S. C. CAPEHART AND JASPER SMITH, OWNERS OF THE STEAMER R. T. COLES, COMPLAINANTS, v. THE LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY, THE MEMPHIS & CHARLESTON RAILROAD COMPANY, THE EAST TENNESSEE, VIRGINIA & GEORGIA RAILROAD COMPANY AND THE NASHVILLE, CHATTANOOGA & ST. LOUIS RAILWAY COMPANY, DEFENDANTS. Petition filed October 30, 1889.-Demurrers filed November 18-25, 1889. Amended petition filed December 16, 1889.-Answers filed January 2-7, 1890.-Heard June 18, 1890.-Brief for complainants filed June 18, 1890. Decided November 3, 1890. 1. Several rail carriers engaged in interstate commerce each cross or touch a navigable river leaving a large space of territory along and near the river and between their lines that can be served only by steamboats, and in connection with steamboats these rail carriers carry freight to and receive it from this territory at points where they touch or cross the river respectively, but as to it they make through rates with only one line of steamboats and refuse to make such through rates with other steamboats on the river. Held, that under the law the rail carriers may do this, and that it is not unjust discrimination nor unlawful preference. Citing Napier v. The Glasgow & Southwestern Railway Company, 1 Railway & Canal Cases, 292. 2. In such a case all that a steamboat has a right to demand, with which the rail carriers have refused to make through rates and to do through billing, is that the rail carriers shall receive from and deliver to such steamboat freight for transportation at their published local tariff rates. 2. Through rates and through billing are matters of agreement among carriers engaged in interstate commerce, and, as was decided in the case of The Little Rock & Memphis Railroad Company v. The East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia Railroad Company, 3 I. C. C. Rep. 1, the Commission has no power under the statute to compel them against their consent to enter into arrangements for through rates and for through billing. 4. An aggregate through rate is itself an entirety, although made up of agreed percentages, proportions or divisions, as the case may be, of the entire rate among the several carriers; and where the rail carrier makes a through rate from a point on a navigable river with a steamboat line, and refuses to make such through rate with another steamboat, the Commission cannot compel the rail carrier to receive freight from or deliver it to the steamboat, with which it has refused to make a through rate and to do through billing, upon the prepayment of charges for an estimated proportion of the through rate equal in amount to that which the rail carrier receives from the steamboat line with which it has an arrangement for through rates and through billing. 5. Where a carrier not subject to the Act to regulate commerce, for example, a steamboat plying the Tennessee river between Decatur, Alabama and Bridgeport, in the same State, has applied to rail carriers engaged in interstate commerce for through rates and through billing of freight and has been refused these, and during a period of several years has paid these rail carriers their local published tariff rates on freight, and now sues to recover the difference between the amount so paid on the local rates and the proportion of the through rate between the same points covered by the local rates. Held, that no recovery can be had in such a proceeding before the Interstate Commerce Commission, and the complaint is dismissed without prejudice. 6. The common carriers named and referred to in the last clause of section 3 of the Act to regulate commerce are such alone as are subject to the provisions of that statute. S. II. Gruber, for complainants. W. M. Baxter and Hoadly, Lauterbach & Johnson, for E. T., V. & G. R. R. Co. Edward Baxter, for L. & N. R. R. Co. REPORT AND OPINION OF THE COMMISSION BRAGG, Commissioner: The original complaint in this case was preferred by and in the name of "The Steamer R. T. Coles" and was verified by the oath of S. C. Capehart as master and managing owner. The defendants interposed a demurrer to the effect that the steamer itself was not a proper party complainant under the provisions of the Act to regulate commerce. Complainant thereupon asked and obtained leave (without a decision upon the question raised by the demurrer) to amend the petition, and subsequently filed an amended petition in which said S. C. Capehart and Jasper Smith, as owners of the vessel, appeared as complainants. The parties defendant to the original petition were the Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway Company, the Memphis & Charleston Railroad Company and the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company; and in the amended petition a new defendant was added, namely, the East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia Railway Company. The facts in the case are conceded, not only to a large extent by the pleadings, but upon the hearing there was no disagreement as to the real situation. The steamer R. T. Coles, which is owned by the complainants, forms one of the lines of transportation upon the Tennessee river, and the defendants are railroads having, each of them, stations at different points along the river. These several lines of railroad are each engaged in interstate traffic and admit that they are subject to the provisions of the Act to regulate commerce. Among the other water carriers upon the river is a company known as the Tennessee River Transportation Company, and this company forms a line in direct competition with the line formed by the steamer owned by the complainThe substantial grievance alleged by the complainants is that the defendant railroad companies discriminate in favor of the Tennessee River Transportation Company in that they take the business of that company at a cheaper rate than the business of the complainants. It appears that an agreement exists between the several defendants and the said Tennessee River Transportation Company by which joint through rates are in effect, applicable only to the business of that company, and said railroads interchange freight transported upon through bills of lading with said Tennessee River Transportation Company's line of steamers or barges at a lower rate by the railroads than is charged to the complainants, with whom no such arrangement for freight rates exists. ants. The complainants specify several instances of alleged discrimination against them, growing out of this condition of affairs. One or more of such transactions are given as to each of the defendant railroad companies in the transportation of property passing in both directions over the route formed by the steamer Coles and the several lines of defendants, respectively. That a joint through rate is given to the Tennessee River Transportation Company by the defendants which is less on through business than is given to complainants by combined local rates was conceded at the hearing, and the tariff sheets showing the local rates (the latter being charged to the complainants) were submitted. It appears that the real trouble is that under the arrangement the Tennessee River Transportation Company constitutes with the defendants part of a through line, while the steamer R. T. Coles is not part of any such through line with the defendants, and upon freight carried by this steamer each of the defendants charges its local rates of freight to and from its station on the Tennessee river. The following tables will show these through and local rates in effect December 10, 1889, and at the time when this complaint was filed: EAST TENNESSEE, VIRGINIA & GEORGIA RAILWAY, Memphis and Charleston Division. Local rates between Memphis, Tenn., and Decatur, Ala. CLASSES. 1 2 3 4 5 6 A B C D E H F 50 43 36 30 24 20 15 17 14 12 23 28 29 Through rates from Memphis, Tenn., to Tennessee river landings between Decatur and Bridgeport, Ala., via Decatur, Ala. 1 2 3 4 5 6 69 56 50 44 37 31 CLASSES. A B C DEHF 31 31 31 22 37 44 62 Rates on cotton from Tennessee river landings, between Decatur and Bridgeport, Ala., to Memphis-$1.50 per bale. LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD. Local rates between Nashville, Tenn., and Decatur, Ala. 1 2 3 4 5 6 40 35 30 25 21 17 CLASSES. A B C D E H F 13 15 12 10 20 25 25 Through rates from Nashville to Tennessee river landings between Decatur and Bridgeport, Ala., via Decatur, Ala. CLASSES. 1 2 3 4 5 6 55 45 40 35 30 25 A B C D E H F 25 25 25 18 30 35 50 NASHVILLE, CHATTANOOGA & ST. LOUIS RAILWAY. Local rates between Nashville, Tenn., and Bridgeport, Ala. 1 2 3 4 5 6 50 45 40 35 33 30 CLASSES. ABC D E H F 30 30 15 14 30 30 28 Through rates from Nashville, Tenn., to landings on the Tennessee river between Decatur, Ala., and Bridgeport, Ala., via Bridgeport, Ala. 1 2 3 4 5 6 55 45 40 35 30 25 CLASSES. A B C D E H F 25 25 25 18 30 35 50 The above rates are in cents per hundred pounds, except class F, which is in cents per barrel. The local rates shown above apply in both directions. The through rates read from Nashville and Memphis to Tennessee river landings, and there are no rates on file reading from these landings, except the rate on cotton to Memphis shown above. It seems, however, to be the plain result of the evidence adduced on the trial, that if the same class of traffic should be shipped from these landings the rates would apply in both directions. |