relationships should be maintained. Due to the construction of the extension of the Atlantic Coast Line from Perry to Drifton, the distances to the destination territory here considered from the Perry group are practically the same as from zone 1 points. In Investigation and Suspension Docket No. 2479, Lumber and Forest Products Between Southern Points and Destinations in Virginia, now pending, the carriers propose to make the rates from the Perry group to Virginia cities 1 cent over Georgia main-line points.

Much of defendants' testimony deals with the history of the rate adjustment from Georgia and Florida prior to the revision of July 20, 1924. They take the position that the origin relationships have been maintained and that transportation conditions and distances justify higher rates from the Perry group than from zone 1. As previously stated, the present boundaries of zone 1 follow closely those existing prior to the revision, except that stations on the Atlantic Coast Line from Perry to but not including Wilcox, Fla., and stations on the Live Oak, Perry & Gulf west of Live Oak, were removed from that zone and placed in zone 2.

Prior to the opening of the Perry-Monticello cut-off, the Atlantic Coast Line had no connection between Perry and Monticello. Shipments from Perry to Buffalo-Pittsburgh territory now move over that line, but to eastern points and from stations south of Perry traffic still moves via Jacksonville and Savannah, Ga. All traffic from points on the Atlantic Coast Line south of Perry is handled through Newberry, Fla., but traffic from Perry to the east moves over the Live Oak, Perry & Gulf to Live Oak, where it is turned over to the Atlantic Coast Line. While traffic from Perry may be moved over the Atlantic Coast Line as an initial carrier, for transportation reasons it is handled in the manner outlined above.

In support of the reasonableness of the spread of 2 cents from the Perry group over Georgia main-line points and 1 cent over Live Oak, defendants refer to numerous cases in which we prescribed rates on various commodities to and from points in Florida south of the Seaboard Air Line from Jacksonville to River Junction based on arbitraries which are determined by the distance of the south Florida point from the junction on the Jacksonville-River Junction line through which the short-line distance to the Florida destination is obtained. These arbitraries are in addition to the rate obtained by the use of the base scale between Florida points and southern destinations.

As indicating the irregularity of the western boundary of zone 1 attention is directed to the fact that Live Oak, from which rates were

prescribed as the Florida key point in the North Carolina Pine case, is on the western boundary of the zone, 81 miles from Jacksonville. Tallahassee, the most westerly point in the zone, is northwest of Perry and Cross City, 165 miles from Jacksonville. Over the route through Live Oak the distance from Perry to Jacksonville is 125 miles, while through Newberry it is 161 miles. The distance from Cross City by way of Newberry is 117 miles. From zone 1 points to Albany, N. Y., the average distance is 1,200 miles, while from Perry and Cross City the average distance to Albany is 1,257 miles. Inclusion of the Perry group in zone 1 would place Live Oak, the key point, more nearly in the center of that zone, where it was prior to the change in zone 1.

Traffic from points in zone 1, Wilcox to Newberry, both inclusive, transported over the short route by way of the Perry cut-off and Cincinnati would move through the higher rated Florida zone 2 territory, resulting in fourth-section departures at points of origin. These departures are protected by a temporary fourth-section order, which was issued at the time of the opening of the Perry cut-off. Carriers attempted to remove these departures by increasing the rates from the origins above described to the basis applicable from zone 2, which would have resulted in grouping those points with Perry and Cross City. Upon protest of interested shippers, the proposed increased rates were suspended and in Lumber from Florida Points, 147 I. C. C. 96, we found that the proposed schedules had not been justified. Protestants there, complainants in the instant case, contended, as here, that the proposed changed grouping, as well as the grouping now in effect on the Perry cut-off, is not in accordance with our direction in the North Carolina Pine case that the rate relationships then existing should be maintained. In finding the proposed increases not justified, we stated that the carriers proposed to increase rates to correct departures resulting from increases in rates from intermediate points, Perry to Wilcox, which were not justified at the time of their establishment, and that were it not for those increased rates the existing departures in the rates from the intermediate points would not have been created.

Certain fourth-section violations have also existed in connection with rates to eastern destinations from certain points in zone 2 on the Live Oak, Perry & Gulf and South Georgia, in that rates from those points were higher than from Perry, a more distant point. Such departures were removed on January 7, 1929, by the publication of rates from the intermediate points no higher than those contemporaneously in effect from Perry. The publication of rates in

compliance with the findings herein will remove the other fourthsection departures previously discussed.

We find that the rates assailed from the Perry group to destinations in Buffalo-Pittsburgh, trunk-line, and New England territories are, and for the future will be, unreasonable to the extent that they exceed, or may exceed, the rates contemporaneously in effect from origins in Florida zone 1 to the same destinations.

An order for the future will be entered.

157 I. C. C.

No. 21309

CHRISTIAN FEIGENSPAN, A CORPORATION, v. ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY

Submitted June 13, 1929. Decided August 20, 1929

1. Certain shipments of imported anthracite coal and coke from Weehawken, N. J., to East Orange, N. J., found to be import traffic subject to the jurisdiction of this commission.

2. Rates charged on above shipments found unreasonable. Reparation awarded.

Eric E. Ebert for complainant.

Marion B. Pierce for defendant.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

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

Exceptions were filed by complainant and defendant to the report proposed by the examiner. Our conclusions differ somewhat from those recommended by the examiner.

Complainant is a retail coal dealer with two yards, one at Newark, N. J., and the other at East Orange, N. J. By complaint filed July 26, 1928, it is alleged that the rates charged by defendant for the transportation from its piers at Weehawken, N. J., to East Orange, between December 7, 1925, and April 29, 1926, of 374 carloads of anthracite coal and 55 carloads of coke, imported from Germany, were unreasonable. Reparation is sought. Informal complaint was filed on December 3, 1927, and complainant was notified on February 2, 1928, that the claims could not be informally adjusted. Rates on coal will be stated in amounts per gross ton and those on coke in amounts per net ton of 2,000 pounds.

Defendant contends that the continuity of the movement from Germany was broken at Weehawken, and that the transportation from that point was intrastate commerce and not subject to our jurisdiction. This feature of the case will be considered first.

During the Pennsylvania anthracite coal miners' strike of the winter of 1925 and 1926, the coal shortage became acute and complainant negotiated with the Transocean Coal & Transport Corporation, hereinafter referred to as the Transocean Corporation, a New York concern representing certain mining interests in Germany, for the purchase and importation of anthracite coal and coke. Before the

vessels were chartered seven contracts were drawn, four of which provided that complainants should immediately place in the bank irrevocable letters of credit covering the price of the fuel on a basis of cost, marine insurance, and ocean freight, the freight to be paid when the vessels began loading and the balance to become due on presentation of ocean bills of lading and other documents relating to the shipments. The remaining three contracts were the same, except that the letters of credit covered only the price of the fuel on a basis of cost and marine insurance, the ocean freight to be paid directly by complainant to the Transocean Corporation when the vessel began loading. The freight on one vessel was not paid until it reached New York Harbor. The contracts further provided that cargoes were to be discharged at complainant's expense. Under these contracts complainant purchased the complete cargoes of four vessels, three of which were unloaded entirely at Weehawken and the fuel shipped to East Orange.1 The other vessel originally docked at Jersey City, N. J., and 80 carloads of fuel were removed to complainant's Newark yard. Because of congestion at that yard, the vessel was then shifted to Weehawken and the remaining 19 carloads unloaded and shipped to East Orange. The consignments were made to the order of the Transocean Corporation. A number of days before each of the vessels reached the United States, that corporation. had received from complainant the contract price of the fuel, with the exception of the freight on one vessel which, as before set forth, was paid upon arrival of the vessel in New York Harbor, and it had indorsed the ocean bills of lading over to complainant. The Transocean Corporation exercised no control or direction over the shipments after they left Germany. Complainant had title to the cargoes while they were in foreign commerce, and its intention ab initio was to transport them to its yards in New Jersey. In its own name, it attended to all the details in connection with the arrival of the vessels, such as the entry through customs, the arrangements for piers, the engaging of stevedores for unloading, and the issuance of bills of lading for movement from the piers, and it paid all charges arising therefrom, including the freight rates herein attacked.

The facts of this case are essentially different from those considered in Chi., Mil. & St. P. Ry. v. Iowa, 233 U. S. 334; Atl. C. L. R. R. v. Standard Oil Co., 275 U. S. 257; and Erie R. Co. v. United States, 32 F(2d) 613, cited by defendant, in which it was found that the broker or dealer had full control of and title to the material at the, port or

1 With the exception of 12 carloads which were diverted to various New Jersey points, not within the delivery limits of the East Orange yard. Rates charged on these diverted shipments and on those unloaded at Newark are not here in issue. Complainant seeks reparation only on 429 carloads unloaded at Weehawken and sent to East Orange.