Show CANNOT CHARGE FOR SWITCHING Interstate Commerce Commis Commission Commission Commission sion Decides Against Cali Call California fornia farnia Railroads IN NOTED SWITCHING CASES CASESI I u Mom bi bl C In III Los I mod Sun Soli t of r Per 1 Cur Mu l 1 Cent 1110 Pore In a report by b Commissioner Frank Franklin lin K Lane the Interstate commerce commence commission has ha handed hand down Its Re de decision deC declaim claim C In the Han den an Francisco Pra clo and Lou 1 Angeles twitching switching easel cae in involving Inn n the th right of a carrier artier to make makein in an additional charge ha for fol delivering and nd ln carload freight ht to and an from Industries located tram ut xi Industrial spurs or skis side 1 tracks when It receives receive the main loins line haul For Kor 1 01 some ask years Pans no peal It has lias flee been tho the practise of ot the railroad rail entering Ise J os Angeles and Han Ran Francisco to exact act 10 I r r In addition to the regular lar freight charge char for tor thu th spur trek trade de des delivery d livery very The Th commission holds Midi that the th charge la In hi conflict with the provisions of the th act to regulate commerce and orders that Ihal it be discontinued dl d It la is lathe the view vi of the tho commission that the spurn and anti aide tracks serving Individual ual nil Industries constitute a im fart of oC the railroads terminal t facilities and anil that delivery ry of or carload cariad ca 1141 freight upon nuch each spur tracks Is I merely a substitute for l team learn track delivery and amt can eh cannot ehnot not tint be made mad the teals basis for an additional charge 18 Is i The Th railroad railroads which were parties parlIN de defendant d defendant In the cases rase before beCore the th cornn com commission mission contended that delivery upon an au Industrial siding Is III an additional service In the nature of ot b rall raila 11 a service for which the carrier Is III not compensated com by the Ih freight rate and for tor which therefore a se separate rato charge may be tic Imposed The Th commis commission sion hm holds that while a delivering car ear carrier Her rier may ma furnish cartage c as II an n ac accessorial service and nay n charge har there for r aa as a distinct l and separate terminal service such uch cartage must mU 1 follow and boo be b supplemental to 10 the th delivery which the carrier makes under lt Its ItA rates nits In The service given on a R spur track Is I a delivery service and anet nothing more mor the delivery being trade made at It one of nt the Ih carriers tanks tn tuc which Is la removed re removed moved at a II greater or less leas 1 distance from Its It II public yards pur delivery de delivery d livery In such lI h eases caes Is designate as a a It substitute service It U relieves the th car ar carriers arriera r riera team Im treks tracks and sheds shed less lean I outlay for expensive n a crow crowded l d city IlL promotes the speedy release I of equipment and vastly tI aids aid aidin In III conducting a commerce which Is greater than the th rr own could freely adequately and economically ally cally handle The MI report says say NOT OT ADDITIONAL An additional charge elMI may be b made when whelm an on additional addition service is la I given Riven ven but bUl the service here given la is not additional nal to 10 that for which the rate says l I ys If the th shipper pays PR for tor team Isaac track daily delivery delivery ery and does not receive It II but bul asks ask Instead and AI Is I given a side Id track de delivery d delivery livery Ihry which whets coats Lt the It carrier no more mo moh he h may mM not net be compelled to pay un an ad ul additional I charge hr upon the I h assumption um that he hI has ba received a terminal team track service which has hR he not been lIn given givenA A carrier may ml not lIot so axe construct Its lIa rates rata as a to 10 compel I an II extra x Ira charge har for like Ike Ilk service and this hIli In our Judgment the It defendants defendant at III Los 1 Angeles Angela AI have doneIt done don donIt It H Is la I to be noted that Ihal the th commission condemns the th switching charge hare only when mate made by the th carrier receiving tin the tinline ti theline line haul The Th tight right to 10 Impose the charge In the III ease case l of freight moving over a foreign line and nd tendered by the Ih latter for tor delivery 11 r to 10 Industries m reached by b the th rails of ot an another another other carrier I Is expressly recognised In short hort If It One Die Santa Mania Fe hauls haul a cw eMot had Id of nf fraught from Kansas Ka City elty it to In toLa Los La Angeles Angela and delivers deliver It upon an Industrial siding which hh It h directly direct serves serve the U switching charge harp cannot lawfully law Cully be collected If Jr l on the other land hand the t ear car Is I transferred at Los Lo LoAnI Angeles AnI to the Ih tracks of 0 the tI southern Mouth Pacific and M H su h hed d hj hI the tho th latter to on un an Industry tributary to 10 Its iii II own n eyelet the right to y t n a charge barge In III addi addition tion to the ti freight rat ral rate cannot an not be de denied eI denied nied This hl has long been beena a cause for tor complaint on the Ih part of ot California shipping Interests Al Although l 1 though thou the practise of ot giving I ruin Indu trial spur pour ur track delivery Is le I universal through the th unreal states It II hits lias loR new n i been 11 the ti custom to make mRk a al hl charge harge for Cor the service except at San son F II r u J i Sag I I an U 1 loners rj Prouty Joul oral mil lallan Iii oni opinions II IA hib Knapp I napp dissents |