justice of the principles upon which the exceptions are based is equally apparent.

The temptation of carriers to add to the exceptions arising from competition in business, from the pressure brought to bear upon them by particular localities, and by the importunities and devices of large dealers, is, of course, one that, in the nature of things, is ever present, but all the time the steady power of the law has been doing its work, and this is seen in the gratifying progress that has been made by the carriers in the direction of compliance with the provisions of this section of the statute.

It was not to be expected that compliance with the requirements of this section could be accomplished without a very great change of methods existing previously to and at the time of the enactment of the statute, involving changes of rates at various points, loss of earnings at some of these points, and increased earnings at others, the extent of which, as a matter of estimate in advance, was in each instance problematical and involved in much uncertainty. The localities in which the greatest difficulty has been found in the application of the general rule have been in the territory of the transcontinental lines and the States south of the Potomac and Ohio Rivers, and States also south of Kansas and Missouri. The causes of this have heretofore been reported and discussed in our previous annual reports. Briefly stated, in the case of the transcontinental lines, it has been to some extent the actual and apprehended competition of the Canadian lines and of water competition, and also to the fact that in the intermediate portion of the long haul between the Pacific coast and the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers there are large portions of uninhabited country, with occasional points widely separated, where the traffic is so inconsiderable that it is served at a largely increased cost and expense to the carrier.

In the Southern States it is an extensive coast line, with ports reached by a large number of steam ship lines and coasting vessels, and the penetration of the interior by deep, navigable rivers to an extent that exists nowhere else in the country, and here the population is more sparse, and the traffic lighter than in the States north of the Potomac and Ohio Rivers, and the cost of service at intermediate points correspondingly greater. While it is true that there yet remain many instances in which the existing exceptional difficulties can and must be further overcome by carriers in each of these localities in the direction of a nearer compliance with the fourth section, yet it is also true that since our last annual report very considerable progress has been made by them on this line. The business of localities, no less than of the carriers, is growing to the law, and all this strengthens its operation and administration. Results for the better are, upon the whole, everywhere reached in the transportation rates and methods of carriers.

To those who may suppose that no very good reason can be given why

all disparities and inequalities of rates and methods may not be discov. ered and corrected as fast as they exist by a tribunal appointed by Congress for that purpose, it may not, perhaps, have occurred that the railroad mileage of the United States, if it could be transposed into that shape, would make six parallel lines of railroad around the earth. Over this net-work of public highways, in extent without parallel, in diversity equal to its extent, and constantly increasing, the vast commerce of the United States is, in one way or another, transported. The competition of carriers and localities contend for it with ceaseless energy. Its transportation is environed by different circumstances and conditions at many points in the wide confines of the Republic. That, growing out of this condition of affairs, inequalities and disparities of rates, for which plausible, but not lawful, reasons on the part of the carriers can always be given, must occasionally occur even where the carriers who make them are animated by the best of motives, and that objectionable methods may in like manner be adopted by them occasionally, is one of the inevitable features of such a situation.

The statute which provides for the regulation of these rates and methods prescribes rules of conduct for the transaction of an amount of business that no other statute has ever done; and if it be true, as is the case, that every other statute which prescribes methods and rules of conduct for the transaction of business, to any considerable extent, has been occasionally violated, thereby furnishing employment to the courts of the country for a large portion of their time, it would seem not to be strange that there are here and there many failures to comply with the provisions of the act to regulate commerce, that require laborious and patient investigation to correct them. But the feature of the statute that renders the regulation it contemplates practical is that it prescribes plain, general rules, just and fair in themselves, which are for the most part declaratory of the common law, and creates a tribunal before which the voice of the citizen, or of the community or the carrier, may always be heard to challenge rates and methods that involve unjust discrimination, extortion, or unlawful preference in an informal and comparatively inexpensive way; and goes further by requiring this tribunal, at all times, as a matter of duty, to keep a watchful supervision over these rates and methods; to which is added the power of the courts.

A case of much interest, arising under this section and illustrating its operation, was recently brought to our attention. It involved the question of relative rates on lumber from two far interior points in the Southern States to the city of Boston. The usual excuse for discrimination, that there was far distant water competition of supposed controlling force, was brought forward by the carrier to justify the lower rate on the longer haul. But in addition to this the carrier attempted to justify the lower rate for the longer haul chiefly on the further ground that in the case of the longer haul the lumber had already paid a local rate from

the interior point of origin to a common or competitive point as a market before it was afterwards transshipped over the longer haul to Boston, and insisted that this ought to be taken into consideration as part of the lower rate from this competitive point to Boston, and the rates were thus made to equalize them as between these respective localities. The interior point from which shipments were made and which was challenging these rates before the Commission, was neither a common nor a competitive point, but it was several hundred miles nearer to Boston than the competitive point from which the lower rate was given, and was on the same line, and in the same direction over which the lumber was in each instance transported by the carrier to Boston.

An investigation showed that it was simply a case of a shipper from one interior point shipping his lumber first to one competitive point, a large city, and trying the market there, and afterwards, by another shipment, availing himself of the lower rate made by the carrier from such competitive point to the city of Boston, while the shipper of lumber at the interior point on the same line and in the same direction, but several hundred miles nearer to the city of Boston, was required to pay a higher rate. Accordingly the Commission held that the lower rate for the longer haul was not justified, and directed that the rate at the interior point nearest to the city of Boston should be reduced below the rate for the longer haul, which was done.

UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION.

It becomes our duty to report the progress that has been made by interstate carriers in reference to the subject of uniform classification, and in doing so it is to be regretted that the results attained have not been equal during this period to what the indications then existing led is to expect might be accomplished at the time of the presentation to Congress of our second annual report. At that time a call had been ssued by a conference consisting of representatives from each of the leading traffic associations of the country, dated November 15, 1888. In that conference it had been agreed that this call should be made for meeting of officers, agents, and representatives of each of the great freight associations of the country in the city of Chicago on the 4th of December, 1888, for the purpose of determining what progress could be made toward unifying the several freight classifications then in use. Delegates from each of these associations were appointed to that meeting, and there were eight of these traffic associations. The attendance was of a character to fairly entitle the conference to be considered national in its representation. The Pacific, the South, the West, the Middle, the East, and the New England States had representation.

At this meeting two days were spent in discussing the subject under consideration, and finally resolutions were adopted to the effect that in the opinion of the committee greater uniformity in classification of freight is both desirable and practicable, but that the magnitude and

diversity of the interests involved are such that strict uniformity can not be reached by forced or hurried measures without producing conditions disastrous to the business interests of the country, while it may be closely approximated without danger to these interests by frequent conference and constant effort by the carriers to remove the disparities in the several classifications now in use; and that the progress in the past in this direction attests this view. A standing committee, composed of two members from each of the traffic associations, was appointed for the purpose of unifying as rapidly as possible the several classifications in use. The committee was instructed to first endeavor to combine the existing different classifications in one general classification by the use of such number of classes as would prevent conflicting commodity as well as class rates in the several sections of the country, without sacrificing the proper interests of the carriers.

The committee organized, met after the adjournment of the general meeting, and agreed upon methods of procedure for the first regular session, to be held in Chicago February 5, 1889, at which time the committee met with a full representation, either in person or by proxy; and this session lasted seven days. After three days spent in discussion the committee agreed upon rules and regulations necessarily preceding a classification, and the remaining time was spent in discussing questions of classification. The committee, however, divided upon the question of representation as between the West and the East, the Western representatives claiming that they did not have sufficient representation. After this, and when the committee met in New York, in June, 1889, the four delegates from the Texas and Transcontinental Associations and from the TransMissouri Association had withdrawn. But notwithstanding this the committee met in Saratoga in September, 1889, and continued its work, and after a four days' session adjourned to meet in New York during the same month, at which place a session of one day was held. Afterwards the committee met in Washington, D. C., November 19-23, where the work assumed much of a routine character. The list of articles to be placed embraced nearly six thousand items, and in many cases involved protracted discussion. The committee is yet far from having completed its work.

The members of the committee are of the rank of general freight agents, on the idea that judgment and experience in traffic matters are requisite to the proper performance of the task assigned. The excuse made for the short sessions of the committee, as above outlined, is that the members of the committee are general freight agents and are busy men, upon whom large and pressing responsibilities, growing out of their official positions, constantly rest. The report of the committee, when made, will be merely recommendatory, and will go to the various traffic associations and carriers for adoption or rejection, as these constituent bodies may determine.

A. Mis. 50-4

As stated in the first and second annual reports of the Commission, the difficulties and work connected with establishing a uniform classification or even approximating a uniform classification are indeed very great. The short sessions, however, devoted to this work at long intervals by the committee, the tedious delays, and the failure to reach a result that amounts even to a recommendation to the freight associations and carriers, who, after all, may accept or reject the work of the committee, would seem to indicate that much more might have been done by the freight associations and carriers if more time had been taken for this work, and that while recognizing, as they fully do, the importance of an approach to uniform classification, the freight associations and carriers have not yet taken such effective steps to reach that result within a reasonable time as is commensurate with its importance, though the good faith of the committee in their efforts is not intended to be questioned by anything said in this report.

While it is true that it does require men of judgment and experience, well versed in freight matters and in the business and interests of localities, to perform well the task of preparing such a classification, yet it would not seem to follow that the only person possessing such experience and capacity that could be found to represent each of the great freight associations would necessarily be a general freight agent; and if it be considered that the general freight agent's presence is necessary in the work of such committee, then it does not appear to follow that some other suitable arrangement can not be made by the carriers for the place of the general freight agent being properly filled by some other competent person temporarily while the general freight agent is engaged in the important work of preparing a uniform classifi cation to be submitted to the carriers for their approval or rejection. A work of this character and importance, in view of the provisions of the act to regulate commerce and the general interests of the country, should be made the subject of more than a few days' meetings at long intervals from time to time during the course of a year. When such report is made as a recommendation, it will doubtless undergo the most careful scrutiny and revision at the hands of the carriers, and will be antagonized in many instances by local and special interests; and while this is a reason that it should be well and carefully prepared in the first instance, it is also a controlling reason that it should be framed at as early a period as it can reasonably be done.

Not only will it be true that the carriers will act upon the proposed uniform classification as a mere recommendation, but it is also true that after that classification is adopted, if it succeeds in approximating uniformity in the treatment of the bulk of the tonnage interchanged between eastern, western, and southern roads, and should be adopted and made effective upon the lines operating between the Atlantic sea-board and the Rocky Mountains, complications to some extent may still arise on account of the different classifications maintained