INVESTIGATION AND SUSPENSION.

Increased Rates: See INCREASED RATES.

Orders: Motion to vacate order reopening of suspension proceeding on ground
that the controversey had become moot, Commission having declined to suspend
revised schedules conforming to its findings, denied. Lawfulness of such schedules
was properly before Commission on further hearing, and such findings and order
could be made as the record warranted. Transit Lumber, Pacific Coast to
Eastern Destinations, 189 (190).

Motion to vacate and set aside a suspension order, denied. Such summary
disposition of the proceeding would clearly be at variance with the provisions of
sec. 14 and of the established practice of the Commission. Bunker Coal from
Alabama Mines to Gulf Ports, 485.

Reductions: See REDUCTIONS.

INVESTIGATIONS.

In General: Delay in investigating construction by Youngstown & S. Ry. of
extension to connect with Pittsburgh, L. & W. R., without certificate of conveni-
ence and necessity, did not bar finding on the facts as to the status of the extension
and of the Suburban with respect to it, when references to the extension in applica-
tions of the Suburban and the Lisbon for other authority did not give adequate
notice of its construction by the Suburban, or disclose that that electric line was
operated as part of a steam railroad system subject to the act, and the matter
was first placed directly before Commission by petitions of trunk lines filed some
years after the construction. Pittsburgh, L. & W. R. Co. Practices, 73 (100-103).

ISSUE.

Broadening: As rates on fresh meats from Missouri River points were not
under suspension in a proceeding involving rates from interior Iowa and Minne-
sota to the East, breaking up of the grouping of the River points was beyond the
issues and, without evidence as to the effect upon carriers' revenues, the desira-
bility thereof could not be determined. Fresh Meats from Iowa and Minnesota
to the East, 765 (780).

Scope: Dismissal in 175 I. C. C. 699 of application of Youngstown & S. Ry. for
certain operating authority, on ground that it was an interurban electric line not
subject to the act, did not constitute an administrative construction of sec. 1 (22)
which precluded finding that it was subject to sec. 1 (18) at the time it constructed
an extension connecting its line with Pittsburgh, L. & W. R., when the finding in
that case related solely to the particular matter presented and not to the lawful
status of the Suburban when it constructed the extension. Pittsburgh, L. & W.
R. Co. Practices, 73 (103).

Complaint which stated that complainant was charged a certain rate on ship-
ments in described cars from named origin was broad enough to cover assailed
rate to destination which was not named therein, when complainant's memoran-
dum of facts and argument put carriers on notice that the shipments moved to
the destination to which they were billed. Commission's practice is to look to the
substance rather than the form of a complaint. Pierce Butler Radiator Corp. v.
Delaware & H. R. Corp., 171.

While order instituting proceeding to determine methods of ascertaining antici-
pated postal revenue from domestic air mail, for use in prescribing air-mail rates
within limitation of sec. 6 (e) of Air Mail Act, did not in terms include determin-
ation of aggregate cost of transportation or of necessity for reduction in rates to
keep such cost within anticipated revenue, those matters constituted the real
objective of the statute and of the investigation. Postal Revenue Limitation on
Air Mail Rates, 498 (502).

JOINT RATES AND FARES.

Aggregate of Intermediates Exceeding: See AGGREGATE OF INTERMEDIATES.
Establishment: Through routes and joint rates on lime and stone from
Chemical, Pa., over Bellefonte Central R. to Tyrone, Pa., and Pennsylvania R.
beyond, were not shown to be necessary or desirable in the public interest. On
traffic moving east beyond Tyrone through Milesburg, Pa., routes sought were
relatively much longer than existing routes directly through Milesburg, and the
haul from Tyrone to Milesburg was virtually a back haul; and in any case, routing
via Tyrone would be less economical and efficient than via Milesburg because of
unfavorable operating conditions on the Bellefonte Central. Bellefonte Central
R. Co. v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 699 (702-704).

Restrictions: See RESTRICTED RATES.

JURISDICTION. See particular tribunals or functions by name.
LACHES.

Inasmuch as lapse of the periods specified in sec. 16 (3) not only bars the
remedy but also destroys the liability, a complaint, to stop the running of the
statute, must be sufficient in substance, and laches of defendants in raising
objections thereto is immaterial. Cicardi Bros. Fruit & Produce Co. v. Atlantic
Coast Line R. Co., 67 (70).

LEASE. See also VALUATION (LANDS).

Refusal of carrier to place cars on its team track at Cleves, Ohio, for loading
grain from complainant's loading device situated adjacent to property leased by
carrier to an individual, and to grant to complainant such use of the leased property
as might be necessary for such loading, found not unreasonable or unduly prej-
udicial Milroy Grain Corp. v. Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co., 1.

Real estate leased by carrier to an individual was not part of its transportation
facilities devoted to public use. Id. (3).

A lease of the railroad properties of the Union Stock Yard & Transit Co. by
terms of which the Company covenanted if called upon by its lessees, to exercise
its charter powers as a railroad to condemn any lands needed in connection with
operation of the leased property and to keep alive its charter powers as a railroad
during the term of the lease, to preserve its power of eminent domain, did not
accomplish any change in the Company's status under the act. Cancelation of
Livestock Services at Chicago, 716 (720).

LEGAL RATE. See SCHEDULES (APPLICABILITY AND INTERPRETATION).
LESS THAN CARLOAD.

In General: It is not customary or permissible for a shipper to order a car for
a shipment tendered as less than carload. Penn Metal Corp. of Pa. v. Delaware
& H. R. Corp., 167 (169).

Under principle in 284 U. S. 370, reparation based on unreasonableness could
not be awarded on less-than-carload express shipments of bread when any-
quantity class rates prescribed on bread in 83 I. C. C. 606 were intended primarily
for such shipments. Colonial Baking Co. of Des Moines v. Railway Exp. Agency,
Inc., 573 (575).

Carload Rate and Minimum as Maximum: When shipment tendered as
less than carload, loaded by shipper and unloaded by consignee, could have been
loaded in a standard car with double doors, shipper presumably would not
ordered a longer car if shipment had been tendered as a c
under classification rule 34, minimum weight to be applic
carload rate applicable under rule 15 should be that for a st
that for longer car furnished by carrier solely for its conv
Corp. of Pa. v. Delaware & H. R. Corp., 167 (169).
Express Traffic: See EXPRESS RATES.

Less than Carload Moving on Carload Rate: Shipper who sought repara-
tion on shipments which were loaded in a car by two or more shippers in order to
get benefit of carload rates and were forwarded under his name was entitled to
reparation only on portions of shipments owned by him and on which he bore
the charges. Freight charges were paid by consignees and there was no proof
that the person named as shipper acted as agent for the other shippers. American
Fruit Growers, Inc., v. Alabama G. S. R. Co., 139 (146).

Ratings: On freight ranging in value from 40 to 70 cents per pound, a rating
of first class for less than carloads is not unreasonably high. Champion Pants
Mfg. Co., Inc., v. Lehigh Valley R. Co., 263 (265).

LIABILITY OF CARRIERS.

Inasmuch as lapse of the periods specified in sec. 16 (3) not only bars the
remedy but also destroys the liability, a complaint, to stop the running of the
statute, must be sufficient in substance, and laches of defendants in raising
objections thereto is immaterial. Cicardi Bros. Fruit & Produce Co. v. Atlantic
Coast Line R. Co., 67 (70).

Commission's direction of attention to defects in complaints does not relieve
carriers of any obligation, particularly where the objection is that the terms are
too general. Id. (71).

The carriers cannot be released from the liability resulting from a violation of
tariff provisions. American Fruit Growers, Inc., v. Alabama G. S. R. Co., 139
(153).

Where an unreasonable joint rate has been collected, the liability of the parties
is joint and several and reparation may be awarded, although not all of the car-
riers participating in the transportation are made parties defendant. Failure to
name all participating carriers as defendants was not a fatal defect. Swift & Co.
v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 579 (587).
LIGHTERAGE.

Inclusion of pick-up and delivery service and absorption of switching and light-
erage charges in all-rail rates and limitation of ocean-rail rates to application from
dock would be unjust and unreasonable in violation of sec. 1 (6) and discriminatory
in violation of sec. 3 (3). Receipt and Delivery Service at Eastern Ports, 317.
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS.

Some of Commission's Rules of Practice relate to matters of form; others to
matters of substance. A complaint defective merely in form would suffice to
stop the running of the statute, and for that purpose the Rules of Practice need
not be complied with in every detail. A complaint returned for minor corrections
tolls the statute as of original date of receipt. But since lapse of the periods
specified in sec. 16 (3) not only bars the remedy but also destroys the liability,
a complaint, to toll the statute, must be sufficient in substance, and laches of
defendants in raising objections thereto is immaterial. Cicardi Bros. Fruit & Pro-
duce Co. v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 67 (70).

Since some matters mentioned in Rules of Practice are merely illustrative,
informal complaint which failed to specify all details of shipments, but which
contained essential elements required by the rules, sufficient to apprise carriers
of the nature of the claims, and which contained a prayer under rule III (q) for
reparation on shipments moving pendente lite, details of which necessarily could
not be supplied, was sufficient in substance to toll the statute of limitations.
Id. (70).

LINE HAUL.

In General: A carrier to which a shipment is tendered is entitled to a line
haul and is not required to surrender the shipment to a competitor which may
have a lower rate. Charles Ilfeld Co. v. Southern Pac. S. S. Lines, 291 (296).

LIVESTOCK.

Loading and Unloading: The Union Stock Yard & Transit Co. of Chicago
found to be a common carrier by railroad, subject to the provisions of the act, in
respect of the services it performs at the Union Stock Yards in Chicago, Ill., in
connection with the unloading and loading of carload shipments of livestock
transported by railroad in interstate commerce to and from the yards. Proposed
cancelation of tariffs naming loading and unloading charges on livestock at Union
Stock Yards, Chicago Ill., found not justified. Cancelation of Livestock Services
at Chicago, 716.

Rates and Charges: Combination rates of Wabash Ry., on livestock from
Kansas City, Mo.-Kans., and Omaha, Nebr., to Detroit, Mich. and Buffalo,
N. Y., composed of proportional factors to and from Missouri River crossings
prescribed in 165 I. C. C. 277, 171 I. C. C. 1, and 190 I. C. C. 611, found not
unreasonable. While the Wabash operated single-line routes, general applica-
tion of the combination basis on livestock from the West to the East was approved
in 220 I. C. C. 227, without regard to single or joint character of routes, and
reduction of assailed rates would tend to disrupt the interterritorial rate structure.
Hygrade Food Products Corp. v. Wabash Ry. Co., 306.

LOADING.

In General: When shippers have private sidings, a carrier's duty to afford
reasonable and practical facilities for loading carload freight extends to placing
cars on those sidings, but, in the absence of such sidings, the duty is fulfilled by
placing cars on public team tracks. A shipper may not require spotting cars for
loading at specific points on public team tracks, for the privilege of making such
a selection would be a special privilege that could not be made available to all
shippers and would result in undue prejudice and preference. Milroy Grain
Corp. v. Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co., 1 (3).

Livestock: See LIVESTOCK.

Stoppage for Partial: See TRANSIT.
LOCATION. See ADVANTAGES.

LONG AND SHORT HAUL.

In General: Proposed reduced rates on sheet-iron or steel cans, from Balti-
more, Md., to Bridgeton, N. J., to meet motor-carrier competition, which would
result in fourth-section departures at intermediate points, found not justified
without prejudice to filing new schedules in conformity with the findings. Cans
from Baltimore, Md., to Bridgeton, N. J., 391.

Adjacent Foreign Country, Application to: See ADJACENT FOREIGN COUN-

TRY.

Circuity: See CIRCUITY.

Compensatory Rates: See COMPENSATORY RATES.

Competition Authorizing Relief: See COMPETITION.

Damages: Proof of specific damage is required before reparation may be
awarded because of fourth-section departure. Primrose Petroleum Co. v. Gulf,
C. & S. F. Ry. Co., 261 (262).

Equidistant Clause: The granting of fourth-section relief without imposition
of the equidistant clause to preserve existing grouping is justified only when such
grouping is shown to be reasonable and proper. Coke to Palmerton, Pa., 269
(270).

Maintenance of rates to intermediate points on basis of the same scale as
applied to more distant points resulted in substantial compliance with the equi-
distant provision of sec. 4. Lime from Berwick, La., 275 (277).

Fourth-section relief granted without imposition of the equidistant clause when
rates were based on distance scale and to meet motor-truck competition.
Oil from South Atlantic and Virginia Ports, 465 (467).

Fuel

New Orleans, La.: Wallboard Between Southern and Official Territories,
235 (242).

Malt

Points intermediate between St. Louis, Mo., Peoria and Chicago, Ill., and
Milwaukee, Wis., on the one hand, and Pacific coast points, on the other.
Liquors from Midwestern Points to Pacific Coast, 494 (495).

MINIMUM RATES.

In General: A doubt as to whether proposed single-line or joint-line rates on
bunker coal from Alabama mines to the Gulf ports were less than minimum
reasonable rates was resolved in favor of carriers. The showing by carriers and
shippers served by them was persuasive that the proposed rates to Mobile, Ala.,
and to Pensacola, Fla., offered practically the only alternative to the loss to the
producing competitors at Hull and Empire, Ala., and to the unregulated Govern-
ment barge line of substantially all of the bunker coal which moved to those ports
from mines on carriers' lines. Bunker Coal from Alabama Mines to Gulf Ports,
485 (493).

Prescription by Commission: Section 4 contains no provision relating to the
compensatory character of an intermediate rate but the Commission may, as
provided in sec. 15, prescribe just and reasonable minimum rates.
and Chassis to Chicago, Ill., 223 (224).

MINIMUM WEIGHTS. See also WEIGHTS AND WEIGHING.

Automobiles

Car Capacity: Minimum weight on a carload of asphalt-coated stone from
St. Louis, Mo., to Effingham, Ill., based on capacity of larger car furnished for
carrier's convenience, was found unreasonable. Reasonable minimum based on
capacity of smallest available car determined and reparation awarded. Granite
Bituminous Paving Co. v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 679.

When shipper ordered smaller cars than were available, minimum weight should
have been based on smallest car available to carriers. Id. (679).

Under an interchange rule at point of origin, that carriers performing switching
service should furnish cars ordered without calling on the line-haul carriers, the
determinitation of minimum weight when larger car than ordered is furnished
by carrier should not be predicated on available equipment of line-haul carriers
alone, but on the total of such equipment owned by carriers serving the origin.
Id. (680).

Carrier's Convenience Rule: When shipment tendered as less than carload,
loaded by shipper and unloaded by consignee, could have been loaded in a standard
car with double doors, shipper presumably would not have ordered a longer car
if shipment had been tendered as a carload. Therefore, under classification rule
34, minimum weight to be applied in connection with carload rate applicable
under rule 15 should be that for a standard car and not that for longer car furnished
by carrier solely for its convenience. Penn Metal Corp. of Pa. v. Delaware &
H. R. Corp., 167 (169).

Commodities: Minimum weights were involved or fixed in the following case:
Pulp, wood: Columbian Paper Co. v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co., 373.

Graduation: As shipper had informed carrier that bulky character of shipment
required a double-door box car, and no particular length of car was specified,
shipment being tendered as less than carload, classification provision for applica-
tion of graduated minimum weight was not applicable in connection with carload
rate when shipment could have been loaded in a standard car with double doors
and a longer car was furnished solely for carrier's convenience. Penn Metal
Corp. of Pa. v. Delaware & H. R. Corp., 167 (169).

Two-for-One: See CARRIER'S CONVENIENCE RULE under this heading.
MISQUOTATION. See QUOTATION OF RATES.