points. They bore this notation: "Rates as provided herein will only apply upon such articles and from such points as are specifically mentioned." As related, however, to the vast number of articles shipped to the Pacific coast from interior points and the vast number of points participating in such traffic, the exceptions made in these special tariffs were relatively few. Their effect upon the business of inland cities was immediately noticeable; in Chicago and St. Louis particularly much opposition and active remonstrance were excited. This was met by issuing a series of supplements increasing the number of articles, and adding to the points from which commodity rates were allowed.

Meanwhile the various tariffs, circulars and letters of instruction which were issued by all the lines, were carefully examined by the Commission. The working of the new system was observed and it became obvious that certain changes were necessary in order to make it practically successful. A conference was invited between the Commission and representatives to the trans-continental lines, which was held at the office of the Commission in Washington on October 16th, at which time the subject was considered, and additional information was received which the Commission had not been able to obtain by an examination of the papers and by correspondence with shippers and others. In the course of this interview the Commission took occasion to lay before the representatives of the roads its views upon certin features of the tariffs in question. It is proper that those views should now be ma le public. In substance they ware as follows:

HRST. FAST-BOUND TRANS-CONTINENTAL FABILP“.

Last-bound rates are given in No. 9 to the Atlantic coast on commodities only, and in No. 10 specified class rates and over filty commodity rates are given to interior points.

A comparison of the cast-boul commodity rates on the two tariff's shows some anomalous results. In many, in fact in most cases the rates are identical; in but very few cases are the rates to interior points higher than the rates to New York City, liquors being the principal if not the only exam

ple. The discrepancy in respect to them is not great, and it is a fair query whether the Atlantic coast rate would not bear a sufficient advance to bring them into line, or whether the rates to interior eastern points could not be reduced to the same extent.

Another class of cases indicates a want of relation between the two sets of tariffs; for example:

Matting, China, 15,000 lbs., C. L..... 1 20

1 60

It is obvious that in these instances a shipper would make money by routing his goods to Buffalo and then at local rate to New York. Other inconsistencies will be found under vegetables, lumber, barley, bark, etc.

A comparison of the commodities in No. 9 with the class rates to Buffalo under No. 10, does not disclose many articles of importance on which the carriers are protecting themselves against east-bound clipper-ship competition, by charging rates materially less to New York than to interior points. The leading articles shipped from California (except sugar, which is not brought largely to points east of the Missouri river) appear to be covered by the commodity list in No. 10. As to the articles of minor importance, very many of them bear the same rate to New York that is given to Buffalo, under the Western classification. Some bear a somewhat higher rate; on others the rate to New York is lower. California products have, however, been so thoroughly covered by the commodity rates in No. 10 that these examples cannot be of great consequence, and the policy adopted has evidently been such that if shipments in large quantities were expected to interior points, the commodity list in No. 10 would be extended accordingly.

There are also in No. 9 quite a number of articles, products

of California or imported from Japan, China, etc., which are not found at all in the Western classification. Some of these are found in No. 10 also, and if any general principle is to be adopted the same course should be taken with the rest, or the classification should be amended.

It should be observed moreover that in some of the instances in which, as the matter is now left, a higher rate to interior points than to the Atlantic coast exists, the difference is unreasonable, c. g., Beeswax, 1.80 to New York, 4.00 to all interior points. In a case like this shippers of course would route their goods to New York and return at local rates. It is not perceived, however, that any great amount of valuable traffic from the Pacific coast is charged higher rates to interior points than to Atlantic coast points, while it is apparent that the tariffs were prepared in haste and are in considerable confusion.

So far as this subject has been examined no important reason appears why the east-bound business could not be thrown into a single tariff sheet, giving commodity rates to all points, even or progressive, upon such articles as it is judged expedient to reduce from the Western classification, and class rates upon the remainder. This would substar tially establish the full operation of the short-haul principie upon east-bound business.

Upon this last suggestion it must not be forgotten that the proportion earned by the trans-continental lines on business to the Mississippi valley is considerably higher than that which they receive on business to the Atlantic seaboard, at

even rates.

SECOND.

WFSI-EOUND TRANS-00NHINENIAL TARIFFS,

No. 8 of the series is a west-bound commodity tariff covering all business from the Atlantic coast to the Pacific coast. Additions and amendments have been made to the first issue by supplement. The list of articles has no relation to the Westin elissification, either in nomenclature or arrangement. In fact the difference in language is so great that it is frequently difficult to determine what rate articles named in No. S would bear under No. 10. The list of articles in No. 8 is

apparently a perpetuation of the old Pacific Coast West-Bound classification.

The last-named classification, however, was applied upon business from the Missouri river and all points east thereof. The effect of the new scheme is to apply the Western classification for the first time on business originating between the Missouri river and the Atlantic seaboard, destined for the Pacific coast. The grading of the Western classification is decidedly higher than that of the old Pacific Coast West-Bound classification. The result therefore is a very material advance in rates from all the interior territory upon the business in question. Meanwhile from the Atlantic seaboard the rates have not been greatly changed.

This situation has been further complicated by the issue of a set of tariffs numbered from 11 to 16 inclusive, which give commodity rates from various named interior points to the Pacific coast, on long lists of enumerated articles, the rates so named being almost invariably the Atlantic seaboard rates. Upon articles not enumerated in these special lists the changes have been such as to throw everything out of line and into confusion. There is no fixed standard of proportion. On a few articles the Western classification, as applied in No. 10, makes lower rates than No. 8. In most cases, however, the rates under No. 10 are so much higher than the rates under No. 8 that they are subject to the obvious objection that they exceed to a considerable extent the combination rate made by shipping east locally to the seaboard and return on No. 8 to the Pacific coast.

The system is subject to the further objection of giving rates to favored points only, and suggesting that rates will be made to other points on application showing that some considerable amount of traffic will follow. This practice is directly opposed to the fundamental principles of the Act to regulate commerce.

By the class rates of tariff No. 10 under the Western classification, which would govern at all points not named in the commodity lists, the charges would be considerably higher than at the points which are specified. Why one rate should be named on hammers and hatchets from Cohoes and an

other from Troy or Schenectady; why windmills should have a certain rate established from forty-six specified points named in the various tariffs of the series, to the exclusion of all the rest of the United States, presents a question to which no answer can be found in the tariffs themselves. It is no doubt, however, the fact that the enumerated places as to each commodity are the places where the respective articles are chiefly manufactured for California consumption. In fact it has been semi-officially announced that manufacturing points where important shipments of each commodity have been heretofore received for the Pacific coast have been selected and named, and that it is the intention to supplement these lists with new points when any important amount of traffic in the articles named, or perhaps in other articles, shall be offered for shipment by manufacturers or producers. The theory on which this has been done is by no means clear. If these rates are just and reasonable from the selected points, ranging as they do through the entire territory east of the Missouri river and west of the Atlantic seaboard, it would seem to follow that they would likewise be just and reasonable from all points in the same territory.

If no traffic now exists it certainly can do no harm to the carriers to announce the rate. They say that they are rea ly to make the rate in case traffic is offered. A tariff naming a rate from one locality lower than that enjoyed by its neighbor, when the circumstances are the same, tenders a preference or advantage to the first, and when any shipper is damaged by the exaction of an additional burden the preference becomes undue and unreasonable, unless it can be justified upon some sound and sufficient ground.

Further than this, common carriers are under obligation to take all descriptions of ordinary traffic from all points, and it is right that the rates should be known and announced publicly in advance of the offering of traffic. Even if there is no reasonable prospect that traffic will be tendered there is no reason why the schedules should not be given the broadest possible field. Under the existing system of almost universal joint tariffs and rates it would be much less burdensome to carriers in the matter of expense, and much less perplex