INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION REPORTS No. 23296 M. J. NOLAN COMPANY v. CHICAGO GREAT WESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY Submitted August 14, 1930. Decided November 6, 1930 Carload shipment of asphalt paving joints from Clearing, Ill., to Langdon, Minn., found to have been undercharged. Claim based on alleged misrouting found barred. Complaint dismissed. Victor J. Hermel for complainant. B. R. Harris for defendant. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION DIVISION 2, COMMISSIONERS AITCHISON, PORTER, and Tate BY DIVISION 2: This case was presented under the shortened procedure. No exceptions were filed to the report proposed by the examiner. Complainant, a corporation, by complaint filed March 14, 1930, alleges that the rate charged on one carload of asphalt paving joints shipped on August 8, 1927, from Clearing, Ill., to Langdon, Minn., delivered August 12, 1927, was inapplicable and that the shipment was misrouted. Reparation is sought. The claim based on alleged misrouting is barred. Rates will be stated in amounts per 100 pounds. Clearing is within the Chicago, Ill., switching district. Langdon is a local station on the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific, hereinafter called the Milwaukee, 13 miles southeast of St. Paul, Minn. The shipment was tendered to the Belt Railway of Chicago with shipper's routing: "C. G. W.-M. N. S.-G. N." From Chicago it moved northwest over the Chicago Great Western to Red Wing, 45732°-31-VOL 169—1 Minn., and over the Milwaukee beyond. No joint rate was in force over the route of movement. Charges were collected at combination commodity rate of 28 cents, composed of 18 cents to St. Paul, and 10 cents beyond. This rate was not applicable, as this shipment did not move via St. Paul. The lowest combination over the route of movement was 33 cents, composed of a commodity rate of 18 cents to Red Wing and a fifth class distance rate of 15 cents beyond. Accordingly, the shipment was undercharged. Complainant refers to rates of 15.5 and 18 cents. The 15.5-cent rate, although published in connection with interstate rates, was restricted to apply as to this commodity only on intrastate traffic. The 18-cent rate was applicable only when the tariff provided specific routes. No route from Clearing to Langdon was specified in the tariff. We find that the shipment was undercharged, and that the claim based on the allegation of misrouting is barred. The complaint will be dismissed. 169 I. C. C. No. 20567 ATLANTIC LUMBER COMPANY v. LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL. Submitted June 19, 1930. Decided November 6, 1980 Upon further hearing, findings in original report, 157 I. C. C. 236, modified. Rates on lumber, in carloads, from Duff and Knoxville, Tenn., to Cowans. ville and St. Hyacinthe, Quebec, Canada, found not unreasonable. shipments found overcharged and reparation awarded. George E. Wentzell and Charles E. Vose for complainant. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON FURTHER HEARING Certain DIVISION 2, COMMISSIONERS MCMANAMY, BRAINERD, AND LEE BY DIVISION 2: Exceptions were filed by complainant and defendants to the report proposed by the examiner. Our conclusions differ somewhat from those recommended by him. This case was originally presented under the shortened procedure. In the former report, 157 I. C. C. 236, decided September 12, 1929, we found that rates charged on hardwood lumber, in carloads, from Duff and Knoxville, Tenn., to Cowansville and St. Hyacinthe, Quebec, Canada, were inapplicable in certain instances, and the applicable rates were found unreasonable on and after November 14, 1924, to the extent they exceeded a rate of 43.5 cents, which was also found reasonable for the future. Reparation was awarded and complainant directed to comply with Rule V of the Rules of Practice. On November 8, and December 30, 1929, the order for the future was modified and on March 4, 1930, the modified order was vacated. On defendants' petition the case was reopened on December 2, 1929, for further hearing "with respect to the general revision made effective June 15, 1929." Rates will be stated in cents per 100 pounds. The general revision referred to was a comprehensive voluntary adjustment of rates on lumber and forest products, in carloads, from all points in the territory lying generally east of the Mississippi River and south of the Ohio and Potomac Rivers, and from all points in the States of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas to destinations in northeastern Canada. Under this revision the applicable rate on the traffic here under consideration became 51.5 cents. Originally the water-competitive joint rates on lumber from points in the United States to Montreal, Quebec, and Boston, Mass., were observed as maxima to intermediate Canadian destinations, including Cowansville and St. Hyacinthe. Later the rates from. official territory were revised and have been maintained for several years without observing the Montreal and Boston rates as maxima. Beginning in 1920 the Canadian lines began an agitation for increased divisions on lumber from the South to correspond with their earnings on similar traffic from official territory. These demands culminated in a conference of shippers and carriers in Chicago in 1927 at which it was agreed that existing joint rates from the South on lumber and forest products to northeastern Canada should be increased 1 cent to Toronto, Ontario, and to stations west and north thereof, and 4.5 cents to stations east of Toronto. In effecting these increases the carriers were faced with the fact that while a rather complete line of lumber rates was in effect from Mississippi Valley territory and from the Southwest, this condition was not true in the Southeast. There the rate structure was irregular and inconsistent. Few joint rates existed and the scattering rates which had been established from time to time to destinations in Canada were upon no uniform basis. The unsatisfactory character of the then existing rate structure so far as it concerned the origin points under consideration is apparent from an examination of the former report. If the agreement reached at the Chicago conference had been strictly adhered to, therefore, that course would have further aggravated an already unsatisfactory situation, and would have created many fourth-section departures. Some departure from the conference plan was therefore necessary. The Canadian lines worked out the destination groups while the United States carriers grouped the origin points. Cowansville and St. Hyacinthe were placed in the Sherbrooke, Quebec, group, which embraces about 222 destinations and covers an area averaging about 58 miles in width by about 131 miles in length. Knoxville and Duff became points in an origin group in eastern Tennessee extending about 185 miles north and south and 265 miles east and west. Related contiguous groups were also created. The revision involved both increases and reductions. Some of the changes resulting therefrom are indicated in the following table compiled from defendants' exhibits: 169 I. C. C. Defendants contend that the revision brought about a harmonious adjustment of rates from the entire southern portion of the United States; that it made available many new joint rates; that it has proven satisfactory to shippers; and that it should not be disturbed. In specific support of the reasonableness of the 51.5-cent rate it is argued that the average per car and ton-mile earnings of 23.5 cents and 9.23 mills, respectively, which that rate produces approximate minimum revenue. Defendants state that the Canadian lines would refuse to concur in a joint rate of 43.5 cents as divisions thereof would be unsatisfactory, and as a result thereof combination rates would apply. Complainant concedes that a rate of 43.5 cents would result in "complications." It argues that a rate of 48 cents would be reasonable. This figure is arrived at by adding the proposed increase of 4.5 cents to the rate of 43.5 cents found reasonable in the former report. The prior report pointed out that rates lower than those from Duff and Knoxville applied to the same Canadian destinations from more distant points, such as Montgomery, Ala., and Chattanooga, Tenn. So far as the 4.5-cent increase in concerned, flexibility demanded that it be not made in every instance. Complainant's contention that in some instances the rates established June 15, 1929, increased the revenues of United States carriers, whereas, the conference agreement contemplated increases to the Canadian lines only, is without significance in considering the issue of reasonableness. Complainant criticizes the Knoxville and other origin groups. The method of grouping largely follows that prescribed in North Carolina Pine Asso. v. A. C. L. R. R. Co., 85 I. C. C. 270, approved in Adams-Bank Lumber Co. v. Aberdeen & R. R. Co., 157 I. C. C. 280. Complainant also criticizes the groups within Canada. We have no authority to require changes in the grouping of Canadian points. A few scattering protests were filed, principally by shippers in Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina, against the schedules filed to become effective June 15, 1929. Other shippers and shipper |