No further action being taken by the Legislative Assembly, the matter was brought before the Board by a petition from the Board of Trade of Fargo, N. D., asking that low rates be made to Fargo and Grand Forks, and that these be made terminal points and rates given that would foster the jobbing trade and build up distributing and jobbing centers within the State.

The matter was taken up by the Commissioners, and the Northern Pacific, Great Northern and Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul railways were asked to make such rates to these points. The representatives of the roads expressed themselves as favoring the trial of such a course, if the laws of the State and the Interstate Commerce Law would permit them to do so, and asked that the question be submitted to the Attorney General, which was done in the following language:

"Can the Commissioners of Railroads or the railroad companies establish terminal rates for any one or more cities or localities in the State of North Dakota, without giving to all other cities or localities in the State the same proportionate rates?" To which the Attorney General replied as follows:

OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL,
BISMARCK, N. D., June 9, 1890.

Harvey Harris, Esq., Secretary Board of Commissioners of Railroads, Bismarck, N. D.:

DEAR SIR: May 19, 1890, your honorable Board requested my opinion upon the following question: "whether this Board or the railroad companies can establish terminal rates for one or more cities or localities in the State of North Dakota, without giving to all other cities or localities in the State the same proportionate rates.' In order to a correct understanding of this question, it is necessary to call your attention to certain provisions of an Act passed by the late Legislative Assembly entitled, "An Act to regulate common carriers and defining the duties of Railroad Commissioners in relation thereto in the State of North Dakota," approved March 19, 1890.

Sections 2 and 6 of said Act reads as follows: "Sec. 2. That all charges made by any common carrier, subject to the provisions of this Act, for any service rendered or to be rendered in the transportation of passengers or property as aforesaid, or in connection therewith, or for the receiving, delivering, storage or handling of such property, shall be equal and reasonable; and every unequal and unreasonable charge for such service is prohibited and declared to be unlawful; Provided, That one carload of freight of any kind or class shall be transported at as low a rate per ton, and per ton per mile, as any greater number of carloads of the same kind and class from and to the same points of origination or destination. It shall be unlawful for any common carrier, subject to the provisions of this Act, to make or give any unequal or unreasonale preference or advantage to any particular person, company, firm, corporation or locality, or any particular description of traffic, in any respect whatsoever, or to subject any particular person, company, firm, corporation or locality, or any particular description of traffic to any unequal or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage in any respect whatsoever."

SEC. 6. "That it shall be unlawful for any common carrier, subject to the provisions of this Act, to charge or receive any greater compensation for the transportation of passengers or of like kind, or class and quantity of property for a shorter than for a longer distance over the same line, the shorter being included within the longer distance, but this shall not be construed as authorizing any common carrier, subject to the provisions of this Act, to charge or receive as great compensation for a shorter as for a longer distance; Provided, however, That

upon application to the Commissioners of Railroads, such common carrier may, in special cases, after investigation by the said Commissioners, be authorized to charge less for longer than for shorter distances, for the transportation of passengers or property; and the Commissioners may from time to time prescribe the extent to which such designated common carrier may be relieved from the operation of this section of this Act."

This law is substantially a copy of the Interstate Commerce Law as passed by Congress, with some important changes to be noted. Section 6 of our law is substantially the same as Section 4 of the Interstate Commerce Act, and is identical with the same section in the Minnesota law. Although in the Minnesota and Dakota law the words "in the aggregate," and the words "under substantially similar circumstances and conditions," and the words "in the same direction," which are in the Act of Congress, seem to have been purposely omitted from the law in Minnesota and Dakota. Reading Section 6 in connection with the proviso contained in Subdivision A of Section 2 and the provisions contained in Subdivision B of Section 2, and it seems too clear for controversy that the Legislature, whether wisely or unwisely remains to be seen, intended to take away the power of common carriers or of the Commissioners of Railroads to make any discrimi nation in favor of individuals or localities on account of peculiar kinds of business, the amount of bulk of business to be transacted, or for the purpose of building up trade centers or what may be termed terminal points, subject to the proviso contained in the latter part of Section 6 with regard to special cases hereinafter referred to. To allow the Board of Commissioners or the common carriers of the State to establish rates for any particular cities or localities in the State that are proportionately less than are given to other cities and localities on the same line of road would be to violate the spirit as well as the letter of the law. Under the pro'viso contained in Section 6 above quoted, your Board is authorized, upon application by the common carrier in special cases, and after investigation, to authorize said common carriers to charge less for longer than shorter distances and to lay down rules prescribing the extent to which such designated common carrier may be relieved from the operation of said Section 6. In my opinion this proviso does not authorize the Board, even upon application of the common carrier, to establish a general rule applicable to all shipments from a given locality. It is only in special cases that the Commissioners are authorized to act under this proviso; what constitutes a special case must be determined by your Board whenever application is made by the common carrier according to the facts submitted in each particular You will find this subject fully discussed by the Railroad Commissioners of Minnesota in their annual report for 1887, on pages 134 to 147 inclusive. Respectfully submitted,

case.

GEO. F. GOODWIN,
Attorney General,

As the laws of the State were clearly against the establishing of terminal rates. No further action on the matter has been taken by the board.

On October 16, 1890, E. M. Raworth & Co., importers and wholesale grocers of Fargo, N. D., entered complaint before the board of unjust discriminations against Fargo by the railroad companies in sugar schedules from San Francisco, Cal., to Fargo and St. Paul.

The matter being interstate business was referred to the Interstate Commerce Commission, and under date of November 11, 1890, the following reply was received: