At the respective hearings the requests for rates for the future were withdrawn, except that in No. 20778 rates for the future from Louisiana points to Hugo, Okla., and from Grand Saline, Tex., to certain destinations on the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific in Oklahoma are sought.

Most of the shipments on which reparation is sought moved from points in Kansas. There is considerable movement from points in Louisiana and some from Grand Saline, Tex. Charges were collected from all points at rates established on and after May 23, 1925, on the basis prescribed in the Memphis-Southwestern Investigation, subject to a minimum of 45,000 pounds. In Salt Between Western and Southwestern Points, 120 I. C. C. 91, 128 I. C. C. 431, and 144 I. C. C. 428, hereinafter called the Salt case, we prescribed a distance scale of rates on salt, in packages or in bulk, in carloads, from Kansas producing points to destinations in Arkansas and Oklahoma and from Louisiana producing points to Oklahoma City, Okla., subject to a minimum of 45,000 pounds, and awarded reparation to the basis prescribed therein on shipments moving on and after May 23, 1925. The present rates are in most instances those prescribed in the Salt case and became effective from Kansas July 10, 1927; from Louisiana and Texas to Arkansas October 5, 1927; from Louisiana to Oklahoma City and certain intermediate points July 11, 1927; from Louisiana to other Oklahoma points July 1, 1928; and from Texas to Oklahoma June 1, 1928.

Complainants contend that the present rates from Louisiana producing points to Hugo and from Grand Saline to stations Caston to Calvin, inclusive, on the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific in Oklahoma, are in excess of the rates prescribed in the Salt case for the distances considered and to that extent unreasonable. The average short-line distance from Louisiana producing points to Hugo is shown to be 425 miles, for which distance we prescribed a rate of 25.5 cents. The present rate is 26.5 cents. There are no commodity rates on salt from Grand Saline to the above-named destinations on the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific.

Complainants compare the rates charged with the present rates on those for like distances prescribed in the Salt case. Exhibits in No. 20778 indicate that the rates charged average about 9 cents per 100 pounds higher than the present rates.

Defendants contend that, except from Louisiana points to Oklahoma City, the present rates from Louisiana and Texas to Arkansas and Oklahoma were voluntarily established to enable the Louisiana and Texas producers to compete with those in Kansas. They contend that the rates prescribed in the Salt case are too low to be made the basis for an award of reparation, and in support thereof show that

the rates prescribed on salt are lower than or closely approximate the rates prescribed in the recent Consolidated Southwestern revision on other low-grade commodities, such as fertilizer and junk. Similar evidence was presented and considered in the Salt case.

Defendants also point out that the rates prescribed in the Salt case are lower than those prescribed on salt in the Memphis-Southwestern Investigation and in Mississippi Railroad Commission v. A. & V. Ry. Co., 102 I. C. C. 540, and 120 I. C. C. 569. The rates prescribed on salt in the Memphis-Southwestern Investigation were to be applied on a minimum not in excess of 37,500 pounds and were not prescribed from producing points. In Mississippi Railroad Commission v. A. & V. Ry. Co., 120 I. C. C. 569, at page 571, we found that differences in transportation conditions and the fact of a river transfer considered, the rates prescribed therein from Louisiana to Mississippi were in harmony with the rates prescribed in the Salt case. We have frequently found that transportation conditions throughout Arkansas, western Louisiana, Oklahoma, and eastern Texas are so similar as to warrant substantially the same level of rates, and the instant record does not warrant a different conclusion in respect to the rates in issue. In the recent case of Okla. City Chamber of Commerce v. Arkansas V. I. Ry. Co., 151 I. C. C. 202, the relief sought was similar to that herein requested and defendants made similar contentions as those herein advanced. We, however, rejected defendants' contentions and prescribed rates from Louisiana and Texas producing points to destinations in Oklahoma based on the Salt case and awarded reparation on the same basis.

Defendants contend that complainants did not bear the freight charges and therefore are not entitled to any reparation which may be awarded herein. Complainants paid the freight charges in the first instance and subsequently deducted them as such from the shippers' invoices. The fact that complainants paid the freight charges to the carriers is sufficient to support an award of reparation under a finding of unreasonableness. Missouri Portland Cement Co. v. Director General, 88 I. C. C. 492. In No. 20775, the Southwest Utility Ice Company, Lahman Ice Company, and the El Reno Wholesale Grocery Company are the only complainants on whose behalf testimony in respect of paying or bearing of charges was introduced. It was stipulated, however, that the other complainants had received shipments and had paid or borne the freight charges to the same extent as had those on whose behalf such testimony was introduced. In No. 20778 no testimony was introduced to show that John Witherspoon & Company made any shipments or paid and bore any charges thereon.

We find that the rates assailed from Louisiana producing points to Hugo and from Grand Saline to stations Caston to Calvin, inclusive, on the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific in Oklahoma were, are, and for the future will be, unreasonable to the extent that they exceeded, exceed, or may exceed the distance scale of rates prescribed for like distances in the Salt case applied in the manner therein indicated and subject to the minimum weights therein prescribed; and that the other rates assailed were unreasonable in the past to the extent that they exceeded the present rates between the same points. We further find that the Ward Ice Industries, Thompson-Oberste Company, Incorporated, and Pollock Stores Company of Talihina, interveners, and complainants except John Witherspoon & Company and the Fort Smith Traffic Bureau, received shipments as described and paid the charges thereon at the rates herein found unreasonable; that they have been damaged thereby in the amounts of the differences between the charges paid and those which would have accrued at the rates herein found reasonable; and that they are entitled to reparation, with interest. Complainants and interveners entitled to reparation should comply with Rule V of the Rules of Practice, including in the statements shipments that moved during the pendency of this proceeding, supported by affidavit that they paid or bore the charges thereon. If defendants object to this method of proof, a further hearing may be requested.

An order requiring the establishment of the rates found reasonable from Louisiana producing points to Hugo and from Grand Saline to stations Caston to Calvin, inclusive, on the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific in Oklahoma will be entered.

157 I. C. C.

No. 20766

FREDONIA LINSEED OIL WORKS COMPANY v. MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL.

Submitted March 21, 1929. Decided September 3, 1929

Rates on linseed oil, in carloads, from Fredonia, Kans., to Menphis, Tenn., found unreasonable. Reasonable rates prescribed for the future and reparation awarded.

B. L. Glover for complainant.

C. C. P. Rausch and B. L. Vaughan for defendants.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

DIVISION 3, COMMISSIONERS AITCHISON, TAYLOR, AND PORTER BY DIVISION 3:

No exceptions were filed to the report proposed by the examiner. Complainant is a corporation producing and selling linseed oil at Fredonia, Kans. By complaint filed March 5, 1928, it alleges that the rates charged, on and after March 6, 1926, on linseed oil, in carloads, from Fredonia to Memphis, Tenn., were and are unreasonable, and unduly preferential of complainant's competitors at Minneapolis, Minn., Chicago, Ill., and Des Moines, Iowa. Reasonable rates for the future and reparation are sought. Rates will be stated in cents per 100 pounds.

Fredonia is in southeastern Kansas in what is known as the gasbelt district and is served by the Missouri Pacific, the St. Louis-San Francisco, hereinafter called the Frisco, and the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe. The first two carriers are defendants in this proceeding. Linseed oil is a product of flaxseed and is used in the manufacture of paints and other commodities. The oil produced by complainant is of the same quality as that manufactured by its competitors and is sold on a delivered basis.

Generally, linseed oil is rated the same as animal and vegetable oils, such as sea-animal, cottonseed, china-wood, copra, peanut, and sova-bean oils. These oils are rated fifth-class in carloads in western classification, which governs traffic to Memphis from Fredonia and many other competing points. The short single-line distance, Fredonia to Memphis, via the Frisco, hereinafter called the Frisco route, is 460 miles and the short three-line distance is 453 miles.

Prior to October 25, 1923, a commodity rate of 52 cents applied on linseed oil. The fifth-class rate of 73 cents was applicable from that date to November 15, 1926, when the 52-cent commodity rate was restored over all lines except those operating east of the Mississippi River. Since July 1, 1927, the Missouri Pacific has maintained over its more circuitous route, hereinafter called the Missouri Pacific route, 527 miles, a rate of 43 cents, which includes a bridge toll of 2 cents. This rate would also apply under the vegetable-oil scale prescribed in Oklahoma Corporation Commission v. A. & S. Ry Co., 98 I. C. C. 183, 267, hereinafter referred to as the Cottonseed case. The Frisco did not publish the corresponding vegetable-oil scale rate of 40 cents, which also includes the bridge toll of 2 cents, over the single-line route.

At the time three of the shipments moved the applicable rate from Fredonia to Vicksburg, Miss., was 63 cents. The record indicates that through error this rate was applied on these three shipments to Memphis. Complainant seeks the vegetable-oil scale rate prescribed in the Cottonseed case based on the short single-line distance of 460 miles.

The following table compiled from complainant's exhibits sets forth the rates assailed and the earnings thereunder based on the distance over the short single-line route; the rates from the alleged preferred points and earnings thereunder based on the short singleline or joint-line routes; and the rates from and to the same points under the vegetable-oil scale:

Rate effective Oct. 25, 1923, to Nov. 15, 1926.

Frisco present rate, effective Nov. 15, 1926.

Missouri Pacific present rate, effective July 1, 1927, 527 miles.

Rate sought, includes 2-cent bridge arbitrary at Memphis, Tenn.

We have repeatedly said that the transportation characteristics of linseed oil and other vegetable oils are substantially alike and that the rates thereon should be the same. De Forest Co. v. A., T. &