Union Asphalt Co. v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 192 I. C. C. 123____ Union Underwear Co., Inc., v. Frankfort & C. R. Co., 214 I. C. C. 695.--. United States v. Abilene & S. Ry. Co., 265 U. S. 274-- Chicago, M., St. P. & P. R. Co., 294 U. S. 499. Illinois Central R. Co., 263 U. S. 515. Ryan, 284 U. S. 167 Union Pac. R. Co., 28 I. C. C. 518. Page 80 374 213 427 171, 427, 714 484 604 588 588 United States Potters' Assn. v. Akron, C. & Y. Ry. Co., 172 1. C. C. 618.- - Vanderbilt Co., Inc., v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 167 I. C. C. 319____ Wabash Ry. Co. Modification of Systems, 234 I. C. C. 291---Wagner Construction Co. v. Chicago, M., St. P. & P. R. Co., 219 I. C. C. 317.---. Waste Material Dealers Assn. v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 164 I. C. C. 587; 226 I. C. C. 683. Weights on Vegetables Stored in the Southwest, 223 I. C. C. 483.. Wells Lbr. Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 38 I. C. C. 464- 114 28 146, 545 208 497 354 331, 467 366, 367, 459, 462, 469 Western Trunk Line Class Rates, 164 I. C. C. 1; 173 I. C. C. Wharton Steel Co. v. Delaware, L. & W. R. Co., 25 I. C. C. W. H. Bintz Co. v. Abilene & S. Ry. Co., 216 I. C. C. 481. Wolff Mfg. Corp. v. Abilene & S. Ry. Co., 146 I. C. C. 377. Woodward-Bennett Co. v. San Pedro, L. A. & S. L. R. Co., 29 Wrought Pipe and Fittings, 234 I. C. C. 347.......... 94, 181 498 465 439 503 284 570 496 539 314 463 INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION REPORTS No. 12964 CONSOLIDATION OF RAILROADS IN THE MATTER OF CONSOLIDATION OF RAILWAY PROPERTIES OF THE UNITED STATES INTO A LIMITED NUMBER OF SYSTEMS Submitted July 24, 1939. Decided October 13, 1939 Consolidation plan, 159 I. C. C. 522, modified so as to assign the railway properties of the Gulf, Mobile & Northern Railroad Company and the New Orleans Great Northern Railway Company to system No. 11, Chicago & North Western, instead of to system No. 8, Atlantic Coast Line. Other prior reports in this proceeding: 163 I. C. C. 188, 183 I. C. C. 663, 185 I. C. C. 403, 219 I. C. C. 665, 229 I. C. C. 608, and 232 I. C. C. 213. J. N. Flowers, Y. D. Lott, Jr., W. Culver White, Carl Fox, and James C. Stephens for applicants. S. R. Prince, Henry L. Walker, Frederick E. Brown, Wilbur LaRoe, Jr., Arthur L. Winn, Jr., Edmund M. Goodman, George W. Jaques, John D. Van Cott, Elmer A. Smith, Harold E. Spencer, Samuel Spencer, J. Kemp Bartlett, and D. Willard, Jr., for interveners. SEVENTH SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT OF THE COMMISSION BY THE COMMISSION: By report in this proceeding dated December 9, 1929, 159 I. C. C. 522, we adopted a plan for the consolidation of the railway properties of the continental United States into a limited number of systems, in which we assigned the properties of the Gulf, Mobile & Northern Railroad Company and the New Orleans Great Northern Railroad Company to system No. 8, Atlantic Coast Line, and the properties of the Mobile & Ohio Rail Road Company to system No. 11, Chicago and North Western. Later the New Orleans Great Northern Railroad 1 Company was succeeded, through reorganization, by the New Orleans Great Northern Railway Company. New Orleans G. N. Ry. Co. Acquisition and Securities, 193 I. C. C. 349. On April 5, 1939, the Gulf, Mobile & Northern Railroad Company, the Gulf, Mobile & Ohio Railroad Company, and the New Orleans Great Northern Railway Company filed in this proceeding a petition for modification of our consolidation plan so as to assign the properties of the Gulf, Mobile & Northern and the New Orleans Great Northern to system No. 11, instead of to system No. 8. This petition was filed in connection with, and for the purposes of, applications recorded in Finance Dockets No. 12272 and No. 12273, wherein the Gulf, Mobile & Northern and the Gulf, Mobile & Ohio ask authority under section 5 (4) of the Interstate Commerce Act, as amended, for purchase by the Gulf, Mobile & Ohio of the railroad properties of the Mobile & Ohio, merger therewith of the properties of the Gulf, Mobile & Northern, acquisition by the Gulf, Mobile & Ohio of further control of the New Orleans Great Northern, etc., and a hearing was held upon these proposals and the petition jointly. The proposed change in allocation of the properties of the Gulf, Mobile & Northern and the New Orleans Great Northern is opposed by the Illinois Central Railroad Company and two subsidiaries on the ground that while one of the aims of consolidation is to merge weak with strong lines, the present proposal is to weld weak lines into a trunk line notwithstanding the want of public need for the establishment of a new trunk line. It is also opposed by minority stockholders of the Mobile & Ohio, who contend that the Mobile & Ohio should be a part of system No. 9, Southern; that union of the Mobile & Ohio and the Gulf, Mobile & Northern with the Chicago & North Western system, as proposed, would result in an extremely weak combination because that system is essentially an east-and-west line having the Union Pacific as its principal connection, and would get into St. Louis only by means of the Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railway, which was at one time controlled by the so-called Van Sweringen interests; and that the Gulf, Mobile & Northern actively competes with the Mobile & Ohio, in connection with the New Orleans & Northeastern Railroad Company, for traffic between New Orleans and St. Louis and between St. Louis and Memphis, and with the Mobile & Ohio for traffic between Mobile and Jackson, Tenn., as well as intermediate points. The petitioners urge that the Mobile & Ohio was treated as a logical part of a north-and-south line to be operated, at some time in the future, in connection with a group in the central Northwest. They admit that whether such a connection or joint operation ever will be accomplished cannot now be known but contend that the plan was framed in recognition of such a possibility, however remote. They point out that the Atlantic Coast Line and an affiliate filed an answer to the petition to the effect that the Atlantic Coast Line has no objection to removal of the Gulf, Mobile & Northern and the New Orleans Great Northern from system No. 8, from which the petitioners infer that that group is made up of lines which could make no profitable use of the Gulf, Mobile & Northern. They also urge that transfer of that property to system No. 11 would preserve existing competition between it and the Louisville & Nashville, also mainly a north-and-south line. For other reasons in support of their petition, the petitioners rely on the considerations in support of unification of the properties of the Mobile & Ohio, the Gulf, Mobile & Northern, and the New Orleans Great Northern urged in the collateral proceeding. In Gulf, M. & O. R. Co. Merger, 236 I. C. C. 61, decided concurrently herewith, we have found that the unification of those properties as proposed will promote the public interest and is desirable. Such unification could not be accomplished under the law without the modification of our consolidation plan in the manner here proposed. We find that the properties of the Gulf, Mobile and Northern Railroad Company and the New Orleans Great Northern Railway Company should be assigned to the same system as are assigned the properties of the Mobile & Ohio Rail Road Company. An appropriate supplemental order will be entered. EASTMAN, Chairman, concurring: In 1929 the Commission adopted a plan for the consolidation of the railway properties of the United States into a limited number of systems. Consolidation of Railroads, 159 I. C. C. 522. This plan provided for 21 systems which had some semblance of balance in size and importance. One of these was system No. 11, the important railroads in which were the Chicago & North Western Railway Company and its subsidiary the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Company, the Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railway Company, and the Mobile & Ohio Rail Road Company. The Chicago & Eastern Illinois was an essential part of this system, forming the bond of connection between the Chicago & North Western and the Mobile & Ohio. In 1932 the Commission modified this plan so as to permit the railroads in eastern territory, exclusive of New England, to be combined into the four systems upon which four of the leading railroad executives had agreed. Consolidation of Railroads, 185 I. C. C. 403. In this connection the Chicago & Eastern Illinois was 216338-40-vol. 235--3 |