« PředchozíPokračovat »
value of property employed of little value in fixing express rates. Kindel v. Exp. Co., 13 I. C. C. 475, 485. Rule as to released rates. Re Released Rates. 13 I. C. C. 550. Improper to fix rates according to the use of a commodity. Ft. Smith Traffic Bureau v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 651. Considerations involved in determining the reasonableness of rates. Thompson Lumber Co. v. Ill. Cent. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 657, 664. Voluntary reduction of rates by a carrier does not alone prove former rate unreasonable. Ottumwa Bridge Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co., 14 I, C. C. 121. Storage charges for a reasonable time in which to remove freight part of the transportation and must be reasonable. New York Hay Ex. Asso. v. Penn. R. Co., 14 I. C. C. 178. In exceptional cases the through rate may exceed the sum of the locals. Randolph Lumber Co. v. Seaboard A. L. Ry. Co., 14 I. C. C. 338, citing Minneapolis, etc., R. Co. v. Minnesota, 186 U. S. 257, 262, 46 L. Ed. 1151, 22 Sup. Ct. 900. But see Lindsay Bros. v. Grand Rapids & I. Ry. Co., 15 I. C. C. 182; Michigan Buggy Co. v. Grand Rapids & I. Ry. Co., 15 I. C. C. 297. State rates though not binding on the Interstate Commission are valuable in determining the reasonableness of interstate rates. Corn Belt Meat Producers Asso. v. Chicago, B. & Q. Ry. Co., 14 I. C. C. 376. The question of the reasonableness of a rate one of fact and each case must stand upon its own record. Kansas City Hay Dealers Asso. v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 14 I. C. C. 597; City of Spokane v. N. Pac. Ry. Co., 15 I. C. C. 376. Effect of increased cost of labor and materials. Shippers and Receivers Bureau of Newark v. New York, O. & W. Ry. Co., 15 I, C. C. 264. Statute declaratory of common law. Int. Com. Com. v. B. & 0. R. Co., 43 Fed. 37, 42, 3 I. C. R. 192. Affirmed. 145 V. S. 263, 36 L. Ed. 699, 4 I. C. R. 92, 12 Sup. Ct. 814; Tift v. So. Ry. Co., 123 Fed. 789, 792, 138 Fed. 753; So. Ry. Co. v. Tift, 148 Fed. 1021, 206 U. S. 428, 51. L. Ed. 1124, 27 Sup. Ct. 709. Cannot recover for unreasonable charges except under statutes, as the United States has no common law. Swift v. Philadelphia & R. R. Co., 58 Fed. 858, 64 Fed. 59. Disapproved. Kinnavey v. Terminal R. Asso. of St. Louis, 81 Fed. 802, 804; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Call Publishing Co., 181 U. S. 92, 45 L. Ed. 765, 21 Sup. Ct. 561. 'In determining the question whether or not a rate is reasonable rigorous theoretical rules cannot be adopted—circumstances that must be considered stated. Int. Com. Com. v. L. & N. R. Co., 73 Fed. 409, 419 to 426. Cost of service of a particular movement cannot be found by taking the average cost of all movements of same commodity. Int. Com. Com. v. Lehigh V. R. Co., 74 Fed. 784. The word "charges used in section defined. Detroit, G. H. & M. Ry. v. Int. Com. Com., 74 Fed. 803, 21 C. C. A. 103, 43 U. S. App. 308, reversing 57 Fed. 1005, 4 I. C. R. 722. Affirmed. 167 U. S. 633, 42 L. Ed. 306, 17 Sup. Ct. 986. Reasons for the act. Van Patten v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 81 Fed. 545. Question whether or not rates are reasonable a relative one and may be determined by comparison. Int. Com. Com. v. East Tenn., V. & G. Ry. Co., 85 Fed. 107, enforcing order in 5 I. C. C. 546, 2 I. C. R. 798, 3 id. 106, 4 id. 213. Affirmed. East T. V. & G. Ry. Co. v. Int. Com. Com., 99 Fed. 52. Reversed 181 U. S. 1, 45 L. Ed. 719, 21 Sup. Ct. 516. Mere fact of a greater charge for a shorter than a longer haul does not prove rate unreasonable. Int. Com. Com. v. Western & A. R. Co., 88 Fed. 186; Allen v. Oregon R. & Nav. Co., 98 Fed. 16; Int. Com. Com. v. Nashville, C. & St. N. S. & St. L. Ry. Co., 120 Fed. 934. Refusing to enforce order, 8 I. C. C. 503. Section defined, its purpose stated and a statement of what must be considered in determining the reasonableness of a rate. Int. Com. Com. v. Chicago G. W. Ry. Co., 141 Fed. 1003. Affirmed. 209 U. S. 108, 52 L. Ed. 705, 28 Sup. Ct. 493, where is stated the probative effect of a rate long in existence. Demurrage charges must be reasonable and such charges governed by section. Michie v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co., 151 Fed. 694. The question of the reasonableness of a rate is a judicial one. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. Minnesota, 134 U. S. 418, 33 L. Ed. 970, 981, 10 Sup. Ct. 462, 702. Under Act prior to June 29, 1906, Commission could determine the reasonableness of a particular rate, but could not prescribe rates. Cincinnati, N. 0. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Int. Com. Com., 162 U. S. 184, 40 L. Ed. 935, 16 Sup. Ct. 700. Int. Com. Com. v. Cincinnati, N. 0. & T. P. Ry. Co., 167 U. S. 479, 511, 42 L. Ed. 243, 17 Sup. Ct. 896. Affirming 76 Fed. 183. Int. Com. Com. v. Ala. M. Ry. Co., 168 U. S. 144, 162, 42 L. Ed. 414, 18 Sup. Ct. 45. This power now specifically given by Act June 29, 1906. Expenditures for permanent improvements should not be charged to current expenses. Ill. Cent. R. Co. v. Int. Com. Com., 206 U. S. 441, 51 L. Ed. 1128, 27 Sup. Ct. 700.
Notes of Decisioms Rendered Since 1909.
A published rate not just and reasonable is not lawful when attacked—“Legal" and "lawful" distinguished-Arkansas Fuel Co. v. C. M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 16 I. C. C. 95, 97. Applies to mileage book rates. Commutation Rate Case, 21 I. C. C. 428, 442, 443. "Lawfulness" under Sec. 1 not to be confused with "legality" under Section 6. Crescent Coal & Mining Co. v. C. & E. I. R. R. Co., 24 I. C. C. 149, 156. Covers all cases of unreasonableness relatively and otherwise. Board of Trade of Chicago v. C. & A. R. R. Co., 27 I. C. C. 530, 535. Elevation is a service in connection with transportation. Elevation Allowances at St. Louis, 30 I. C. C. 696, 697. Value of the commodity a material fact. Western Advance Rate case 1915, 35 I. C. C. 497-606.
Notes of Decisions Rendered Since 1915.
The section means "that rates to be just and reasonable must be relatively fair as between localities similarly situated as well as reasonable per se.” Corp. Com. of Va. v. C. & 0. Ry. Co., 40 I. C. C. 24, 28. “The commerce of the country shall flow freely in established channels, without unnecessary hindrance, embarrassment or delay.” Omaha Grain Exch. v. G. N. Ry. Co., 47 I. C. C. 532, 537.
§ 340. Classification of Telegraph, Telephone and Cable Messages.—Provided, that messages by wire or wireless subject to the provisions of this Act may be classified into day, night, repeated, unrepeated, letter, commercial, press, Government, and such other classes as are just and reasonable, and different rates may be charged for the different classes of messages: And provided, further, That nothing in this Act shall be construed to prevent telephone, telegraph, and cable companies from entering into contracts with common carriers for the exchange of services.
Proviso to paragraph 5 of section 1, Interstate Commerce Act as amended by Transportation Act 1920. The former section read : Provided, That messages by telegraph, telephone, or cable, subject to the provisions of this act, may be classified into day, night, repeated, unrepeated, letter, commercial, press, Government, and such other classes as are just and reasonable, and different rates may be charged for the different classes of messages: And provided further, That nothing in this act shall be construed to prevent telephone, telegraph and cable companies from entering into contracts with common carriers, for the exchange of services.
Added to Sec. 1 by Amendment of June 18, 1910.
Classification must be initiated by the carrier—White v. W. U. Tel. Co., 33 I. C. C. 500. Provision for limited liability valid. Western Union Tel. Co. v. Compton, Ark. 169 S. W. 946, contra, Bailey v. Western Union Tel. Co., 171 S. W. 839. State laws relating to delivery of telegrams superseded by Act. Norfolk Truckers Exchange v. Western Union Tel. Co., 82 S. E. 92; W. U. Tel. Co. v. First National Bank, 83 S. E. 424.
Rule that misquoting a rate does not relieve from payment of correct rate does not apply to telegraph companies. Higbee v. W. U. Tel. Co., 179 Mo. App. 195, 166, S. W. 825.
Notes of Decisions Rendered Since 1915.
Telephone calls may be classified. Malone v. New York Tel. Co., 40 I. C. C. 185. Section construed. Unrepeated Message Case, 44 I. C. C. 670. Discrimination condemned. Commercial Cable Co. v. Western Union Tel. Co., 45 I. C. C. 33. Wholesale theory not applicable to common carriers of messages. Private Wire Contracts, 50 I. C. C. 731. Provision for notice of claim for damages valid. Gardner v. Western Union Tel. Co., 231 Fed. 405. Congress having taken possession of the field, a state may not prescribe a penalty for the negligent failure to deliver an interstate telegram. W. U. Tel. Co. v. Boegli, 250 U.S. -, 64 L. Ed. –, 40 Sup. Ct. –
$ 341. Classifications, Regulations and Practices Must be Reasonable.
::-It is hereby made the duty of all common carriers subject to the provisions of this Act to establish, observe, and enforce just and reasonable classifications of property for transportation, with reference to which rates, tariffs, regulations, or practices are or may be made or prescribed, and just and reasonable regulations and practices affecting classifications, rates, or tariffs, the issuance, form, and substance of tickets, receipts, and bills of lading, the manner and method of presenting, marking, packing, and delivering property for transportation, the facilities for trangportation, the carrying of personal, sample, and excess baggage, and all other matters relating to or connected with the receiving, handling, transporting, storing, and delivery of property subject to the provisions of this Act which may be necessary or proper to secure the safe and prompt receipt, handling, transportation, and delivery of property subject to the provisions of this Act upon just and reasonable terms, and every unjust and unreasonable classification, regulation, and practice is prohibited and declared to be unlawful.
Paragraph 6 of section 1, Interstate Commerce Act, as amended by section 400 Transportation Act 1920. The only change this Amendment made to strike from the former section “such" before "unjust and unreasonable" third line from end of section, and before “is prohibited" in the last line to strike the words “with reference to commerce between the states and with foreign countries;" striking out this language from the former section, which section was added by the Commerce Court Act, shows that Congress intended to recognize the power of the Commission over intrastate rates which might unduly prejudice shippers paying interstate rates.
Section quoted in considering the character of cars furnished, Southwestern Mo. Millers Club v. St. L. & S. F. R. R. Co., 26 I. C. C. 245, 249. Quoted in reference to baggage shape and dimensions. Regulations Restricting the Dimensions of Baggage, 26 I. C. C. 292, 293. Classification a public function, principle of, discussed. Suspension of Western Classification, 25 I. C. C. 442; Western Trunk Line Rules, 34 I. C. C. 554.
§ 342. Free Services with Certain Exceptions Prohibited and Penalties Prescribed.-No common carrier subject to the pro