similarity in the same class, and where an article is not analogous to any other to put that article in the class containing commodities which are most nearly related to it in general character and other essential respects." 10

8557. Classification not unduly minute.

No classification can be so minute as to conform to the differing varieties and conditions of traffic; and to separate different grades or densities of the same article into different classes with varying rates, even if it could be accomplished, would go far to defeat the real purpose of classification. If the rate on an article is reasonable to those who ship the great bulk of that article in the form in which it is commonly prepared for transportation, that rate does not become unreasonable to the shipper of a small quantity of the same article merely because the shipment is prepared in an uncommon form, and one which affords the carrier a greater profit per hundred pounds. This is particularly true when the preparation of that article in the more profitable form would impose some degree of hardship upon a large majority of shippers because of its greater expense or for other reasons; and accordingly in the case of the Planters' Compress Company v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway 11 the Interstate Commerce Commission held that cotton compressed in a round bale, in which form it could be handled much more easily and occupied much less space than in the ordinary bale, was not necessarily for that reason entitled to a lower classification. And the Commission commended the rail

10 9 I. C. C. Rep. 264, 306 (1902). This case was overruled by the Circuit Court of the United States, Interstate Com. Com. v. Lake Shore & M. S. Ry., 134 Fed. 942 (1905), on the ground that although the commission might declare classification unreasonable it might not direct what classification the commodity should take. This decision was upheld by an evenly divided court in the United States Supreme Court.

11 11 I. C. C. Rep. 382 (1905).

roads for placing in the same class all window shades, whether mounted or unmounted. 12

It would seem that the classification should be no more minute than could be described in a reasonable general rule. This view was expressed by Mr. Commissioner Shoomacher in the case Andrews Soap Company v. Pittsburgh, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad:13 "A matter so extensive and difficult as classification of freights must evidently be mainly governed by general rules. This is indispensable to any system of classification at all. The alternative is a rate for every commodity separately, instead of a class rate for articles of enough similarity in some controlling features to be classed together."

§ 558. Extra class divisions.

The standard classification, which contains five or six classes, while sufficient for ordinary commodities, does not and in the nature of things cannot cover exceptional cases, and especially cases of especially difficult carriage. In order to cover such exceptional cases, it is the custom to give certain commodities a rating above the first class, such as "double first class rates," or even higher.

Furthermore, there is a continual tendency to differentiate commodities, and to seek a means of giving to some article a rate which falls between two successive class rates. This tendency has resulted in the creation of intra-class ratings; such as a rate "forty per cent less than third class." This tendency is of course opposed in its fundamental principle to the whole theory of classification, and if given play enough would soon put an end to the system on which present rates are based; and it is therefore not to be commended as a general expedient. If it seems

12 Veazie, Com. in Page v. Delaware, L. & W. R. R., 6 I. C. C. Rep. 148, 168 (1894). But see Interstate Com. Com. v. Delaware, L. & W. R. R., 64 Fed. 723 (1894).

13 3 Int. Com. Rep. 77, 4 I. C. C. Rep. 41 (1891).

necessary in any particular case, it is probably because the difference in rates of the two classes concerned is unduly great.

§ 559. Commodity rates.

But besides the extra-class rates proper, every road has specially low rates for some staple commodities, below the lowest class rates, which are known as commodity rates. The principle on which such rates are established is doubtless a sound one. The articles which are granted commodity rates are staples of comparatively low value, like grain, lumber, and salt, moving in great quantities over roads of which they form a large part of their traffic. A granger road, carrying great quantities of grain in bulk, is in an entirely different position as to traffic in grain from a road in another part of the country carrying small quantities from time to time to the small consumer; and while the traffic of the latter road can be classified, that of the former requires special treatment. Each road, therefore, may establish commodity rates in such cases; subject to the limitation that the rate must not be unduly low, so as to cause a loss. A commodity must not be carried at such unremunerative rates as will impose burdens upon other articles transported to recoup loss incurred in carrying that commodity.14

§ 560. Method of classification.

Classification in the United States, as matters are ordered to-day, is made by a committee appointed by the railroads operating within the terrritory for which the classification is to be prepared, who meet from time to time to prepare or revise the classification sheet. Classifications are adopted by this committee by majority vote, and are then published; and when published are binding on all the roads concerned. The printed

14 Anthony Salt Co. v. Missouri Pac. Ry., 4 Int. Com. Rep. 1, 5 I. C. C. Rep. 299 (1892).

schedule containing the classification of all articles for carriage is called the classification sheet.

561. Interpretation of the classification sheet.

The classification sheet becomes a document of interest to the public, and shippers are at once entitled to the benefit of its terms. It is therefore a document to which the carrier cannot give such an interpretation as it desires. The interpretation is subject to the rules governing writings in general, and the carrier is bound by the classification sheet according to its ordinary legal interpretation.

"The classification is supposed to inform the persons engaged in that business in what classes the articles they handle are placed for transportation purposes, and it would fail to do this if instead of employing terms of designation in the sense familiar to themselves it made use of them in a sense fixed upon by persons engaged in an occupation altogether different, and which might to an expert in their own business be strange and misleading.'

" 15

TOPIC B-GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CLASSIFYING.

562. Influences determining classification.

In Grain Shippers' Association v. Illinois Central Railroad 1 Mr. Commissioner Prouty thus described the process by which classification of freights has been accomplished: "In ideal traffic conditions certain elements would be taken into account in establishing a freight rate. These, among others, would be the value of the commodity, the bulk of the commodity, the cost of service, the volume of traffic, etc. Under these conditions the witnesses rather thought that value might be a pretty important

15 Cooley, Chairman, in Hurlburt v. Lake Shore & M. S. R. R., 2 Int. Com. Rep. 81, 2 I. C. C. Rep. 122 (1888).

18 I. C. C. Rep. 158 (1899).

factor in determining the freight rate. Under actual conditions, while an attempt was made to regard these various considerations, as a rule the controlling influence was competition. What ever traffic managers would be glad to do, at the present time they do not, and perhaps cannot, consider in the making of rates much beyond actual competitive conditions. Originally these various factors entered to an extent into the freight rate, and under their operation schemes of rates and classifications were built up. Those classifications and class rates serve in a measure as the basis of rates at the present time, having been gradually modified by the action of competitive forces. Taking those as a basis, the traffic manager to-day obtains for his company all he can without much reference to any system upon which rates ought to be constructed. He gets usually the best rate possible, without inquiring any further than he may find it convenient what in fact justifies that rate."

Following the same line of thought, Mr. Commissioner Veazie, in Proctor & Gamble Company v. Cincinnati, Hamilton & Dayton Railway,2 pointed out, in speaking of the classification committee, that," It should not be overlooked that their training has been largely from the railroad standpoint and on this account their error, if either way, is more liable to be in favor of high rates. That they should always be exactly right is more than any earthly tribunal ever attained."

§ 563. Adjustment of business to established classification. Since the classification of freights is the result of long experience, and business has become adjusted to it, the classification and rates will not be disturbed unless it is made clear that there is some tangible inequality involved and a fairer adjustment of rates is shown. As Mr. Commissioner Prouty said in Grain Shippers' Association v. Illinois Central Railroad :3

23 Int. Com. Rep. 131, 4 I. C. C. Rep. 87 (1890).

38 I. C. C. Rep. 158 (1899).