OCR Text |
Show ROADS CANNOT CHIMES Only Tariffs Accepted by Interstate Inter-state Commerce Commission Must Apply. DISTRICT COURT HOLDS OFFICIALS ARE POWERLESS Fixing of Higher or Lower Schedules Declared Not to Re Binding. 1 a decision rendered by Judge. M. L, iTiichio of Iho district court lucsday in the case of the Oregon Short Lino Railroad companv against the Consolidated Consoli-dated Wagon and Machine company, the freight rates between points in dillorent states, as fixed by the interstate commerce com-merce commission, aro upheld, regnr.l-Icss regnr.l-Icss of the fact that tho railroad company com-pany made a conlracl v.-itli Iho wagon and machine company to haul Ihe freight at a lower rale. It is hcl( y .Judge Kitchio that no railroad on . 1. 1 can bind ihe company to haul flight at a lower rate than 1ht agreed .upon i,v the interstate 1"'',,crccV:0"'71SS nk a fair rate to bo charged, and pub-ish"d pub-ish"d in the tarilT schedules after they have .boon filed with the commission. The Short Line, as a common carr ei transported shipments of hay itom Spencer, Ida,, lo lellowslone, N011.. aid the wagon and machine comp.1113 paid therefor at the rate 01 J con niiidrcd pounds. The railroad onip. ui filed action to recover SI.j2.i8, alleg g that that much more was due on the rate of 19 cents a hundred, fixed b3 the tariff filed with the interstate commerce com-merce commission. Contentions of Defendant. II was contended by the defendant that the general freight agent fl the Short li no had agreed to the I I -cent rate, and hence the company should be held to its contract, and should not be allowed to recover the higher rate. It was also contended by ihe do-fendant do-fendant that Ihe tariff sheet. 111 which the lD-ccut rate was fixed was scut to the commission, but was rejected as be-in be-in irregular in form, aud hence the commission had never approved that rate. Relying on the contract to carry the hay at U cents a hundred, the defendant de-fendant had mado tho shipment and sold the hay. and if the higher rate should be upheld by the court, it alleges that the defendant would sustain a loss on the shipment- Official's Action Not Binding. Judge Ritchie holds that the defendant defend-ant had no right to rely upon the rate fixed by an agent of the company, high or low' in authority, becauso he could not bind the company by any representation represen-tation in the face ot the approval ot a rate by the commerce commission. As 10 the rejection of the tariff schedule bv the commerce commission, the evidence showed that the reason allegod by the clerk of tho commission commis-sion who Vf turned the schedule for re-fnsing re-fnsing to file it. was I hat these words appeared on the title page: "Shipments "Ship-ments to be accepted only at convenience conven-ience of construction department. " As to tho right of the cleric to reject tho schedule for the reason assignod, Ittdge Hitchic holds that so long as the rate is free from ambiguitv and uncertainty un-certainty and its application is affirmative affirma-tive and definite, the 'commission has no power lo make regulations concerning concern-ing it in any other respect. Rate Was Binding. Continuing 011 that point, .ludge Ritchie holds: "That the schedule in question was actually received hy the commission, aud ought to havo .been filed, and was improperly rejected by it. The receipt of a lawful schedulo imposed upon the comniiBsjon the duty of filing il, and that that, in the eye of tho law. constituted a filing is amply supported by the authorities." The court, in closing, finds that the tariff, as sent to the commerce commission com-mission by tho Short Jiine, was in effect, and the rale therein fixed was binding nnou the railroad company and the defendant in the case. Hence, judgment judg-ment is rendered in favor of the railroad rail-road company for tho full amount asked in its complaint. |