2 47.9 41.8 35.6 33.1 27.5 22.5 250 71.5 59.4 4S.9 42.6 36.4 33.8 28.1 23.0 260 .' 73.0 60.6 49.9 43.4 37.2 34.5 28.7 23.5 270 74.5 61.8 50.9 44.2 38.0 35.2 29.3 24.0 280 76.0 63.0 51.9 45.0 88.8 35.9 29.9 24.5 290 77.5 64.2 52.9 45.8 39.6 36.6 30.5 25.0 300 79.0 65.4 53.9 46.6 40.4 37.3 31.1 25.5 310 80.0 66.2 54.6 47.2 40.9 37.8 31.5 25.8 320 81.0 67.0 55.3 47.8 41.4 38.3 31.9 26.1 330 82.0 67.8 56.0 48.4 41.9 38.8 32.3 26.4 340 83.0 68.6 56.7 49.0 42.4 39.3 32.7 26.7 350 84.0 69.4 57.4 49.6 42.9 39.8 33.1 27.0 360 85.0 70.2 58.1 50.2 43.4 40.3 33.5 27.3 370 86.0 71.0 58.8 50.8 43.9 40.8 33.9 27.6 380 87.0 71.8 59.5 51.4 44.4 41.3 34.3 27.9 390 88.0 72.6 60.2 52.0 44.9 41.8 34.7 28.2 400 89.0 73.4 60.9 52.6 45.4 42.3 35.1 28.5 410 90.0 74.2 61.6 53.2 45.9 42.8 35.5 28.8 420 91.0 75.0 62.3 53.8 46.4 43.3 35.9 29.1 430 92.0 75.8 63.0 54.4 46.9 43.8 36.3 29.4 440 93.0 76.6 63.7 55.0 47.4 44.3 36.7 29.7 450 and over 94.0 77.4 64.4 55.6 47.9 44.8 37.1 30.0 1 Where exact distance is not shown, use next greater distance. 2 Governed by the Western Classification. 10.2 7.9 10.5 S.l 10.8 8.3 11.0 8.5 11.2 8.7 11.4 8.9 11.6 9.1 11.8 9.3 12.0 9.5 12.2 9.7 12.4 9.9 12.6 10.1 12.8 10.3 13.0 10.5 13.2 10.7 13.4 10.9 13.6 11.1 13.8 11.3 14.0 11.5 14.2 11.7 14.4 11.9 14.8 12.2 15.2 12.5 15.6 12.8 16.0 13.1 16.4 13.4 16.8 13.7 17.2 14.0 17.6 14.3 18.0 14.6 18.4 14.9 18.7 15.1 19.0 15.3 19.3 15.5 19.6 15.7 19.9 15.9 20.2 16.1 20.5 16.3 20.8 16.5 21.1 16.7 21.4 16.9 21.6 17.1 21.8 17.3 22.0 17.5 22 2 17.7 22.4 17.9 OKLAHOMA RATES 97 TABLE 21 Single-Line Commodity Rates Rates in Cents Per 100 Tounds (Except as Noted) Ice, Broom Corn, Grain Horses and carloads, carloads, Mules, car- Miles 1 minimum minimum l'roducts, loads, in dol- weight weight less lars and cent3 30,000 16,000 carloads per Standard pounds pounds car 2.8 6.5 8.0 9.5 10.S 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 17.8 18.6 19.4 20.2 21.0 21.7 22.4 23.1 23.8 24.5 25.1 25.7 26.3 26.9 27.1 27.6 28.1 28.6 29.1 29.6 30.1 30.6 31.1 31.6 32.1 32.5 32.9 33.3 33.7 34.1 34.9 35.8 36.7 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 18.0 18.8 19.6 20.4 21.2 22.0 22.S 23.4 24.0 24.6 25.2 25.8 26.4 27.0 27.6 28.2 2S.8 29.3 29.8 30.3 30.8 31.3 31.8 32.3 32.8 33.3 33.8 34.6 35.4 36.2 10.00 10 15 3.1 3.4 12.00 14.00 20 3.7 15.00 25 4.0 16.00 30 4.2 17.00 35 4.4 18.00 40 4.6 19.00 45 4.8 20.00 50 5.0 21.00 55 5.2 21.90 60 5.4 22.80 65 ........ 5.6 23.70 70 5.8 24.60 75 6.0 25.50 80 85 6.2 6.4 26.25 27.00 90 6.6 27.75 95 6.7 28.50 100 6.8 29.25 105 *. 6.9 29.95 110 7.0 30.65 115 7.1 31.35 120 7.2 32.05 125 7.3 32.75 130 135 7.4 7.5 33.40 34.05 140 7.6 34.70 145 7.7 35.35 150 7.8 36.00 155 7.9 36.60 160 s.o 37.70 165 8.1 37.80 170 8.2 38.40 175 8.3 39.00 180 8.4 39.50 185 8.5 40.00 190 8.6 40.50 195 8.7 41.00 200 . . ■. 8.8 41.50 210 9.0 42.30 220 9.2 43.10 230 9.4 43.90 98 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 21— Continued Single-Line Commodity Rates Rates in Cents pee 100 Pounds (Except as Noted) Mit.es 1 Ice, carloads, minimum Broom Corn, carloads, minimum Grain Products, Horses and Mules, car- loads, in dol- i weight 30,000 pounds weight 10,000 pounds less carloads lars and cents per Standard car 240 9.6 250 9.8 260 10.0 270 10.2 280 10.4 290 10.6 300 10.8 310 11.0 320 11.2 330 11.4 340 11.6 350 ". 11.8 360 12.0 370 12.2 380 12.4 390 12.6 400 12.8 410 13.0 420 13.2 430 13.4 440 13.6 450 and over 13.8 37.6 37.0 44.70 38.5 37.8 45.50 39.2 38.3 40.20 39.9 38.8 46.90 40.6 39.3 47.60 41.3 39.8 48.30 42.0 40.3 49.00 42.6 40.8 49.60 43.2 41.3 50.20 43.8 41.8 50.80 44.4 42.3 51.40 45.0 42.8 52.00 46.0 43.3 52.50 46.5 43.8 53.00 47.0 44.3 53.50 47.5 44.8 54.00 48.0 45.3 54.50 48.4 45.8 55.00 49.2 46.3 55.50 49.6 46.8 56.00 50.0 47.3 56.50 50.0 47.8 57.00 iWhere exact distance is not shown, use next greater distance. APPLICATION OF RATES The rates named in Tables 20 and 21 are for application on shipments moving over one line of railroad or over two or more lines of railroad -which are either directly or indirectly under the same management and control. Through joint rates for the transportation of shipments over two or more lines of railroad which are not directly or indirectly under the same management and control, shall be made by adding to the rates named in Items OKLAHOMA RATES 99 160 and 165 or reissues thereof, the following arbitrary figures, observing combination of local rates as maximum : Oasses 1 2 34 5 A BODE A 9 S 7 6 5 5 4 4 3 2.5 B 14 13 11 10 8 S 6 G 5 5 C 18 17 15 14 11 11 S 8 7 7 Broom Grain Horses and Ice Corn Products Mules A 2.5 5 5 $ S.00 B 5 S 9 12.00 C 7 11 14 1G.00 The above named arbitraries are in cents per 100 pounds, except on Horses and Mules, which are quoted in dollars and cents per ear, of any length, and apply as follows : "A" — Over two lines not under the same management and control, either directly or indirectly. " B ' ' — Over three lines. " C ' ' — Over four or more lines. These rates are published by the carriers, through their agents, under protest, the tariff containing them having a provision on the title page reading as follows : The rates and conditions quoted herein on Classes and Com- modities are quoted thereon solely for the purpose of complying with Orders Nos. 382 and 518 of the Corporation Commission of Oklahoma, and under no circumstances will rates named herein apply on Interstate shipments, i. e., on traffic originating at or destined to points outside of the State of Oklahoma, and traffic originating at and destined to points in Oklahoma but moving outside of the State in transit. On interstate traffic for which rates are made on a mileage basis, the scale established by the carriers is used, although it is somewhat higher than that prescribed by the state commission. However, on traffic moving within the state the state rates must be observed. 2. Interstate Eates In this adjustment, the jobbing centers of the Missouri River, by virtue of their location, have the lowest basis 100 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY of rates. The rates from the Kansas Citj and St. Louis groups to the stations on the St. Louis & San Francisco Eailroad from Wyandotte, Okla., to Oklahoma City and to the stations on the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway from Oklahoma City to Texola, Okla., are shown in Table 22. TABLE 22 Joint. Rates from Kansas and St. Louis Groups to Oklahoma Territory ■ From Kansas City Group To Rates in Cents per 100 Founds Classes 1 123 45ABCDE Afton, Okla Todd, Okla White Oak, Okla 65 56 46y 2 33 29 32 24 16 15 12 66 56 46 y 2 33 29 32 24 16 15 12 66 56 461/2 33 29 32 24 16 15 12 67 56 46y 2 33 29 32 24 16 15 12 70 56 50 36 29 32 24 16 15 13 72 59 51 36 29 32 24 16 15 13 75 63 52 36 29 32 25 y a 18 16 14 85 70 62 46 36 39 34 25 22 y 2 18 85 71 62 46 36 39 34 25 23 18 86 72 64 48 42 43 36 y 2 27 23 y 2 20 95 82 74 62 46 48 39 32 26 23 95 82 74 62 46 48 39 32 26 23 95 82 74 62 46 4S 39 32 26 23 95 82 74 62 46 48 39 32 26 23 95 82 74 64 47 47% 36 % 31 24 20 105 90 81 75 50 61 y 2 52 y 2 43 33 30 105 90 81 75 52 61 y 2 52% 43 33 30 100 88 78 73 52 58 50 41% 32 28% 110 98 87 81 54 66% 49 43 34 28 110 99 89 83 63 67 49 43 34 28 116 99 94 83 66 68 55 45 36 31 119 103 96 87 70 72 60 49 40 34 120 107 97 89 70 73 62 50 42 35 132 116 100 93 73 75 68 55 43 36 Warwick, Okla Spencer, Okla Oklahoma City, Okla. Ft. Reno, Okla Bickford, Okla Ferguson, Okla Bridgeport, Okla .... Indianapolis, Okla. . . Ralph, Okla Elk City, Okla Texola, Okla Benonine, Tex governed by the Western Classification. OKLAHOMA RATES 101 TABLE 22— Continued To Wyandotte. Okln Moray, Okla Ogeechee, Okla Af ton, Okla Todd, Okla White Oak, Okla Chelsea, Okla Verdigris, Okla Tulsa, Okla Sapulpa, Okla Davenport, Okla Warwick, Okla Spencer, Okla Oklahoma City, Okla. Ft. Reno, Okla Calumet, Okla Bickford, Okla Ferguson, Okla Bridgeport, Okla Indianapolis, Okla... Ralph, Okla Elk City, Okla Texola, Okla Benonine, Toy From St. Louis Group 1 87 91 91 100 101 107 110 115 115 117 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 132 138 140 140 140 152 Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Classes 1 4 5 4 B 68 72 72 80 83 86 90 100 100 100 109 109 109 1 09 109 109 109 109 111 116 117 117 117 130 57 61 61 69 73 . 74 75 30 80 82 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 98 104 104 104 105 108 43 4(1 46 51 55 55 55 65 05 68 82 82 82 82 84 90 90 87 90 92 94 96 96 100 34 36 36 40 43 43 43 52 52 54 63 63 63 63 64 66 68 68 69 72 74 7.1 75 78 37 39 39 43 45 45 45 54 54 56 65 65 65 65 65 74 74 74 74 76 78 79 80 29 31 31 33 36 36 38 44 44 44 55 55 55 55 53 65 65 63 65 67 68 70 70 22 22 22 24 27 27 20 32 35 35 46 46 46 46 45 54 54 52 54 56 58 58 58 60 D 19 20 20 22 24 24 25 28 31 31 39 39 39 39 37 43 43 41 43 45 46 46 47 48 E 16 17 17 18 19 19 20 24 25 25 32 32 32 32 29 34 34 33 35 38 39 39 40 41 1 Governed by the Western Classification. Rates from the territory tributary to Kansas City are made on a differential adjustment over the rates estab- lished from Kansas City, there being two groups besides the Kansas City Group. (a) Kansas City Group Some of the more important points in the Kansas City Group are: Kansas City, Mo.; Kansas City, Kan.; St. Joseph, Mo. ; Atchison, Leavenworth, Armadale, Topeka, Hutchison, Dodge City, Kiowa, Arkansas City, and Coffeeville, Kan. ; Joplin, Springfield, and Sidalia, Mo. 102 FKEIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY (b) Omaha Group Some of the more important points in the Omaha Group are : Omaha, Neb. ; Council Bluffs and Pacific Junc- tion, Iowa; Lincoln, Nebraska City, and Beatrice, Neb.; Hiawatha, Kan. ; Ashland and Fremont, Neb. (c) Sioux City Group Some of the more important points in the Sioux City Group are : Sioux City, Aster, and Arian, Iowa ; Bancroft, Neb. ; Onawa, Iowa ; and Oakland, Neb. The above grouping shows but a few of the more important points located in each group. The Kansas City rates are applied from practically all points in Kansas on and south of the line of the Missouri Pacific Eailway, from Kansas City, Mo., to the Colorado-Kansas state line and from points in the southwestern section of the state of Missouri. The differential adjustment used in establishing rates from the Omaha and Sioux City groups is as follows : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A BODE Omaha Group 20 IS 15 12 10 11 9 S 7 6 Sioux City Group 40 33 25 20 17 19 10 13 12 11 These differentials are to be added to the Kansas City rates in establishing through rates from these territories. (d) Rates from Defined Territories Although there are some exceptions, the rates from Memphis are usually made the same as the St. Louis rates, while from the Peoria, Chicago, and Minneapolis- OKLAHOMA RATES 103 St. Paul groups rates are made by adding the following differentials to the St. Louis rates: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B O D E Peoria Group 10 10 5 2% 2% 3% 3% 2y 2 2% 2% Chicago Group 20 20 10 5 5 7% 7y 2 5 5 5 Minneapolis-St Paul Group 25 24 13 7 6 9% 8% 6 6% 6 These differentials, as may be observed, follow very closely those used in establishing rates from the Peoria and Chicago groups to Missouri River points. CHAPTER VIII SUMMARY The reasonableness of the existing rates to Texas Common Points as well as of those to the Missouri River, Colorado, and Utah common points, has been assailed by various com- mercial organizations from time to time. The Interstate Commerce Commission has upheld, in general, the structure upon which the adjustment rests, and in this connection the following opinion rendered by that body in the case of the Southwestern Shippers' Traffic Association v. the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company et al., 1 dealing with the rates between points in Texas and adjoining states and territories, is especially instructive. The Southwestern Shippers' Traffic Association is a voluntary asso- ciation embracing a number of traffic organizations, which represent to a considerable extent various business interests and localities in the states of Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Colorado. The gist of the complaint made by that association in the two above cases in which it stands as complainant is that rates from the Atlantic sea- board through Galveston into this' southwestern territory are excessive. No. 2900 attacks the reasonableness of present class and commodity fates from Galveston to various interior points. The Commission is asked to establish local rates from Galveston to these points and also to put into effect "proportional" rates which are less than local rates and which are to apply to traffic which has reached Galveston by water from the Atlantic seaboard. In No. 2904 the rates attacked are the joint through rates estab- lished by the united action of the steamship and rail lines from Atlantic seaboard territory through Galveston to these southwestern i 24 I. C. C. Rep., 570. 104 SUMMARY 105 points. The Commission is asked to establish lower reasonable joint rates. Upon these issues hearings were had at which a great amount of testimony was taken, briefs were filed, and the cases were finally sub- mitted, after oral argument, in November, 1910. The real gravamen of the complaint in these cases is that the actual cost of handling business from the Atlantic seaboard into this south- western territory through Galveston is less than by other routes, but that carriers by virtue of their control both of the rail and the steam- ship lines operating through that port have refused to recognize in their rates this more favorable avenue of transportation. An impor- tant question is, therefore, whether the actual cost of transportation by this route is less. When the Commission came to examine the record as made up by the parties in the cases as submitted, it was found that this record was almost barren of evidence as to the water portion of the service. Since the issue was one which had often been the subject of contro- versy, and which it was desirable to permanently and intelligently settle if possible, the Commission of its own motion reopened the cases for the purpose of further investigating this branch of the sub- ject. Testimony as to the manner in which this freight was handled by water carriers, the rates under which it had been handled and the cost of the service, so far as that could be given, was taken in the late spring of 1911 at New York and Galveston. Before the case had been submitted after the taking of this new testimony, the petition in No. 4586 was filed. The complainant in that case represents the city of Denver, and the complaint is directed against the reasonableness of the present class and commodity rates from Galveston to that city. This same question might fairly have been raised under the complaint in No. 2900, but for some reason the city of Denver was not represented upon the hearing in that pro- ceeding. The Denver Consumers & Shippers' Association also filed a peti- tion for leave to intervene in No. 2904, that being the proceeding which involves through rates from the Atlantic seaboard to various in- terior points of which Denver now asks to be considered as one. Since it was plainly in the public interest that this whole matter should b*e disposed of at one time, this petition for leave to intervene was granted. Upon, the filing of the complaint in No. 4586, and the petition of intervention No. 2904, certain lines leading from the Missouri River to' Denver asked to intervene in both these cases for the reason that, while they did not participate in the movement of traffic from Gal- veston to Denver, they did handle business originating upon the 106 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Atlantic seaboard to Colorado common points, and their assertion was that the rates under which this traffic moved over their lines were so intimately connected with the rates through Galveston to the same destination points, that any change in the Galveston rate must of necessity work a corresponding change in their rates. Upon this statement, these lines, of which the Union Pacific is an example were permitted to intervene. No. 4586 and 2904 were now set down for further hearing at Den- ver, where another volume of testimony was taken. Additional i • s briefs were filed and the case was again orally argued before the full Commission. While, as will be seen from the foregoing statement, the matters involved are of great importance in the estimation of the parties, and while an enormous record has accumulated, the issues are never- theless comparatively simple. They can be best understood by ref- erence to the accompanying map. Atlantic seaboard territory, as defined in the tariffs of the defend- ants, depends somewhat upon the point of destination. The term, as SUMMARY 107 used in the schedules under consideration, embraces, roughly speak- ing, New England, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, all of Pennsylvania excepfr the western border, a large portion of West Virginia, and Virginia north of the line of the Norfolk & Western Railway. The same rate applies as a blanket from all this territory to the southwestern points under consideration. Traffic originating in this territory may be transported to these points by one of four general routes. For the purpose of clearly indicating these different routes an interior point, like Albany, N. Y., may be selected upon the east and Wichita, Kans., upon the west. Between these points the following routes are available: 1. The traffic may move all-rail. The line of movement is indi- cated upon the map by a straight line drawn from Albany to Wichita, and the actual movement by rail would be almost as direct as this line. 2. The traffic may move *by rail from Albany to Buffalo, at the head of Lake Erie, thence by the great lakes to -Chicago, and thence by rail to Wichita. The route from Albany to Buffalo, and again from Chicago to Wichita, is nearly a straight line. The water route is circuitous. 3. The third route is from Albany to New York by rail, thence by water to Norfolk, and thence by rail to Wichita. Here again the rail movement from Norfolk to Wichita is in a comparatively direct line and is indicated upon the map by a straight line. This traffic might move by water to some other south Atlantic port like Charleston or Savannah, and from thence by rail. The rail move- ment, instead of being through St. Louis, might be and often is through some lower Mississippi River crossing like Memphis. 4. The last route is by rail to New York, from New York to Gal- veston by water, and from Galveston to Wichita by rail. The railroads in this country were for the most part constructed from the Atlantic seaboard west. The first lines into the southwest were built from the various Mississippi River and Missouri River crossings in a westerly direction. The lines via the great lakes and via the south Atlantic ports have been long in operation. The old lines, therefore, are 1, 2, and 3 as above described and are usually termed the east and west lines. The line via New Orleans to a certain part of this territory is a comparativeh' old one; that via Galveston was the latest to be developed. Within comparatively recent years the United States government has expended large sums of money upon the port of Galveston, and that pert by reason of its location and the shipping facuities which the improvement of its harbor has given it. has 108 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY become an important one. In the year 1911 it took rank in the value of its exports second only to New York. The lines of railroad leading from Galveston north into this south- western territory have also been much strengthened in recent years. Their physical condition has been improved, the density of their traffic has increased, and they have come to rank among the substan- tial railroads of the country. In view of the transportation facilities which now exist both by water and by rail, the complainants earnestly insist that the route via Galveston into this southwestern territory is now the cheapest, but that the east and west Hues by securing control of the rail lines leading north from Galveston, and by controlling either directly or indirectly the water lines from New York to Galveston, have pre- vented the natural movement of traffic via this route by maintaining unjust and unreasonable rates. It was pointed out by the defendants, and is undoubtedly true, that there has always been, and must continue to be, a relation in the rates by different lines from Atlantic seaboard territory into this southwestern country, so that any marked reduction of the transporta- tion charge by one route must be met by a corresponding reduction via all other routes if they continue in the business. It was further pointed out that most of the articles consumed in this southwestern territory are manufactured both in the middle west and upon the Atlantic seaboard, and that any reduction in rates from the Atlantic seaboard into this territory would inevitably be followed by demands from the middle west for a similar reduction. Past expe- rience shows that a reduction from the Atlantic seaboard has been followed by a corresponding reduction from St. Louis and similar territory and vice versa. The commercial interests of St. Louis and Chicago have intervened in these proceedings and insist that whatever reduction is made from the Atlantic seaboard shall be met from those cities. It can not be doubted, therefore, that a material reduction in these rates from producing points in the east to consuming points in the southwest would lead to widespread reductions and involve a very material loss of revenue to a great number of carriers. While, however, the fact that a reduction of the rate through Galveston must lead to other extensive reductions is a reason why this Commission should proceed with great caution, it is no conclusive reason against the granting of the prayer of these complainants. This territory is entitled to reasonable rates of transportation. One market of supply is the Atlantic seaboard, and one avenue of carriage from that market is through the port of Galveston. If the rates SUMMARY 109 imposed via that route by these defendant carriers are unreasonable it is our plain duty to reduce them, irrespective of the consequences to other routes or other markets. We have, therefore, for determination this single question, Are rates from the Atlantic seaboard into this southwestern territory reasonable per se ? And this as presented by the complainants divides itself into two other questions : 1. Are the rail rates from the port of Galveston to interior desti- nations reasonable ? 2. Are the combined rail-and- water rates from Atlantic seaboard points to southwestern destinations reasonable? Many points of destination are involved throughout this south- western territory, but in answering these questions Denver, Wichita, and Oklahoma City may be selected as fairly representative. Both class and commodity rates are involved, but in the presenta* tion of the case reference has been made almost exclusively to the classes, and these rates only will be referred to in this discussion. We proceed, therefore, to inquire whether class rates now in effect from Galveston to these selected points are reasonable, beginning with Denver. The present class rates from Galveston to Denver are as follows: Class.... 1 2345ABCDE Rate.... 180 148 110 84 65 81 62 52 43.5 36 In 1909 the Commission, after elaborate investigation and careful consideration, established a scale of class rates from Chicago to Den- ver. The Denver rate applies in all these cases to Colorado common points, and distances to these various points differ somewhat. The average distance from Galveston would be approximately 1,100 miles, and title average distance from Chicago substantially the same. The conditions of transportation from Chicago to Colorado common points are somewhat more favorable and might well justify a some- what lower rate than from Galveston. The rates established from Chicago were as follows: Kindelv. N.Y.,N.E. <& E. R.R., 15 I. C.C., 555. Class 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Rate 180 145 110 85 67 80.5 63 54 47 40 In 1910 this Commission, again after very careful consideration, established a scale of class rates from Missouri River to Utah com- mon points. ; Commercial Club of Salt Lake City v. A., T. <& S. F. Ry. Co., 19 I. C. C, 218. The distance from the Missouri River to Utah points is approxi- mately the same as from Galveston to Denver. The conditions of 110 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY transportation are approximately the same. The rates established were as follows: Class.... 1 2345ABCDE Rate.... 190 162 142 119 98 98 77 70 50 42 From a comparison of the above three schedules it will be seen that the present rates from Galveston to Denver are slightly lower than those fixed from Chicago to Denver and materially lower than those established from the Missouri River to Salt Lake City. These cases are all of recent date and were all deliberately decided. Unless we are prepared to reverse those decisions and to put in effect materially lower schedules than were then found reasonable, it is evident that the contention of the complainants that the present class rates from Galveston to Denver are unreasonable can not be sustained, and it is not. The present class rates from Galveston to Wichita are as follows: Class.... 1 2345ABCDE Rate.... 147 125 104 96 75 79 70 58 46 39 In 1908 class rates from St. Louis to Texas common points were materially advanced and this advance was attacked by complaint of the railroad commission of Texas in the interest of that state. After a most exhaustive investigation the Commission finally, hi February, 1911, established the following schedule. Railroad Com- mission of Texas v. A., T. <& S. F. Ry. Co., 20 I. C. C, 463. Class.... 1 2 345ABCDE Rate.... 147 125 104 96 75 79 70 58 46 39 This scale applies from St. Louis to Texas common points, and tharefore covers distances which vary greatly in length. In the trial of that case much was said as to the average haul. While the parties did not agree, it fairly appears that the average- haul to which this schedule applies, would be not far from S00 miles. From Gal- veston to Wichita the distance is 700 miles, and the conditions of transportation are substantially identical. If, therefore, we are to adhere to our decision in that case, it must be found that the pres- ent rates from Galveston are somewhat in excess of what would bo just and reasonable. We are of the opinion that the following rates would be reasonable and that the present rates are unreasonable to the extent that they exceed this schedule: Class.... I23 45ABCDE Rate.... 132 112 94 86 68 71 63 52 41 35 The distance from Galveston to Oklahoma City by the short line is about 550 miles; to Wichita, as just stated, 700 miles. The class rates now in effect from Galveston to Oklahoma City are as follows: Class.... 1 2345ABCDE Rate.... 133 115 98 89 70 75 65 53 42 36 SUMMARY 111 Using as the measure of a reasonable rate to Oklahoma City tho schedule which we have just found reasonable to Wichita, we are of the opinion that the present class rates from Galveston to Oklahoma City are unreasonable, and that such rates for the future should not exceed the following; Class.... 1 2345ABCDE Rate.... 112 96 80 73 57 60 54 44 35 30 The tiling for which the complainants are contending is a lower transportation charge from the Atlantic seaboard to these points of consumption. The reductions suggested to Wichita and Oklahoma City will for this purpose be of no avail to Wichita and of but little, if any, benefit to Oklahoma City. This traffic comes by water to Gal- veston and pays a port-to-port rate, which is not under the jurisdic- tion of this Commission. From Galveston it moves upon the local rate to the interior point. Now, when the local rates which we have found reasonable are combined with the port- to-port water rates which have been in effect for any considerable time in the past, the resulting rates are higher than the joint through rates which are now in effect. The complainants realize that this must be so, and they therefore ask us to treat the haul on this business from Galveston as part of a through transportation, which it in fact is, and to apply to it from that port a rate lower than the local rate. We are asked to do this by establishing from Galveston proportional rates applicable to traffic which has reached that port from the Atlantic seaboard by water. The defendants deny the jurisdiction of the Commission to fix a • rate of this character, and they further urge that if the jurisdiction exists it ought not to be exercised under the circumstances of this case. It is well understood that carriers voluntarily maintain so-called export and import rates to and from the various ports which are less than their domestic rates. Such rates are maintained through the port of Galveston by the rail carriers, defendants in these pro- ceedings. The maintenance of so-called proportional rates, which differ from corresponding local rates, to and from junction points applicable to traffic which originates or goes beyond such points is very general. Rates are named from interior points to various ports on domestic business which are less than the local rates, and which differ according to the final destination of the traffic. The Commission has recognized the propriety of such rates, to an extent at least, and has at times acted upon those rates when estab- lished by the carriers. 112 FEEIGHT HATES— WESTERN TERRITORY There is much to be said in favor of the exercise of that jurisdiction in this case, if it exists. Water transportation between the Atlantic seaboard and Galveston has never been open to free competition. In recent years this business has been largely controlled by two lines of steamships which seem to have established and maintained a sched- ule of rates mutually satisfactory. On several occasions independ- ent boats have endeavored to break into this traffic and rates have been temporarily much depressed, but the railways have declined to recognize these ships or to establish joint rates with them, and the result has finally been either that the line has withdrawn from the business, as in case of the Lone Star line in 1908, or been absorbed by a competing line, as was the Texas City line in 1911. The complainants assert that the benefit of water competition between the Atlantic seaboard and Galveston never can be enjoyed^ and that the fair cost of this water transportation can not be detep- mined unless carriers are compelled to handle this through business to and from the port of Galveston upon equal terms as to all water carriers It is evident that such proportional rates if named must be con- fined to the traffic to which they apply by some proper system of policing. It is also evident that unless there are through arrange- ments for the movement of this business from the point of origin to destination, involving the 'issuing of through bills of lading, and the collection and distribution among the different carriers of the total charges either at the point of origin or at destination, the rates them- selves will not be of much benefit to the general public, and may re- sult in discrimination in favor of those who are so situated as to be able to take advantage of them Assuming that the right to establish these proportional rates exists, it ought not to be exercised unless such conditions can be attached to their use a3 will make them nondiscriminatory and of general advantage. We have also considered with considerable care the amount of the rate itself which we might fix. We have held that a first-class rate of $1.80 was reasonable from Galveston to Denver. The complain- ants ask us to fix a proportional rate between these points of 72 cents. The difference between proportional rates requested and the local rates found reasonable from Galveston to Wichita and Oklahoma City, while not as great in proportion as the above, is nevertheless a large percentage of the local rates. When it is remem- bered that in the BurThham-Hanna-Munger case, 14 I. C. C, 299, we finally applied from the Mississippi River a rate only 5 cents lower to traffic coming from beyond than the local rate, it will be seen that mo such difference as that suggested by the complainants could be SUMMARY 113 recognized, and it is admitted by them that unless figures approxi- mating these can be used no special benefit would be obtainable from the establishment of such rates. It is also true, as claimed by the defendants, that substantially the same rates should apply over all lines, and that the establishment of proportional rates sufficiently low to produce any effect would result in continual fluctuation by tins line. Looking at this whole situation and having in mind particularly the rates which we must establish in justice to the rail carriers, we are of the opinion on the whole that to attempt to name proportional rates, as requested by the complainants, would not under the circum- stances be a wise or proper move. These rail carriers should be re- quired to maintain reasonable rates with all responsible steamship linesplying between the Atlantic seaboard and Galveston. They should be required to accept as their division of the through rate a reasonable sum, which may well be substantially less than their just local charges. If any steamship company is content to take as its division materially less than what is now accepted by the present steamship lines, that is a substantial reason for a reduction of the total through charge, but we are strongly of the opinion that the establishment of proportional rates would introduce a novel and untried element into this situation, that it would result in no general benefit, that it might lead to dis- crimination in many instances, and. that upon the whole the experi- ment ought not to be tried. Indeed, the complainants themselves, realizing the impossibility of obtaining proportional rates low enough to be of much avail, have devoted themselves mainly to the attempt to demonstrate that the present joint rates are unreasonable, and this is the real question for determination. The complaint in No. 2904 puts in issue the reasonableness of the through rate from the Atlantic seaboard to -points in the state of Texas; but that phase of the case has not been urged in the trial and is not considered here. Since the advent of the Texas City line port-to-port rates have been so reduced that the combination through Galveston of the port-to-port rate and the rate of the Texas commission has, in all cases, made a lower through charge than the joint through rate. No business moves, therefore, upon the joint rate, and no joint rate which this Commission would be likely to establish would be as low as the combination. Hence shippers in Texas are satisfied with the present situation, especially as long as the high rate must be paid by their competitors in Oklahoma. We proceed to consider, therefore, the reasonableness of these through rates to points outside the state of Texas, taking, first, Wichita and, examining the first-class rate, which is now $1.80. 114 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY This rate applies as a blanket from all points in Atlantic seaboard territory as defined by these tariffs. This territory, it will be remem- bered, is of considerable extent. Lines of railroad leading from inte- rior points to New York, which is the port from which all sailings occur, generally have rails of their own and are always parts of through routes by which this traffic could be handled directly from the point of origin to the southwest by all-rail movement. They are therefore antagonistic to the movement via Galveston and exact for their service from the interior up to New York full local charges. The line from the Atlantic seaboard via Galveston really begins at New York, and the expense of bringing this traffic up to New York and getting it to the dock of the steamship at New York is an outlay which must be borne by the Galveston line. The defendants went into an elaborate computation with a view to determine the average rail haul from the interior point to New York, reaching the conclusion that this was slightly in excess of 300 miles. But the method employed and the conclusion reached are worthless for the purpose of this discussion. Each station in Atlantic seaboard territory was taken and the average distance arrived at by adding together the sum of the distances from each station and dividing by the number of stations. A result so reached is of no significance here, since the amount of traffic originating at each sta- tion is not by any means the same. A very large proportion of the business which seeks the water route via Galveston comes from New York itself or from that indus- trial center, and pays virtually no rail transportation charge. • Much of it originates at comparatively nearby points. The record con- tains no data from which an accurate conclusion can be drawn; but, making the best estimate possible, it seems probable that the average rail haul estimated upon all traffic, including that originating in the city of New York, would be equivalent to 100 miles. The first-class rate applicable to a haul of this distance in that territory would be about 25 cents, and it is probably just to allow these defendants to charge 25 cents per 100 pounds against the ex- pense of bringing traffic which moves under the first-class rate to the city of New York. There is in addition to this a drayage charge upon traffic reaching New York by rail and perhaps a drayage absorption in case of traffic originating in New York, which is fairly equivalent to another 5 cents per 100 pounds on first-class business. This freight is handled under what is known as an insured bill of lading; that is, the marine insurance is paid, not by the shipper, as is usually the case with water-borne traffic, but by the carrier on account of the shipper, and it was said that this would amount in case of first-class business to at least 5 cents per 100 pounds more. SUMMARY 115 These originating charges are deducted from the through rate before the division is made, and so deducting there remains to the water line from New York to Galveston and the rail line from Galveston to Wichita out of the $1.80 rate $1.45, which is divided, 35 per cent to the .water line and 65 per cent to the rail line. Stating these divisions in cents, the rail line would receive 94£ cents, the water line 50£ cents. We have held that a first-class rate from Galveston to Wichita of $1.32 would be reasonable. The division received by the rail carrier ought to be less than its local rate, but it can hardly be said that 94$ cents would be an unreasonable charge for the rail part of this through service. It remains to inquire whether the division in this case is upon a fair basis or whether the water line receives more than is justly its due, and whether, therefore, the through rate can be properly reduced by reducing the division of the water carrier. It has already been stated that this record, as originally made up by the parties, contained almost no evidence upon the cost of water transportation or the reasonable charge for handling this business from New York to Galveston. For this reason the case was reopened by the Commission upon its own initiative and a considerable amount of testimony bearing upon that point taken. But the record even now affords no basis for a satisfactory conclusion, nor indeed is it easy to see how such a basis can be supplied. The conditions governing water transportation are entirely unlike those pertaining to transportation by rail. The cost of operating the ship is practically the same whether it carries a full cargo or no cargo. The profitableness of this operation under a given schedule of rates would depend wholly, therefore, upon the ability of the ship to obtain a proper load. Much would depend, also, on the possi- bility of obtaining a loading in both directions. We have before us the rates charged from port to port before the Texas City line began operations, and the rates in effect at the time of the hearing. The manager of the Texas City company stated that his present rates were reasonably satisfactory, although they were much less than those formerly in effect. We are satisfied that the monopolistic conditions which have existed in this water traffic between the Atlantic seaboard and Gal- veston have resulted in excessive charges, but to what extent it is impossible to say. As bearing upon the reasonableness of these through charges and of the divisions before us an attempt was made to determine the number of water miles whieh should be taken as equivalent to one rail mile. It was said by the defendants that the ordinary propor- tion was about three to one, while the complainants insisted that in 116 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY the case before us, at least, not less than seven to one would be the fair proportion. This record shows that the expense of operating the ship upon the ocean is not great, and that the terminal or dockage expenses are the more serious item. It was said that of the total expenses 60 per cent were at the dock and 40 per cent uporcftlie ocean. Plainly, therefore, in determining the number of water miles which shall be set over against a rail mile as the basis of division everything must depend upon the length of the haul. The cost of transportation per mile by water is comparatively high for short distances and very small for long distances. It is also evident that much must depend upon the character of the rail mileage with which the division is to be made. The cost of the water transportation between New York and Galveston is the same whether the traffic is to be taken from New York to an interior poinlr or to Galveston, but the first-class rate for a given distance from Galveston is twice that from New York. Plainly it is impossible to determine with exactness the number of rail miles which should be charged against this water haul, but for the purposes of this discussion we assume that the contention of the complainants is in the main correct. The total distance from New York to Galveston is slightly less than 2,200 miles, and we have assumed that this distance, as compared with a rail haul of the char- acter of that from Galveston to either Wichita or Denver, would be fairly equivalent to 350 miles. The distance from Galveston to Wichita is 700 miles, and upon the basis above named the rail carrier would be entitled to two-thirds, or 66§ per cent, of the net amount for division, which is almost exactly the figure used. We must find, therefore, that the rate of $1.80 from Atlantic sea- board territory to Wichita is not excessive; and what is true of the first-class rate is true of the other classes. The first-class rate from Atlantic seaboard territory to Denver is $2.34. Deducting from this 35 cents, the gathering charge at the eastern end, which must be paid before the through rate is divided, there is left $1.99 to cover the transportation from New York to Denver. Assuming that the water distance from New York to Galveston is equivalent to 350 rail miles and that the distance from Galveston to Denver is 1,100 miles, we have a total rail haul of 1,450 miles which this rate covers. We have just held that $1.80 from Galveston to Denver for 1,100 miles is not excessive. In the Salt Lake case, previously referred to, we established as reasonable a first-class rate of $1.90 for an average haul SUMMARY 117 of about 1,100 miles. In the Reno case, 19 I. C. C, 238, we fixed a first-class rate of $2.50 from the Missouri River to Reno, a haul of about 1,600 miles, and to Winnomucca, a distance of approximately 1,400 miles, the rate was made S2.38. If these rates, and they were all named in cases recently decided and carefully investigated and considered, are to be taken as reasonable, then certainly we can not hold that SI. 99 is excessive for a total haul of* 1,450 miles over railroads of the character of those between Galveston and Denver. We are therefore constrained to hold that the rate from Atlantic seaboard territory to Denver is not unreason- able. There remains for consideration the rate from Atlantic seaboard territory to Oklahoma City, which is the same as to Wichita — $1.80 first class. The distance from Galveston to Oklahoma City is about 550 miles. Adding ,to this 350 miles for the water line from New York, there results a rail distance of 900 miles. Deducting from the through rate the gathering charge, Si. 45 is left to be applied to this rail haul of this distance. In the Texas Commission case, already referred to, we approved a first-class rate of Si. 47 for an average distance of approximately 800 miles. In this case we have just established, as reasonable a rate of SI. 32 from Galveston to Wichita, a distance of 700 miles. Upon analogy with these cases in the same territory it must be held that SI. 45 first class is not an excessive charge from Atlantic seaboard territory to Oklahoma City. The hardship which the present adjustment of rates imposes upon central Oklahoma points has been strongly urged upon the attention of the Commission in this proceeding. The Texas commission estab- lishes rates upon a mileage basis up to a certain distance beyond which the rate applies as a blanket to all Texas common points. Thus, the first-class rate from Galveston for a distance of approxi- mately 300 miles is 87 cents and this same rate applies to the northern border of Texas, a distance of 450 miles. This gives the distributing cities in the north of Texas, which wholesale in competition with Oklahoma points, a distinctly lower rate from the Atlantic seaboard than Oklahoma enjoys, and undoubtedly results in a decided advan- tage to Texas jobbing centers in case of articles purchased upon the Atlantic seaboard. But this discrimination is one which this Commission is powerless to remedy. The Texas rates are a matter of domestic concern over which we exercise no control. The so-called discrimination results not from the Texas rates, but from the fact that under the de- cision of the Supreme Court of the United States the shipper, by 118 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY taking possession of Ins traffic at Galveston, can obtain the benefit of the water rate to Galveston and the rail rate from Galveston, although the shipment is, in point of fact, an interstate movement. If the results which flow from this holding are not satisfactory Con- gress may easily provide that a .movement which is interstate in fact shall not be converted into two local movements by an inter- vening possession. In that case this Commission could establish a reasonable rate to Texas points which must be applied to all ship- ments from the Atlantic seaboard to those points, and discrimination resulting from abnormal conditions like that before us would be ren- dered impossible. To-day this Commission, while it recognizes the existence of a discrimination, can not pronounce it unlawful. Upon the east Oklahoma City is in competition with jobbers at Fort Smith, Ark., which is alleged to enjoy rates much lower than its relative location would warrant. The carriers assert that this is due to competitive conditions, but that situation is not before us. We are considering here simply the reasonableness of the rate from the Atlantic seaboard via Galveston. The whole case of the complainants rests upon the assertion that the cost of transportation via Galveston is less than via other routes, and that if this route, which is termed the "natural" route, were given its legitimate opportunity, lower rates would result. But can it be affirmed with confidence that the cost of handling business from Atlantic seaboard territory is less by this route than by, for example, the rail-and-lake route to Chicago ? The distance from Chicago to Denver is slightly less than from Galveston to Denver. The distance from Chicago to Wichita is almost exactly the same as from Galveston to Wichita. If, therefore, this traffic can reach Chicago from Atlantic seaboard points at as low a transportation charge as Galveston, then there is no reason why the rate through Galveston should be lower than the rail-water- rail rate through Chicago. We have already seen that the cost of delivering traffic from Atlan- tic seaboard territory upon the dock at New York, from which it is taken by the steamship to Galveston, is equivalent to a rail haul of 100 miles plus a drayage charge. The average rail haul from this same territory to Buffalo would be probably 300 miles. From Buffalo to Chicago the distance by water is approximately 900 miles. When the greater competition from these points to Chicago by rail and water as well as by all-rail lines is considered, can it be asserted that the rate on the average from Atlantic seaboard territory to Galveston should be less than that to Chicago ? Let this situation be restated. It costs the Galveston line 30 cents per 100 pounds upon the average to concentrate from Atlantic sea- SUMMARY 119 board territory first-class freight upon the dock at New York. There is a further charge for marine insurance, which is borne by the carrier, but which, in comparing the Galveston rate with the Chicago rate, may be disregarded, since the rail-and- water rate to Chicago also carries with it at the present time an item of marine insurance. We have held that the water haul from New York to Galveston may be fairly equivalent to a rail haul for 350 miles in southwestern territory. The Texas commission names a first-class rate of 80 cents for 245 miles, and the Commission has approved this as reasonable in the Shreveport case, 23 I. C. C, 31. We have just found that $1.12 is a just rate for 550 miles from Galveston to Oklahoma City. In the Cincinnati case, 18 I C. C-, 440, the Commission established as reasonable a first-class rate of 70 cents for a distance of 336 miles from Cincinnati to Chattanooga, and this rate, as stated in that opinion, is below the ordinary rate in southern territory for a corresponding number of miles We could not, certainly, establish for a distance of 350 miles with any consistency a first-class rate of less than 70 cents. But suppose, instead of taking this rate, we take the low com- petitive rate in effect at one time via the Texas City fine, which was 50 cerits, and add to that the gathering charge of 30 cents. The result would be a first-class rate of 80 cents from Atlantic seaboard terri- tory to Galveston, while the rate now in effect from New York to Chicago via rail and water is 62 cents, and the average rate from Atlantic seaboard territory would not probably differ much from that figure. The complainants have suggested that we ought to establish a rate from New York City lower than from the remainder of Atlantic seaboard territory and that we should compel rail lines leading from various points in that territory to New York to join in through rates from the point of origin. It is somewhat doubtful whether the commission has jurisdiction to do this even though the complaint was so framed as to cover the making of such an order. The statute requires us to give carriers the benefit of the long haul in establishing joint rates. Could we, for example, taking Albany again as a point of departure, establish via the New York Central, through New York to Wichita, a joint through rate, thereby depriving the New York Central of the longer haul on this business, either rail-and-lake or all-rail ? But, assuming that we might do this, the net result could only be a comparatively slight reduction in rates as at present constructed, namely, the difference between the local rates of originating lines to New York City and a fair division of the through rate to those" lines. The carriers protested against any change in the present 120 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY blanket system and the complainants did not insist upon it, except as one means of possibly forcing lower rates than the present. Great stress is laid by the complainants upon the fact that lines leading from the south Atlantic ports accept for their service up to the Mississippi River the low divisions which they do. It is said that many of these lines are no stronger than lines leading from Galveston to Wichita and to Denver, and we are asked to apply as divisions to these latter hues the same amounts per mile which the south Atlantic rail lines accept. This argument overlooks the fact that the rate via these south Atlantic ports is strictly competitive. It is the rate from New York to Chicago, whether it be by rail, by rail-and-water, or by ail-water which fixes the charge from New York through the south Atlantic port to the Mississippi River. That rate must be less than the all-rail rate or business will not move via that route. Hence, the rate can not be said to be voluntary and ought not to be used as a standard of comparison. It was said that owing to the disadvantages of the Galveston route in length of time, etc., a differential should be accorded to that route; but this is a matter in which these complainants have no interest. They are satisfied with the service via the south Atlantic ports, which is better than that via Galveston. They frankly state that the purpose of this proceeding is to secure lower rates to which they believe they are entitled by the Gulf. We do not, therefore, consider the question of differentials. We simply hold that present rates from Atlantic seaboard territory to these southwestern points are not unreasonable. No reference has been made to many of the facts shown in evidence and the arguments adduced in the course of this proceeding. The fundamental contention has been stated, and with this contention after the most patient investigation we are unable to agree. The complaints numbered 2904 and 4586 will be dismissed. An order will be entered in No. 2900 establishing from Galveston to Wichita and Oklahoma City the class rates found reasonablo, SUMMARY 121 The illustrations given of the existing rates in Western Territory show that the rates as a whole are higher than those of the territories east of the Mississippi River. As the tendency of freight rates is downward, it is quite reasonable to anticipate that as this portion of the country is developed through the vast irrigation projects and by the colonization of what is now arid territory, the increase in the volume of traffic will force the level of the current rates to a scale which will compare quite favorably with that in other sections of the country. In the preceding chapters an outline of the more im- portant rate adjustments has been given. It should be borne in mind, however, that there are many cases where the general basis must be disregarded and individual rates established without regard to the general adjust- ments. This is very effectively illustrated by the following remarks of Mr. R. S. Lovett, made before the Railroad Securities Commission in 1910. Mr. Lovett was Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Union Pacific Railroad at the time he delivered this speech. I have been rather intimately connected with the management of railroads for over twenty-five years. * * * If you ask me to state all the factors that entered into, and that still enter into, the making of rates, it is impossible for me to do so. They are as innumerable as the transactions in the commercial and business life of the nation. They grew out of the needs of each commu- nity, each station, each industry, each commodity, and each indi- vidual ; and as the needs of one of these were met the rate result- ing would often, and I may say generally, affect a different com- munity and different individuals in such other community, and require the readjustment of the rate there ; and so on almost without limit. Out of such considerations as these the present system of rates grew. * * * Such changes in rate schedules must be made from time to time; and the method of making 122 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY them must be very flexible, so as to respond to the needs and requirements of business in each community and in each indus- try, if our commercial, industrial, and agricultural development is to continue naturally. Scarcely a day passes but that some complaint is filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission or with the various state com- missions, questioning the reasonableness of rates long existing. Especially has this been true in recent years (since 1907), many axes having been ground on the carriers ' rates. The ques- tion of reasonable and unreasonable rates involves so many fac- tors that it is impossible to discuss them at this time. Suffice it to say that it must be clearly proved that the rates complained of result in the curtailment of the advantages to which a local- ity, individual, or commodity is naturally entitled. TEST QUESTIONS These questions are for the student to use in testing Lis knowledge of the assignment. The answers should be written out, but are not to be sent to the University. 1. What is the rate structure in the Territory of the South- western Tariff Committee partially the result of ? 2. What is and has been the policy of the State Railroad Commission of Texas? 3. What other system of rate-making in the United States resembles the system employed in Texas? 4. Into what territorial divisions is the State of Texas divided ? 5. AVhat are the rates for Common Point Territory? 6. In what way does this system of rate-making enable jobbing centers to compete with each other? 7. How does it affect competition between points within the state and those in adjoining territories? 8. Why cannot rates made on the distance principle stand the test of competition? 9. What are the principles of competition in this territory ? 10. How is the degree of competition between markets of production expressed? 11. What has the Interstate Commerce Commission to say relative to differentials? 12. What is direct market competition? 13. Give an illustration of the indirect competition between transportation routes. 14. AVhat kind of competition exists between carriers? 15. Name five cities that are located in Texas Common Point Territory. 16. Who promulgates the Texas intrastate class rates? Com- modity rates? 17. How are the distances between points within the State of Texas ascertained ? 18. When may a combination of local distances be employed ? 19. How are joint rates constructed? 20. Are specific rates from point to point authorized by the State Railroad Commission? 21. How are rates on the Chicago, Rock Island & Gulf Rail- way constructed? 123 124 TEST QUESTIONS 22. "Where is Differential Territory located ? 23. What is the basis for the construction of rates between points in Texas Common Point Territory and points in Texas Differential Territory? Give an illustration of the application of this basis. 24. Are exceptions made to the general basis? 25. Is the long-and-short-haul clause strictly adhered to? 26. On what general kind of commodities does the State of Texas authorize commodity rates ? 27. How are joint rates on shipments of stock cattle con- structed ? 28. What are the minimum weights on shipments of horses, mules, etc., when shipped in cars 36 feet in length ? When they are shipped in cars in excess of 40 feet in length? 29. What is the general application of the rate prescribed on live stock ? 30. How is a ' ' stable car ' ' denned ? 31. Enumerate several exceptions to the application of the general basis for rates. 32. What is the rule relative to the rule of mixed carload shipments of live stock? 33. Has the trend of the St. Louis-Texas Common Point rates been upward or downward? 34. What rates to other parts of the country does the Inter- state Commerce Commission say furnish some guide as to what are proper class rates to Texas Common Points? 35. What are the defined territories? Name a principal point in each one of them. 36. Define the differential adjustment. 37. Do the differentials from any one of the defined terri- tories fluctuate? 38. Is the basis for the construction of southbound rates the same as that employed for the construction of northbound rates ? 39. How are class rates from Texas Common Points to Utah Common Points constructed? 40. How are .rates from Texas points to Central Freight Association points constructed? 41. How would a rate from Pittsburgh-Buffalo Territory to a point in Texas Differential Territory be constructed ? 42. Via what route does the bulk of the traffic originating in Trunk Line and New England territories move into the State of Texas? 43. How are established lines defined? 44. Would you say the business from this territory is highly competitive ? Why ? TEST QUESTIONS 125 45. How does the service of the Gulf lines compare with that of the railroads? 46. To what territories do the water lines compete with the all-rail routes? 47. Define the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Com- mission over the traffic of the water carriers. 48. How do the water rates from New York to Galveston compare with the all-rail rates ? 49. What section of the country would you say enjoyed a great advantage because of the service afforded by the water routes ? 50. How are the water-and-rail rates to interior points in the State of Texas constructed ? 51. How are rates from interior seaboard points and Atlantic Seaboard territories constructed ? 52. How far west may shippers avail themselves of the serv- ice via New York? 53. Give an example of the construction of rates from an interior point in Seaboard Territory to a point in Texas Common Point Territory. 54. How are rates from Atlantic Seaboard Territory to points in Texas Differential Territory constructed? 55. What is the basis employed in the construction of com- modity rates via these routes? 56. By whom are intrastate rates in the State of Arkansas prescribed ? 57. Comparing these rates with those prescribed by the Railroad Commission of Texas, do they show any points of similarity ? 58. What is the basis for the construction of joint rates over two lines? 59. Is the same basis employed in constructing rates over three or more lines ? 60. What other system of rate-making does that employed in constructing interstate rates resemble? 61. What are the more important basing points? 62. Enumerate several of the more important Arkansas Junction Points. 63. On traffic moving from the east, what basing point enjoys the most favorable location ? 64. What is the method employed in establishing interstate rates to local points within the State of Arkansas? 65. Does the grouping of defined territories on traffic des- tined to points in Arkansas resemble that employed in the adjustment of rates to Texas? 126 TEST QUESTIONS 66. How are all-rail rates from points in Seaboard Territory to Arkansas Common Points constructed ? 67. Are differentials conceded the lines via South Atlantic and Gulf ports ? How are the rates established ? 68. "Who prescribes the intrastate rates applicable on Okla- homa traffic? 69. Give an illustration of the competition of foreign mar- kets. 70. How do the rates prescribed by the Corporation Com- mission of the State of Oklahoma compare with those prescribed by the State Kailroad Commission of Texas ? 71. What is the basis for the construction of joint rates ap- plying within the State of Oklahoma? 72. Has the order of the commission of Oklahoma been com- plied with by carriers? If so, under what circumstances? 73. On traffic destined to points within the State of Okla- homa, what jobbing centers have the advantage of location? 74. What are the more important points in the Kansas City Group ? 75. Has the adjustment employed in Southwestern Territory been a subject of complaint? 76. How may traffic from the eastern sections of the United States move to points in Southwestern Territory ? 77. What is the most recent route to be developed? 78. What is said relative to the physical condition of the lines leading west from Galveston ? 79. If rates from New York via the water line are reduced, does a similar reduction from St. Louis follow? 80. Explain the absorption principle employed by the water lines in attracting traffic to their route in Seaboard Territory. 81. Are the rates to interstate points insured or uninsured? 82. What is said in regard to the cost of insurance? 83. Is the competition between the water carriers serving the Gulf and Atlantic ports bona tide? 84. In regard to the division of the revenue, what ratio is employed relative to the water haul as contrasted with the land haul? 85. As to water navigation, how are the expenses of operation divided ? 86. What is the total distance from New York to Galveston ? 87. Assuming the movement to be from New York to Wichita, on what basis would the revenue be divided between the water lines and the rail lines ? 88. What was the Commission's conclusion'" TEST QUESTIONS 127 89. What is said with reference to the tendency of freight rates in this section of the country? 90. May the reasonableness of a rate between any two points be gauged by the general basis employed in the territory as a whole? FREIGHT RATES WESTERN TERRITORY PART 3 TRANS- CONTINENTAL TERRITORY J. A. BEHRLE Chief of Tariff Bureau Chicago & Alton Railroad 4 LASALLE extension university (Non-Resident Instruction) CHICAGO Copyright, 1914 LaSALLE EXTENSION UNIVERSITY CONTENTS I. Development of Rates and Routes Outline of Territory 1 Routes 1 Distances 6 Competition of Carriers 7 II. Grouping of Territories Grouping of Pacific Coast Territory 14 Grouping of Eastern Territory 15 Grouping of Pacific Coast Points of Origin or Des- tination 26 III. Through Rates Class Rates to and from Terminal Points 27 Marine Insurance 36 Arbitrary Rates 36 Commodity Rates 39 Class Rates on Eastbound Trans-Continental Traffic 40 Eastbound Commodity Rates 44 IV. Local Rates Local Rates in Pacific Freight Tariff Bureau Ter- ritory 46 Between Stations in California on One Hand and Sta- tions in Arizona and Nevada on the Other 46 Maximum Rates 49 From North Pacific Coast Terminals to Interior Points 50 Sources of Traffic 51 Mileage Rates 52 V. Intermediate Rates Rates to and from Intermediate Points 54 Readjustment of Rates to Reno and Related Points. . 59 Grouping of Territory for Construction of Com- modity Rates to and from Intermediate Points. ... 60 Bases for Rates 62 Rates to and from Phoenix, Ariz 63 Commodity Rates 64 Rates to Spokane, "Wash 64 Readjustment of Rates to Spokane 68 TRANS-CONTINENTAL TERRITORY CHAPTER I development of rates and routes 1. Outline of Territory This treatise is devoted to an exposition of the so- called Trans-Continental rate structure. This structure is, without question, the most comprehensive of any em- ployed in this country, as practically the entire United States is subdivided into groups, from and to which rates are published. In the comparatively small issues of the Trans-Conti- nental Freight Bureau it is possible to obtain rates be- tween Pacific Coast Terminal Points and related points on the one hand and any and all points east of and includ- ing the Colorado Common Points on the other hand. The grouping of the territory for rates to and from Pacific Coast Terminal Points is clearly indicated on Map 7 of the Atlas of Traffic Maps. This map will be found to be of much assistance in following the discussion of the general adjustment, which is given in the follow- ing chapters of this work. 2. Routes On traffic between the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States, a number of alternative routes with 2 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY varying charges are available to shippers located on and adjacent to either coast: (1) The all-water routes by way of Cape Horn for sailing vessels and through the Strait of Magellan for steamers; (2) the routes via the Isthmus of Panama in connection with the Panama Rail- road; (3) the routes via the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in connection with the Tehauntepec National Railway, transferring traffic across the isthmus by rail from Puerto Mexico to Salina Cruz, Mex. ; (4) coastwise lines to South Atlantic and Gulf ports and thence via rail; (5) rail-lake-and-rail routes during the season of navigation upon the Great Lakes; and (6) all-rail routes. The only railroad possessing a through route between the Atlantic and Pacific coasts is the Southern Pacific Railroad, which operates a subsidiary company, the Mor- gan Line of Steamers, between New York City and Gal- veston and New Orleans, transporting the traffic from Galveston and New Orleans west over its own rails or those of affiliated companies. (a) All-Water Routes The first route by which large quantities of freight were transported from coast to coast was by sailing ves- sel around Cape Horn, and indeed, even at this late date, there is a continued movement of freight by this way and means. The steamships have, however, to a great extent displaced the sailing vessels by taking advantage of the shorter but more hazardous passage through the Strait of Magellan. Moreover, it may be safely stated that, irrespective of the completion of the Panama Canal, traffic will continue to move by these routes. While sailing vessels often re- TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 3 quire 200 clays in which to complete the voyage, this very element of time is of especial advantage on some traffic. It has been stated that the wine producers in California make use of this route, claiming that the motion of the vessel for so long a time ages the product more rapidly than any other known means and enhances its value ac- cordingly. (b ) Rail-and-W ater Routes via Panama The attending perils and the length of time required by the voyage around Cape Horn led to the establish- ment, in 1848, of a shorter route by way of the Isthmus of Panama. Passengers and freight were taken to Colon by water and transferred across the isthmus to Panama by stages, or pack trains, and barges. The discovery of gold in California accelerated traffic via this route to a great extent and subsequently (in 1855) the Panama Railroad was completed across the isthmus, thus con- necting the Atlantic and Pacific terminals. This rail- road is still in existence, being operated by the United States government through the Isthmian Canal Com- mission, although its value for general traffic has been greatly impaired during the years in which the canal has been building. 1 However, when the canal is put into operation it is not unlikely that considerable use will still be made of this route for miscellaneous cargoes which, for several reasons, do not warrant the expense of canal tolls, or which may be transferred across the isthmus via rail and reshipped to destination from the i Until recently the Panama Railroad and Steamship Line have been used almost entirely in moving material for the construction of the Panama Canal. 4 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY other terminal to better advantage than by the vessel passing through the canal. (c) Rail-and-Water Routes via Isthmus of Tehuantepec The competition between the Panama route and the all-water routes around Cape Horn became so acute that in 1907 the American-Hawaiian Steamship Company, which had, in 1900, supplanted its fleet of sailing vessels (known as the Clipper Service) around Cape Horn by a fleet of steamers through the Strait of Magellan, inaug- urated a new service by way of the Isthmus of Tehuante- pec. Traffic was now borne by water from New York to Puerto Mexico (Coatzacoalcos) and thence by rail to Salina Cruz, where it was reshipped to destination. The rail carriage across the isthmus is 193 miles in length and is over the Tehuantepec National Railway, which is owned by the Mexican government. At the pres- ent time the fleet of the American-Hawaiian Steamship Company consists of some 26 vessels, built and building, of from 5,000 to 12,000 tons each. This company main- tains a weekly service, averaging five sailings monthly, from New York and from San Francisco ; the scheduled time for a voyage is 25 days to San Francisco, 35 days to Portland, Ore., and 40 days to Seattle, Wash. The company is also engaged in the Hawaiian trade and handles immense cargoes of sugar exported from that island to the United States. (d) Rail-and-Water Routes via Gulf Ports In 1883 a route linking the two seaboards was estab- lished by a coastwise steamer from New York to Gal- veston and New Orleans and thence by rail via the TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 5 Southern Pacific Railroad and allied lines to destina- tion. The steamship line between the ports is known as the Morgan Line, and is owned by the Southern Pacific Railroad and operated as their Atlantic division. It is the only rail-and-water route between the coasts wherein the participating lines are under a common manage- ment or control. The Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway has a work- ing arrangement with the Mallory Line, an independent water carrier operating between New York and Galves- ton, under which it maintains the same rates as those in effect via the route of the Southern Pacific Railroad on traffic originating at or destined to points in Seaboard Territory to or from points beyond the port of Galves- ton, including Trans-Continental business. These lines maintain such an excellent schedule, from coast to coast in from 12 to 16 days, that a large volume of the Trans- Continental traffic originating in Trunk Line Territory is forwarded via this route. (e) Rail-and-Water Routes via Great Lakes Still another route is that via the water carriers oper- ating upon the Great Lakes between their eastern and western termini and thence via the railroad carriers thereto or therefrom. The rates thus established are somewhat less than the all-rail rates, but this route is available only during the season of navigation upon the Great Lakes and does not exert any controlling influence upon the rate structure as a whole. 6 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY (f) All-Rail Routes The year of 1869 marked the completion of the Central Pacific Eaihvay, which, with the Union Pacific Railroad, formed the first all-rail through route from coast to coast. Today five great systems connect the Middle West and the Far West. These systems, together with their subsidiary lines, form many routes over which traffic may move to and from this territory, and an in- spection of the existing tariffs indicates that practically every carrier of prominence, both east and west of the Mississippi River, participates with these systems in the maintenance of through rates and routes to and from this territory. 3. Distances The distances from New York, to San Francisco via the various routes afford an interesting comparison. All water via Strait of Magellan 13,135 miles Ocean, rail, and ocean via Panama 5,270 miles Ocean, rail, and ocean via Tehuantepec 4,246 miles Ocean and rail via Galveston 4.371 miles All rail 3.1SS miles Upon the completion of the Panama Canal, the all- water routes will be somewhat shorter than the present water-rail-and-water routes, the estimated distance be- tween New York and San Francisco being 5,262 miles. The cost of operation of the present routes by way of Panama and by way of Tehuantepec is greatly increased over the all-water routes, for the reason that on such traffic at least four additional handlings of shipments are necessary: (1) the unloading of the vessel at the TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 7 isthmus, (2) the loading into cars at the eastern terminal, (3) the unloading from cars at the western terminal, and (4) the reshipping at that point. It is quite reasonable to anticipate that when the canal is completed the elimi- nation of these reshipping and loading and unloading charges, as well as an attendant reduction in expense, via the Panama route should force the rates to a still lower level than those in force at this time. 4. Competition of Carriers Having now shown the alternative routes that are available from some sections of the country, it may be well to consider just how effective the competition is between the all-water, water-and-rail, and all-rail routes. In so far as the water carriers via Cape Horn or the Isthmus of Panama or the Isthmus of Tehuantepec are concerned, rates are made only from and to the ports they touch. Persons located at interior points may avail themselves of this service by rebilling the shipment from the port of call at the local rate applying therefrom, the aggregate charges in many instances being less than the through rate of the all-rail lines. In fact, the traffic manager of one of these lines stated before the Inter- state Commerce Commission that although traffic via his line did not move in great quantities from points west of the Buffalo-Pittsburgh district, his line had handled starch from Chicago, radiators from Detroit, books and papers from Milwaukee, farm implements from South Bend, and that shipments of various kinds from points west of this line were comparatively frequent. So far the rates made by the water carriers have been sufficient in themselves to attract to these routes an 8 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY amount of traffic that taxes their present facilities to the utmost. Table 1 gives some idea of the volume of traffic handled via the water routes. TABLE 1 Volume of Inter-Coastal Water Traffic from 1906 to 1911 Tons of Tons of Freight Hawaiian Sugar Yeab Via Panama R. R. Via Isthmus of Tehuan- tepec Via Cape Horn and Strait of Magellan Via Tramp Vessel Via Isthmus of Tehuan- tepec 1906 50.S51 140,900 271,276 271,324 91,700 1907 42,229 145,900 239,553 239,63S 198,300 1908 .... 38,420 144,200 188.918 89,075 242,700 1909 46,823 312,400 74,982 75,195 248,100 1010 79,876 306,700 151,073 151,073 244.300 1911 211, 92S 458,300 137,907 138,318 290,000 No accurate figures can be obtained as to the total volume of Trans-Continental traffic, although an esti- mate by officials of the Trans-Continental roads indicated a total of 3,000,000 tons of westbound freight for the year 1909. The tonnage of the water carriers for that year was 313,558 tons, or 10.5 per cent of the total, indi- cating a westbound movement via rail of almost 90 per cent. In 1911 these figures had risen to a total of 3,481,- 600 tons, of which the water carriers secured 494,600 tons, or 14.2 per cent of the total, and the rail lines 2,987,- 000 tons, or 85.8 per cent. From this it is seen that water competition does exist and that it exerts no little influence upon the rates that the rail carriers may charge; while there are some ar- ticles that the water lines do not care to or are not per- TRANS-CONTINEXTAL RATES 9 mitted to handle, these articles are but a small precent- age of the total volume, and the all-rail structure must be built with a wholesome respect for the rates applied via the water lines. At this time six water lines have signified their inten- tion of participating in Trans-Continental traffic upon the opening of the Panama Canal. Thus, it may be seen that in the very near future the Trans-Continental rail- roads will be called upon to meet a competition by water which will be much more aggressive than any they have been compelled to meet in the past, not only in so far as rates are concerned, but in regard to service as well, for it is anticipated that the time of the present voyage be- tween the coasts will be reduced to about two weeks. The direct effect of the present competition is felt by the all-rail carriers at points where the aggregate of the water rates plus the rates from or to the ports makes a lower rate than that which would apply via rail under normal conditions. It is practically impossible to show by specific tariff reference the rates that are made by the water lines, be- cause these carriers are not subject to the same regula- tions governing the posting and filing of tariffs with the Interstate Commerce Commission as the all-rail lines are subject to, but base their rates, in some instances, on the volume of traffic offered and tlie tonnage that they have in sight for their ships. It is generally admitted, however, that on what is known as the Merchant Iron List, which constitutes very attractive tonnage to the water lines on account of the density of its loading, the rate from New York City to California terminals is ap- proximately 60 cents per 100 pounds. The rate from Pittsburgh, Pa., to New York City is 18 cents per 100 10 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY pounds, which produces a combination rate of 78 cents per 100 pounds. The all-rail lines must approximate this rate if they desire to secure any of the traffic for all-rail move- ment; as a consequence, the rate on this Merchant Iron List via all-rail lines is 80 cents on structural iron and 85 and 90 cents on other iron articles. The all-rail car- riers may not publish the same rate in cents per one hundred pounds as is obtainable via the water routes, for the reason that shipments via water routes are sub- ject to certain charges outside of freight rates that affect the value of the service to the shipper, viz.: (1) Insur- ance must be placed covering the marine risk; (2) inter- est is charged on the invoice value of the goods; and (3) TABLE 2 Commodity Rates from New York via Lines Operating Therefrom to Pacific Coast Cities Commodities Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Via All-Rail Lines i Harvesters, reapers, etc., C. L Beer (malt extract) in glass or stone, packed or in wood, C. L Coffee (roasted) in boxes, barrels, or] drums, C. L Cotton sheets and sheetings, C. L Iron billets, blooms, ingots, and scran steel, C. L Condensed milk in tins, glass packed in boxes, or in wood, C. L Nails, spikes, and wire, C. L 100 110 100 CO 85 TO Via Panama Lines 88 88 77 70 45 00 55 Via American- Hawaiian Lines 85 GO 70 65 40 60 55 1 Governed by the Western Classification. TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 11 shipments via water routes require better packing than shipments via all rail. These reasons permit the all-rail lines to fix their rates somewhat higher than the actual figures obtainable via the water routes. To illustrate further the water rates which must be met by the all-rail lines, Table 2 shows the rates from New York via lines operating from that point on some of the principal commodities carried by them to Pacific Coast cities. It is to be noted that in all instances the rates via the isthmus lines are considerably lower than those applying by rail. Within the past two decades the industrial movement has been westward, so that now practically the same classes of manufacturers are located in the central and middle states as are located in eastern and New England states, and naturally they are in competition with each other in the world's markets. In respect to traffic destined to the Pacific Coast, the western manu- facturer is in a peculiar position, for, although he is ap- proximately 1,000 miles nearer than the manufacturer located in New York, he must pay a rate which is from one-third to one-half higher than that paid by his com- petitor in the East. Therefore, it is quite obvious that unless some relief were accorded him, placing him on a relative footing with the eastern manufacturer, he would be under so great a handicap that it would be impossible for him to compete with the business interests in and about the eastern seaboard, and, as a result, the east- ern competitors could hold the balance of trade in the Pacific slope regions to the detriment of the western manufacturers. Likewise, it would compel the Pacific 12 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY coast merchant or jobber to purchase his supplies in one market. In speaking of this adjustment of the rates, the Inter- state Commerce Commission, through Mr. Prouty, says : Carriers maintain the same transcontinental rate from Chi- cago as from New York, not by reason of the direct effect, but rather as an indirect result of water competition. The reason for this will be best understood by an actual illustration. Assume that a building requiring the use of a large amount of structural steel is to be erected in San Francisco. That steel is manu- factured both at the seaboard and in Chicago. That which is made at the seaboard can be taken by water from the point of origin to the point of destination, and the rate at which it can move is therefore determined by water competition. The cost of producing steel is the same at both points. In order, therefore, that the producers may stand an equal chance in competing for this business it is necessary that the rate from both points should be the same, and the business can not move from Chicago unless the rate from that point is as low as from the seaboard. The Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway begins at Chi- cago. If this steel is bought at Chicago and moves by that line, the entire freight money is retained by it; if, upon the other hand, the steel is bought at New York, moved by some line to Chicago, and there delivered to the Santa Fe, that line receives only a part of the through charge. The service performed by it is the same in either case, but the amount of its compensation is larger when the freight originates at Chicago. It is there- fore for the interest of that line to name a rate from Chicago which will originate the business at that point instead of allow- ing it to originate upon the seaboard. The interest of the line from New York to Chicago is that the business should be taken up at New York, and as a compromise it is finally agreed to apply the same rate from both these points. This clearly shows how water competition, if it does not actually extend to the interior point, may and does dictate the rate from that point. What would he true of the steel entering into the construe- TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 13 tion of this building is true also of almost every article of commerce which moves between the East and the West. The Middle West today manufactures nearly everything which is produced upon the Atlantic seaboard, and the effect of this policy of the railroads has been to make the Middle West the almost exclusive market of origin for the intermountain coun- try and largely for the Pacific coast itself. 2 2 21 I. C. C. Rep., 422. CHAPTER II grouping of territories 1. Grouping of Pacific Coast Territory For rate-making purposes, so far as the Western states on or adjacent to the Pacific Ocean are concerned, the destinations in Pacific Coast Territory are grouped under two general divisions, viz., Terminal Points x and Intermediate Points. The Terminal Points are subdi- vided into two groups, namely, the North Pacific Coast Terminals and the California Terminals. The former comprise points in the states of Oregon and Washington and the latter certain stations in California. Repre- sentative points in the northern group are Seattle and Tacoma, Wash., and Portland, Ore.; in the southern group, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, and San Diego, Cal. Many of the Terminal Points are not located on the seaboard, but are, by reason of their com- mercial importance and the ease with which they may be reached from the seacoast, accorded the terminal basis of rates. The rates to these points are made considerably less than the rates to points much further inland. Assuming that the water carriers' net rate from port to port on a given division of traffic is 40 cents and that the normal rail rate is 60 cents, traffic would be forwarded by way of the water line only from such inland points from i See Traffic Glossary (Part 4 of Freight Classification). 14 TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 15 or to which the rate to or from the steamship pier plus the steamship line 's net rate would result in a lower rate than that currently in effect via the rail line. These inland points are known as Intermediate Points and the specific, construction of rates to them will be dealt with in a succeeding chapter of this treatise. Rep- resentative Intermediate Points are Reno, Nev., Phoenix, Tucson, and Maricopa, Ariz., and Spokane, Wash. 2. Grouping of Eastern Territory The portion of the United States lying east of the Rocky Mountains is divided into nine irregular groups, designated as Groups A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and J. From the outlines of these groups, which are very clearly indicated on Map 7 of the Atlas of Traffic Maps, it may be seen that some states are in more than one group and that the southeastern part of the country is not assigned to any group. In connection with the rates shown on Map 7, it will be noted that the class rates westward to a great ex- tent decrease. It must be' taken into consideration, how- ever, that a large part of the Trans-continental traffic moves on commodity rates and that the same rates often apply on a particular commodity from a number of the groups ; for example, it is very common to find the same rates applying on specific articles from New York and Chicago to Trans-continental Territory. 16 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY In the publications of the Trans-Continental Freight Bureau, the territorial application is specifically shown in each issue in such a manner that there can be no doubt as to which group a point may be assigned. The follow- ing excerpt from one of these publications illustrates the manner in which this information is given. Application of Tariff Points from Which Rates Named Apply Rates Applicable Alabama : points on following lines as provided below : Alabama Great Southern Railroad— All points, includ- ing Birmingham, via New Orleans, La., and via Yicks- burg, Miss. Illinois Central Railroad— All points, including Birm- ingham. Louisville & Nashville Railroad — Mobile, Ala., only. Mobile & Ohio Railroad — All points west of Tuscaloosa and Birmingham, both inclusive; west of Kellerman, inclusive; and west of Mobile, Alabama Port, and Bayou LaBatre, all inclusive. Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway— All points, including Gadsden and Attalla. New Orleans, Mobile & Chicago Railroad — All points. Northern Alabama Railway — All points. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad — All points, includ- ing Birmingham, Bessemer, and points between. Southern Railway — Stations west of Chattanooga, Tenn., and west of Irondale. Gate City, and Birming- ham, all inclusive, also Alabama City. Attalla, and Gadsden, and all stations between Birmingham and Bessemer, inclusive, but not including any stations south of Bessemer. Arkansas : all points. Group C rates Group E rates TRAXS-COXTIXEXTAL RATES 17 Application of Tariff — Continued Canada : Garneau Grand Shawinigan Windsor Group C Junction, Que . Mere Que. Falls Que . Mills Que. Hull Qi je. Ottawa . . . .Out. (Application of rates from above-named stations is limited rates to rates on Newspaper) . Colorado : Group Julesburg. . Wt ir G rates Abeyta Bovina Dixon (Lari- Gilcrest Acequia Bo wen mer Co.) Gilkison Spur Acme Junction Boyds Dixon (Weld Gill Adna Boyero Co.) Glade Adrian Bracewell Dixon's Mill Glick Ady Bradbury Dodd Glover Agate Bragdon Dorsey Godfrey Aguilar Castile Douglas Golden Akron Castle Rock Dover Goodale Albia Catherine Downer Henkle Alfalfa Cedar Point Drakes Herrick Amberst Celeryvale Dresden Highland G roup Amity Chandler Dundee Hillrose J Anstees Chandler Jet. Dupont Hillsboro \- Apacbe Channing Eads Hill Top Apgar Spur Chapman Earl Hilton Black Hollow Chemung Eastlake Hodgson Blandin Cheraw Eastonville Hoehne's Blende Cheyenne Gallinas Holly Bloom Wells Gann Holyoke Boaz Chico Garcia Hope Boettcber's Chicosa Jet. Gates Hudson Boone Chivington Geddis Spur Huerfano Boulder Church's Genoa Hugo Boulder Jet. Water Tank Giddings Hurrich This grouping was adopted by the carriers at the close of 1908. Prior to this the blanketing of rates was not ex- tended west of certain Missouri River points and did not include the territory between there and the Rocky Moun- tains nor did it include Southwestern Tariff Committee Territory. At that time the six groups were designated as (1) Missouri River Common Point Territory, (2) Mis- 18 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY sissippi River Common Point Territory, (3) Chicago Common Point Territory, (4) Cincinnati-Detroit Com- mon Point Territory, (5) Pittsburgh-Buffalo Common Point Territory, and (6) New York-Boston Common Point Territory. The present plan, however, differs but slightly, except in so far as the extension of the system is concerned, from that previously in effect. Under the old system Chicago was shown in Chicago Common Point Territory, while under the present plan Chicago, as a point of origin or destination, is shown as a Group D point. This change was brought about in order to make the tariffs conform to the requirement of the Interstate Commerce Commission prohibiting the use of territorial descrip- tions to indicate points from and to which rates were ap- plied. The present method of publishing rates is one of the most satisfactory in the country. Rates made under such a system are generally more equitable and stimulate a healthier trade competition than those made under a graded or mileage scale principle. A blanket system not only opens up a large market of production to the people on the Pacific slope, but it places the manufacturinig and commercial districts, situated at approximately equal distances from the points of con- sumption, upon the same basis. On the other hand, the California fruit grower, for instance, is enabled to dis- pose of his products at all markets east of the Mississippi River at the same rate of freight, which would be impos- sible under any other scheme of rate-making. Some doubt has existed in the minds of many persons interested in transportation as to the propriety of a carrier, an association, or the Interstate Commerce Com- TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 19 mission prescribing rates involving such large areas of territory. In several cases the lower courts have set aside orders of the Commission wherein it has prescribed blanket or zone rates, stating that it had no power, by the use of differentials, to divide up the country artifi- cially into trade zones, tributary to given trade and manu- facturing centers so as to give the Commission power to pre-determine what the trade and manufacturing centers should be. In numerous instances, however, these de- cisions have been carried by the Interstate Commerce Commission to the Supreme Court of the United States, where the verdict of the lower court has been reversed. This question, however, seems to have been definitely decided for all time by the recent decision of the United States Supreme Court in connection with the so-called Intermountain Rate Case, which decision was delivered June 22, 1914. In this case, the Interstate Commerce Commission divided the portion of the United States east of and including Missouri River Territory into five groups and prescribed rates to intermountain cities therefrom. The carriers, in petitioning the Supreme Court to set aside the order of the lower courts, alleged : (a) The absolute want of power of the court below to deal with the subject involved in the complaint because contro- versies concerning the fourth section of the Act to regulate com- merce of the nature here presented were by an express statutory provision excluded from the cognizance of the court below, (b) That even if this be not the ease the action of the Com- mission which was complained of was purely negative and therefore not within the cognizance of the court because not inherently justifiable, (c) That correctly interpreting the fourth section, the order made by the Commission was abso- lutely void because wholly beyond the scope of any power con- ferred by the fourth section as amended, (d) That even if in 20 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY some respects the order of the Commission was within the reach of its statutory power there was intermingled in the order such an exertion of authority not delegated as to cause the whole order to be void, (e) That the order of the com- mission was void even if the fourth section be interpreted as conferring the authority which the Commission exerted, since under that assumption the fourth section as amended was repugnant to the Constitution. 2 The allegations of the carriers were considered by the Supreme Court and its conclusions were as follows : 1. The meaning of the statute. * * * Power in the carrier primarily to meet competitive conditions in any point of view by charging a lesser rate for a longer than for a shorter haul has ceased to exist, because to do so, in the absence of some authority, would not only be inimical to the provision of the fourth section, but would be in conflict with the preference and discrimination clauses of the second and third sections. But while the public power, so to speak, previously lodged in the carrier is thus withdrawn and reposed in the Commission, the right of carriers to seek and obtain under authorized circumstances the sanction of the Commission to charge a higher rate for a longer than for a shorter haul because of competition or for other adequate rea- sons is expressly preserved, and, if not, is in any event by nec- essary implication granted. And as a correlative the authority of the Commission to grant on request the right sought is made by the statute to depend upon the facts established, and the judgment of that body in the exercise of a sound legal dis- cretion as to whether the request should be granted compatibly with a due consideration of the private and public interests con- cerned, and in view of the preference and discrimination clauses of the second and third sections. 2 136 — The United States of America, Interstate Commerce Commis- sion et al., Appellants, v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. et al. 162 — The United States of America, Interstate Commerce Commission et al., Appellants, v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. et al. TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 21 2. The alleged repugnancy of the section as amended to the Constitution. * * * The argument is that the statute as correctly con- strued is but a delegation to the Commission of legislative power which Congress was incompetent to make. But the con- tention is without merit. * * * It is said in the argument on behalf of one of the carriers that as in substance and effect the duty is imposed upon the Commission in a proper case to refuse an application, therefore the law is void, because in such a contingency the statute would amount to an imperative enforcement of the long-and-short-haul clause and would be repugnant to the Constitution. It is conceded in the argu- ment that it has been directly decided by this court that a general enforcement of the. long-and-short-haul clause would not be repugnant to the Constitution (Louisville & N. R. R. Co. vs. Kentucky, 183 U. S. 503), but we are asked to reconsider and overrule the case and thus correct the error which was manifested in deciding it. But we are not in the remotest degree inclined to enter into this inquiry, not only because of the reasons which were stated in the case itself, but also because of those already expounded in this opinion and for an addi- tional reason, which is that the contention by necessary impli- cation assails the numerous cases which from the enactment of the Act to regulate commerce down to the present time have involved the adequacy of the conditions advanced by carriers for justifying their departure from the long-and-short-haul clause. We say this because the controversies which the many cases referred to considered and decided by a necessary postu- late involved an assertion of the validity of the legislative power to apply and enforce the long-and-short-haul clause. How can it be otherwise, since if this were not the case all the issues presented in the numerous cases would have been merely but moot, affording, therefore, no basis for judicial action, since they would have had back of them no sanction of lawful power whatever ? 3. The jurisdiction of the court. The argument on this subject is twofold: (a) That as by the act creating the Commerce Court, that court was endowed 22 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY only with the jurisdiction "now possessed by the circuit courts of the United States and the judges thereof" and provided that "nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed as enlarging the jurisdiction now possessed by the circuit courts of the United States or the judges thereof, and is hereby trans- ferred to and vested in the Commerce Court," and as new powers were created by the subsequent amendment of the fourth section, therefore the Commerce Court had no jurisdiction. But we pass any extended discussion of the proposition, because it is completely disposed of by the construction which we have given to the amended section, since that construction makes it clear that the effect of the amended fourth section was not to create new powers theretofore non-existing, but simply to redis- tribute the powers already existing and which were then subject to review. * * * (b) The second contention as to jurisdiction yet further affords an illustration of the same mental attitude, since it rests upon the assumption that the order of the Commission refusing to grant the request of the carrier made under the fourth section was purely negative and hence was not subject to judicial inquiry. The contention, therefore, presupposes that the power which from the beginning has been the subject of judicial review by the mere fact of its transfer to the Com- mission was made arbitrary. Besides, the proposition disre- gards the fact that the right to petition the Commission con- ferred by the statute is positive and, while the refusal to grant it may be in one sense negative, in another and broader view it is affirmative, since it refuses that which the statute in affirma- tive terms declares shall be granted if only the conditions which the statute provides are found to exist. It is, of course, true, as pointed out in Interstate Commerce Commission vs. Illinois Central Railroad, 215 U. S. 452, 470, and since repeatedly applied, that findings of fact made by the Commission within the scope of its administrative duties must be accepted in case of judicial review, but that doctrine, as was also pointed out, does not relieve the courts in a proper case from determining whether the Constitution has been violated or whether statu- tory powers conferred have been transcended or have been exer- TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 23 cised in such an arbitrary way as to amount to the exertion of authority not given, doctrines which but express the elementary principle that an investiture of a public body with discretion does not imply the right to abuse, but, on the contrary, carries with it as a necessary incident the command that the limits of a sound discretion be not transcended, which, by necessary implication, carries with it the existence of judicial power to correct wrongs clone by such excess. And, without pausing to particularly notice it, we observe in passing that what has been said is adequate to meet the contention that as violations of the fourth section were made criminal no power existed to enjoin an order of the Commission made under that section, because the consequence would be to enjoin criminal prosecution. The right which, as we have seen the act gives to test the validity of orders rendered under the fourth section, is not to be destroyed by a reference to a provision of that section. The two must be harmoniously enforced. 4. The validity of the order in the light of the statute as interpreted. * * * The main insistence is that there was no power after recognizing the existence of competition and the right to charge a lesser rate to the competitive point than to intermedi- ate points to do more than fix a reasonable rate to the inter- mediate points, that is to say, that under the power transferred to it by the section as amended the Commission was limited to ascertaining the existence of competition and to authorizing the carrier to meet it without any authority to do more than exercise its general powers concerning the reasonableness of rates at all points. But this proposition is directly in conflict with the statute, as we have construed it and with the plain pur- pose and intent manifested by its enactment. To uphold the proposition it would be necessary to say that the powers which were essential to the vivification and beneficial realization of the authority transferred had evaporated in the process of transfer, and hence that the power perished as the result of the act by which it was conferred. As the prime object of the transfer was to vest the Commission within the scope of the discretion imposed and subject in the nature of things to the limitations 24 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY arising from the character of the duty exacted and flowing from the other provisions of the act with authority to consider competitive conditions and their relation to persons and places, necessarily there w T ent with the power the right to do that by which alone it could be exerted, and therefore a consideration of the one and the other and the establishment of the basis by per- centages was within the power granted. As will be seen by the order, and as we have already said, for the purpose of the per- centages, established zones of influence were adopted and the percentages fixed as to such zones varied or fluctuated upon the basis of the influence of the competition in the designated areas. As we have pointed out, though somewhat modified, the zones as thus selected by the Commission were in substance the same as those previously fixed by the carriers as the basis of the rate making which was included in the tariffs which were under investigation, and therefore we may put that subject out of view. Indeed, except as to questions of power, there is no con- tention in the argument as to the inequality of the zones or per- centages or as to any undue preference or discrimination result- ing from the action taken. But be this as it may, in view of the findings of the Commis- sion as to the system of rates prevailing in the tariffs which were before it, of the inequalities and burdens engendered by such system, of the possible aggrandizement unnaturally beyond the limits produced by competition in favor of the competitive points and against other points by the tariff in question, facts which we accept and which, indeed, are unchallenged, we see no ground for saying that the order was not sustained by the facts upon which it was based or that it exceeded the powers which the statute conferred or transcended the limits of the sound legal discretion which it lodged in the Commission when acting upon the subject before it. It results that the Commerce Court in enjoining the order of the Commission was wrong and its decree to that end must therefore be reversed and the case be remanded to the proper district court with directions to dismiss the bill for want of equity. TABLE 3 List op Stations in Oregon, Washington, and British Colum- bia to Which Rates Named Herein Apply, Showing Delivering Lines, Rates Applicable, and Western Gateways via Which Said Rates Apply (Ex- cept as Otherwise Specifically Shown) x Delivering Lines Rates Applicable Stations Class Index No. Commodity Note (Except as Noted) Bellingham, Wash. . . . A. P. S. S. Co. 2 Terminal 32 Bellingham, Wash.... B. & N. 2 Terminal 32 Bellingham, Wash.... B. L. T. Co. 2 Terminal 32 Bellingham, Wash.... G.N. 2 Terminal .... Bellingham, Wash.... I. B. S. S. Co. 2 Terminal 32 Bellingham, Wash.... N. P. 2 Terminal .... Bellingham, Wash.... P. C. S. S. Co. 2 Terminal 32 Bellingham, Wash.. . . I. N. Co. 2 Terminal 32 Bellingham, Wash.. . . P. S. N. S. R. 2 Terminal 32 Bellingham, Wash.... B.&N. J 2 Terminal 32 (Kentucky Street) 1 2 Terminal 21,32 Boat Harbor, B. C... C. P. Note 3 Note 3 3, 20 Boat Harbor. B. C... G.N. Note 3 Note 3 3, 20, 24 Boat Harbor, B. C G. T. P. C. S. S. Co. Note 3 Note 3 3, 20,32 Boat Harbor, B. C. . . . I. N. Co. Note 3 Note 3 3, 32 Boat Harbor, B. C P. S. N. S. R. Note 3 Note 3 3, 20, 32 Bon Accord, B. C. . . . G. N. 3 Note 2 2 Bonita, Ore 0. E. 2 Note 15 15 Bonita, Ore S. P. 2 Note 14 14 Bremerton, Wash P. W. & Co. Note 13 Note 13 13, 33 Bremerton, Wash I. B. S. S. Co. Note 13 Note 1 3 13,33 Bremerton, Wash I. N. Co. Note 13 Note 13 13, 33 Bremerton, Wash M. T. Co. Note 13 Note 13 13,33 Bremerton, Wash N. Y. R. Note 13 Note 13 13, 33 P. S. N. S. R. Note 13 Note 13 13,33 Broadacres, Ore 0. E. 2 Note 15 15 S. P. 2 Note 14 14 Brush Prairie, Wash. N. P. 2 Note 1 1 Bruun, Ore O.-W. R. & N. 2 Terminal 20, 30-A Burlington, Ore C. T. Co. o Terminal Burlington, Ore J. K. T. Co. o Terminal .... Burlington, Ore O. R. L. Co. 2 Terminal Burlington, Ore O.-W. R. & N. Stmr. 2 Terminal .... Burlington, Ore S. P. & S. 2 Terminal Burlington, Ore V. T. Co. 2 Terminal .... Burlington, Wash.... G.N. 2 Note 1 1 Burlington, Wash.... P. N. T. 2 Note 1 1 2 Note 4 Note 8 Note 4 g Port Williams, Wash. B. L. T. Co. 4, 33 Port Williams, Wash. I. B. S. S. Co. Note 4 Note 4 4.33 Port Williams, Wash. 1. N. Co. Note 4 Note 4 4. 33 Port Williams, Wash. P. S. N. S. R. Note 4 Note 4 4, 33 Powell River, B. C. . B. L. T. Co. Note 12 Note 12 12, 20, 32 Powell River, B. C. . . F. W. & Co. Note 12 Note 12 12, 20, 32 Powell River, B. C. . . K. N. Co. Note 12 Note 12 12, 20, 32 Ruskin, B. C C. P. 3 Note 2 2 Ruskin, B. C G.N. 3 Note 2 2. 23, 31 1 These rates have been taken from Trans-Continental Tariff 4-K. 26 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 3. Grouping of Pacific Coast Points of Origin or Destination The publications of the Trans-Continental Freight Bu- reau show in each instance a list of the points in Pacific Coast Territory to which or from which rates are ap- plied. The issues show, also, whether the terminal basis of rates is to be employed or whether rates are to be arbitrarily established with relation thereto. Table 3 is illustrative of the manner in which this information is set forth. CHAPTER III through rates 1. Class Rates to and from Terminal Points As a foreword to this chapter, attention is drawn to the fact that, irrespective of the point of origin of the traffic, the rates are subject to the Western Classification. This classification is applied regardless of whether the traffic originates at or is destined to points in Southern or Official Classification territories. This is due to the fact that Chicago and the territory west thereof is governed by the Western Classification, and as the rates are through rates and the major portion of the haul is over western lines, one classification has been adopted for the purpose of uniformity and sim- plicity. In the event, however, that the Trans-Continental rates are used in combination with other rates to construct through rates, the rates used in combination with the Trans-Continental rates are applied in conjunction with their governing classification. Thus, for example, should a shipment originate in the southeastern section of the United States and the lowest combination available be via Birmingham, Ala., the rates to Birmingham, if inter- state, would be governed by the Southern Classification, while the rates from Birmingham to San Francisco, Cal., would be governed by the Western Classification. Like- wise, the rates to some inland Pacific points are made 27 28 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY by adding to the Terminal rates certain local rates there- from which are governed by state classifications. But in so far as the major part of the territory is concerned, the Western Classification is applied. Such exceptions to the application of the rates as are made by the participating carriers are specifically set forth in the issues of the Trans-Continental Freight Bu- reau in connection with the rates, as are also the special rules and regulations pertaining to the traffic, routing, etc. This has resulted in a tariff publication that is much more readily digested by the layman than the average committee issue, now so much in vogue. (a) All-Rail Rates In Table 4 are set forth the westbound class rates ap- plying from all eastern points of origin to North Pacific Coast Terminals in Oregon and Washington. These rates, as may be observed from Map 7 in the Atlas of Traffic Maps, vary slightly from those in effect to California Terminals from some groups. The points in British Columbia referred to are located on and adjacent to Puget Sound, some of the representa- tive points being Liverpool, New Westminster, Van- couver, and Victoria. To the British Columbia Termi- nals, the rates on all classes are made arbitraries of 5 cents per hundredweight over the rates currently in effect from Groups A, B, C, D, E, and H to North Pacific Coast Terminals; from Groups F, G, and J the same rates are applied to North Pacific Coast Terminals and to terminals in British Columbia. TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 29 Eh o H fc 1 ri 111 rt » <1 O £ fa o Q 55 oa a < P CO H 55 n 55 i— i u o O O w Ph OS W O CO Hrt 55 os 55 H OS N **o H a? l-H CO < ■^ 55 w £ H-( hrt rt m a OS u OS fa Eh 55 a CJ H co OS fa Eh 1 <5 O CJ O fa a fc i— i fa hrt ft © GO 10 M io io " n OOOOfflOOSSlOt- i-l © iffl :i o n fi co m io o HrlHOOSOOW © l- ci t~ O O O O o M H O ffi C. rt W -1 QO 1.0 © 1.0 :: cc co © c CO lo © io LO ^ -r co :i CO :i © r. t- 01 00 00 1- 01 t- © M © t- © t- © 1< t- rtj ci r. t~ ci 00 00 © © © (0 go © © 10 © LO 00 © © LO © 10 © 10 © M ©GC00t-©©©t~rt o f. * 00 t- rt r- tiHrHrHT-^THTHr-l r- I r^ r-t tH i— © IO CO © t- IO LO •» CO rt©©©©0000Ot- H H rl H © © t- 01 tH © h- CO CO © © H O O) C6 H 00 10 CN © LO © LO LO LO CO n w fi h h ffi c h oo © © © © © © 00 •* io©wt-©cocot-© ClClrtOOOOOOO© N CI MCI M rt H M H 10 © 01 10 00 © © LO © © © LO -* CO 01 CI Tt< © .1 01 01 01 01 M CI N H © © CO LO W © © LO l» MHOCSWttCfflCI co co co oi oi ci oi ci o» M ©OOO©©©©© [- © LO Tf CO © © T*H © CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 01 © lo © oi lo co co oi e M M CI ri O CO '/. rt O 01 01 01 CI CI rt rt CI rt ©LOt-OCO©©©© t- © LO LO t* 01 N LO © CI M CI CI M CI CI CI H 1OL0 00OOOCO10 01 rt © © © © © o 01 CO CO CO CO 01 01 CI CO 01 LO LO LO LO LO © © LO © t~©L0rtCC©©Tj<© cocOcocococococooi o 7, s «i H CO H 3 (rt Group A rates Group B rates Group C rates Group D rates Group E rates Group F rates Group G rates Group II rates Group J rates Group A rates Group B rates Group C rates Group D rates Group E rates Group F rates Group G rates Group II rates Group J rates o a o +-> CJD a 3 CO M * 8) •/) a a « I* a S3 H 00 o - rt fa ■O bJ3 a c ri 3 GCl +J °* ^ js .S 8 a 3 H — 3 O S O o xi a Oi w +-1 ■»-> EE kl t- oa a cd a g C "H UJ E> CO E S o S " 5 CU p d a> +j to a) -M 3 c i- c- 3 o 4> XI 4-> >, X2 •o c 3 i- o > o a ocj t» O "O O ^ «N 3 a ■4-a c o O M 30 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY (b) Class Rates via Lake-and-Rail Routes The application of the class rates in connection with the lake lines is confined to traffic originating at all points located in Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Colum- bia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and at specified stations in Michigan, Ohio, Virginia, and West Virginia, and the territory embracing Groups A, B, and a portion of C. The differentials conceded the lake lines by the all-rail routes are shown in Table 5. These differentials are deducted from the joint all-rail through class or commodity rates named in the table from points taking Group A (see Exception C, below the table), Group B, or Group C rates to points taking Terminal rates. The differentials, in cents per 100 pounds, authorized to be deducted from the joint all-rail through class or commodity rates applying to points taking Terminal rates, also are deducted from the joint through all-rail class or commodity rates applying from points in Group A (see Exception C, below the table), Group B, or Group C to points in Oregon, Washington, and British Colum- bia, for the same class of commodity. TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 31 TABLE 5 Differential Rates via Lake and Rail » 80 to 85 to 30 to 95 to Where Through All-Kail GrouiTA ( See ExceptioiTc below), Group B, or Group O Class or Commodity Rate to Points Taking Terminal Kates is (See Exceptions and Notes below) Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Less than 75 cents i 75 to 70 cents, inclusive i S4 cents, inclusive 89 cents, inclusive 94 cents, inclusive 9!) cents, inclusive 100 to 109 cents, inclusive 110 to 119 cents, inclusive 120 to 129 cents, inclusive 130 to 139 cents, inclusive 140 to 149 cents, inclusive 150 to 159 cents, inclusive 1C0 to 169 cents, inclusive 170 to 179 cents, inclusive ISO to 189 cents, inclusive 190 to 199 cents, inclusive 200 to 209 cents, inclusive 210 to 219 cents, inclusive 220 to 229 cents, inclusive 230 to 239 cents, inclusive 2-10 to 249 cents, inclusive 250 to 259 cents, inclusive 2G0 to 2G9 cents, inclusive 270 to 279 cents, inclusive 280 to 2S9 cents, inclusive 290 to 299 cents, inclusive 300 or over Differential to be deducted from authorized through all-rail rate is 4J cents 5 J cents (U cents 7i cents Si cents S£ cents 9* cents 10 cents 11 cents 12 cents 13 cents 14 cents 15 cents 15 cents 15 cents 16 cents 17 cents 18 cents IS cents 19 cents 19 cents 20 cents 21 cents 22 cents 22 cents 23 cents Exception A. — When through rate on commodities enumerated under headings "Iron and Steel Articles' and "Wire Goods" is $1.00 per 100 lbs., or higher, the differential is the regular differential provided above ; when such through rate is less than $1.00 per 100 lbs., the differ- ential is 4J cents per 100 lbs. Exception B. — The lake-and-rail differential to be deducted from the authorized through all-rail rate on canned goods, carloads, is 5 cents per 100 lbs. Exception C. — Does not apply from New York Pier of Southern Pacific Co.-Atlantic Steamship Lines (Morgan Line). 1 These differentials are taken from Trans-Continental Tariff 4-K. 32 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Note 1. — Lake-and-rail rates to points in British Columbia taking Note 2 basis for rates, 2 are subject to additional rates over points taking Terminal rates as provided in Note 2. 3 Note 2. — Lake-and-rail rates to points in Oregon and Washington taking Note 1, 4, 6, 7, or 13, basis for rates, 2 for commodities other than those for which through rates are named are subject to addition of arbitraries (over the lake-and-rail rates) applying to points taking Terminal rates, as provided in the aforesaid notes.3 Note 3. — The differential lake-and-rail rates applying via the Gate- ways apply only to such points that can be reached by the destination lines indicated. Note 4. — The differential lake-and-rail rates authorized herein do not apply on the following commodities, viz. : Chloride of lime (except as otherwise provided), oil, sweat and collar pads, harness pads (not leather), tin, and terne plate. As an illustration of the working of these differentials, class rates from Groups A, B, and C are constructed in the following manner : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E All-rail rates from Group A 370 320 205 225 190 102 152 120 115 105 Lake-and-rail dif- ferentials 23 23 20 18 15 15 13 10 9! 81 Through rates via lake and rail... 347 297 245 207 175 177 139 110 105! 961 Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E All-rail rates from Group B 360 310 260 220 185 1S7 148 117 112 100 Lake-and-rail dif- ferentials 23 23 20 18 15 15 12 9i 9! 81 Through rates via lake and rail... 337 287 240 202 170 172 136 1073 1021 91! Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E All-rail rates from Group C 350 303 252 215 180 182 145 115 110 9S Lake-and-rail differ- entials 23 23 19 17 15 15 12 94 91 81 Through rates via lake and rail... 327 2S0 233 198 165 167 133 1051 100! 891 * See Table 3. * See explanation of notes, page 37. TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 33 These rates are available for use only during the sea- son of navigation upon the Great Lakes and are applied to North Pacific Coast Terminals and related points. (c) Water-and-Rail Rates via South Atlantic and Gulf Ports The water-and-rail routes through the South Atlantic and Gulf ports formerly published class and commodity rates from New York, N. Y., and other points in Atlantic Seaboard Territory which were less in all cases than the rail rates applying from the same territory. Under the present adjustment, however, the rates via these routes are the same as the all-rail rates, in so far as class traffic is concerned, while on commodities the same rates as those established from Chicago (Group D) are made by the water lines from New York, these rates applying only from their piers in New York harbor. The competition existing between the rival routes is well ex- pressed in the rates on steel rails from various producing points to California Terminals, as shown in Table 6. From this it may be seen that the rates via the Gulf lines and South Atlantic Port lines are fixed or made the same as those applying from Chicago (Group D). The rates from New York then in turn fix the maximum rates that may be charged by the rail carriers from other pro- ducing points. The rates from Cumberland, Md., for ex- ample, may not exceed to any great extent the combina- tion rates made on New York in connection with the $11 per ton rate therefrom, while from points in closer prox- imity to New York, the rail carriers do not attempt to meet the competition, but hold the rates up to a normal FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY > a «£ o QS o o5 «^o) •FN EH to w p U 00 HI 03 0) P t) 00 X, a o CS fa 5£ — a; o ^ a So E 1 I - 03 -■ o o o a§ x K •o a CO O ? ™ V a o ■a 0) ft QQ od be ^ c3 a O C S c ■9 ^ to — a 03 XI bt D a -o 00 -• ' '/: crt s y a r "~* O O « 0) 2 00 * -3 00 3 xl 00 ■a o cr. — 03 o b 0* ~ u bo oj ft 03 - s ° a -u a g .£* ° si 3J ^< 4) XI ^ — J foti A as IS -h fci 00 £ 03 rt TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 35 Q P C ft ft go CO E- - - o to O 2 2 4 p ffl c to r - - - - s CJ5 3 c a 03 — - C : In I o s.h! H In • ID o o in m in m in in w in in in in o M a, of* M J 73 73 to ►J Q H H rH O i-l CJ to ~ Z <« ■- ti 3 ffl s < Eh C O H M 5 » 72 a ?; :< 91 *>* W — M ■-I V, pq < 71 ~ H ri Z fa a 3 .11 < fa W £ K E- Z 73 . 0} fa 5 H fa to <- -5 gag a -a o a; a) rH « " H J a a o u X rt £ fa a) -a /3 03 S S £ — a O H-J s « O "O 71 g 3 a a g M 3rf H M i EH -d +3 03 n o> -3 ctf 2.5? QJ O a o 2° 7! O *3 O M « a o* co "S si te •« O 73 O § tB *> 3 a C3 +■> o 3 «jd O- OS « «fa - o _ O J o ■ o O J3 M 0) O 03 u 03 rt oj .a 03 '3 -a Sol oj -a +j te 03 73 o 03 - r- •« a I '3 as .S 03 r h-* a T3 f— < T3 a rt n O (J 73 n. o o ^3 H 71 a 11 rt a 03 +J 7. -w a >. 03 u 9 O rt in s 73 „ « >^ '/3 03 •/) rt ■ -H 3 £ a to rt n 00 Q o w r-. s * - ' > 73 03 a rt o « si 13 :Ji -^- a 73 S a « rt 03 50 crt ■w 1 ri a u •rt 03 rt fa :n O d ri Eh o rt o +J rH rt O Ch su a ■M V! o H-> a 73 CJ Ch 03 03 fa to urs m o ■i (H o _ 03 ft BO a a 03 u 03 <^ *J v; 03 H-H rt rt o OS • — i a a o P 36 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY basis. A combination rate from Philadelphia made by way of New York would in this case produce a rate less than the through rate published by the all-rail lines. 2. Marine Insurance In regard to the rates applying in connection with water carriers, particular attention should be paid as to whether the rates include or do not include marine in- surance. The rates applying via the lake lines and via the Old Dominion Steamship Company, the Morgan Line, and the Mallory Line, are insured rates and include the cost of marine insurance, while the rates via the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, Panama, and Cape Horn do not include this feature and shippers must arrange to insure their shipments against the perils of the sea and navigation. This charge varies according to the vessel in which it is transported and the route taken. Rates of insurance on shipments forwarded by sailing vessels around Cape Horn would naturally call for the highest premium. In the case of established lines, shipments are insured under what is known as an open policy and the rates are quite nominal, being as low as 15 cents per $100 valution. 3. Arbitrary Pates Rates to a number of points within a comparatively short distance from Terminal Points proper are made by adding fixed sums to the Terminal rates. Table 3 indi- cates the grouping of some of the western points of desti- nation and page 37 certain note numbers illustrating the method employed in establishing rates to such western TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 37 points. By referring to Table 3, it may be noted that in connection with the class rates to Bremerton, Wash., reference is made to Note 13. Referring to Note 13, ex- plained on page 38, it is found that the class rates to this point are constructed by adding 10 cents per hundred- weight to the less-than-carload rates and 5 cents per hundredweight to the carload rates applying to the North Pacific Coast Terminals, shown in Item 1 of Table 4. Particular attention is directed to that feature of the note which provides a graduated increase in the arbi- trary to be added, based on the weight of the individual shipment. Explanation of Notes to Which Reference is Made in Table 3 Note 1. — Except where through commodity rates are named on page 159, pages 161 to 169, pages 189, 190 and 193, all inclusive, through commodity rates to points in Oregon and Washington, shown on pages 20 to 41, inclusive, as taking Note 1 basis for rates are (unless otherwise specifically pro- vided) ten (10) cents per 100 lbs. on less than carloads and five (5) cents per 100 lbs. on carloads higher than the Terminal commodity rates named herein. Note 2. — Except where through commodity rates are named on page 159, pages 161 to 169, 188, 193 and 194, all inclusive, through commodity rates to the points in British Columbia, shown on pages 20 to 41, inclusive, as taking Note 2 basis for rates are five (5) cents per 100 lbs. on carloads and less than carloads higher than the Terminal commodity rates named herein. Note 3. — Except as otherwise provided, rates to points in British Columbia shown on pages 20 to 41, inclusive, as taking Note 3 basis for rates, are made by adding ten (10) cents per 100 lbs. on carloads, and twenty (20) cents per 100 lbs. on less than carloads, to the Index 2 class rates, or to the Terminal commodity rates named herein. 38 FKEIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Note 4. — Rates to points shown on pages 20 to 41, inclusive, as taking Note 4 basis for rates, are made by adding five (5) cents per 100 lbs. on carloads and ten (10) cents per 100 lbs. on less than carloads, to the Index 2 class rates or to the Termi- nal commodity rates named herein. Note 6. — Rates to points shown on pages 20 to 41, inclusive, as taking Note 6 basis for rates, are made by adding ten (10) cents per 100 lbs. on carloads and fifteen (15) cents per 100 lbs. on less than carloads, to the Index 2 class rates, or to the Termi- nal commodity rates named herein. Note 7. — Rates to points shown on pages 20 to 41, inclusive, as taking Note 7 basis for rates, are made by adding ten (10) cents per 100 lbs. on carloads and twenty-five (25) cents per 100 lbs. on less than carloads, to the Index 2 class rates, or to the Terminal commodity rates named herein. Note 8. — Points on Southern Pacific Co. (Lines in Oregon), shown on pages 20 to 41, inclusive, as taking Note 8 basis for rates, are subject to through commodity rates shown on page 159 and pages 171 to 186, inclusive. Note 12. — Rates on carload traffic to Powell River, B. C, via Gateway 42, are 7% cents per 100 lbs. higher than rates pro- vided herein to Vancouver, B. C, and apply on traffic via car ferry service in connection with Kingcome Navigation Co., via Seattle, Wash. Rates on carload traffic to Powell River, B. C, via Gateways 23, 23-A, 23-B, 23-C, 42-A, 42-B, 42-C, 42-D, 42-E, 8S-B, 88-C, and 88-D, are 7% cents per 100 lbs. higher than rates provided herein to Vanvouver, B. C. Note 13. — Rates to points shown on pages 20 to 41, inclusive, as taking Note 13 basis for rates, are made by adding : (A) Ten (10) cents per 100 lbs. for less than carloads and five (5) cents per 100 lbs. for carloads (see Section B), to the Index No. 2 class rates, or to the Terminal commodity rates named herein, except — TRANS-CONTINENTAL RATES 39 When the weight of any single piece or package is — Arbitrary to be added — 1,001 lbs. to 2,000 lbs., inc 15 cents per 100 lbs. 2,001 lbs to 10,000 lbs., inc 20 cents per 100 lbs. 10,001 lbs. to 25,000 lbs., inc 30 cents per 100 lbs. 25,001 lbs. to 39,999 lbs., inc 40 cents per 100 lbs. 40,000 lbs. to 59,999 lbs., inc 50 cents per 100 lbs. 60,000 lbs. to 79,999 lbs., inc 60 cents per 100 lbs. 80,000 lbs. to 89,999 lbs., inc 70 cents per 100 lbs. 90,000 lbs. to 99,999 lbs., inc 90 cents per 100 lbs. (B) Carload shipments handled by car ferry service of the Island Belt Steamship Co., from Anacortes, Bellingham, Seattle, or South Bellingham, Wash., Navy Yard Route, Puget Sound Naval Station Route, or the Inland Navigation Co., from Seattle, Wash., to Bremerton, Charleston, or Port Orchard, Wash., are charged for on basis of five (5) cents per 100 lbs., regardless of size or weight of any single piece or package. Note 14. — If the rates named in this tariff, applying from points of origin to Portland or East Portland, Ore., plus the arbitraries shown below to points of destination make less than the through rates authorized in this tariff, the combination rates so made apply. 4. Commodity Bates Table 7 is a reproduction of a specimen page of one of the Trans-Continental issues, showing all-rail rates on various commodities from eastern points of origin to California Terminals. The application of these rates is identical with that of the class rates. At this point it mav be stated that the bulk of the traffic moving to the Pacific coast is handled under the commodity rates. The publications of the Trans-Continental Freight Bureau show that there are at this time some 1,500 ratings on 40 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY specific commodities. Only such articles as general mer- chandise moving in small quantities or traffic which is not subject to water competition is carried on the class- rate basis. 5. Class Rates on Eastbound Trans-Continental Traffic The grouping of the eastern part of the United States for destination territories on traffic originating at or ad- jacent to North Pacific Coast Terminals is, in general, the same as that employed on westbound traffic. The bulk of the traffic from California and other western states may be assigned to the three following divisions : Products of agriculture, products of the forest;, and products of the mines. The first division, which includes the movement of California fruits, and the second, which includes Oregon and Washington lumber, have assumed wonderful proportions in recent years. The volume of export and import traffic through Pacific coast points also shows substantial increase from year to year. The proposition confronting the carriers was to adjust their rates so as to enable the producer in Western Ter- ritory to find a market for his product, which greatly exceeds the demand for local consumption. They accomplished this by publishing eastbound an adjustment similar to that carried westbound, namely, blanket rates, which enabled California shippers to reach all markets by one rate and thus compete with commodi- ties that might be produced locally in the vicinity of that market. In the movement of eastbound traffic, liberal reconsigning privileges are granted which enable the shipper to test or to try various markets without addi- TABLE 7 All-Rail Commodity Rates from Eastern Points of Origin to California Terminals TO California Terminals ARTICLES Minimum Weight. Carloads. 30.000 lbs., except as otherwise provided. IN CENTS PER HUNDRED POUNDS From Points Taking group A RATES L.C.I. | C.I. GROUP B RATES l.C.l. C.I. GROUP c RATES I.O.I. C.l GROUP D RATES I.C.I. C.l I.C.I. C.l. GROUP E RATES GROUP P RATES l.C.I. C.l. GROUP G RATES l.C.I. j C.l. GROUP H RATES l.C.I. C.l. l.C.I. C.L GROUP J RATES JHOE FINDINGS, viz.— Continued : Shoe Laces, boxed. . ." Shoe Nails, Shoe Tacks and Steel Shanks, boxed Slipper Soles (fleece-lined), Com- pressed Wool Insoles and Cork In- soles, in boxes Shot, in bags . Silica (pulverized), or Silex, and Pumice Powder, In bags, min. C. L. wt. 60,000 lbs Sllicated Cloth (for Blackboards), boxed 5kids Slate Roofing, N. O. S., min. C. L. wt. 40,000 lbs. Slates, School, boxed SOAP, Soap Chips and Soap Powder, in boxes or bags, and Scouring, Washing, Polishing and Sweeping Compounds, N. O. S. (not including Liquid Com- pounds, except when in metal cans, boxed), also Washing Crystals, in boxes or bags, min. C. L. wt. 40,000 lbs. Soapstone, N. O. S Soapstone Dust, in bags 240 260 125 160 ISO 135 BO 75 Soapstone Slabs and Griddles, cored.. Soda Ash (may be shipped In sacks cr in bulk), Soda Crystals, Caustic Soda and Hypo-Sulphate of Soda, Hypo- Sulphite* of Soda, i'iitrate of Soda (may be shipped ia sacks), Silicate of Sod;t (maybe shipped in sacks), and Sulphate of Soda, Sulphide of sodium and Chlo- ride of Lime (may be skipped in casks), and Tallow Bleach; in kegs, boxes cr iron drums ,min. C. L. wt. 40,000 lbs. ■fcCarloat! shipments will be subject bo the local rate to Now "i ork Piers or to pi ir.*s Inkir*-. Group D or Group E rates, pi tl herein named from New ^ ork i ra or point!! taking Group D or Group E ratea to destina- tion. VRate from New York will not apply on, ship- ments in bulk Soda Fountain Supplies, viz.: /yrups, Fruits (crushed or whole), and Fruit Juices, when packed in wood, glass, or earthenware, boxed 130 i?: 240 260 125 80 90 75 240 260 125 160 190 135 130 i; BO 35 80 Solder, min. C. L. wt. 40,000 lb3 Speedometers and Cyclometers, boxed. . Spices, N. O. S., Including Cassia, Cloves, Ginger, Nutmegs, Pepper, (whole or ground), Celery Salt, Onion Salt, Celery Seed, Coriander, Cummin and Caraway Seeds and Ground Sage, in boxes or bags, min. C. L. wt. 24,000 lbs 125 600 150 80 170 125 I 160 ISO 135 90 240 260 125 SO 85 130 173 125 600 80 160 1S0 135 90 78 50 240 80 BE 170 125 ^25 6GC 170 130 80 17i 63 1Sffl 80 125 260 125 1 190 135 130 175 125 60i 170 150 80 125 90 75 5C 125 600 80 80 240 260 125 160 1S0 135 130 175 55 15C 90 75 50 170 125 80 125 COO 170 240 SO 00 160 190 135 80 130 175 260 125 75 125 600 125 50 80 85 240 SO 160 190 135 55 150 80, 170 125 130 175 90 260 125 75 50 240 260 125 160 190 135 90 75 50 83 85 80 130 80 175 125 G30 170 150 80 125 125 600 170 55 150 83 125 42 FREIGHT BATES— WESTERN TERRITORY tional expense. This is probably best illustrated in con- nection with the orange movement, cars being frequently reconsigned six or seven times before they are finally dis- posed of. For example, a shipper may consign a car to Denver and upon its arrival there the market may be glutted. Under the provisions of the Trans-Continental Freight Association, he is permitted to reconsign the car to Kansas City and if the same conditions prevail there, he may reconsign it to St. Louis, and so on until the car is eventually disposed of, provided that no back- haul movement is required. The class rates applying from the California Termi- nals to Eastern destinations are reproduced in Table 8. TABLE 8 Class Rates Applying from California Terminals to Eastern Destinations x From California Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Terminals to Groups Taking Classes - 1 2 3 4 5 ABODE 370 320 2G5 225 100 102 152 120 115 105 Croup B rates 300 310 200 220 185 1ST 148 117 112 100 350 303 252 215 ISO 182 145 115 110 98 340 295 245 207 175 177 140 110 105 95 Croup E rates 330 2S5 2:;S 200 168 172 135 105 102 92 300 200 220 183 100 100 123 95 93 85 Croup J rates 280 242 205 170 150 150 115 90 87 78 280 242 205 170 150 150 115 90 87 78 200 225 100 100 140 140 107 83 SO 73 1 These rates have been taken from Trans-Continental Tariff 3-K. 2 Governed by the Western Classification. As was the case in connection with the westbound rates, the volume of traffic moving under class rates is very small, owing to the fact that the articles which move in large volumes, viz., fresh and dried fruits and vegetables, TABLE 9 Terminal Commodity Rates Applying from California Ter- minals to Eastern Points of Destination * PROM IN CENTS PER HUNDRED POUNDS. California "Terminals (Only)'" To Points Taking ARTICLES Minimum Weight, Carloads, SO.COOlbs., except as otherwise provided. group A RAT33 GROUP B P.AT2S cpotjp C RATES GEOU? D RATES GROUP E RATE3 GROUP F RATES I GEOUP G RATES GROUP H RATES I GROUP J RATES L.O.L.I C. L. L.C.L.! C. L. L.e.i.l o. i. L.C.L.I C. 1. 1X1 1 C. 1. L.C.L.I C. L. L.C.L.I C. 1. L.C.L.j C. 1. LX.l.|c.L G Glue, in bags 85 ... 65 126 225 86 76 130 100 90 165 125 225 85 76 130 100 90 -165 126 225 85 76 lv-U 100 90 165 86 85 125 225 65 76 130 100 so 165 86 Glycerine, in barrels ■70 13C 100 - ■ ■ jLZC OOP 75 130 10C 90 165 126 76 130 "100 90 125 76 130 100 so 75' H Hides, Dry, including Deer Hides, Sheep Slats, Hair Seal,' Sheep Pelts and Goat Pelts, Dry, in bales, min. C. L. wt. 20,000 lbs 125 226 225 100 130 I Ink, boxed, or in bulk in barrels. . . „.. 100 Insulators, Glass (subject to Item -15. page 76) 125 so 165 200 •200 90 fil Metal Paper Towel Holders, in boxes, 225 260 165 200 200 225 242 165 200 200 165 Metal Parts (defective), of -self-pro- pelling Vehicles,' returned to fac- 320 310 100 200 200 30S 200 295 £00 200 285 200 200 242 100 200 200 60 66 MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, viz. : Organs and Pianos, boxed, min. C. L. wt. 12,000 lbs '. '2^ Pipe Organs, K. D., min. C. L. wt. 12,000 lbs....: ".. 200 200 Mustard Flour, in bags -...-. 100 -100 70 90 90 100 50 * I 55 70 * 90 * 90, 100 eo -100 : 50 55 70 90 100 60 65 O OIL, in cans boxed, or in bulk in bar- rels, or in bulk in tank carsyexcept as otherwise provided; -min. C. L. •wt. when in cans bozed, or in bulk in barrels will be 40,000 lbs., and when in bulk in tank cars" (sea Rule 30), as follows: 60 — 70 ' 90 90 Oil, Codoanut (crude), in tank cars (see Rule 30) 55 70 65 Fish, N. O. S., including Whale Oil 70 90 70 70 7 fl s s V — o • — 5 — O V § a m to d M o « a a a 0. IB BO £ & •»* 3 o d ■M of 6 S / "3 o 03 a A « £ 4- CO £ u TS >> - a s 03 Q 03 o a o o 6 H a s £ *i OS 17 18 17 10% 12% 23 17 18 19 17 32 23 13 19 13 13 19 13 19 19 20 1 Governed by the Official Classification. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 17 TABLE 4 Import Commodity Rates from Shipside, Portland, Me., to Western Destinations From Shipside, Port- land, Me., to Percentage Groups Rates i in Cents per 100 Pounds Commodities Bagging, Burlap Cement Potash, Muriate o .Salt Sugar Sulphur. Crude Tin. PiK Castor Beans 17 12 13 10 15 10 12 16 71 17 13 15 10 15 13 13 18 74 17 13 16 10 16 13 14 19 76 7 13 16 11 17 13 14 20 78 7 13 17 11 17 13 15 20 79 7 13 17 11 18 13 15 20 80 7 13 17 11 18 13 16 20 81 17 13 17 12 18 13 16 20 82 17 13 18 12 18 13 16 20 S3 17 14 18 12 19 13 16 20 84 17 14 18 12 19 13 16 20 85 17 14 18 12 19 13 17 20 86 17 14 IS 12 19 13 17 20 87 17 14 18 13 20 13 17 20 88 17 15 18 13 20 13 17 20 89 17 15 18 13 20 13 17 20 90 17 15 IS 13 20 13 18 20 92 17 15 18 14 21 13 18 20 93 17 17 16 16 18 18 14 14 21 21 13 13 18 19 20 'M 20 95 17 16 18 14 22 13 19 20 96 17 16 IS 14 22 13 19 20 97 17 16 IS 14 22 13 19 20 100 17 17 IS 15 23 13 20 20 100A 20 19 20 18 25 15 22 22 103 18 18 19 16 24 13 21 21 104 18 18 19 16 24 14 21 21 108 19 19 20 16 25 14 22 22 110 19 19 20 17 26 15 22 22 112 19 19 21 17 26 15 23 23 115. 20 20 21 18 27 15 23 23 116 20 20 21 18 27 16 24 24 117 20 20 22 18 27 16 24 24 118 21 21 22 18 28 16 24 24 120 21 21 22 19 28 16 25 25 122 21 21 23 19 29 17 25 25 122A 25 23 25 21 32 19 28 28 1 Governed by the Official Classification. 18 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY The rates shown in Tables 2, 3, and 4, as may be seen, are based on the rates on the same commodity established from New York, the deduction of the Baltimore differen- tials generally producing the figures given in these tables. 3. Via Gulf Ports (a) Class Rates The rates via Gulf ports which are authorized to apply on traffic originating in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, New Zealand, and the Philippine Islands are made certain differentials under the New York standard all-rail rates. The differentials at this time are as follows, in cents per 100 pounds : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 6 Differentials 18 18 12 8 6 6 Points in Illinois and Wisconsin and points on the Ohio and Mississippi rivers are grouped in somewhat the same fashion as for southbound local rates to New Orleans and interior Mississippi Valley points. The through rates from New York to St. Paul Territory are the New York-Chicago rates plus the differentials shown below ; Classes 1 2 3 4 5 6 Rates from New York to Chicago 75 65 50 35 30 25 St. Paul differentials 40 34 26 18 16 13 Through rates from New York to — — — — St. Paul 115 99 76 53 46 38 Observing the Mississippi River combination, as well as the domestic rate, as the maximum, rates from other ports, both Atlantic and Gulf, are made on the same basis as that to Chicago explained above. The current class rates to some of the more important groups are set forth in Table 5. These rates are the differentials previously stated under the current all-rail rates. « EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 18 TABLE 5 Class Rates from Shipside Gulf Ports to Northern Destinations Group Numbers From Shipside Gulf Ports to Groups Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Classes » 12 3 4 5 6 1 Cincinnati 47 39 32 22 20 16 2 3 4 Indianapolis Louisville, Chicago, Milwaukee 52 42 35 25 22 17 57 47 38 27 24 19 65 54 43 31 27 22 5 6 7 Freei>ort .... 65 54 43 31 27 22 70 58 47 33 29 23 74 61 49 35 31 25 s 79 66 54 39 34 27 9 St. Paul 97 SI 64 45 40 32 1 Governed by the Official Classification. (b ) Commodity Rates In Table 6 is given a representative line of commodities imported through Gulf ports and the rates applicable thereon to certain denned territories or groups. TABLE 6 Commodity Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds (Except as Noted) Applicable from Shipside Gulf Ports to Northern Destinations Commodities Potash, muriate and sulphate of Rice, brewers' Wood pulp Rags, old rope, hemp waste, etc. Cement Ferro manganese Ferro phosphorous Fuller's earth Cocoanut oil Ore, crude iron Rates i in Cents per 100 Pounds Except as Noted From Shipside Gulf Ports to North- ern Destinations in Groups 2 1 2346789 13 16 16 18 . . 21 23 29 15 15 15 17 15 20 22 24i/ 2 11 13 14 16 17 18 20 25 13 14 16 15 17 11 IS 16 .. 280 s 308 340 386 418 441 481 660 3153 345 380 430 465 490 530 700 11 13 14 16 17 18 20 27 16 17 19 22 23 25 27 35 211 233 260 298 325 343 384 520 1 Governed by the Official Classification. » See Table 5. s Per gross ton, 2.240 pounds. 20 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY In connection with the application of differential rates, the following rules obtain in establishing rates on com- modities via Gulf ports : (1) On commodities taking less than the sixth-class rate, the sixth-class differentials ap- ply; and (2) on commodities taking the sixth-class rate or a higher rate, the differential applying to the class nearest said commodity rate applies, except where the commodity rate is exactly intermediate between two class rates, in which event the lower differential applies. Thus, for example, should a commodity rate be estab- lished on a basis of 70 cents from New York to Chicago, the second-class differential would be applied, as the com- modity rate on a basis of 70 cents is exactly between the first-class and the second-class rates. If, on the other hand, a commodity rate were established on a basis of 71 cents, the first-class differential would be deducted, as that is the class which the commodity rate most nearly approximates. On the other hand, if a commodity rate were established between New York and Chicago which was the same as the class rate, the differential for that class would be deducted in order to establish the corre- sponding rates via Gulf ports. CHAPTER III import class rates to points west of the mississippi river 1. Missouri River Territory This territory may be defined as the territory on and adjacent to the Missouri River from Kansas City, Kan., to Sioux Falls, S. D., inclusive. The rate structure in general adheres closely to that employed in establishing domestic rates, which was explained in the treatise de- voted to the construction of freight rates in Western Territory. (a) Class Rates from New York, N. Y. The rates from New York are arbitrarily established, that is, the general basis, which would be a combination on Chicago or the Mississippi River, is disregarded and rates are established without reference thereto. This is necessary, as there is such a difference between the rates from New York and from the Gulf ports that unless the Gulf rates were equalized in a measure by the trunk lines the traffic would be forced via these ports. 21 22 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Employing the all-rail combination of rates, the through rates from New York to Missouri Eiver points are as follows : Classes 1 2 3 4 Rates from New York to St. Louis. . . 88 76 59 41 Rates from St. Louis to Kansas City 55 41 32 24 Through rates 143 117 91 65 This is the lowest domestic basis. On the other hand, the through rates from the Gulf ports, made by combining the import rates to St. Louis, Mo., with the domestic proportional rates therefrom, are as follows : Classes 1 2 3 4 Rates from Gulf ports to St. Louis. . 70 58 47 33 Rates from St. Louis to Kansas City 55 41 32 24 Through rates , 125 99 79 57 The domestic rates from New Orleans, La., to Kansas City, Mo., are as follows : Classes 1 2 3 4 Rates HO 85 65 53 As the import rates are in no case to exceed the domes- tic rates, the domestic rates from New Orleans, La., are applied on import traffic through the Gulf ports. The rates from New York are made by adding the following differentials to the rates so established from the Gulf ports : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Differentials IS 18 12 8 6 6 6 6 6 6 The rates currently in effect from New York, N. Y., to the various Missouri River groups are shown in Table 7. EXPORT AXD IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 23 These rates are the differentials stated above over the rates from New Orleans shown in Table 9 to the same groups. TABLE 7 Class Rates from New York, N. Y., to Missouri River Groups via All-Rail Routes- Group From New York. Numbers N. Y., to Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Atchison, Kan Kansas City, Mo. . . Kansas City, Kan . . Leavenworth, Kan. St. Joseph, Mo II Council Bluffs, Iowa. (Nebraska City, Neb. Omaha, Neb I South Omaha, Neb.. Classes i 3 4 5 A B C D B 12S 103 77 61 44 4^ 43 33 30 29 III IV Sioux City, Iowa. Sioux Falls, S. D. Fremont. Neb. Lincoln, Neb. . 1 oo loo 10S 81 65 47 51 46 36 33 32 13S 113 85 68 49 53 48 38 35 34 143 US 89 69*4 51 55 50 40 37 36 138 113 85 69 50 54 49 39 36 35 1 Governed by the Western Classification. (b) Commodity Rates from New York, X. Y. The commodity rates applicable from New York to the corresponding groups of destination shown in Table 7 are reproduced in Table 8. The competition for import traffic is exceedingly ag- gressive, with the result that these rates frequently change. The rates reproduced in this treatise are for the purpose of conveying some idea as to the general adjust- ment and are not intended for use in actual business. 24 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 8 Commodity Rates from New York, N. Y., to Missouri River Groups via All-Rail Routes Commodities in Carloads Except as Noted Bagging, burlap Bagging, burlap, L. C. L.. Beans, castor Cement Clay Fuller's earth Ferro manganese Ferro phosphorous Ferro silicon Iron and steel, pig iron . . Cocoanut oil Ore, crude iron, in bulk. Rags Seed, flax Wood pulp Zinc, oxide, dry, in bbls, . Rates i in Cents pee 100 Pounds Except as Noted From New II York to Groups 2 III IV V 34 62 41 22i/ 2 30 26 9453 9703 9453 658 36 65S 31 40 26 43 34 66 44y 2 251/L. 30 29 945 1038 945 725 36 690 31 40 43 34 70 511/2 251/2 30 31 945 1078 945 770 690 31 47 y 2 43 74 51 % 271/2 30% 32 967 1100 967 814 712 31% 47% 44 37 71 47 1/2 28% 33 32 1005 1098 1005 785 40 750 34 43 46 1 Governed by the Western Classification. a See Table 7. 3 Per gross ton of H.L'-IO pounds. (c) Class Rates from Gulf Ports The class rates currently in effect from the Gulf ports to Missouri River groups are as shown in Table 9. These rates are, as has been previously stated, the local rates applying from New Orleans, La., to Missouri River Territory and are extended in their application to apply from other Gulf ports. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 25 TABLE 9 Class Rates Applying from New Orleans, La., to Missouri River Groups Group From New Orleans to Groups Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Numbers Classes i 1 2 3 4 5 ■ , A B ' C D E I 11 Omaha 110 So 65 53 38 42 37 27 24 23 115 90 09 57 41 45 40 30 27 20 III IV V VI Lincoln 120 95 73 60 43 47 42 32 29 28 125 100 77 61 y, 45 49 44 34 31 30 2 2 2 2 4i 45 40 30 27 26 120 95 73 61 44 4S 43 33 30 29 1 Governed by the Western Classification. - The class rates applicable to East St. Louis, 111., are : First class, 70 cents ; second class, 58 cents ; third class, 47 cents ; and fourth class, 33 cents. These rates, in connection with the proportional rates established therefrom (see Part 1 of Freight Rates — Western Territory, Chapter II), apply as proportional rates to the Mississippi River Crossings in the construction of through rates. TABLE 10 Commodity Rates from New Orleans, La. River Groups to Missouri Commodities in Carloads Except as Noted Cocoauut oil Bagging, burlap Bagging, burlap, L. C. L. . Cement Clay Fuller's earth Ferro manganese Ferro phosphorous Ferro silicon Ore, crude iron Rags Seed, flax Zinc, oxide Rates i in Cents per 100 Pounds Except as Noted 1 From New Orleans to Groups 2 II III IV V VI 33 28 50 16 y 2 25 20 S2S3 8503 8843 538 3 27 37 37 33 28 54 i9y 2 828 913 S84 30 37 37 45 28 58 19% 25 25 828 913 884 593 31 37 37 32 62 21 y 2 25% 26 850 935 906 615 31% 42 38 20 20% 37 31 58 22 J 28 26 88S 973 944 653 33 40 40 72 1 Governed by the Western Classification. 2 See Table 9. * Per gross ton, 2,240 pounds. 26 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY (d) Commodity Rates from Gulf Ports The commodity adjustment follows very closely the one employed in connection with the class rates, that is, the local rates from New Orleans are applied from other Gulf ports. There are, however, many commodity rates estab- lished which are less than the local rates and are made to equalize the competition via North Atlantic ports. A rep- resentative list of these commodity rates is shown in Table 10. It may be noted, in passing, that these rates are almost uniformly six cents per 100 pounds less than the rates shown applying from New York, N. Y., in Table 8. TABLE 11 Class Rates to Oklahoma Points from Shipside Gulp Ports From Shipside Gulf Ports to Aril in ore Ada Chickasaw Elreno Aenead Guthrie King-Fisher .... Lawsou McAllister Muskogee Oklahoma City. . Perry Shawnee Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds 95 121 121 133 140 133 153 121 121 124 133 140 133 Classes * 5 A P, C st; 106 106 115 122 115 115 106 106 109 115 122 115 i_ 90 90 9S 105 98 9S 90 90 94 9S 105 its 68 S2 82 89 96 89 89 82 82 89 S9 90 S9 52 64\ 64 TO 75 70 70 64 64 70 70 75 70 56 69 69 7-~> 80 7~> ~~> 69 69 r-n lO 75 SO 75 49 GO 60 65 71 65 65 60 60 65 65 71 65 38 48 4S 53 58 53 53 48 48 53 53 58 53 I) 42 47 42 42 37 37 42 42 47 42 i: 20 30 30 35 31) 35 35 30 30 35 35 39 35 1 I'.nverned by the Western Classification. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 27 (e) Class Rates to Oklahoma Stations from Gulf Ports It might be inferred that from Galveston, Tex., at least, the Missouri Eiver rate structure would form a barrier which would have some effect on the rates from that point to intermediate points. That it does not, is evident by a line of class rates to a few stations in Oklahoma which are intermediate in a measure to the Kansas City Group of stations, and from Table 11 it may be observed that the rates to the majority of these points are greatly in excess of the rates to the Missouri River points. (f) Commodity Rates to Oklahoma Points from Ship- side Gulf Ports A general line of commodity rates is not established to all Oklahoma stations, rates being published on only such commodities as actually move or are consumed at interior points in the state of Oklahoma. (g) Rates to Points in Arkansas and Louisiana A few import rates are published from Shipside Gulf ports to points of destination in the states of Arkansas and Louisiana. No general basis, however, is employed in establishing such rates, for the application of the local rate from the Gulf port of entry is applied as the import rate and is usually low enough to secure the traffic for the Gulf lines. These points, by virtue of their location, obtain reasonably low rates from Gulf ports, establishing a competition that the trunk lines cannot meet. ■ 28 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY (h) Import Rates to Southeastern Territory Import rates are published to what is generally known as Southeastern Territory from Gulf ports on the one hand and from South Atlantic Seaboard ports on the other. This Southeastern Territory is located south of the Ohio River and east of the Mississippi River. 1 Rates from South Atlantic Seaboard ports are pub- lished from such ports as Savannah and Port Royal, but no general basis is employed in constructing such import rates. In fact, there are only a few scattering import commodity rates published, these rates being on such articles as fertilizer material, ferro manganese, man- ganese ore, etc., and these import rates are made accord- ing to the rates from other ports to other points of con- sumption. Of course, the fact is taken into consideration that the time required on the water is less than the time required to the Gulf ports; also the rate of insurance is lower than to the Gulf ports. Import rates to Southeastern Territory are published from the Gulf on the basis of the lowest domestic rate from one port plus the handling charge. This rate is ap- plied from all the Gulf ports, New Orleans, La., and east, there being no import rate's published from Texas ports of entry to Southeastern Territory. A few import com- modity rates are published, however, from Shipside New Orleans and Westwego, La., and Galveston and Texas City, Tex., to Memphis, Tenn. These rates are made in relation to the commodity in question, or they are the domestic rates from one port applied as import rates from all ports mentioned above. i This territory is? shown on Map 5 of the Atlas of Traffic Maps. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 29 In the absence of import rates from the ports of entry, the regular domestic rates from such ports are applied as the import rates to points of destination. These rates are subject to the rules and regulations published by the individual lines in the Terminal Circulars governing the importation of articles from the port in question. (i) Rates to Utah and Colorado Common Points The grouping of the territory to which the rates to Colorado Common Points and Utah Common Points are extended is practically the same as that used in the estab- lishment of domestic rates. The Colorado Common Points comprise stations north and south of Denver, as far north as Cheyenne, Wyo., and as far south as Royce, N. M., embracing stations on and adjacent to this line, while the Utah Common Points take in stations located near Salt Lake City and Ogden, Utah. Rates From Eastern Seaboard Cities. — The rates from New York and other North Atlantic ports are made on the Chicago, the Mississippi River, or the Missouri River combination, whichever produces the lowest rate, using the import rate from New York to Chicago, to the Mis- sissippi River, or to the Missouri River, as the case may be, plus the local or proportional rate beyond. As there are no import class rates established that are less than the domestic rates to either Chicago or the Mississippi River, the lowest available combination would be that made on the Missouri River. Taking New York, N. Y., as a point of origin and adding to the import rates to Kansas City, which rates are shown in Table 7, the rates from the Missouri River to the Colorado Common Points or the Utah Common Points, a scale of rates somewhat 30 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY less than those currently in effect on domestic traffic is obtained. For example, the through rates from New York to the Colorado Common Points are as follows, using the Missouri River combination : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Rates from New- York to Mis- souri River... 128 103 77 til 44 4S 43 33 30 29 Rates from Mis- souri River to Colorado Com- mon Points... 115 92 74 60 47 56 42 37 33 29 Through rates.. 243 195 151 121 91 104 85 70 63 58 This basis is somewhat less than the basis for the do- mestic rates, for, in the case of the domestic rates, the lowest available combination from New York via all-rail routes is made on the Mississippi River. The first-class rate of 88 cents from New York to the Mississippi River plus the first-class rate from the Mississippi River to the Colorado Common Points makes a through rate of $2.60 as contrasted with $2.43 in the above illustration. For example, the through rates from New York to Colorado Common Points are as follows, using the Mis- sissippi River combination : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Rates from New York to Mis- sissippi River. 88 76 59 41 35 29 29 29 29 20 Rates from Mis- sissippi River to Colorado Common Points 162 129 101 80V 2 63 74 56 50 42 36 Through rates.. 250 205 160 121 y 2 98 92 85 79 71 65 EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 31 It may be observed that some of these rates are the same as the domestic rates. The rates to the Utah Common Points are established by using the import class rates to the Missouri River plus the local rates therefrom. Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Rates from New York to Missouri River 128 103 77 til 44 48 43 33 30 20 Rates from Missouri River to Salt Lake City 100 162 142 110 08 08 77 70 50 42 Through rates 318 265 210 180 142 146 120 103 80 71 These rates are somewhat less than the rates that ob- tain under the domestic-rate adjustment. Rates from Gulf Ports. — The Gulf ports have such^an advantage over the North Atlantic ports, by virtue of their close proximity to these territories, that it might be inferred that the import rates would not differ ma- terially from those in effect on domestic traffic. Such, however, is not the case. In Table 12 are set forth the class rates applicable from Shipside Gulf ports to Den- ver, Colo., and Salt Lake City, Utah, and in Table 13 is set forth a representative list of commodities. 32 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 12 Class Rates Applicable from Shipside Gulf Ports to Denver, Colo., and Salt Lake City, Utah Feom Shipside Rates IN Cents pee 100 Pounds Gulf Ports to 1 2 3 4 Classes i 5 A B C D E Denver, Colo., and Group 180 148 110 84 65 81 62 52 435 36 Salt Lake City, Utah, and Group 2S8 243 203 166 132 137 no 92 645 55 1 Governed by Western Classification No. 30 (F. J. Hoffman's I. C. C. No. 8), supplements thereto and reissues thereof. TABLE 13 Commodity Rates Applicable from Shipside Gulf Ports to Denver, Colo., and Salt Lake City, Utah Rates 2 in Cents pee 100 Pounds Except as Noted Commodities i Feom Shipside Gulf Poets to Denver, Colo., and Group Salt Lake City. Utah, and Group Bagging and bags, burlap, gunny, or jute, C. L. minimum weight 30,000 lbs 55 Bags, burlap, gunny, or jute, also burlaps, C. L. minimum weight 30,000 lbs 115 Cement, common, natural, hydrau- lic, or portland, C. L. minimum weight 40,000 lbs 30 Clay, C. L. minimum weight 50,000 lbs 30 Ore, iron, C. L. minimum weight 56,000 lbs S61 a Rice, brewers', C. L. minimum weight 30,000 lbs 33 68 4 Tin plate, C. L. minimum weight 36,000 lbs 565 01 1 Commodities embraced in the same item may be shipped in mixed carloads, unless otherwise specified. 2 Governed by Western Classification No. :<0 (F. .T. Hoffman's I. C. C. No. 8), supplements thereto and reissues thereof. 3 Per gross ton, 2.240 pounds. 4 Minimum weight 40.000 pounds. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 33 (j) Rates to Pacific Coast Terminals While there are no import class rates applicable on traffic from Eastern ports of entry to Pacific Coast Terminal Points, there are commodity rates applying from New Orleans, La., Galveston, Port Voliver, and Texas City, Tex., applicable upon all traffic originating in foreign countries. These rates are generally con- structed on a basis 10 per cent under the rates from New York in order to influence import traffic destined to California to move through the Gulf ports, as it is generally conceded that superior steamship service is to be had to the North Atlantic ports of entry. Further than this, there is quite a movement of traffic from Europe destined to California Terminals and adjacent territory which moves by way of the Suez Canal. This latter route, while affording a much slower movement, offers rates which are, to some extent, lower than those that obtain in connection with the Trans-Continental railroads of this country. Table 14 illustrates some of the existing rates appli- cable upon specified commodities from Gulf ports to Cali- fornia Terminals. These rates are usually confined to manufactures or articles of food, very few rates being named throughout the tariff on crude materials or articles, for the reason that these commodities when imported to Pacific Coast destinations usually move via all-water routes. 34 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 14 Proportional Commodity Rates Applicable from Shipside, New Orleans, La., and Galveston and Texas City, Tex., to California Terminals Commodities Bagging, burlap Canned goods Earthenware, stoneware, and crockery Fuller's earth Iron and steel articles, cast iron Pipe Tea Varnish in barrels or in cans Less Than Carloads 112 135 135 135 171 117 A similar line of rates is established to North Pacific Coast points, but to intermediate points rates are con- structed in much the same manner as are the domestic rates. The method that has been employed up to the time the Interstate Commerce Commission announced its decision in the Intermountain Rate Cases was to apply the rate to the Terminal plus the local domestic rate back to destination. However, as the Commission has con- demned this practice, the proportional import commodity rates will have to be adjusted in conformity with their order respecting the construction of rates on domestic traffic. CHAPTER IV IMPORT RATES FROM OTHER THAN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES The foregoing chapters having been devoted to an exposition of the general basis for the construction of import rates from European countries, the basis for rates applicable from countries other than these will now be taken up. 1. Via Atlantic Seaboard Ports The import rates from the Atlantic Seaboard on busi- ness originating in South and Central America, the West Indies Islands, and the Maritime Provinces of the Dominion of Canada are the same, in general, as on business originating in Europe, although in several in- stances a lower basis of rates sometimes obtains. The carriers' practice of making a different rate for export or import traffic, depending on the points of origin or destination, has not been condemned by the Interstate Commerce Commission. Generally speaking, the import rates from the Atlantic Seaboard Ports are the same, regardless of the country in which the shipment originates. This, however, is not true in so far as the Gulf ports are concerned. 2. Via Gulf Ports Import rates are published to cover shipments originat- ing in other countries from all Gulf ports. These rates 35 36 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY are the lowest available domestic or local rates from one Gulf port to a point of destination, which rates are applied from all other Gulf ports as an import rate. For example, if the rate from Galveston, Tex., to an interior destination on a given commodity is 35 cents per hundredweight, from New Orleans, La., 25 cents per hun- dredweight, and from Mobile, Ala., 47 cents per hundred- weight, the New Orleans rate is applied from Galveston and Mobile. This places all the Gulf ports on an equal footing in so far as the traffic is concerned. The same basis is applied to the Missouri River and to Western Territory as is applied to the Mississippi River, Chicago, and points in Central Freight Association Territory, except that interested carriers have, in some instances, used the New York or Baltimore rates as a maximum to Central Freight Association Territory. This basis does not extend to the Missouri River because the rates from the Atlantic Seaboard to the Missouri River are based upon the Mississippi River combination. The same basis is employed in constructing the rates from the Gulf to the Missouri River, that is, the rate from the Gulf to the Mississippi River plus the local or the propor- tional rate, whichever is lower, from the Mississippi River to the Missouri River, would be the through import rate from the Gulf. This feature, however, was explained in the Missouri River rate adjustment. 3. Mexican Import Traffic There are through all-rail import rates published from points in Mexico to points in the United States, on the principal commodities that are exported by Mexico. These through rates are constructed on combinations of the rates to and from Rio Grande Crossings or Interna- tional Border Points plus the local rates therefrom. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 37 The Rio Grande Crossings are Brownsville, Laredo, Eagle Pass, and El Paso, Tex., while the International Border Points are Douglas, Naco, and Nogales, Ariz. (a) Local Rates The local rates of the Mexican lines are established in Mexican currency per 1,000 kilos and apply only to the Rio Grande Crossings or International Border Points. In constructing combination rates, it is necessary to convert the Mexican rate per 1,000 kilos into United States currency per 100 pounds, and this requires that the rate of exchange be ascertained from some banking or financial organization. The term "rate of exchange" is employed to indicate rates employed in converting the money of one country into its equivalent in the money of another. In so far as Mexico is concerned, the rate of exchange is in favor of the United States, because a debt of $500 in Mexican currency can be liquidated with less than half of that amount in United States bullion; or, in other words, a Mexican dollar is worth less than fifty cents when taken in exchange for United States currency. The current rate of exchange from Mexican currency into United States currency is in the neighborhood of 400, this figure fluctuating to some extent. In Table 15 is given a range in the rate of exchange from 190 to 225, inclusive, this table indicating the decimals to be used in converting Mexican rates in dollars and cents per 100 kilos into dollars and cents per 100 pounds United States currency. The figures shown in this table may be used to convert Mexican money per 1,000 kilos into United States money per 100 pounds, and vice versa. 38 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 15 Equivalents of American and Mexican Money To Reduce United When Rate To Reduce Mexican States Money pee 100 Money per 1,000 Ki- Lbs., Multiply of los, Multiply Rate by Exchange is Rate by 41.89 190 .02387 42.11 191 .02375 42.33 192 .02363 42.55 193 .02350 42.77 194 .02338 42.99 195 .02326 43.21 196 .02314 43.43 197 .02303 43.65 198 .02291 43.87 199 .02279 44.09 200 .02268 44.31 201 .02257 44.53 202 .02246 44.75 203 .02234 44.97 204 .02224 45.19 205 .02213 45.41 206 .02202 45.64 207 .02191 45.86 208 .02181 46.0S 209 .02170 46.30 210 .02160 46.52 211 .02150 46.74 212 .02140 46.96 213 .02130 47.18 214 .02120 47.40 215 .02110 47.62 216 .02100 47.84 217 .02091 48.06 218 .02081 48.28 219 .02071 48.50 220 .02062 48.72 221 .02052 48.94 222 .02043 49.16 223 .02034 49.38 224 .02025 49.60 225 .02016 To convert kilos to pounds multiply kilos by 2.2046. To convert pounds to kilos multiply pounds by .4586. Fractions of A and over are considered as a whole are dropped. fractions under A EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 39 To illustrate the application of Table 15, the current class rates on the Sonora Railroad from Nogales, Ariz., to Hennosillo, in the state of Sonora, Mex., in Mexican dollars and cents per 1,000 kilos, are : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Rates. 20.08 18.17 17.41 16.40 15.5 14.5G 13.SO 13.21 12.45 11.69 11.12 10.03 These rates are governed by the Mexican Classifica- tion. The rate of exchange between these points in July, 1914, was 400 and the multiplicand was half of that applicable when the rate of exchange was 200, or .01134. To reduce the above scale, which is in Mexican dollars and cents per 1,000 kilos, to United States money in cents per 100 pounds, multiply each of the above rates by this figure. The following scale is obtained : Classes 1 -' 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Rates 23 21 20 19 18 17 It! 15 14 13 13 12 These rates plus the rates to Nogales, Ariz., form the through rates from any point in the United States to Hermosillo, Mex. As 2,204.6 pounds is the equivalent of 1,000 kilos, mul- tiplying this figure by 23 cents shows that the charge would be $5.07 in United States currency for this weight as contrasted with $20.08 in Mexican currency for the same weight. (b) Bail-and-W ater Rates For a number of years several established lines of 40 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY steamers have served the North Atlantic and Gulf ports on traffic originating at or destined to Mexico. The business was handled through the ports of Vera Cruz and Tampico. The rates between the ports, for example, between Galveston and Tampico or between New York and Vera Cruz, being all-water rates, they are not filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission and fluctuate to some extent. No joint through rates are established from Atlantic Seaboard Territory, the rates being made on a combination of the rates to and from the port. The rate so produced is sufficiently lower than the all-rail rates to influence the traffic via this route. Interior points in Mexico are reached in the same man- ner, that is, by using the local rates from the port of entry or transshipment to or from the interior points. The same procedure is followed with regard to traffic imported through the Gulf ports, a combination of the local rates to and from the ports with the rates of the water lines being employed in establishing through rates. 4. Impokt Rates via Pacific Coast Ports of Entry The bulk of the imports through Pacific Coast ports of entry are confined to traffic originating in the Orient, Australia, and the Hawaiian Islands, although fre- quently shipments are received from Europe, particularly from the Mediterranean countries, these shipments being forwarded bv way of the Suez Canal. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 41 (a) Grouping of Interior Destinations The eastern part of the United States is grouped in identically the same manner as for the construction of domestic rates, the various groups being outlined, in general, on Map 7 of the Atlas of Traffic Maps. When an import commodity rate is established it is usually blanketed or applied to all these groups. (b) Class Rates The class rates currently in effect from North Pacific and California terminals to Eastern groups of destina- tion are shown in Table 16. These rates apply also on shipments for which no commodity rate is provided. These rates, as may be observed, are the same as the domestic rates, with the exception that from some points in British Columbia they afford a slightly lower basis. This is also true in so far as some of the coast cities in California are concerned. When import rates are estab- lished on import traffic they are usually applied from all ports of entry. (c) Application of Rates The extent of the application of Trans-Continental rates on traffic imported to Pacific coast ports is defined below, the current rules in the Trans-Continental Freight Association's Tariff with respect to this traffic being set forth. 42 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 16 Class Rates Currently in Effect from North Pacific and California Terminals to Eastern Groups of Destination From Vancouver, Victo- ria, B. C, Seat- Rates in Cents PER 100 Pounds tle, T A C O M A, Wash., Albina, East Portland, 1 •> o 4 Clas 5 sess A B C I) K Portland, Ore., to Groups i .... A 370 360 350 320 310 303 265 260 252 225 220 215 190 185 ISO 192 187 182 152 148 145 120 117 115 115 112 110 105 B 100 C 98 D 340 295 245 207 175 177 140 110 105 95 E 330 300 300 300 2G0 .285 260 260 260 225 238 220 220 220 100 200 183 183 183 160 168 160 160 160 140 172 160 160 160 140 135 123 123 123 107 105 95 95 95 83 102 93 93 93 80 92 F 85 G 85 H 85 j 73 From East San Pedro, Oakland, Redon- do Beach, San Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Classes 2 Diego, San Fran- cisco, San Pedro, 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Cal., to Groups i A 370 360 320 310 265 260 225 220 190 185 192 187 152 148 120 117 115 112 105 B 100 C 350 303 252 215 ISO 182 145 115 110 98 D 340 295 245 207 175 177 140 110 105 95 E 330 285 238 200 16S 172 135 105 102 92 F 300 260 220 183 160 160 123 95 93 85 G . 280 242 205 170 150 150 115 90 87 78 H . . . ... 2S0 242 205 170 150 150 115 90 87 78 J 260 225 190 160 140 140 107 83 80 73 1 See Map 7, Atlas of Traffic Maps. - Governed by the Western Classification. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 43 APPLICATION OP RATES VIA CALIFORNIA TERMINALS RATES ON IMPORT TRAFFIC VIA PACIFIC COAST PORTS (A) In the absence of import rates from San Francisco, San Pedro, San Diego, Redondo Beach, and East San Pedro, Cal., shipments originat- ing at points in Asia, Philippine Islands, Australia, New Zealand, Fiji Islands, or beyond, are subject to rates from San Francisco, Cal. (B) Rates as authorized in paragraph (A) apply from shipside at wharves at San Francisco, San Pedro, San Diego, Redondo Beach, and East San Pedro, Cal., served by the tracks of the initial rail carriers, parties hereto, as well as from the stations of said initial rail carriers at. San Francisco, San Pedro, San Diego, Redondo Beach, and East San Pedro, Cal. (C) The rates authorized in paragraphs (A) and (B) are applied only when satisfactory proof is furnished initial rail carrier, party hereto, that shipments originated at points in Asia, Philippine Islands, Aus- tralia, New Zealand, Fiji Islands, or beyond. RATES APPLYING ON TRAFFIC ORIGINATING AT POINTS IN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS (A) On traffic originating at points in the Hawaiian Islands and destined to points in the United States and Canada, when consigned through the port of San Pedro, San Diego, Redondo Beach, or East San Pedro, Cal., the rates authorized to apply from San Francisco, Cal., also apply from shipside at the wharves at San Pedro, San Diego, Redondo Beach, or East San Pedro, Cal., served by the tracks of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway (Coast Lines), San Pedro, Los Angeles & Salt Lake Railroad and Southern Pacific Company, respectively. (B) The rates authorized in paragraph (A) are applied only when satisfactory proof is furnished initial rail carrier, party hereto, that shipments originated at Hawaiian Islands. RATES APPLYING ON TRAFFIC ORIGINATING AT POINTS IN MEXICO, CENTRAL AMERICA, OR SOUTH AMERICA (A) On traffic originating at points in Mexico, Central America, or South America, and destined to points in the United States or Canada, when consigned through the port of East San Pedro, San Pedro, San Diego, or Redondo Beach, Cal., the rates authorized from San Francisco, Cal., also apply from shipside at the wharves at East San Pedro, San Pedro, San Diego, or Redondo Beach, Cal., served by the tracks of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway (Coast Lines), San Pedro, Los Angeles & Salt Lake Railroad and Southern Pacific Company, respe* tively. 44 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY (B) The rates authorized in paragraph (A) are applied only when satisfactory proof is furnished initial carrier, party hereto, that ship- ments originated in Mexico, Central America, or South America. VIA NORTH PACIFIC COAST TERMINALS RATES ON TRAFFIC ORIGINATING IN HAWAIIAN ISLANDS AND ON IMPORT TRAFFIC VIA PACIFIC COAST PORTS (A) In the absence of import rates from Vancouver, Victoria, B. C., Seattle, Tacoma, Wash., Albina, East Portland, and Portland, Ore., ship- ments originating at points in Asia, Philippine Islands, Australia, New- Zealand, Fiji Islands, or beyond, are subject to rates named herein from Vancouver, Victoria, B. C, Seattle, Tacoma, Wash., Albina, East Port- land, and Portland, Ore. (B) Rates as authorized in paragraph (A) apply from shipside at wharves at Vancouver, Victoria, B. O, Seattle, Tacoma, Wash., Albina. East Portland, and Portland, Ore., served by the tracks of the rail car- riers, parties hereto, as well as from the stations of said rail carriers at Vancouver, Victoria, B. C, Seattle, Tacoma, Wash.. Albina, East Port- land, and Portland, Ore. (C) The rates authorized in paragraphs (A) and (B) are applied only when satisfactory proof is furnished initial rail carriers, parties hereto, tbat shipments originated at Hawaiian Islands, Asiatic points, Philippine Islands, Australia. New Zealand, Fiji Islands, or beyond. From this it is seen that through California Terminals a distinction is made as to whether the traffic originates in the Far East, in the Hawaiian Islands, in Mexico, in Central America, or in South America. While there are North Pacific Coast Terminals, no cognizance is taken of traffic originating in the latter countries. However, via North Pacific Coast Terminals, on several commodi- ties peculiar to Central America, rates are published to apply from North Pacific ports of entry. With these exceptions, however, the rate applicable upon domestic traffic would be applied via North Pacific Coast ports of entry. Traffic, in general, originating in South America, Cen- tral America, or the Republic of Mexico is discharged EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 45 by the boat lines through the southern California Ter- minals, very little of the traffic being transported north of San Francisco. The intent of this application of rate basis is to confine the application of these import rates to bona fide import shipments and to remove the possibility of their being applied on traffic originating at points on the Pacific seacoast and transported by vessel to the various terminal points. (d) Commodity Rates In Table 17 are shown some of the rates applicable upon commodities imported through the Pacific Coast ports to points in the United States and Canada. These commodities are, in a great measure, as may be noted, peculiar to the Orient, although such familiar items as cigars, peanuts, and rice are encountered. 5. Cuban Traffic As is the case in regard to the Republic of Mexico, the Island of Cuba, especially the port of Havana, enjoys a very efficient steamship service. A number of established lines have for years maintained sailings between that port and the more important ports on the seaboard of the United States. No through rates, however, are published to interior destinations on traffic exported from that island, through rates being made by a combination of the local rates to and from the ports of entry or by the establishment of proportional rates applicable therefrom. These propor- 46 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 17 Import Commodity Rates from Pacific Coast Ports to Points in United States and Canada Commodities i Bamboo, split, in packages Camphor, crude, in packages Cigars Cocoa beans, in packages Curios, toys, metal ornaments, soapstone ornaments, Nipponoid ornaments, not otherwise indexed by name herein, in pack- ages, valuation not exceeding $10.00 per 100 pounds Curios, toys, metal ornaments, soapstone ornaments, Nipponoid ornaments, not otherwise indexed by name herein, in packages Fire crackers, straight carloads, or in mixed carloads, with joss sticks, in packages Gum kowrie, minimum carload weight 40,000 pounds Gums, including gum copal, gum da mar, gum kowrie, East India gum, Manila gum, gam- bier and bird lime, in packages Lacquered ware, in boxes Liquors, Japanese and Chinese alcoholic or spirituous wines and liquors (not including champagne) : In barrels or iron drums In glass Loofahs, compressed in bales Matting, matting rugs, matting grass, straw fibre and straw fibre table mats, in pack- ages, minimum carload weight 20,000 pounds Silk, raw, spun and silk goods, in packages. . Skins, kangaroo, opossum, rabbit, wallaby, and wombat, minimum carload weight 20, 000 pounds Wool, in grease, in bales, compressed, mini mum carload weight 24,000 pounds Kates 2 in Cents per 100 Pounds Less Than Carloads 150 100 225 135 150 200 12.", 125 125 250 275 300 125 400 155 Carloads 80 200 85 100 00 80 1 E 292 256 -'20 202 176 182 102 142 122 102 292 256 226 202 176 182 162 142 122 102 303 205 233 207 179 180 165 14". 125 104 298 261 231 206 i79 186 105 14.'. 125 104 283 247 217 193 170 175 156 136 116 96 285 249 21!) 195 171 175 157 137 117 07 297 260 229 204 178 184 164 144 124 103 300 263 231 206 178 185 164 144 121 104 300 263 231 206 178 185 164 144 124 104 307 268 235 307 268 235 337 290 253 327 283 247 316 276 241 322 2S2 246 322 2S2 246 330 290 250 300 264 232 303 267 235 307 268 235 210 181 210 181 219 190 220 189 214 184 216 188 216 188 219 190 208 181 210 181 210 181 189 168 189 168 199 177 196.5178 190 170 194 173 194 173 197 174 187 166 189 168 189 168 147 127 106 147 127 100 156 135 114 152 132 111 150 130 110 151 131 110 151 132 110 154 134 113 145 124 104 147 127 106 147 127 100 280 244 214 190 166 172 153 133 113 93 1 Governed by the Western Classification. 2 Rates from Colorado Common Points to Moxieo City. Mex.. are, as a general proposition, published on the same basis as St. Louis-Mexico City rates. «2 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 22— Continued Export Class Rates to Mexico City and Other Mexican Points from Specified Territories To Points in Mexico from the Following Tebeitobies St. Louis Kansas City Omaha - Davenport ( except Quincy, 111.) Quincy, 111 New Orleans Little Rock-Fort Smith and Memphis Nashville Louisville Macon Chicago-Milwaukee and Cin- cinnati Carolina Raleigh Fox River Dayton-South Bend Detroit-Cleveland Middlesboro Youngstown Kansas No. 1 Kansas No. 2 Kansas No. 3 Houston and Galveston, Tex.. Shreveport, La., and points taking same rates Colorado Common Points - Differentials in Cents pes 100 Pounds Classes i 4 5 A BOD 12 12 12 12 10 10 E 11 9 i 5 3 4 3 3 2 (J 5 5 4 O ** 4 3 3 3 2 9 !» 9 9 G 7 6 6 6 6 i i i i o i o o 5 o 5 4 o 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 8 I 5 4 2 3 o 2 2 2 S 1 4 2 3 2 2 2 2 15 12 9 8 5 7 t> 5 5 4 15 12 9 S 5 7 6 5 5 4 45 34 27 17 14 37 15 14 13 12 35 27 21 18 13 Ui 12 10 10 9 24 20 15 12 8 8 8 8 8 8 30 26 20 14 12 12 11 9 9 8 30 20 20 14 12 12 11 9 9 8 38 34 24 17 14 15 12 12 12 11 8 8 6 6 5 5 4 3 2 — 11 11 9 8 5 — G 5 5 4 15 12 9 s y i r> 5 4 9 1 Governed by the Western Classification. - Rates from Colorado Common Points to Mexico City, Mex., are, as a general proposition, published on the same basis as St. Louis-Mexico City rates. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 63 For example, the through rail-and-water rates from St. Louis to Mexico City are made as follows: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E All-rail rates from St. Louis to MexicoCity.292 256 226 202 176 1S2 162 142 122 102 Rail-and-water differ- entials 16 14 12 9 8 9 7 6 6 6 Through rail-and- water rates 276 242 214 193 168 173 155 136 116 96 4. Rates to Monterey, Mex. Through all-rail rates from St. Louis to Monterey, Mex., are made by deducting the following differentials from the all-rail rates published to Mexico City: Classes 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E All-rail rates from St. Louis to MexicoCity.292 256 226 202 176 182 162 142 122 102 Differentials 70 60 51 39 43 46 44 45 41 30 Through rates from St. Louis to Monterey. 222 396 175 163 133 136 118 97 81 72 The all-rail rates to Monterey, Mex., from other terri- tories are made on the same basis as are the rates to Mexico City, Mex., that is by adding to or deducting (as the case may be) the differentials used from each terri- tory in arriving at the rate to Mexico City. For example, the through rates from Cincinnati Territory to Mexico City, Mex., are made by adding the following differentials (as above explained) to the rates from St. Louis to Mexico City: Classes 12 34 5ABODE Differentials 15 12 '.» 8 5 7 6 5 5 4 64 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Therefore, in order to obtain the through rates from Cincinnati Territory to Monterey, Mex., add the above differentials to the rates from St. Louis to Monterey, as follows : Classes 12345ABCDE Rates from St. Louis to Monterey 222 196 175 163 133 136 118 97 81 72 Differentials 15 12.98 5 7 6554 Through, rates from Cincinnati Territory to Monterey 237 20S 184 171 138 143 124 102 86 76 5. Rates to Vera Cruz and Tampico, Mex. Through rail-and-water commodity rates are published to Tampico and Vera Cruz, Mex., via the ports of New Orleans, La., or Texas City, Tex., from Mississippi River points and points east thereof. The outline of the great- est part of Central Freight Association Territory covered in the tariff publishing these rates is west of a line drawn as follows: From Toronto, Ont., via the shore of Lake Ontario and Hamilton to Niagara Falls, Ont. ; thence via the Niagara River including both banks of said river to Buffalo, N. Y. ; thence via the Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Railway to Salamanca, N. Y. ; thence via the Erie Railroad to Faulkner Junction, N. Y. ; thence via the Dunkirk, Alle- gheny Valley & Pittsburgh Railroad to Warren, Pa.; thence via the Western New York & Pennsylvania Rail- way to Oil City, Pa. ; thence via the Allegheny River to EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 65 Franklin, Pa. ; thence via an imaginary line immediately west of the Allegheny River to Butler, Pa. ; thence via the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad to Allegheny, Pa. ; thence to Pittsburgh, Pa. ; thence from Pittsburgh, Pa., via the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad to Wheeling, W. Va. ; and thence via an imaginary line due south from Wheeling, W. Va. Rates to Vera Cruz and Tampico, Mex., are generally made by the use of the local rates from originating points in Central Freight Association Territory to New York plus the steamship lines' rates to Tampico and Vera Cruz, less the following differentials : 1 2 14 3 12 4 9 5 8 A B 7 C 6 D G E 16 The rates thus obtained are subject to the combination rates from the same points of origin to Gulf ports plus the local rates of the steamship lines from such Gulf ports to Tampico and Vera Cruz, Mex., as maxima. It must be understood that in making less-than-carload rates via New York, cartage transfer at New York is to be added to the rate. 6. Rates to West Coast of Mexico A number of commodity rates are published from points in Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Okla- homa, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin to points in Mexico on the west coast route, such as Guaymas, Empalme, and Mazatlan. These rates are made, in a 66 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY great many cases, on combinations of local rates, using the rates to border points, such as Nogales or Naco, Ariz., plus the local rates in Mexico, to which is added the transfer charge at the border. Rates to other points on the west coast route are made on combinations of local rates, as no through rates from points in the United States are published. CHAPTER VI CUBAN TRAFFIC 1. Class Rates from Central Freight Association Territory via Atlantic Seaboard Ports On traffic forwarded to Cuba via North Atlantic ports, no special basis of rates is provided by the Central Freight Association and Trunk Line carriers, through rates being made by a combination of rates to and from the ports, using the proportional rate to the port as the inland proportion and the ocean carrier's rate from the port of transshipment to the port of call. 2. Class Rates from Central Freight Association Territory via Gulf Ports From Central Freight Association Territory on traffic destined to Cuban ports, exported through the Gulf ports, a proportional scale of rates is established to the said ports. These rates apply from well defined groups into which that portion of Central Freight Association Territory lying east of the Indiana-Illinois State Line is assigned. Representative points in each of the six groups are indi- cated in Table 23. 67 68 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 28 Grouping of Pohntts of Origin Representative Points G'ps Representative Points G'ps Representative Points G'ps 2 Allegheny, Pa . . . 2 Ashland, Ky. . . . 3 Farbison, Ohio. . 2 Buffalo, N. Y 2 Selina, Ohio 1 Chillicothe, Ohio 3 Cleveland, Ohio. . 2 Columbus, Ohio. . 1 Day ton, Ohio 3 Detroit, Mich .... 2 Dunkirk, N. Y . . •> Elizabeth town, Erie, Pa 2 Ft. Wayne, Ind. . Goshen Tnd 1 Iud 3 Gary, Ind Hamilton, Ont. . . 1 1 Fostoria, Obio. . . 2 2 Huntington, W. Greenville, Ohio. 1 3 Jackson, Mich . . . Kenova, W. Va.. 2 3 Va 2 Indianapolis, Ind. Jonesboro, Ind. . . 1 Kalamazoo, Mich. 2 LaFayette, Ind. . 1 Charleston, W. Va. 2 1 1 Lansing, Mich. . . 2 Decatur, 111 5i Marion, Ohio 1 2 Marion, Ind 1 Muncie, Ind 1 Middletown, Ohio 3 Mackinaw, 111... 4i New Lexington, Muskegon, Mich. *> New Cumberland, Ohio 2 North Vernon, W Va 2 2 Owasso, Mich.. . . Portsmouth, Obio 2 3 Ind •_» Orville, Ohio. . . . Paris, 111 5i Pittsburgh, Pa.. . 2 Round Bottom. Quincy, Ohio. . . . 1 Richmond, Ind. . . • > • » W. Va 2 Rushville, Ind . . . 3 Saginaw, Mich. . . 2 St. Thomas, Ont. 2 Sandusky, Ohio. . V 2 South Bend, Ind. 1 Stuebenville, Ohio 2 Terre Haute, Ind. 3 Toledo, Ohio 2 Trinway, Ohio. . . 2 Uricbsville, Ohio. 2 Urbana, Ohio. . . . 1 Valparaiso, Ind. . 1 Vienna, Mich .... 2 Washington Court Vincennes, Ind.. . ti House, Ohio. . . Q *> Wheeling, W. Va . 2 Windsor, Ont 2 Youngstown, Obio •) Zanesville, Ohio. . 2 1 Stations on the Vandalia Railroad in Illinois from Farrington, 111., to but not including St. Louis, Mo., and from Farrington, III., to Kennie, 111., inclusive, are in Group 5. Stations, Midland City to Peoria, inclusive, are in Group 4. These are the only Illinois stations that are grouped in the Central Freight Association tariff. Rates from these stations are puhlished by the Western Trunk Line Committee. Table 23 gives some general idea as to the grouping of Central Freight Association Territory. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 69 3. Proportional Class Rates from Central Freight Association Territory to Gulf Ports, Except Key West, Fla. In Table 24 are given the current class rates applicable to all Gulf ports, except Key West, Fla., on traffic destined to Havana and other points in Cuba. These rates, as may be observed, are governed by the Official Classification. It will be recalled that the local rates to New Orleans and Mobile were governed by the Southern Classification, while the rates to Galveston and other Texas ports were governed by the Western Classification. TABLE 24 • m • Class Rates Applicable to All Gulf Ports, Except Key West, Fla., on Traffic Destined to Havana and Other Points in Cuba To Gulf Ports > from Groups 2 Rates [N Cents per 100 Pounds 1 2 3 Classes 4 5 3 6 R25 R26 R28 75 75 69.5 72 69.5 65 65 65 60.5 63 60.5 56.5 50 50 46.5 49.5 46.5 43.5 35 35 32.5 34 32.5 30.5 30 30 28 29 28 26 25 25 23 24.5 23 21.5 55 55 51.5 53.5 51.5 48 40 40 37.5 39.5 37.5 34.5 40 2 40 37.5 4 5 6 39.5 37.5 35 Exception. — Does not apply on live stock for export ; no export rates in effect on live stock. Exception. — Does not apply on cotton seed products, viz. : Cotton seed meal, cotton seed cake, cotton seed hulls, cotton seed oil, cotton seed soap stock, cotton seed foots, cotton seed hull bran, cotton seed settlings, cotton seed tank bottoms, cotton seed hull shavings (not bleached or dyed), and cotton factory sweepings (refuse of cotton seed oil mills). 1 Algiers, La., Galveston, Tex., Gretna, La.. Gulfport, Miss., Mobile, Ala., New Orleans, La., Pensacola, Fla., Port Arthur, Tex.. Tort Bolivar. Tex., Port Chal- mette, La., Texas City, Tex., and Westwego, La. - See Table 23. 3 Governed by Official Classification No. 41, Agent R. N. Collyer's I. C C- O. C. No. 41, supplements thereto and reissues thereof, and by Exceptions to said classification. 70 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY The rate to Gulf ports from any point in Central Freight Association Territory shown in Table 23 will be the same as for the corresponding group to which it is assigned. Thus, for example, reference to Table 23 shows that Vincennes is in Group 6 and the rate from Vincennes would be the scale shown for Group 6 in Table 24. 4. Proportional Class Rates from Central Freight Association Territory to Key West, Fla. To illustrate the difference in the rate to Key West, Fla., as contrasted with the other Gulf ports, the current rates to Key West, Fla., are reproduced in Table 25. TABLE 25 Class Rates Applicable to Key West, Fla., on Traffic Destined to Havana and Other Points in Cuba To Kfy West FLA., J S1 Rates in Cents pee 100 Pounds FROM GROU1 1 •■> • » Classes 2 4 5 6 R25 R26 R28 1 •> 127 127 121.5 124 121.5 117 109 109 104.5 107 104.5 100.5 S6 86 82.5 S5.5 82.5 79.5 63.5 63.5 61 62.5 61 59 54.5 54.5 52.5 53.5 52.5 50.5 45.5 45.5 43.5 45 43.5 42 95 95 91.5 93.5 91.5 88 72.5 72.5 70 72 70 67 71.5 71.5 3 4 68.5 70.5 68 5 6 66 Exception. — Does not apply on live stock for export ; no export rates In effect on live stock. Exception. — Does not apply on cotton seed products, viz. : Cotton seed meal, cotton seed cake, cotton seed hulls, cotton seed oil, cotton seed soap stock, cotton seed foots, cotton seed hull bran, cotton seed settlings, cotton seed tank bottoms, cotton seed hull shavings (not bleached or dyed), and cotton factory sweepings (refuse of cotton seed oil mills). 1 See Table 23. 1 Governed by Official Classification No. 41, Agent R. N. Collyer'e I. C. C.-O. C. No. 41, supplements thereto and reissues thereof, and by Exceptions to said classi- fication. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 71 These rates, as may be observed, are in all instances considerably higher than the rates to the other Gulf ports and the difference is justified, in a great measure, by the difference in the length of haul. Both the rates to Key West and to the other Mexican Gulf ports are considerably less than the local rates from the same group to the same point. These rates are designated as proportional rates and are confined in their application to apply only on traffic destined to Havana, Cuba, and other points on the island. 5. Class Rates from the Ports The class rates applicable in connection with the water carriers operating between Southern ports of transship- ment and Cuban ports of call are shown in Table 26. These are the rates that are currently in effect and as they are not filed with the Interstate Commerce Com- mission they are subject to change upon very short notice. From Table 26 it may be seen that the rates from Key West to Havana are hardly one-third of the rates appli- cable from the other ports and it may also be observed that there are no rates from Key West to the other Cuban ports of call, such as Cienfuegos, Matanzas, Guan- tanamo, or Manzanillo. This is due to the fact that the Peninsular & Occidental Steamship Company, which affords the service between Key West and Havana, does not make these points as ports of call, confining its operations to Havana only. n FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 26 Class Rates Applicable from Southern Ports op Trans- shipment to Cuban Outports From Key West, Fla., Mobile, Ala., New Or- leans, La., Galveston, Tex.. (Shipside) to Havana Havana Cienfuegos Santiago . Matanaas , Cardenas . Guantanaino Caibarien * . Sagua * .... Manzanillo Rates in Cents PER 100 Pounds 1 2 Classes 1 4 5 6 R25 R26 752 65 55 40 35 30 60 45 233 21 19 11.5 10.5 9.5 20 12.5 802 70 60 43 38 33 65 50 S22 72 62 45 40 35 67 52 852 75 65 47 42 37 70 55 1 Governed by the Official Classification. 2 Rates apply from all points shown above except Key West, Fla. 3 Rates apply from Key West, Fla., only. 4 When in connection with the United Steamship Company, traffic to these points is subject to sufficient cargo being offered and special booking of steamer room. The Munson Steamship Company has direct sailings from Mobile to all ports named above. Taking a Group 1 point of origin, the rates via New Orleans would be constructed as follows : Classes 1 2 3 4 5 6 Rates from Group 1 to Gulf 75 65 50 35 30 25 Rates from Gulf to Havana 75 65 55 40 35 30 Through rates 150 130 105 65 55 The rates via Key West would be constructed as follows : Rates from Group 1 to Key West 127 109 86 63% 54% 45% Rates from Key West to Havana 23 21 19 11% 10% 9% Through rates 150 130 105 75 65 55 EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 73 From this it is seen that the rates from Group 1 are the same to Havana whether forwarded via Key West or via other Gulf ports. This emphasizes the equaliza- tion of the competition via the various routes, as it may be seen by further comparison that the rates from the other groups are the same also. This is brought about by the fact that the rates to Key West are established on a differential basis over the rates to other Gulf ports. The following differentials are added to the other Gulf port rates to establish proportional rates to Key West. Classes 1 2 3 4 5 G Differentials 52 44 36 28% 24% 20 1 :. 6. Commodity Rates from Central Freight Association Territory via Gulf Ports, Including Key West, Fla. In so far as Havana is concerned, the same equalization of rates from Central Freight Association Territory through the various Mexican Gulf ports does not prevail, as lower combinations may be obtained through Key West, Fla., than through other ports on some commodi- ties, and vice versa. A few of the rates currently in effect on some commodities are shown in Table 27. As an exception to the generally accepted idea that commodity rates are less than class rates, it may be seen that the rates between the Gulf ports and Havana on boots and shoes are considerably in excess of the first-class rate, which is the rating they are assigned in the classification. In explanation of this, it may be said that it is a common practice, in so far as water-borne traffic is concerned, to assess very high rates on unde- 74 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY TABLE 27 Commodity Rates Currently in Effect from Gulf Ports to Havana Commodities Boots and shoes, any quantity Cement, in bags or barrels, any quantity. . .. Clay, fire or common, in barrels, C. L Clay, fire or common, in barrels, L. C. L. . . . Coffee, in bags, C. L Coffee, in bags, L. C. L Glassware, common, C. L Glassware, common, L. C. L Hay, in bales Pig lead, C L Pig lead, L. C. L Packing house products. C. L Packing house products, L. C. L Water, mineral, in glass, in cases or barrels, C. L Water, mineral, in glass, in cases or barrels, L. C. L 1 Governed by the Official Classification. - Per gross ton, 2,240 pounds. Rates i in Cents pee 100 Pounds Except as Noteh To Havana from Gulf Poets From Key Other West, Fla. Than Key West, Pla. 100 271/2 11 07% 23 0S% 23 10% 25 12 25 12% 60 20% 60 22 30 .... 4002 192 = 400 = 2132 23 09% 23 09% H!) 35 13 14% The corresponding rates on the same commodities from Central Freight Association Territory to both Key West and other Gulf ports are shown in Tables 28 and 30. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 75 TABLE 28 Commodity Rates Currently in Effect from Central Freight Association Territory to Key West, Fla. Commodities Boots and shoes, in cases, strapped, any quantity Cement, in bags or barrels, C. L. . Clay, fire or common, C. L Clay, fire or common, L. C. L . . Coffee, in bags, C. L Coffee, in bags, L. C. L Glassware, common, C. L Glassware, common, L. C. L Hay Lead, pig, C. L Lead, pig, L. C. L Packing house products, C. L . . . . Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds Except as Noted From Central Freight Association Territory to Gulf Ports in Groups - 12 3 4 5 6 147% 147% 142 144% 142 137% 23 24 18 19% 18% 16 33 33 30% 32% 30% 29% 47% 47y 2 45 46% 45 43% 43 43 41 42 41 39 52% 52 y 2 50 52 50 47 74 y 2 74 % 72 73% 72 72 93 93 89i/ 2 91% 89% 86 7683 768 722 756 722 689 9713 971 915 35 948 37 915 870 1 Governed by the Official Classification. - See Table 23. 3 Per gross ton, 2,240 pounds. TABLE 29 Commodity Rates from Central Freight Association Territory to Gulf Ports Other Than Key West, Fla. Commodities Boots and shoes, any quantity. . . Cement, C. L Coffee, C. L Coffee, L. C. I Glassware Packing house products C. I.... Hay Lead, pig \Va ter, mineral Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds From Central Freight Association Territory to Gulf Ports in Groups = 12 3 4 5 6 17% 20% 14% 16 15 12% •>> 24 ' Governed by the Official Classification. - See Table 23. 76 FREIGHT RATES— AVE STERN TERRITORY o CO tt E-i s o Oh Eh O co CO m co co m © eo eo in m s BjJUdBqo oi CO 4M • :* ! '. m • . ■* Tj* . . © . CM ri r£r£ IM b- rt- ueiauqiBO t- © © b- t> I- b- © in b- b- m s'» suuap.iBO in mm mm • m m © eo m m © „■ Bojui^a sauug CM CO b^ CO CM CO © CO 0J u u - C. 00 u o © © b- © b- a o oo -^ 5 $ pq 00 03 BO o> o -a 00 "5 5 os m t- r-t CO CO Bj •t EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 77 a B . g 2 g * j s S. *a ■o - a ei C o a a l- 0) ^ -° J? ^ «r »* _ © 50 > © Ml C ' 0J £ 4> -a 2 w •- ss es o -a a 3 a <£ . •*■> 2 . •O a ^ s o a a *j g > j? 6 2 OS 5j a. gg g u rr, • 0> 8 tO Cj Oj S " O « ~ ^ £ 2« &■§ »5" o ~o ^ eo .Sf t. b « c> +■> §"§ S ^? s * -~ " OS W BG 8 *£ $ 3o- ^ a M « S B p s ""2 ° a 2 a S " g 5 - .2 S | P; a; ■*-> ^ ""• .. £* o ** * g g 8 r "g 5 *• « .8 b tJ ja*j w ti 2 »j oa *j +■'•-5 a> „ «* * fl o cj a © o rt £ .3 © feaB-tOrrj y >> s fc 2 3 § S r « 1 It; •<= a- £wipft«« 2 J3 is j « "Hkti-H > a +■' -a *» 3 3 S I « r* a a 2 * « « 2 a o » o - a "a o> s * B .as £ a i; ss at, a o St ^ u * = o £ « g & « 5 ffi fS g3 2^ S, & a 1 2 a, a. "Jo. ~§ 2* afl Mflffi-c .^ -bo ■■"OS S B ■** m ■*»• to w „. <3 „r 2 - a _ M w S _ 2 a— J5S hfl Bo. t; S «« 2 a § a « S » S3 2 2 K -S^-pM^Sfl g2" J 2 a n ,»-agol2 Sag- © — oj sa. w a«+3 . iJ © a » .a o os 9aaaa Q ajs +J ya23a -i§'la rt Salgfs^^aaH 4)Soa- c jajaooa5;o ( .l5 £ 3 (/ -'«_j a i2i a -ia 8 »l!S s ii sili e«2-; x ^-wB+ j S5 S w, BbNjaaa f/ ; §S_> 5 :a©Is a 2' S 8fc2. a ! :£a |!|^iaa , 3-gS£§2|sT>|g ( a ^^>2 £ g: »||; s a I a S g? ^ a 3 ^^ aaa-S3 a a 2f § gs « -f J . aaa>rt2 , aa)jTS ^ S © 2 2 & o « a a a a *■ « 2 a S 2 os <- a. _. fi .. — -> *"■ .*. -3 i. jt j» 3 §5 a 78 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY sirable freight. Boots and shoes may be said to be undesirable freight for the reason that the carriers experience no little trouble on account of claims being filed for shortages in shipments of this kind, due to the pilfering of the cases after they have left the shipper's possession. Many water lines refuse to accept them un- less they are strapped, corded, and sealed. This precau- tion is taken to safeguard themselves, as a case cannot be opened by anyone without the seal being destroyed, and the responsibility may readily be placed by determining in whose possession the case might have been when the seal was broken. Other objectionable commodities are treated in the same manner. 7. Class Rates to Cuban Outpoets The class rates to Cuban outports, such as Cienfuegos, Santiago, Caibarien, Guantanamo, and others, are shown in Table 26, these rates being constructed by the addi- tion of certain arbitraries to the rates currently in effect to Havana, Cuba. 8. Commodity Rates to Cuban Outpoets The rates on commodities to the Cuban outports are also constructed by the addition of arbitraries to the rates currently in effect to Havana. These arbitraries are she Tr n in Table 30. The rates constructed on this arbitrary basis are appli- cable in connection with the Munson Steamship Company and the United Steamship Company, the rates via the EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 79 Southern Pacific Company being specifically published, as is indicated in Tables 31 and 32, which show some of the commodity rates currently in effect via the Southern Pacific Company and Atlantic Steamship Lines to the aforesaid Cuban outports. A comparison of these rates with the rates to Havana plus the arbitraries shown in Table 30 will indicate that they are on the same basis. For example, the rate on boots and shoes from Mobile or New Orleans to Havana is $1. The arbitrary shown in Table 30 applicable on boots and shoes destined to Guantanamo is 10 cents, making a through rate in con- nection with the Munson Steamship Company or the United Steamship Company of $1.10 from New Orleans to Guantanamo. This is the same rate as that published by the Southern Pacific Company-Atlantic Steamship Lines as a through rate. Through rates from interior points in the United States are constructed in much the same manner as are the rates to Havana, Cuba, that is, by a combination of the rates to the ports with the rates from the ports plus the arbi- traries, if via the Munson Steamship Company or the United Steamship Company, or plus the through ocean rates, if via the Southern Pacific Company-Atlantic Steamship Lines. The following is an illustration, assuming the movement to be cement in carload quan- tities from Toledo, Ohio, to Manzanillo, Cuba. 80 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Via Munson Steamship Company or Atlantic Steamship Company Rate from Toledo (Group 2) to New Orleans or Mobile 20Vs> cents per cwt Rate from New Orleans or Mobile to Havana 11 cents per cwt. Arbitrary, Manzanillo over Havana 5 cents per cwt Through rate 36U cents per cwt. Via Southern Pacific Company — Atlantic Steamship Lines Rate from Toledo (Group 2) to New Orleans or Mobile 20*4 cents per cwt Ocean rate. New Orleans to Manzanillo 20 cents per cwt. Through rate 40Y 2 cents per cwt. 9. Minimum Charge On small shipments, the minimum charge applicable via the various routes, that is, via Key West or other Gulf ports, has some bearing on the lowest charges obtainable. In so far as applied to the inland propor- tional rates applicable to Key West or other Gulf ports, the minimum charge is that for the actual weight at tariff rate but in no case less than $1. The minimum charge from the Gulf ports to Havana or to the outports, when, forwarded via direct steamers, is $3.25; when for- warded to the outports via Havana, that is, transshipped at that point via the route shown in the table, the mini- mum charge is $5.25 ; and when forwarded from Havana in connection with the Cuban Railways, the minimum charge to Cardenas and Matanzas is $5 and to Caibarien and SagTia $6. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 81 N Tsqno op X K3 1". LO LO lO LO oSbhobs CO I- LO CO o T— 1 Cl CO S X to- CI a LO 1- c: ci CO ci co C O t-' -^ I- 01 LO ajpuj ci Cl X lO — LO s 1—1 LO LO 1; 10 LO M LO 3 10 M Tf ci c o 0}jan<3 13 :: LO Ti — LO i« CI M E-1 - » IN v. 13 sB^iAanx LO 00 QO CO LO Tji © i" ci CO LO co — LO a 10 LO LO co 05 .0 ci a oi ci £ o co •< r-l CS iH H K* Cl Ph c LO 00 LO O EH 9dm •* SO O X 01 •J 83 ~- CJ -1 Qn oc t» a h > IO CD 1- H 1-1 c"i t- "— 35 x co •* O r-l oo < 10 LO s J3 o \inSv.$ co 01 1- CO o - - ci 01 X "* N 01 LO -1 -- 01 CI oi ■s oi d >0 I- Cl c z Cl e* ■< 00 c © < OOimiB} co d O CO r- C 01 Cl i* ci CI 1". $ § e § ■j" 01 10 C I- 01 1-1 J -nt?no l-i LO es 0) K OS iq CO LO LO \o 10 LO LO LO t- S5 i~ LO Cl' m LO QC i—i ci l~ LO — CO ca oi c: ce < lu^qif) <* "* CO H 08 LO (N t -r gfl :: a ; :: E- K r"l LO i— fc t-5 as N Ed o LI 00 j" LO 10 LO LO LO & a BJjBdvqo 1- OB LO •* - H N s LO — CI ci — LO Cl ci LO T. 6 i- i- c: 10 — N ^i LO LO 09 S ueuBqiBQ co IN 1- CO c CO CI N 01 ?! CI lO c* oi cc a CI ci " N d LO t- 01 o es ri •*< C5 fa N to Mi LO Cl C O JQ ~ 01 a o c QQ a a op a co ir BOOUJBa © © P H -~ H t- -** X CO — — LO Cl 00 1- >~ o W t- LO o 10 LO ;# — t- LO LO p2 I" O LO LO sauug ■* LO £ CO c 1—1 — CI — LO lO CO " c: oi co LO iH DO o o 9 o o - — S r. O J3 M -r s •y. t-l o M S o so c T, S c "•c c: «-i ■a - — a - 1 >. c a Bd S — — e 5 r. X 4) 4) a] 09 . — -x c c £ CC o 3 -s te 4> O C o o o y fe fa S fc a o 3 > - cd - 25 EQ C. c = c — 4-* — »- E 5 S o a o "3 2 S 2? v = S 5 i 1 E «- — ^ ■*- o C ■ f. £ a — u -: « — a ■- — u >2 c c 10 c e E o v — .— % " C r c w a - 5 d 3 - OC CJ c — V. >. a •o = E C „. • * S = *-• = _ S — 3 .S c — - b - >— r c — = - *" u = 09 £ ■ 3 a _ >> ■c <= g ■ r 7 S c- A — ■w 3 >> B is 3 • S t > 2 i; « C S ** a c _ 3 -w > - c S — a ■ i § ■ i b o s. ■* & =1 O N 2 °* B o 8 * a c c z £. e. _ E 82 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY ON CO cq < 03 O 04 Eh £3 O < CQ 53 O to a Eh ■«jJ Eh Q O o o < p o cS 5 ° -fi|s "ft£ Son o: 1 ^ P5 oofl 2u ilk'. Q My w « *H KoyW a 50 a o a 8 KO N in Cl W in I- Cl in & ci m os in s OS s OS in t- CO cq t- i" n r»o« oi CO CD O r(4 CO CO -<* in h- CD CD rH in CD rH t- TJ4 CO CO O CM 00 r|4 rH © CO l~ OS ci t- 00 © rH in os o in t-' CO Q EH a o OS Eh fl o w 6. fc Eh < « Eh r— • c c s c O a < Kates in Cents per 100 Pounds Noted t- © © CO •*! lg^^ c C re © CC < a hH 5 s c i = < M . — M c^ i- M Cfl — rH C) CN x" LCj — CO — r- t- Hf CC © LC LCJ 2 ©' s CO : C t- LC CC © «*■ ■* ^ >h=C;-S a r-t — rH Pi O S3 £siZ rfJ 25 N ia s CJ cc O 1- c cc © CC Cl a < a Eh ~ u - 65 < «4 -«oJ i ^ O K-3 fcg* t- 1 IC c: n t- CC CO 55 (N 3 a -a < *~ ~ ep s I- © © CI 1- r- t- X s © : i- CI «a © ' OS c ec OC LC t- i- ■<* "*' ■k rH — T" p pOM H 03 — a> oo re rfJ > O « _® c g ° t- . C^l 1- c t- CI N C) © © p t- •* IG « CC t- CC CO rj (N o S3 o 02 5§So t- ■ ca t- r" LC t- IC >2 Cl CM © Cl © c «c OC X IT. c © ta ■rj5 «r: r. ~ rH 1 — T™ « a^ . © s • — o s a 6 .3 ©" H 3 ■4-> g •F^ Wj fl ^% +-) h tl 1 © 00 a S S3 a a cu / i t- i ^ s — a rH 4-1 u w H a : ® — a •— 1 •8 a p '3 a cS ! -a t- i 1 1 eS a a 3 a 5 of 4) a V • a ! es ■ oT • a •FH ! * I i- ; > > i > > Q E ll ) t , I I — a , a< > a a ■j 'J -t c e ■1 1 a o P B - z a i i P C c [ a g 1 03 a CN u C r-T © 4) O a a > — E Pi ! r = t ; .. a . ■J a cf c : a ! e H- "J a' z CM a u C : ; ti - 1 E 1 c a t a u Ja fe o - i a a : c- T X J c N P z a w PQ *< — ) C2 C > C ) c I C ) C ) Q — O a a »% — 3 a ~ < O G ad N a a n r. H p>- . ^ >-• G a <-» ,3 - O t- O » C a C Ss a) _ c — -a a ■w £ J O g.£- .^; P * & S E .- s •G S ■ *» S o. --KG *J C 01 a & z; et 3 _ G G o ri t « V o — > a ? "? P "~ a 1 «- >: a >> c a o a a « si « a a g* ea 5 a r3 C OS oq o< "3 "O a 2«S oo Oh -h GO I gP so £ a -u a S * a ~ Bo*' 5 ^ r3 c P 0) 4J ai (j ,j H CQ r oi a > t» «3 S3 rt i> HI « fl > w > > - OS o s SO | a a a, O SB O O h- ■a _^ -*- 1 11 1 F •U +J ~ S3 o3 — OS OS £ 4J C s c 84 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY The minimum charge, in so far as the rates to the ports are concerned, eliminates the application of the Official Classification rule, which provides that the mini- mum charge is for 100 pounds at the first-class rate and permits of the application of a lower basis for charges. Assuming the movement to be a shipment of 90 pounds of first-class merchandise moving from Buffalo, N. Y., the minimum charge via the several routes would be as follows : Via New Orleans, La. 90 lbs. at 75c=68c, which is less than required minimum of $1. Minimum rate from Buffalo to New Orleans $1.00 Rate from New Orleans to Havana 3.25 Through minimum charge to Havana $4.25 Via Key West, Fla. 90 lbs. at $1.27=$1.14, which is above the required minimum and is therefore applied as the charge to Key West. Rate from Buffalo to Key West $1.34 Rate from Key West to Havana 2.75 Through minimum charge to Havana $3.89 The minimum charge from New Orleans would also apply to CuL>an outports provided the shipment was for- warded via direct steamer. If, however, the shipment was forwarded via the water route to Santiago de Cuba and transshipped at Havana, the minimum charge via New Orleans would be $6.25. If forwarded via the rail- ocean-and-rail lines, using the ocean line to Havana in connection with the Cuban Railway, the minimum charge EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 85 to Cardenas and Matanzas would be $6, while to Caiba- rien and Sagua the minimum charge would be $7. 10. Marine Insurance The rates to Cuban ports do not include marine insur- ance and shippers must arrange with the steamship company for this feature if they so desire. The current rate of insurance from Mobile and New Orleans to Havana is 20 cents per $100 when insured under the open policy of these lines, and when shipments are trans- shipped at Havana to other Cuban outports, shippers must arrange for the insurance covering that portion of the voyage. 11. Rates from Ohio and Mississippi Rtver Points and Related Points Published by the Western Trunk Line Roads The inland proportional rates applicable on Cuban traffic from the points previously set forth are those published by the Central Freight Association lines through their agent, Mr. Eugene Morris. The rates set forth in Table 33 are those published by the Western Trunk Line Association and in some instances they apply from the same points as the Central Freight Asso- ciation issue. Thus, for example, we find rates published from Indianapolis, Ind. This is brought about by the fact that some of the lines serving, Indianapolis are members of the Central Freight Association, such as the Cincinnati, Hamilton & Dayton Railway, the Cleveland. Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway, the Lake Erie & Western Railroad, and the Vandalia Railroad, while 86 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY others are members of the Western Trunk Line Com- mittee. The policy of the carriers is to confine the publication of rates to as few bureaus as possible. 12. Grouping of Territory The territory from which the proportional rates are established is assigned to various groups, as is the case in the construction of rates to Western Trunk Line and Southwestern Committee territories. The borders vary somewhat from the ones used in those adjustments, however. The groups are designated as the Chicago, Peoria, St. Louis, Evansville, La Crosse, Milwaukee, Springfield, Cincinnati, Cairo, Dubuque, Indianapolis, Louisville, and Detroit groups. 13. Proportional Class Bates to Key West, Fla. The rates currently in effect from these groups to Key West, Fla., are indicated in Table 33. These class rates may be used in connection with the class rates of the ocean carriers operating from Key West to Havana as shown in Table 26, through rates being constructed in the same manner as was illustrated in the case of the Central Freight Association points. In Table 3.4 is given a representative list of commodity rates applicable on traffic originating in Central and South America, Mexico, and the West Indies Islands and destined to interior points in the United States. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 87 TABLE 33 Proportional Class Rates from Various Western Trunk Line Groups to Key West, Fla., on Traffic Destined to Havana, Cuba To Key West, Fla., FEOM Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds 1 2 3 Classes 1 4 5 6 R25 R26 Chicago (Group 1) 127 109 86 63% 54% 45 % 95 72 % Milwaukee (Group 2) . . . 127 109 86 63% 54% 45% 95 72% Dubuque (Group 3) 133 114 90 66% 56% 47% 99% 75% Peoria (Group 4) 124 107 85% 62% 63% 45 93% 72 Springfield (Group 5j... 121% 104% 82% 61 52% 43% 91% 70 Indianapolis (Group 6) . 121% 104% 82% 61 52% 43% 91% 70 St. Louis (Group 7) . . . . Cincinnati (Group 8) . . . Louisville (Group 9) . . . 117 105% 79% 59 50% 42 88 67 Evansville (Group 10) . . Cairo (Group 11) Detroit (Group 12) 127 109 86 63% 54% 45% 95 72 ' .... La Crosse (Group 13) . . . 164 136% 101 % 79 64% 56 118% 85 1 Governed by the Official Classification and exceptions thereto, issued by Eugene Morris and W. H. Hosmer, Agents. TABLE 34 Proportional Commodity Rates Applicable on Traffic Originating in Central and South America, Mexico, and the West Indies Islands via Gulf Ports Commodities Cigars Tobacco, unmanufactured, L. C. L Tobacco, unmanufactured, C. L Pineapples, C. L Oranges, C. L Straw hats Honey, C. L Honey, L. C. L Rates in Cents per 100 Pounds From Central and South America, Mexico, and the West Indies Islands to Cincin- nati, Ohio Chicago, 111. 66 66 32 32 37 75 50 75 66 75 Kansas City, Mo. Denver, Salt Lake Colo. City, Utah 110 85 180 148 313 268 35 53 84 182 32 46.4 88 162.4 40 60 115 150 75 110 180 288 50 110 180 313 75 110 ISO 313 CHAPTER VII REGULATION 1. Jurisdiction of Federal Government over Water Carriers The question of federal control over foreign commerce has been raised from time to time in the past, and it is generally conceded that Congress assumed control over commerce between the United States and foreign coun- tries under the Commerce Clause in the Federal Constitu- tion, which provides "that Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations." This view was sustained as early as February 18, 1793, by the Supreme Court of the United States. At the time, however, that the Constitution of the United States was drafted, the conditions applying to the transportation of property were greatly dissimilar from those of later years. The majority of our com- merce, both foreign and internal, was transported by vessels upon the high seas and by barges and tow-boats on the inland waterways. Very few stage or wagon roads of any importance or length existed and those that were constructed led from the towns and settlements located on the navigable waters to the woods and develop- ing interior settlements. The stage routes of those days did not engage in the transfer of property to any great extent inasmuch as their capacity was taxed to the utmost in the conveyance 88 EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 89 of passengers between the various points that they reached. When the traffic was handled by land, however, the service was performed entirely on common roads and in vehicles drawn by animal power. No one at that time imagined that the roads and bridges of the country (except when the latter crossed navigable streams) were not entirely subject as to their construction, repair, and management to state regulations and control. At the same time, it was not supposed that the wagons of the country, which were the vehicles of this commerce, or the horses by which they were drawn were subject to national regulation. Some of the early statesmen held this same view with respect to the construction of our first railroad, viz., that while the right of way was subject to state and federal legislation, the vehicles themselves were exempt from any regulations. This view did not obtain for any great length of time and the federal right of control was conceded at an early date. 2. The Act to Regulate Commerce as Applied to Foreign Commerce In opening the debate on April 14, 1886, the Chairman of the Senate Select Committee, explaining the bill for the regulation of commerce, for the information of the United States Senate, said : While the provisions of the bill are made to apply mainly to the regulation of the interstate commerce, in order to regulate such commerce fairly and effectively it has been deemed nei • sary to extend its application also to certain classes of foreign 90 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY commerce which are intimately intermingled with interstate com- merce, such as shipments between the United States and adjacent countries by railroad, and the transportation by railroad of ship- ments between points in the United States and ports of transship- ment or of entry, when such shipments are destined to or received from a foreign country on through bills of lading. To avoid any uncertainty as to the meaning of these provisions in regard to what may be at the same time in some instances State and foreign commerce, it is expressly provided that the bill shall not apply to the transportation of properties wholly within one State and not destined to or received from a foreign country. This section of the Act was enacted by both houses of Congress substantially as reported by the Committee, and while the scope of some of its provisions has been enlarged by subsequent amendments, its effect in so far as this particular traffic is concerned remains unchanged. For the purpose of giving the Commission's remarks in connection with several cases involving its jurisdiction over foreign commerce, conferred by Section 1 of the Act, this section is reproduced as follows : The provisions of the act shall apply to any corporation or any person or persons engaged in the transportation of oil or other commodity, except water and except natural or artificial gas, by means of pipe lines, or partly by pipe lines and partly by railroad, or partly by pipe lines and partly by water, wb.o shall be con- sidered and held to be common carriers within the meaning and purpose of this act, and to any common carrier or carriers engaged in the transportation of passengers or property wholly by railroad (or partly by railroad and partly by water when both are used under a common control, management, or arrangement for a continuous carriage or shipment) , from one state or terri- tory of the United States, or the District of Columbia, to any other state or territory of the United States, or the District of Columbia, or from one place in a territory to another place in the same territory, or from any place in the United States to an EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 91 adjacent foreign country, or from any place in the United States through a foreign country to any other place in the United States, and also to the transportation in like manner of property shipped from any place in the United States to a foreign country and carried from such place to a port of transshipment, or shipped from a foreign country to any place in the United States and carried to such place from a port of entry either in the United States or an adjacent foreign country : Provided, however, that the provisions of this act shall not apply to the transportation of passengers or property, or to the receiving, delivering, storage, or handling of property, wholly within one state and not shipped to or from a foreign country from or to any state or territory as aforesaid. One of the most celebrated cases of recent years was the so-called ''Baltic Pool," which was comprised of several of the larger trans-Atlantic lines, namely, the Hamburg-American Company, North German-Lloyd Company, the Wilson (Hull Line), and the Scandana- vian-American, all serving ports on the Baltic Sea. It was alleged by a competing line (the Cosmopolitan Shipping Company) that the Baltic lines, by means of a preferential agreement with the carriers, secured the bulk of the traffic to, from, and via ports on the Baltic Sea. It was contended that this was an illegal pooling of freights under the Act to Regulate Commerce, that the monopoly of the Hamburg-American Packet Com- pany and others was unlawful, and that it tended to decrease competition and to advance illegally transporta- tion charges. The Commission was requested to prescribe such rules and regulations in lieu of those existing at that time over the defendants' lines as would in the future operate to prevent the continuance of the exac- tions, unjust discriminations, undue and unreasonable 92 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY prejudice and disadvantage to which the complainant was at that time subjected. The point raised in this allegation, as may be seen, was the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Com- mission over ocean carriers engaged in the transportation of shipments moving to or from points in the United States and destined to or originating at foreign countries not adjacent to the United States. From a perusal of this section of the Act to Regulate Commerce, it may be observed that traffic from ports of export to foreign ports and from foreign ports to Ameri- can ports of entry is exempted, and that it naturally follows that over such traffic the Interstate Commerce Commission should have no jurisdiction. Further than this, the uniform interpretation of the law is that an all-water carrier engaged in transporting freight origi- nating at New York or at New Orleans may engage in such traffic between such ports without filing its rate with the Interstate Commerce Commission. Likewise, steamship lines plying between Pacific coast ports or carriers transporting freight between ports on the Great Lakes or river carriers operating on the inland waterways, as long as they are independent and are not controlled or managed by the same interest controlling a rail line and in the absence of an arrangement for continuous carriage under joint rates, are exempted from the provisions of the Act. When, however, such lines enter into an agreement and establish joint rates for the continuous movement of freight from port to port in connection with certain rail lines, to or from the respec- tive ports, then the water lines become subject to all of the provisions mandatory and prohibitory of the Act to Regulate Commerce. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 93 This being the case in so far as our domestic commerce was concerned, the complainant asked that our foreign commerce be measured by the same rule, and that on shipments transported under a common arrangement with rail carriers that the ocean carriers be made subject to the Act. In disposing of this point, the Interstate Commerce Commission said, in part : It would be a far cry, indeed, to say that a railroad in France which makes itself part of a through route from Chicago to Paris becomes subject to the interstate commerce act because a railroad in Georgia, by accepting through billing of interstate commerce, has been held to be a carrier described in section 1 of the act to regulate commerce. Yet such would be the logical conclusion of complainant's contention were all export and import commerce moving by rail and water governed by the same rule as applies to interstate traffic; for if through billing determines jurisdiction, then all carriers participating therein become subject to regulation by Congress. The jurisdiction of this Commission is not to be determined by anything other than the language of section 1 of the act, and in this section we find a clear distinction drawn as between interstate commerce and foreign commerce to a country not adjacent to the United States; and this distinction, in our opinion, saves such foreign commerce from the effect of that provision of the section as to continuous carriage beyond the American seaboard. The Commission may regulate interstate traffic, whether by rail or by a combined rail-and-water route, from point of receipt to point of delivery; but the Commission in its control over foreign commerce is limited to the regulation of such traffic, whether by railroad or by a combination of rail and water carriers, from and to the point of transshipment. 1 The proper construction placed upon Section 1 of the Act to Regulate Commerce gives the Interstate Commerce 1 13 I. C. C. Rep.. 271. 94 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY Commission jurisdiction only over the inland portions of the haul on such shipments as are destined to foreign countries. Indeed, as the law is read, that is, the entire Act to Regulate Commerce, every provision by which discrimination may be punished or rebating or any other evil at which the law is aimed, assumes that the Act condemned shall have been committed within the United States and the law takes no cognizance whatever of the possibility of applying it to common carriers or indi- viduals who are outside the jurisdiction of our courts. Generally speaking, the affairs of carriers operating upon the high seas are subject to the jurisdiction of the Admiralty Courts, the scope of whose jurisdiction in the United States only includes maritime causes or such as arise out of commerce and navigation upon the high seas or navigable waters of the United States. This jurisdiction rests solely upon the Constitution of the United States and is not dependant upon and cannot be enlarged or abridged by Congress under its' power to regulate commerce between the states and foreign nations. 2 The Commission, not having been given control over the ocean carriers, cannot compel observance of the law by such carriers and, if they so choose, they may alter their rates at such times or for such patrons as they please. Therefore, the line must be drawn deci- sively between those carriers whose rates and practices this Commission can control and those which it cannot control. Upon this line of reasoning it has been the consistent ruling of the Commission that joint rates can- 2 The Belfast. 7 Wall (U. S. 624, 19 L. Ed. ? 266). EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 95 not be made over carriers subject to the Act and those not subject to the Act. The Federal Government has said that this Commission shall exercise jurisdiction over the inland portion of the haul, either to or from the foreign country ; and it must logically and neces- sarily follow that the rate which must be filed with the Commis- sion under section 6 of the act is the rate governing such movements. On foreign commerce the rate to be published with this Commission should be the rate to the port and from the port — an open rate, which any who desire to do so may use with equal advantage. The publication of such rate does not in any manner limit the very valuable privilege of through billing. Such through billing should clearly separate the liability of the rail and the ocean carrier and show the published rate of the inland carrier. The routing of the freight, however, should remain with the shipper, and upon him may be imposed no greater charge to the port when his freight goes by one ocean line than by another, and this rate to the port the tariffs must disclose. 3 e IS I. C. C. Rep., 281. CHAPTER YUl EXPORT AND IMPORT RATES VS. DOMESTIC RATES The question oi the propriety of a lower rate on export or import traffic than is concurrently in effect on domestic traffic of the same character and kind has frequently been questioned. While the question has not been definitely settled for all time, it is interesting to review the remarks of the Interstate Commerce Commission with respect to this phase of the traffic, as it had held previously that no circumstances and conditions which existed beyond the seaboard in the United States could be regarded legiti- mately by them for the purpose of justifying a difference in rates between those applicable on import traffic and those applicable on domestic traffic. On the other hand, the carriers called attention to the numerous routes that were available for the forwarding of the world's commerce via the various American ports of entry and export, as well as between the port cities themselves. There were facts, although admitted by the Commission to be true, that it was unable to recognize in- asmuch as it was shut up by the terms of the Act to Regu- late Commerce to consider only such circumstances and conditions as pertained to the articles of traffic after they had reached and been delivered to a port of the United States or Canada. The act to regulate commerce will be examined in vain to nnd 96 EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 97 any intimation that there shall be any difference made in the tolls, rates, or charges for, or any difference in the treatment of home and foreign merchandise in respect to the same or similar service rendered in the transportation when this transportation is done under the operation of this statute. Certainly it would require a proviso or exception plainly engrafted upon the fa of the act to regulate commerce before any tribunal char e with its administration would be authorized to decide or hold that foreign merchandise was entitled to any preference in tolls, rates, or charges made for, or any difference in ib b _tment for. the same or similar service as against home mere-hand Foreign and home merchandise, therefore, under the operation of this statute, when handled and transported by interstate carriers, engaged in carriage in the United States, stand exactly upon the same basis of equality as to tolls, rates, charges, and treatment for similar services rendered. The business com- plained of in this proceeding is done in the shipment of foreign merchandise from foreign ports to ports of entry of the United States, or through ports of entry in a foreign country adjacent to the United State to points of destination in the United States, upon through bills of lading. 1 This was the original stand taken by the Interstate Commerce Commission in formnlating its order of January 29, 1S91. which it was subsequently called upon to review. As an illustration of the evolution of import rates, the following extract from the Commission's report is pertinent. The defendant company admitted that, as a scheme or mode of obtaining foreign traffic, it had. agencies by which, and by the use of through bills of lading, it soured shipments of merchan- dise from Liverpool and London and other European ports to San Francisco and to other inl&-"yi ports named. It alleged that, in order to get this traffic, it was Necessary to give through rates from the places of shipment to the places of final destina- I. C C. Rep.. 512. 51ft 3 I C C R*p~ 443, +44. 98 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY tion, and that, in fixing said rates, it was controlled by an ocean competition in sailing and steam vessels by way of the Isthmus and around the Horn, and also, to some extent, by competition through the Canada route to the Pacific coast. These rates, so fixed and controlled, left to the defendant company and to the Southern Pacific Company, as their share of the charges made and collected, less than the local charges of said companies in transporting similar merchandise from New Orleans to San Francisco, and so, too, as to foreign merchandise carried to other inland points. The defendant further alleged that unless it used said means to get such traffic merchandise to the Pacific coast would none of it reach New Orleans, but would go by the other means of transportation; that neither the community of New Orleans nor any merchant or shipper thereof was injured or made complaint; that the traffic thus secured was remunera- tive to the railway company and was obviously beneficial to the consumers at the places of destination, who were thus enabled to get their goods at lower rates than would prevail if this custom of through rates was destroyed. * * * The Commis- sion justified its action wholly upon the construction put by it on the act to regulate commerce, as forbidding the Commission to consider the "circumstances and conditions" attendant upon foreign traffic as such "circumstances and conditions" as they are directed in the act to consider. The Commission thought it was constrained by the act to regard foreign and domestic traffic as like kinds of traffic under substantially similar circumstances and conditions, and that the action of the defendant company in procuring through traffic that would, except for the through rates, not reach the port of New Orleans, and in taking its pro rata share of such rates, was an act of "unjust discrimination," within the meaning of the act. * * * In so construing the act we think the Commission erred. As we have already said, it could not be supposed that Con- gress, in regulating commerce, would intend to forbid or destroy an existing branch of commerce, of value to the common carriers and to the consumers within the United States. Clearly, express language must be used in the act to justify such a supposition. So far from finding such language, we read the act in question EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 99 to direct the Commission, when asked to find a common carrier guilty of a disregard of the act, to take into consideration all the facts of a given case — among which are to be considered the welfare and advantage of the common Carrier, and of the great body of the citizens of the United States to constitute the con- sumers and recipients of the merchandise carried; and that the attention of the Commission is not to be confined to the advantage of shippers and merchants who deal at or near the ports of the United States, in articles of domestic production. Undoubtedly the latter are likewise entitled to be considered ; but' we cannot concede that the Commission is shut up by the terms of this act to solely regard the complaints of one class of the community. "We think that Congress has here pointed out that, in considering questions of this sort, the Commission is not only to consider the wishes and interests of the shippers and merchants of large cities, but to consider also the desire and advantage of the car- riers in securing special forms of traffic, and the interests of the public that the carriers should secure that traffic, rather than abandon it, or not attempt to secure it. It is self-evident that many cases may and do arise where, although the object of the carriers is to secure the traffic for their own purposes and upon their own lines, yet nevertheless, the very fact that they seek, by the charges they make, to secure it, operates in the interests of the public. * * * The conclusions that we draw from the history and language of the act, and from the decisions of our own and the English courts, are mainly these : That the purpose of the act is to promote and facilitate commerce by the adoption of regulations to make charges for transportation just and reasonable, and to forbid undue and unreasonable preferences or discriminations. That, in passing upon questions arising under the act, the tribunal appointed to enforce its provisions, whether the Commission or the courts is empowered to fully consider all the circumstances and conditions that reasonably apply to the situation, and that, in the exercise of its jurisdiction, the tribunal may and should consider the legitimate interests as well of the carrying companies as of the traders and shippers, and in considering whether any particular locality is subjected to an undue preference or dis- 100 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY advantage the welfare of the communities occupying the locali- ties where the goods are delivered is to be considered as well as that of the communities which are in the locality of the place of shipment. That among the circumstances and conditions to be considered, as well in the case of traffic originating in foreign ports as in the case of traffic originating within the limits of the United States, competition that affects rates should be con- sidered, and in deciding whether rates and charges made at a low rate to secure foreign freights which would otherwise go by other competitive routes are or are not undue and unjust, the fair interests of the carrier companies and the welfare of the community which is to receive and consume the commodities are to be considered. That if the Commission, instead of con- fining its action to redressing, on complaint made by some particular person, firm, corporation, or locality, some specific disregard by common carriers of provisions of the act, proposes to promulgate general orders, which thereby become rules of action to the carrying companies, the spirit and letter of the act require that such orders should have in view of the purpose of promoting and facilitating commerce, and the welfare of all to be affected, as well the carriers as the traders and consumers of the country. 2 Evidence was introduced by several of the carriers, illustrating the effects following the issuance of the order by the Interstate Commerce Commission for them to desist from charging less on import and export traffic than was charged on the same kind of domestic traffic. The exhibits tending in all instances to show a substantial decrease in the volume of traffic handled. In referring to the decision of the United States Supreme Court, to which tribunal the order of the Com- mission was appealed by the carriers, the Interstate Commerce Commission states in a somewhat later case as follows: -• I. C. C. Rep., 422. 437. EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES 101 * * * The court treated the entire field of foreign com- merce as a class different from domestic commerce. It did not undertake, nor was there involved, the determination of the propriety of different import rates where the points of origin were not the same, and we do not think the language of that opinion fairly may be considered to impose upon this Commis- sion the impossible burden of examining into the circumstances and conditions that may affect transportation from every con- ceivable point on the globe to points in the United States. Few carriers publish the same export rates on traffic for Europe as for South or Central America, but except in the instant case we are not now aware of any publication of varying export rates on traffic for a single foreign country. It may be, and upon this point we express no opinion, that we properly can consider the comparative differences in conditions affecting transportation for Europe and South America, for this is within the realms of practicability, but to say that we must determine whether the difference in conditions attaching to transportation to every point in England is sufficient to justify different export rates is to cast upon us the duty of inquiring into the circumstances affecting the transportation of property by the English rail- roads. * * * 3 Youngstown Territory That territory beginning at Point Edward, Out., and thence on and south of the Grand Trunk Ry., main line, Sarnia, to but not including Niagara Falls, via London, Ont. ; thence north of the Niagara River to but not including Buffalo, N. Y. ; thence west of the Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh Ry. to but not including Salamanca, N. Y. ; thence west of the Erie R. R. to but not including Falconer Junction, N. Y. ; thence west of the Dunkirk, Allegheny Valley & Pittsburgh R. R. to but not including Warren, Pa. ; thence west of the Western New York & Pennsylvania R. R. to but not including Oil City, Pa. ; thence via the Allegheny River to but not including Franklin, Pa. ; thence via an imaginary line immediately west of the Alle- gheny River to but not including Butler, Pa. ; thence west of '23 I. C. Rep., 469, 470. 102 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY the Baltimore & Ohio R. R. to but not including Allegheny, Pa. ; thence to but not including Pittsburgh or McKees Rock, Pa. ; thence west of the Baltimore & Ohio R. R. to but not including Wheeling, W. Va. ; thence south via an air line to Cannelton, W. Va. ; thence via the Chesapeake & Ohio R. R. to a point just east of Ashland, Ky. ; thence following the south bank of the Ohio River to a point opposite Pomeroy, Ohio; thence north, just east of Pomeroy, Ohio, and the Toledo & Ohio Central Ry., east of Athens to a point just east of New Lexington, Ohio; thence east of the Cincinnati & Muskingum Valley Ry. to a point just east of Zanesville, Ohio ; thence east of the Wheeling & Lake Erie R. R. to a point just east of Coshocton, Ohio; thence east, just south of the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry., south of New Comerstown, to a point just south and east of Uhrichsville, Ohio; thence north, just east of the Cleveland, Lorain & Wheeling Ry., to a point just east of Canal Dover, Ohio ; thence east of the Pennsylvania Co. to a point just south and east of Valley Junction, Ohio ; thence north, just east of the Baltimore & Ohio R. R., to a point just east of Canton, Ohio; thence east of the Pennsylvania Co. and east of Alliance and Ravenna to a point just east of a junction with the Wheel- ing & Lake Erie R. R., north of Earlville, Ohio; thence east of the Wheeling & Lake Erie R. R. to a point east of Bedford, Ohio; thence east of the Pennsylvania Co. and east of New- burgh and Woodland to a point just north and east of Cleve- land, Ohio, but not including Collinwood, Ohio; thence via but not including the south and west shores of Lake Erie and the Detroit River to a point just east of Detroit, Mich. ; and thence via but not including the west shore of Lake St. Clair and the St. Clair River to and including Point Edward, Ont. TEST QUESTIONS These questions are for the student to use in testing his knowledge of the assignment. The answers" should be written out, but are not to be sent to the University. 1. Define foreign commerce. Into what divisions may it be assigned ! 2. Under what circumstances may Chicago, 111., be classed as a port of entry? 3. Is the term "foreign countries" uniform in all cases? 4. How, as a general rule, are rates to countries not adjacent to the United States published ? 5. Are the rates from Central Freight Association Terri- tory to points in the Dominion of Canada filed with the Inter- state Commerce Commission? 6. May the rates on export or import traffic exceed those on like domestic traffic? 7. What influences must the lines serving the North Atlantic ports consider in constructing import rates to points in the Middle West ? 8. What would be the rate on fluor spar from New York to an 80 per cent point? 9. Compare the domestic class rates on import traffic with the rates on domestic traffic from Portland, Me., to Chicago, 111. 10. In general, is the same basis employed in establishing commodity rates from other Atlantic ports? 11. How are the rates to points in Illinois and Wisconsin constructed on traffic imported by way of Gulf ports ? 12. What are the class rates from Mobile, Ala., to St. Paul. Minn. ? 13. What is the rate on wood pulp from Galveston, Tex., to Freeport, 111.? 14. On commodities taking less than the sixth-class rate, what class differential is deducted in establishing through rates? 15. Is the grouping employed in the construction of rates to Missouri River Territory similar to that employed on domestic traffic ? 16. Upon what basis are class rates via Atlantic ports, such as from New York to Kansas City, Kan., constructed? 17. Upon what differentials are rates to Lincoln, Neb., made over the rates on like traffic to Kansas City, Kan. ? 103 104 FREIGHT RATES— WESTERN TERRITORY 18. How are the class rates via Gulf ports to the same points of destination made? 19. In what way is the publication of rates on commodity traffic to points in Oklahoma restricted ? 20. Do the lines serving the North Atlantic ports attempt to meet the rates of the Gulf lines to points in Arkansas and Louisiana ? 21. What is the general practice with reference to the con- struction of class and commodity rates on import traffic to points in Southeastern Territory? 22. How are the Colorado Common Points defined? 23. Compare the rates to Salt Lake City, Utah, on import traffic via Gulf routes with those applicable on like traffic from New York. 24. Upon what basis are rates from Galveston, Tex., to Los Angeles, Cal., made? 25. How are the rates to the so-called intermountain cities constructed ? 26. Does the basis for the construction of import rates fol- low that employed on export traffic ? 27. Is it permissible for the carriers to establish a lower rate on traffic originating in one foreign country than in another? 28. What basis is emploj^ed in constructing rates on Central American traffic from Gulf ports to interior destinations of the United States ? 29. How are the rates on Mexican traffic constructed ? 30. Enumerate some of the more important border countries. 31. What are the principal seaports on the east and the west coasts of Mexico? 32. Assuming the rate of exchange to be 300, what decimal would be employed in converting a Mexican rate per thousand kilos into cents United States currency per 100 pounds? 33. How are the rates from Mexico City. Mex., to New York, N. Y., made ? 34. To what countries are the application of rates via Pacific coast ports of entry confined? 35. Does the grouping of interior destinations conform to that employed on domestic traffic ? 36. Are the rates on class traffic the same as those in effect on domestic shipments? 37. Give an illustration of the application of a rate on mat- ting in less-than-earload lots from San Francisco, Cal., to Chi- cago, 111. 38. Give an illustration of the various routes available on traffic originating in Cuba and destined to St. Paul, Minn. TEST QUESTIONS 105 39. What would be the first-class rate on traffic from Havana, Cuba, to Mobile, Ala. ? 40. To what items are the publication of commodity rates from Cuban ports confined? 41. What basis for rates is employed on traffic exported to foreign countries via Halifax, N. S.? 42. In the employment of this basis, what territories does the term ' ' foreign countries ' ' exclude ? 43. What does the term "New York domestic rates," as used in Table 19, indicate? 44. Compare the export rates from Chicago, 111., to Halifax, N. S., with those on domestic traffic. 45. What are the more important Mexican Common Points? 46. What adjustment does the one employed in constructing rates to Mexico closely follow? 47. How are the rates from St. Louis, Mo., to Mexico City, Mex., determined ? With the rates so determined, how are rates from Chicago, 111., reckoned? 48. How are the rates on rail-and-water traffic from St. Louis, Mo., to Mexico City, Mex., made? 49. How are the rates from Chicago, 111., to Monterey, Mex., made ? 50. In making rates on less-than-carload traffic by way of New York, what charges must be added to the general basis of rates ? 51. What method is employed in establishing rates from Central Freight Association Territory to points in Cuba by way of Gulf ports? 52. On what basis are the rates to Key West, Pla., made with relation to the rates to other Gulf ports ? 53. Give an illustration of the construction of a rate from Youngstown, Ohio, by way of Mobile, Ala., and Key West, Fla. 54. Enumerate some of the more important Cuban outports. 55. Upon what basis are rates to these outports constructed? Do the rates so made include marine insurance? 56. Does the grouping of the territory and the basis for mak- ing rates from points in Western Trunk Line Territory follow that employed in the Central Freight Association Territory? 57. What is said relative to the jurisdiction of the Federal Government over water carriers? 58. In your opinion, does the absence of control over water carriers tend to stimulate competition? 59. What have the courts held with reference to a lower rate on export and import traffic than on domestic traffic ? In your opinion, does such a policy result to the advantage or disadvan- tage of the public at large? FREIGHT RATES WESTERN TERRITORY ONE OF A SERIES OF TREATISES IN AN INTERSTATE COMMERCE AND RAILWAY TRAFFIC COURSE PART 4 EXPORT AND IMPORT FREIGHT RATES WILLIAM CAMERON Chairman, St. Louis Eastbound Freight Committee Chairman, St. Louis-Cincinnati- Louisville Freight Committee iA^AUEl^rENSIONllNIVERSIlY (Non-Resident Instruction) CHICAGO 420— B '^mm W^:W% m* w, m . m :^T Km m Ww m V"4pA ■Pi W-:i m Mm 7W w