Page images
PDF
EPUB

058 tons over defendant's road; in 1880 it was 81,881 tons; in 1881 it was 62,057 tons; in 1882 it was 202,740 tons; in 1883 it was 208,167 tons; in 1884 it was 176,530 tons; in 1885 it was 189,530 tons, and in 1886 it was 193,547 tons. Taking the years 1879 and 1886 by way of comparison and it shows a decrease of 85,511 tons or 7,000 cars of live stock from Chicago alone. Besides oil there has also of recent years been an immense traffic developed in west-bound freights over defendant's line in coal and coke.

While it is true that there has been a considerable falling off in the live-stock shipments east over defendant's road in the last ten years, yet still this is a large business. There is enough of it, taken in connection with other freight, such as is usually shipped in stock cars, to furnish return loads to defendant's stock cars a large portion of the time on their return trips from Chicago to Cleveland. On the other hand, it does not appear that there are any return loads of freight from Chicago to Cleveland in tank cars.

When oil is shipped in barrels in less than carload lots, there are but few articles that can be placed in the same car with it. Any other freight placed in the same car must be such as will not absorb the smell of the oil or be damaged by its leakage. There are four handlings of freight when oil ís shipped in barrels in less than carloads. It is unloaded on the platform; it is loaded on the car and goes forward as way freight; it is handled at the different stations on the platform when taken from the train, and then from the platform to the team. A separate receipt, a separate bill of lading, and a separate way bill have to be made out for each barrel if shipped to only one consignee, and where there are several shipments all in a car in less than carload lots there is as much clerical work in the case of each shipper and each consignee as there would be in the case of only one shipper and one consignee for an entire carload. A carload of oil can go forward on any train, but is generally sent on a through train. Less than carload lots are always shipped in way freight trains, which stop generally at every station along the road.

The Standard Oil Co. has stock cars of its own, as well as tank cars, which are used in the defendant's business, and upon which defendant pays a mileage rate, as above stated. Whether any of the petitioners have such stock cars, is not shown by the evidence. The average oil train on defendant's road consists of thirty stock cars or tank cars. The weight of oil is based on the standard of six and one half pounds for refined oil and five and three fourths pounds per gallon for naphtha and gasoline, and seven pounds and up

wards per gallon for lubricating or black oil. It does not appear, from the evidence, that any of the complainants have made any demand on the defendant for tank cars to transport their oil. No shipper seems ever to have made such demand upon the defendant until very recently, and, as we infer from the evidence, since the filing of this complaint.

The crude capacity of the petitioners Scofield, Shurmer, and Teagle is about 250,000 barrels a year. Their daily capacity is about 1200 barrels. The Standard Oil Co. is by far the largest refiner and shipper engaged in this business at Cleveland, according to the evidence before us.

The evidence shows that the production of these oils can be made at a much less cost by a large refiner, having a capacity of one thousand barrels per day, or more, than by a small refiner, having far less capacity. This difference is from one half to three fourths of a cent per gallon.

None of the petitioners have the capacity of making these oils at this minimum cost except Scofield, Shurmer, and .Teagle. The Standard Oil Co. has the capacity to make, and does make, these oils at this minimum cost. Shippers of oils in barrels, carload lots, cannot compete successfully as against shippers in tank cars at the rates furnished by defendant to the principal points reached by its lines in the States of Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan.

The refineries are located at Newburgh, a suburb of Cleveland; and, when a stock car is furnished to them to be loaded with barrels of oil, it takes five days, on an average, for it to be loaded and returned to the defendant. This delay is caused by the switching over the Cleveland & Pittsburg railroad, an opposition line. Oil in barrels in less than carload lots is brought by the shipper to the oil sheds of the defendant, and is loaded on the cars at once. Stock cars furnished by the defendant to the Standard Oil Co. are loaded by that company at its refineries and returned to the defendant in from 24 to 48 hours. The differences in the rates of defendant upon these shipments are not based on any of these considerations.

Up to the time that the act to regulate commerce went into effect, the rate of the defendant on barrels of oil in carloads was 60 cents per barrel from Cleveland to Detroit, and on less than carloads 70 cents per barrel. The present rate is 30 cents per barrel on carloads, and on less than carloads 64 cents per barrel. Relatively, much the same differences on oil in barrels in carload and in less than carload shipments are made to other points. The ground assigned for this by the carrier is that prior to April 5, 1887, it had been doing this business "in a haphazard sort of way,

and after that it was necessary to make rates harmonious with the various interests and commodities along its road." It is also claimed by the carrier that this change was made necessary by the fact that it had been carrying oil in barrels in less than carloads too low prior to April 5, 1887.

Small shipments of oil, less than carload lots, are usually shipped by the defendant in single-decked stock cars. As a rule, the defendant always ships promptly oil in less than carloads the day it is received, if it has cars, no matter how small the number of barrels may be; but if it has not enough cars, then on the next day. It takes about twice as long to get freight through to destination from point of shipment in less than carloads than in carloads.

The reasons assigned by the defendant for having no tank cars of its own are, in substance, that if it owned such tank cars the party who does the largest shipping over its road (the Standard Oil Co.) would give it to work for such tank cars, and then it would be dependent on other shippers who get their crude oil over other roads than the defendant's, and in consequence give their shipments back to the companies to get their crude oil, and therefore that the defendant would have its equipment of tank cars on its lines for six months of the year doing nothing.

The crude oil used by the refineries at Cleveland is brought from the oil region of Pennsylvania. The estimate is that from 2,400,000 barrels to 3,000,000 barrels of this crude oil is thus brought from the oil fields of Pennsylvania annually to Cleveland to be refined. The greater portion of this crude oil is brought to Cleveland by a pipe line owned and controlled by the Standard Oil Co. A portion of this crude oil is brought from the oil fields to Cleveland by the Pennsylvania system of roads. The defendant has a railway line from Cleveland to Oil City, in the oil region of Pennsylvania, but for the last five years or more has not been engaged in the business of hauling crude oil from the Pennsylvania oil fields to Cleveland. All of the petitioners, except the Brooks Oil Co., receive their crude oil chiefly from the pipe line. The Brooks Oil Co. receives it crude oil from the vicinity of Parkersburg and Oil City entirely by tank cars of the Valley road. There has been a considerable demand upon the defendant for shipments of crude oil from the Pennsylvania oil fields to Cleveland. It makes a rate for this of 25 cents per barrel, while the pipe line only charges 20 cents a barrel. It was conceded by petitioners' counsel upon the hearing, that this pipe line is not a common carrier.

The territory east of Cleveland receives its supply of refined oil chiefly from the east. There are refineries at Oil City,

Buffalo, Philadelphia, Pittsburg, and New York. There is a pipe line from the oil regions of Pennsylvania to the seaboard, and it is owned and controlled by the Standard Oil Co.

The shipments west over defendant's line in stock cars are largely made up of anthracite coal and pig-iron from Buffalo, anthracite coal from Erie, and coke from Ashtabula. The shipments of these classes of freight over it, west, are so large that they often exceed the capacity of the defendant to furnish the requisite cars for their transportation.

Questions arising upon

The questions arising upon this complaint (are the complaint. Several in number) and may be stated briefly and substantially in the following order:

I. The difference between barrel rates in less than carload quantities and barrel rates in car-load lots.

2. The difference in rates between oil in car-load lots in barrels and oil in car-load quantities in tanks, and whether the combination of the difference in favor of tank-car rate with the mileage allowed the shipper for the use of the tank cars, operates to produce a prejudice and disadvantage to the shipper of oil in barrels in car-load lots or less than car-load lots that is obnoxious to the statute.

3. Whether or not it is the duty of the carrier to furnish tank cars as a part of its equipment which can be enforced by order of the Interstate Commerce Commission or upon its recommendation under the act to regulate commerce.

Reason for lower rate for car-load lots

tities.

I. Reasons that are substantial exist for making the rate lower per barrel in carload lots than in less than carload quantities. The cost of service is very considerably less in the case of shipments in carload lots than in less than car-load quantities. We have than less than had occasion to pass upon this frequently, but the car-load quan- evidence here requires us to do so again. The shipment by the car-load goes direct to destination. It is loaded by the shipper and is unloaded by the consignee. The freight in it does not stop at the way-stations to be handled in parcels to different consignees along the line. Only one bill of lading is made. It requires but one entry upon the way-bill. The time occupied in transporting it to destination is far less than in the case of a shipment in less than carload quantities. There is but one collection of charges for freight. All of these reasons apply with the same force whether the shipment be in a tank or in barrel shipments in carload lots.

Where the shipment is made in less than carload quantities, a separate receipt or bill of landing has to be given to every shipper for his parcel. A separate entry for every

item has to be made on the way-bill. The shipment is by a local freight train, which stops at every station for which there is a package of freight. The freight has to be taken out in parcels and delivered at each of these stations. The freight is loaded and unloaded by the railroad company. There are as many collections of charges for freight as there are different parcels. The time occupied in transporting it is usually from two to three times as long as in the case of a carload shipment-according to distance. It occupies a whole car, and for the vacant space in that car the company is receiving no compensation. There is also a considerabie element of danger attending the handling of barrel oil in small lots which are unloaded by the carrier and stand in the local station-houses, whereas carload lots are usually unloaded by the consignee at a distance from the depot building and immediately removed from the premises of the railroad company. All these facts show that a reasonable difference can and should justly be made between shipments in carload lots and less than carload quantities. A reason, additional to these named, is urged by the carrier and sus tained by the evidence in the present case. It is that there are very few articles of freight that can be shipped in the same car with oil in barrels. The force of this is seen at a glance, and it renders this a service that is phenomenal in its expensiveness to the carrier. As thus transported, oil in barrels less than carload lots is not ordinary but extraordinary freight. Taken in connection with all the features of this traffic, it is indeed an exceptionally expensive service on the part of the carrier; and, high as the rates are on oil in barrels less than carload lots, and we must say that they are very high, almost so high that it seems to us that they are in their nature prohibitory,—yet we cannot, upon all the evidence say that they are unreasonable or excessive. This result, however, arises from the peculiar character of the freight stated. It is proper to say in this connection that the defendant, as a carrier, performs this service promptly at an exceptionally large cost of outlay, and that the rates charged for it cannot fairly be measured by the standard of other freights were substantially different conditions, to a very remarkable extent, exist.

The extraordinary differences made by this carrier between barrel shipments in carload lots and less than carload lots, which we have had occasion to consider and have Same-Differsustained, require that we should notice this sub- ence should ject at more length in its general features. Since not be too the act to regulate commerce went into effect, great. carriers have generally reduced their rates in shipments in

« PreviousContinue »