rangement; and one piece of road may | same-no higher and no lower than to any any intermediate point on the same line in the same direction—your petitioner would have no reason to complain.' be part of several lines. 9. Through business over the defendant companies' roads was done by the National Despatch Line (a fast freight line, neither a corporation nor an association of persons, but a name under which business was done), the several roads paying milage for the cars used, furnished to such line by a car company, and the earnings of such line being divided among the roads in agreed proportions. The tariff for the long haul traffic inquestion was made by the manager of the Despatch Line, who was the agent for all the roads over which it did business, and was acquiesced in by them. Held, that the defendant companies were responsible for the long haul rates. 10. Held, that such peculiar facts are not found to exist as will justify the greater charge over the shorter line by the Central Vermont roads. Cooley, Chairman: On the same day the complainant presented another petition representing that "the Boston & Lowell Railroad Company, a Massachusetts corporation; the Concord Railroad Company, a New Hampshire corporation; the Northern Railroad Company, a New Hampshire corporation; the Central Vermont Railroad Company, a Vermont corporation; and the Ogdensburgh & Lake Champlain Railroad Company, a New York corporation, have made an arrangement by which the Steamship Company operated by the Ogdensburgh & Lake Champlain Railroad Company has issued a tariff from Boston to lake ports in the United States at a less rate than is charged at the same time from Boston to Ogdensburgh and other points on the same line at a shorter distance from Boston in the same direction. The rates are as follows: From Boston to- On May 24, 1987, the Boston & Albany Rail-Port Huron, road Company presented its petition stating To 41-36-29-20-17-14 for the six classes of freight respectively. 44-39-31-23-19-16 for the six classes respectively, "This line via Ogdensburgh comes into competition with the Boston & Albany Railroad Company, and its connections at Cleveland, Detroit, Port Huron, Milwaukee, Chicago and other western points. "That the Boston & Lowell Railroad Com- Milwaukee, pany, a Massachusetts corporation; the Con- Chicago, cord Railroad Company, a New Hampshire and from Boston to Ogdensburgh, 60-50-45corporation; the Northern Railroad Company, 30-25-17 for the six classes of freight respecta New Hampshire corporation; the Central ively. Vermont Railroad Company, a Vermont corporation, and the Grand Trunk Railway Company, established by the laws of Canada, have issued schedules of joint rates under the name of the National Despatch Line, and under these schedules the rates from Boston to De- "The grievance which the Boston & Albany troit, Michigan, are: 51-45-35-24-20-18 for Railroad Company and its connections have is the six classes of freight, respectively; and to that the line via Ogdensburgh makes rates to Montreal, Canada, 45-40-30-23-20-18 for the the above places less than the Boston & Albasix classes of freight, respectively; while at ny Railroad Company and its connections the same time the Boston & Lowell, Concord, make to the same points, while at the same Northern & Central Vermont Railroad Com- time the above named roads, viz.: the Boston panies, a part of the roads included in the & Lowell, Concord, Northern, Central VerNational Despatch Line, have made and main-mont, Ogdensburgh & Lake Champlain Railtained rates from Boston to St. Albans, Vermont, a station on the Central Vermont Railroad, a less distance from Boston than either Detroit or Montreal, in the same direction over the same line as follows: 60-50-40-27-24 -17 for the six classes of freight, respectively. "The National Despatch Line comes into competition with the Boston & Albany Railroad Company and its connections at Detroit and other western points. road Companies maintain higher rates to Ogdensburgh and other intermediate points; that is, higher rates for the short haul than for the long haul on the same line at the same time in the same direction; whereas, if the rates to Cleveland, Detroit, Port Huron, Milwaukee and Chicago were made the same, no higher and no lower than to intermediate points on the same line in the same direction, your petitioner would have no reason to complain.' " To these petitions the several defendants made answer, but it is deemed unnecessary to do more in this opinion than to give one in each case. "The grievance which this company and its connections have is that the National Despatch Line makes rates to Detroit and other points in the West less than the Boston & Albany Railroad Company and its connections make The answer of the Boston & Lowell Railroad to the same points; while at the same time a Company to the petition first above recited, certain combination of roads, including a part denies that the defendants "have issued joint of the roads in the National Despatch Line, rates under the name of the National Despatch viz.: the Boston & Lowell, Concord, Northern Company as therein averred; and further de & Central Vermont Railroad Companies, main-nies that the line of railroads, or the railroad tain higher rates to St. Albans and other intermediate points-that is, higher rates for the short haul than for the long haul on the same line in the same direction, on the five upper classes of freight; whereas, if the rates to Detroit and other western points were made the which established and maintains any joint rates, or any rates for the carriage of freight between Boston and St. Albans and intermediate points, is the same line or railroad corporation as the line which establishes and maintains the rates of freight between Boston and Detroit and other western points, as a leged in said petition; and further denies that the same carrier or line of railroads or this defendant charge higher rates for a short haul than for a long haul over the same line in the same direction for the like kind of property in the manner set out in said petition; and further alleges that the transportation of freight between the points named in said petition has not been and is not under substantially similar circumstances and conditions within the true intent and meaning of the Act of Congress. "And this defendant further says that the Boston & Lowell Railroad, the Nashua & Lowell, the Concord, the Northern and the Central Vermont Railroads are connecting railroads so far as trackage is concerned, from Boston, Mass., to St. Albans, Vt. These roads are not managed or controlled by each other, except that the Nashua & Lowell and the Northern are in fact operated by the Boston & Lowell; nor is there between them an arrangement for a continuous carriage or shipment of property over the same, although it is true that they sometimes make joint tariffs of rates between Bos ton and St. Albans, aforesaid, and interchange cars. At the time of filing the petitioners' complaint the rate fixed by said joint tariff from Boston to St. Albans was and is as stated in said petition. "These defendants further say that the National Despatch Line, referred to in the said petition, is a line of cars running from Boston, Mass., to all large points in Canada and in the Western States, west of St. Johns in Canada, via the Grand Trunk line. They consist of 3,750 freight cars, marked National Despatch Line, and they are owned as follows: The National Car Company, a corporation chartered and organized under the laws of Vermont, owns 3,000 of said cars. The Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada, owns 700, and the Chicago, Pekin, & South Western Railroad owns 50. The roads over which the National Despatch Line sends freight, and which use the cars, are as follows: "Boston and Lowell (and others are enumerated, including some whose lines extend beyond the Mississippi). "The National Despatch Line have their principal office in Boston, Mass. They solicit freight at Boston and other places in New England for transportation to all prominent points in Canada and the Western States west of St. Johns. They have agencies in Loston and other eastern points and in Chicago and other western points. They do not receive or solicit freight at Boston or other New England points, the destination of which is south of St. Johns, for west bound freight. They issue their own bills of lading; and they also issue and publish their tariff for transportation from New England points to points in the Western States and Canada west of St. Johns. They do not issue bills of lading for west bound freight from New England points to points south of St. John's, nor do they make a tariff nor profess to be carriers between those points in respect to west bound freight destined south of St. Johns. St. Albans, Vt., is South of St. Johns, and is not embraced in the tariff made by the National Despatch Line for west bound freight. The rates made to points west of St. Johns, where there is competition with complainant's line, are made under this tariff by the National Despatch Line. "And this defendant denies that the joint tariff aforesaid constitutes an arrangement for a continuous carriage, within the meaning of the first section of the Interstate Commerce Law; but if it does, then it alleges that the joint tariff from Boston to St. Albans makes a wholly different line from the one made by the joint tariff of the National Despatch Line, within the meaning of the fourth section of said Law. "And this defendant further says that the rates from Boston and intermediate points to St. Albans are reasonable; that nobody along the line is dissatisfied with the rates made; that the Boston and Albany line is not a competitor for traffic for west bound freight from Boston or intermediate points to St. Albans, and is in no way interested in the rates that are made thereto. It further says that the Central Vermont road runs through a sparsely settled country that the local traffic thereon is small, and that it was constructed at a great expense through an uneven country with high grades; that the road has been foreclosed and reorganized, and the original capital put into the construction of the same has been lost; that if said road was compelled to depend on local traffic, it could not pay its expenses and interest on its bonded debt, to say nothing of the stocks of the road as it has been reorganized. And this defendant further says that the additional expense of doing through traffic as compared with local traffic is small in degree; that its road is the same whether the traffic is local and small or large by reason of through business; that the profit which it makes out of the through business is quite as important to it as the profit on the local business, by reason of the volume of the through traffic as compared with the local traffic; that the volume of business from Boston to St. Albans is not one twentieth part of what it is to points beyond there, westward. That it has been to very large expense for terminal facilities, among other things, to accommodate such through traffic; and this expense amounts to more than $3,000,000. "And these defendants further say that the Central Vermont Road extends northerly from St. Albans to the state line, a distance of about ten miles; that it there connects with the Montreal and Vermont Junction Railroad, a Canada corporation, which extends about twentytwo miles northerly to St. Johns, in Canada, where it connects with the Grand Trunk Railroad, which extends through Canada to Windsor, opposite Detroit. It is over this line that the National Despatch cars principally run. "And this defendant further says that the rate made by the National Despatch Line from Boston to Montreal is, and was at the time of the filing of the petitioner's complaint, the same as stated in said complaint, and for the following reasons: There are many competitors at Boston for traffic to Montreal; there are none for traffic to St. Albans. Boston traffic is taken by ocean steamers to Halifax, Nova Scotia, and St. Johns, New Brunswick, and thence by Cana dian_Railways to Montreal. It is also taken | port west of there to points of competition, via Passumpsic and Southeastern Railway to and more especially Montreal and Detroit. Montreal, the latter railroad being a foreign That the rates made from Boston to Montreal corporation. Traffic is also taken from New and Detroit, respectively, are made from neYork to Montreal by the Delaware & Hud- cessity and for no other reason; that the petison Canal Company, which extends from tioner is in no wise interested in the rates from New York City to Rouse's Point, within fifty Boston to St. Albans; that its motive in filing miles of Montreal, and is a railroad entirely its petition is to break down one of its princiwithin the State of New York. Halifax and pal competitors for through business from St. Johns, N. B., are foreign cities, and together Boston to Detroit and other points in the West, with New York are competitors with Boston and from no other motive. And this defendfor the sale of goods to the merchants of Mon-ant further says that it has acted in good faith treal. Unless the rate of freight is as low in the premises; that it has given the best confrom Boston to Montreal as from the aforesaid struction it could to the Interstate Commerce cities to Montreal, the traffic will not go over the roads used, as the National Despatch Line. The Grand Trunk via Portland is the strongest competitor for traffic from Boston to Montreal, and is a foreign corporation. The National Despatch Line make the rates they do from Boston to Montreal from necessity and and by reason of competition, and for no other reason. Law, and under the advice of counsel, and if it has erred it will ask leave to file its petition to be relieved from the operation of the fourth section of said Act." The joint and several answer of the Central Vermont Railroad Company and the Ogdensburgh & Lake Champlain Railroad Company to the petition secondly above set forth says, that "the Boston & Lowell, the Nashua & Lowell, the Concord, the Northern, the Central Vermont, and the Ogdensburgh & Lake Champlain Railroads, form a connecting line of railroads, so far as trackage is concerned, from Boston to Ogdensburgh, N. Y. These roads are not managed or controlled by each other, except the Nashau & Lowell and the Northern are under lease to the Boston & Lowell, and the Ogdensburgh & Lake Champlain is under lease to the Central Vermont Railroad; nor is there between them an arrangement for a continuous carriage or shipment, unless it may be implied from the making of joint tariffs and the interchange of cars. At the time complained of in the petition there was, and still is, a joint tariff for west bound traffic from Boston to Ogdensburgh over the aforesaid roads, at the rates stated in the petition. "And this defendant further says that the rate made by the National Despatch Line from Boston to Detroit is and was as stated in said petition, at the time of filing thereof. There are many competing lines for Boston traffic to the West, and especially to Detroit. The Baltimore and Ohio takes traffic at Boston by ocean steamers to Philadelphia and Baltimore, and thence over their line to all large points in the West. The Boston and Albany Line via the New York Central and Michigan Central Railroads and steamships from Buffalo takes freight westward to all lake points, and more especially Detroit. The Grand Trunk Line via Portland is still another line in competition for west bound traffic to Detroit and all other large points in the West. The Grand Trunk Railway Company is a foreign corporation, and their line runs principally through Canada to Windsor, Ontario, opposite Detroit, and Point Edward, Ontario, opposite Port Huron, Michigan. The defendant's line from Boston to St. Albans, in connection with the Ogdensburgh and Lake Champlain Railroad and the line of boats on the Great Lakes, called the Central Vermont Line of Steamers, constitute still another line which comes in competition with the National Despatch Line at Detroit and other western points. The Canadian Pacific, another foreign corporation, is "This line is called the Central Vermont in competition for this same traffic. Many Line of steamers. They take no traffic for others might be named, and especially the points between Boston and Ogdensburgh, but New York and New England and its connec-only for points west of Ogdensburgh for westtions, also the Fitchburg and the Hoosac Tun- ward bound freight. They make the rates nel Line. from Boston to Lake points as stated in the petition. "And this defendant further says that these competing lines largely dictate the rates from Boston to Detroit and other competing points in the West; that the defendant's lines must make as low rates to these points of competition as the other lines, or go out of the business; that the through business to competing points is important to this defendant and the other connecting roads, and is a source of large profits to this defendant. And this defendant further says that the circumstances and conditions under which freight traffic is taken and transported from Boston to St. Albans is wholly dissimilar to what it is in respect to freight traffic which they take and trans "From Ogdensburgh there is a line of eight steamers which run between there and Chicago and touch at various points on the Great Lakes, and more especially at Cleveland, Detroit, Port Huron, Milwaukee, and Chicago. This line of steamers is controlled by the Central Vermont Railroad Company, and they have a joint tariff with the roads aforesaid, entirely different and independent from the one be tween the roads themselves, as before stated, from Boston to Ogdensburgh. "The defendants insist that the aforesaid joint tariffs do not constitute an arrangement for a continuous carriage or shipment within the meaning of the first section of the Interstate Commerce Law; but if they do, then they do not constitute the same lines within the meaning of the fourth section of said Law. "And these defendants further say that the rates from Boston to Ogdensburgh referred to in said petition are entirely reasonable; that shippers do not complain, nor do the public at Ogdensburgh. There is no competition with the defendant's line at Ogdensburgh for traffic from Boston to Ogdensburgh. The Ogdens burgh & Lake Champlain and Central Vermont Roads embrace more than half the distance from Ogdensburgh to Boston. They run through a sparsely settled country with high grades, and are operated at unusually large expense, especially in the winter, by reason of heavy drifts of snow and excessive frosts. "They have both been foreclosed and reorganized, and the original capital put into the construction has been lost; and if they were compelled to depend upon local traffic alone, they could not pay their expenses and interest on their bonded debt, to say nothing of the various stocks of the roads as now reorganized. These roads have been brought up to a high state of efficiency for the purpose of doing a through business from the seaboard to the West; and if the rates from Boston to points on the Great Lakes made by the Central Vermont line of steamers aforesaid were raised to the same rates as the tariff from Boston to Ogdensburgh, no traffic would go by this line to points on the Great Lakes by reason of competition with other lines, and more especially the Boston and Albany Line hereinafter referred to. "On the other hand, if the rates from Boston to Ogdensburgh were reduced to the same rates as from Boston to points on the Great Lakes, it would seriously cripple these defendants' roads and would weaken them as competitors for through business by the Boston and Albany Line without affording any relief to Ogdensburgh; but it would probably result in a large increase in the rates from Boston to Ogdensburgh in order to maintain the roads, if the through business is given up. "And these defendants further say that there are many competing lines for Boston traffic to the West (enumerating them) that these various lines compete with the defendant's line at the various lake points referred to in the petitioner's complaint and dictate the rates that shall be charged thereto; that the defendants' line must make as low rates to these points of competition as the other lines, or go out of the business; that this through business to competing points is quite as important to these defendants as their local traffic; that the amount of traffic from Boston to Ogdensburgh and in termediate points is not one twentieth part of what it is to points west of Ogdensburgh; that they make money on their through business, and without it they could not secure any adequate return for the capital invested in defendants' roads. "And these defendants further say that they have acted in good faith in the premises; that they have given as good construction as they could to the Interstate Commerce Law, and under the advice of counsel; and if they have erred, they will ask leave to file their petition to be relieved from the operation of the fourth section of said Act." While the cases were pending the Vermont State Grange of the Patrons of Husbandry, representing itself as "an association of farmmers and business men, organized and located within the State of Vermont," presented what is called in the proceedings an intervening petition, but which for all practical purposes is an original complaint, which, after reciting the pendency of the proceedings, goes on to allege that the tariff rates and charges made by the defendants for the transportation of property from Boston, in the State of Massachusetts, and points near said Boston, to St. Albans, Burlington, Middlebury, and other places in the said State of Vermont and from said places. in Vermont to Boston and places near thereto are higher than the charges made by said defendants and said National Despatch Line from said Boston to Montreal, in the Province of Quebec, Detroit, in the State of Michigan, and other points beyond and northerly and westerly of the said State of Vermont, and from said northern and western points to said Boston," in contravention of the statute, and also "that said charges for transportation of property from Boston aforesaid to said points in Vermont, and from said Vermont points to Boston and other places in the vicinity thereof, so made by the defendants, are exorbitant in fact, and are not reasonable or just.' The same defenses were relied upon to this as to the other petitions, and the cases were all heard together at Rutland, Vermont, on the first day of September and following days. Before proceeding with the evidence the Grand Trunk Railway Company moved that the complaints as to it be dismissed, for the reason that the charges supposed to be in violation of the statute were not made or shared in by it, its participation if any being only in the low charges on the long hauls, which in themselves were perfectly legal and were not averred to be otherwise. The Commission, however, was of opinion, and so held, that the interest of that company was such, and the liability of the low rates on long haul traffic to be affected by changes made in the higher rates on short-haul traffic was so great that in case it had not been made a party, and should now come in and ask to be made such in order that it might present evidence and be heard by counsel, it would be proper to order accordingly. This being the case, it was equally proper for complainants to join it as a party respondent in the first instance. "And these defendants further say that the circumstances and conditions under which they take traffic from Boston to Ogdensburgh is wholly dissimilar from what it is in respect to traffic which they take west of there to points of competition on the Great Lakes; that the cost of service is relatively small for the water carriage west of Odgensburgh, as compared The right of the petitioner in the first comwith the railroad carriage between Boston and plaint to bring the matters involved before the Ogdensburgh; but the rates made from Boston Commission for its action is challenged by the to lake points on this line are made from ne- defendants, who inquire what legitimate intercessity and for no other reason; that the peti-est the Boston & Albany Railroad Company tioners are in no wise interested in the rates from Boston to Ogdensburgh; that their motive in filing their petition is to break down one of their principal competitors for through business from Boston to lake points aforesaid. can have in the rates made by the defendant companies, and which are supposed to be in violation of law. Those rates are local rates; the Boston & Albany does not pay or partici pate in paying them; they are not even compet justly or plausibly be advanced in support of an exception, enough was stated to make clear as we thought how impossible it is to lay down definite rules by which the cases as they arise may be readily determined. It is upon its own circumstances and conditions that each case must be judged. itive rates to those which are imposed on its | whether to impose greater charges for shorter road; and if they were, the fact that they are hauls on its line. Our reasons for this were excessive would tend to its advantage. The fully given In the Matter of the Louisville & petitions do not show that those who pay them Nashville Railroad Co. [ante, 278]. We there regard them as excessive or unjust; nor is it pointed out that the right to make such charges averred that they are so in fact. It is consist- under the Law was exceptional; that it dependent with everything that appears in the first ed in every case upon the peculiar circumtwo complaints that these rates are fair and stances and conditions; and while we did not just; that they are even necessary as defend-undertake to indicate all the reasons that might ants aver they are; and that the parties who pay them do so without complaint and willing ly. Why then should this petitioner complain? The petitions answer this inquiry by saying that "The grievance which this company and its connections have is that the National Despatch Line makes rates to Detroit and other points in the west less than the Boston & Albany Railroad Company and its connections make to the same point," while at the same time making higher rates to the intervening points. But what the higher rates to the intervening points have to do with the complainant's "grievance" the petition fails to inform us. No connection between the high rates and the low is shown or averred. It is not said that the one set are made high in order that the other may be made low, or that the long haul traffic is taken at the expense of the short haul traffic. As the case stands upon the first two complaints the sole grievance of the petitioner is that the defendant roads accept traffic from Boston to Western points at lower rates than are made by petitioner and its connections; and the legitimate inference must be that the purpose of the proceedings is to compel the putting up of those rates. But in that purpose the petitioner can certainly expect no aid from this Commission. The defendant companies have the legal right to make the low through rates, and their competitors cannot restrain them. On the argument it was said on behalf of the Loston & Albany Company that the purpose of the proceeding was to obtain a construction of the Act. The petitioner desires to know whether the Central Vermont Railroad Com pany is justified in making with its connections higher rates from Boston to St. Albans and intervening points than it makes to Montreal and more distant points. It desires to have an authoritative decision on that subject, in order that, if such higher rates are sustained, it may proceed in like manner to impose in respect to its traffic higher rates upon shorter than upon longer hauls. And as it was well understood that this Commission did not give opinions upon abstract questions, or undertake to construe the Law as a guide to parties in their own business when no controversy was pending before it, these proceedings were begun in order to present the necessary contention. In the cases before us there is neither allegation nor proof that the circumstances and con. ditions of the local traffic on the Boston & Albany and its connections are like or substan tially like the circumstances and conditions of the local traffic of the Central Vermont and its connections between Boston and St. Albans. If, therefore, it were to be decided that the greater charges on the shorter hauls which are here complained of are just, reasonable and legal, it would not follow that the Boston & Albany and its connections could make the like charges. The reason is plain: the decision would be confined to the facts of the very case in judgment; and how it would ap ply to the facts of any other case not exactly like it would be matter of inference and argu ment only. The greater the difference in circumstances and conditions the less would be the likelihood that the decision could be ac cepted as a precedent. And perhaps it may be safely said that any well informed person who has even a general knowledge of that section of the country knows that the circumstances and conditions of local traffic on the Central Vermont must be greatly different from what those are of the local traffic on the Boston & Albany. The latter runs through the more densely popu lated country; it has more considerable towns and large manufactories upon it, and for these reasons has a vastly greater volume of business within its reach. It also takes the better direction for a heavy long haul traffic. In what has been said we are not to be understood as holding that a complainant must necessarily have a pecuniary interest in order to entitle him to be heard. There are no doubt many cases in which an individual having no interest, except to see that the law is enforced for the benefit of society, may complain in his own name but in the public interest. In these cases the petitioner does not complain in the public interest, but in its own; and the grievance of low long haul rates, of which it complains, is not a public grievance. Óne obvious remark upon this is that it is The Act to Regulate Commerce, however, not warranted by the complaint, which under-expressly provides that "No complaint shall at takes to advance and rely upon a "grievance." Another, equally obvious, is that the desire to have safe guidance in one's own business is not a legitimate ground for overhauling the business of another with which the party has no other concern. Moreover, a decision upholding the lawfulness of the greater charges made for the shorter hauls by the Central Vermont and its connections, could not, in the nature of things, constitute a rule for the petitioner in deciding any time be dismissed because of the absence of direct damage to the complainant." Under this provision when an alleged infraction of the Law, of such a character as to constitute a public grievance of considerable general importance, is brought to the attention of the Commission, by a responsible party in a duly authenticated form, it may be the duty of the Commission to enter upon its investigation, and if the charge is substantiated, to apply ap |