¿#∞ §§§：*…*ſ*...*ſ*…*…*..* ſ!•**** ، §§|（?:.*$'）; ：* „ºº. ſºſ, § ： * （ ） • • • • • • • •9 gº № = ∞ ſ #Hill + § §§ E º K : LIBRARY [. C C º C C C º C º Q C C C G ſ C ſº { C U O O [. [. º º O ſº & D U ſ O ſ º ſº º O H E : E. # É É H É E E. f 'I I I E G IF"I" () I." W.T. Howanas |S | i F - E R-S i \ * DS2 A- *—ti- __*r-r a -º- ºr tº t it *-a- ------- - -, -, *n_-- ------ WIFIFºx RTE" - FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION ERNEST RITSON DEWSNUP Professor of Railway Administration The University of Illinois IA$ALLERTPNSIONUNIVERSITY (Home Study Under Expert Guidance) Chicago Copyright, 1913 LASALLE EXTENSION UNIVERSITY &EIGHT CLASSIFICATION onE OF A SERIES of TREATIsrås IN AN INTERSTATE COMMERCE AND RAILWAY TRAFFIC coursk ERNEST Ritson DewsNUP Professor of Railway Administration The University of Illinois * part APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS AND . . . . . . . EXCEPTIONS (Non-Resident Instruction) CHHCAÇQ INTERSTATE comme - Prepared under Editorial Supervision of - Samuel MacClintock, Ph.D. E The subjects listed below constitute the basic material of a course in Interstate Commerce and Railway Traffic. This course is especially designed to meet the constantly growing demand for efficiently trained men in railroad and industrial traffic work; to assist students to pass the exam- inations for government service under the Interstate Com- merce Commission; and to meet the demand for men com- petent to direct the work of commercial organizations and traffic bureaus. With the exception of the Atlas of Railway Traffic Maps, the subjects listed below are covered in an average of approximately 200 pages each. Atlas of Railway Traffic Maps Freight Classification . . . Freight Rates: Official Classification Territory and East- ern Canada Freight Rates: Southern Territory Freight Rates: Western Territory Puhlication and Filing of Tariffs Bases for Freight Charges, Reducing Freight Charges to a Minimum, Routing Freight Shipments, Freight Claims, The Bill of Lading, and The Industrial Traffic Department. Railway Organization, Statistics, and Accounting Express and Parcel Post -- - Water Traffic and Rates Government Control of Common Carriers - interpretation of the Act to Regulate Commerce Rulings of the Interstate Commerce Commission and Procedure before that body - . Business Law, 1 - Business Law, iſ The Law of Carriers of Goods Practical Traffic Problems LASALLE ExtENSION UNIVERSITY *\,..., -3 \ f PREFACE ~. For the benefit of those seeking to make themselves efficient traffic men, the LaSalle Extension University has designed the present course in Interstate Commerce, £ . . *-*. wº. dealing with the conditions under which the shipment of commodities takes place whether by freight, by ex- press, or by parcel post. Despite the fact that the trea- tises of this course will cover some three thousand pages, only the essentials of the subject can be treated. Within the space available, however, an attempt has been made to present all the important features of each division of the subject in a clear and accurate manner. *ś. The classification and the rate structure of the country naturally form an important part of the course, and, as a competent understanding of the same is hardly at- *ººº tainable without a firm grasp of what may be termed freight-traffic geography, an atlas of railway traffic maps has been prepared for use as a constant reference work. For the convenience of students, there has been included, at the close of this treatise, appendices of territorial and technical traffic terms. This treatise is the first of the series and deals with what may be termed the technique of railway freight classification. By its aid it is now possible, for the first time, to study, in convenient form, the actual conditions of American classification practice. Bearing in mind the i- º -- º special needs of the men who will use the book, the author has not thought it desirable to give any considerable Space to classification theory, though there is opportunity ii PREFACE for much interesting discussion in connection therewith. The limits of the course have not permitted the assign- ment of a separate treatise to rate theory, and, at the request of the administration of the University, the author has devoted the final chapter of this treatise to a brief discussion of the same in its relation to the rate policy of the Interstate Commerce Commission. The assistance given by Mr. Wm. A. Shelton, in charge of the Interstate Commerce Department of the LaSalle Extension University, and by his colleague, Mr. Asa Col- ton, is acknowledged with gratitude. Without their abie and generous assistance the practical usefulness of the following pages would have been sadly diminished. - E. R. D. CONTENTS I. DEVELOPMENT OF RAILWAY FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION. . 1 II. THE CLASSIFICATIONS Interstate Classifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 State Classifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 III. APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION General Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Official Boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 General Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Illinois and Virginia Classifications . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Between Official Territory and Territory West of Lake Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Between Official Territory and Trans-Mississippi Territory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Between Official Territory and Southwestern Ter- ritory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * 26 Between Official Territory and Trans-Missouri Territory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Between Official Territory and Canadian Terri- tory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 IV. APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CLASSIFICATION Boundaries and Exceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 General Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Between Kentucky and Official Territory. . . . . . . . 32 Between Green Line and Mississippi Valley Ter- ritories and Trunk Line and New England Territories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Between Green Line and Mississippi Valley Ter- ritories and Central Freight Association Terri- tory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 V. APPLICATION OF WESTERN CLASSIFICATION Boundaries and General Application. . . . . . . . . . . 36 State Classifications and Exceptions to the West- ern Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 iii - iv CONTENTS VI. THE RULES OF THE CLASSIFICATIONS Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Carload Shipments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Less-Than-Carload and Any-Quantity Shipments 60 Packing, Stage of Manufacture, Marking, Loading 67 Heated, Refrigerator, and Tank Cars. . . . . . . . . . . 77 Rules Relating to Description and Acceptance of Shipments, Bill-of-Lading Conditions, Rates and Charges (Including Official Rules 25, 26, 28), To-Order Shipments, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 VII. UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION --- The Trend Toward Uniformity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Present Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Early Uniformity Probable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 VIII. PRINCIPLES OF FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION - Carload v. Less-Than-Carload Lots. . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 Carload Mixtures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 Packing Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 General Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 IX. THE PROBLEM OF RATE-MAKING AND THE RATE POLICY OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION Cost of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Value of Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 Summary and Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES Classifications, Exceptions, Etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 Reports and Decisions of the Interstate Commerce Commission, Etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 Volumes and Articles Containing References to Railway Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 Rate Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 APPENDIX A Territorial Traffic Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 APPENDIX B Technical Traffic Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271 APPENDIX C - Abbreviations Used in Traffic Publications. . . . . . 277 APPENDIX D - Application of Classifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION CHAPTER I HDIEVELOPMENT OF IRAILWAY FIREIGHT CLASSIFICATION Current American freight tariffs are prepared in two distinct forms. In the one rates are shown for specified commodities. In the other rates are given for groups of commodities, which are indicated in the tariff by num- ber or letter. The former are conveniently described as commodity tariffs, the latter as class tariffs." Commodity tariffs generally take precedence over class tariffs on interstate shipments and are intended to give special rates to articles which have assumed considerable traffic importance or, it may be, which seem likely to develop such if encouraged by low rates. Thus, commodities like coal, lumber, oil, ore, grain, cotton, livestock and dressed meats, iron and steel, and furniture are usually shipped on commodity tariffs. For such articles there may be, and generally is, a class tariff; but where the commodity tariff applies it generally takes precedence over the class tariff. It is not unusual to find certain commodities governed by a commodity tariff in one rate district and by a class tariff in another. The class tariff, carrying rates appli- 1 A further classification of tariffs is made in the treatise on tariffs. 1 2 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION cable to certain numbered or lettered classes, implies the existence of a classification in which the contents of these classes is described. Modern railway practice has led to the publication of such classifications in separate form. The names of the commodities are arranged in alphabet- ical order, and the class to which each article is assigned is indicated opposite the description. The usual practice here and abroad, though reversed in the case of England, is to assign commodities that should bear relatively high rates to Classes 1, 2, 3, etc., and those that should bear relatively low rates to Classes 4, 5, 6, or, as in certain classifications, to lettered classes. The assignment to a higher or a lower class is based on numerous considera- tions, among which are value of the article, bulk and weight, liability to damage, facility of handling, necessity for special facilities of shipment, etc. In the construction and publication of rates for the transportation of freight, even the earliest railways, as had the waterways before them, found it desirable to make use of the principle of classification. Their appli- cation of the principle was but limited, however, and it was not found necessary to separate the classification from the tariff. As has been said by another writer, the early rate sheets were both classifications and tariffs. This was quite feasible while but few commodities were specified individually and while rates were generally made per ton per mile, but quite impracticable as a greater refinement of classification developed, accom- panied by a more sensitive system of rate-making than that based on mileage. With the growth of these condi- tions an inevitable separation of the classification from the rate sheet took place. As set forth in the Act of 1828, the maximum rate DEVELOPMENT 3 schedule of George Stephenson’s famous railway, the Liverpool and Manchester, contained barely forty freight items. The tariff of the South Carolina Railroad of 1855, quoted by L. G. McPherson, was a more elaborate docu- ment, but was still limited to less than 300 items.” A growing variety in articles of trade and a more mature knowledge of traffic principles combined to expand the size of the classifications. By the early eighties, each of the leading classifications seem to have reached an enu- meration of about a thousand items. In 1890, the Official Classification included 5,747 items, the Western 3,859, and the Southern 1,853.” By 1900, these figures had increased to 9,617, 7,561, and 3,245, respectively. The number of separate articles is, of course, much less; in 1909, the Official Classification was estimated to contain 6,000 dis- tinct articles as against 2,500 in the classification of 1887.4 This remarkable increase has been brought about not merely by a more exhaustive enumeration of commod- ities, but still more conspicuously by the admission, into classification practice, of differentiation based on load- ing and packing. In the South Carolina tariff, above mentioned, there was very little recognition of such con- siderations. In Trunk Line Territory, there were but twenty-four commodities for which carload ratings were quoted in 1877.” By 1887, the number of items in the Official Classification carrying carload ratings had in- 2 McPherson, L. G., Railroad Freight Rates (1909), 151-2. 3 Railways in the United States in 1902, 33, 38, 39, Interstate Com- merce Commission (1903). 4 Dunn, S. O., “Uniform Classification,” Railroad Age Gazette (Sept. 10, 1909), 497. - \ 5 Ripley, W. Z., Railroads: Rates and Regulation (1912), 310 ; 3 I. C. C. Rep., 473. 4 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION creased to 1,276, or about 40 per cent of the total, and by 1902 to 7,648, or 81 per cent of the total. In Western Classification Territory, about 1875-76, but 16 per cent of the items enumerated were given carload ratings. This increased to 44 per cent by 1887 and to 70 per cent by 1912. Likewise, in Southern Classification Territory carload ratings were assigned to but 6 per cent of the total ratings in 1876, to 18 per cent in 1887, and to 65 per cent in 1902." Similarly, as to packing, the classifications of today contrast markedly with those of even a generation ago. In the earliest tariffs no attention was paid to differences of packing. Nowadays, to take a single instance from the Official Classification, wood alcohol falls into a dif- ferent class and bears a different rate according as it is shipped in glass, packed, in cans, boxed, in iron drums, or in wood. Difference in the nature of packing bears directly upon the carrier's profit and loss account, inas- much as it affects his damage liability and also the earn- ing capacity of his equipment. The more securely freight is packed, the less will be the claims to be paid; the more concentrated the packing, the more tonnage can be loaded into each car. While, as stated above, the individual classifications have become more elaborate, the tendency of classifica- 6 The ratings enumerated in the report of the special railway classifi- Cation committee, March 31, 1909, gave the following figures for 1908. These are apparently for separate articles, packing variations being ignored, whereas the figures of the I. C. C., given in the text, include every enumerated item. Carload LeSS than Carload Official . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,235 5,852 Western . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,690 5,729 Southern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,773 3,503 DEVELOPMENT 5 tion, as a whole, has been towards simplicity. The early practice was for each carrier to determine its own classi- fication. In course of time, a limited amount of group- ing of articles was used, but the number of distinct clas- sifications still remained considerable. In what is now known as Official Classification Territory, there were, in 1887, 131 local railroad classifications, and, in addition, certain more general ones known as “Trunk-Line West- bound Classification,” “Trunk-Line Eastbound Classi- fication,” “Middle and Western States Classification,” “East and Southbound Classification,” “Joint Merchan- dise Classification.” ". Commissioner Meyer, in his de- cision concerning Western Classification No. 51, men- tions that in 1883 the Wabash Railroad Company had nine different classifications in effect on traffic originat- ing on its lines. - The discussion of uniform classification will be taken up in a later chapter, but it may be said here that such conditions were necessarily associated with a rate sys- tem of the utmost intricacy. Nor was the difficulty of shippers and railway agents in quoting correct rates the only, or indeed the most vital, disadvantage of the sys- tem. Its unnecessary complexity was a serious obstacle in the way of the attainment of a balanced system of rates, carefully adjusted to the common interests of the country. One must not be too hasty, however, in condemning the railroads for a confusion which resulted from their efforts to meet the traffic needs of the community. When railroads had little traffic beyond that which both originated and terminated on their own lines, variation 7 Railways in the United States in 1902, Part II, Interstate Commerce Commission (1903) ; 25 I. C. C. Rep., 454. 6 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION in classifications was but of minor importance. As traffic began to be interchanged between road and road, with the development of distributive and productive industry, the companies interested in such traffic banded together in an agreement and thus joint classifications came to be established as traffic needs made demand. In some cases the agreement would cover a district of but limited area; in other cases a large territory would be covered. In time, without outside experience, the railroads would have passed from this somewhat confused formative stage into a more stable and uniform one, but, unquestion- ably, the movement was accelerated by the passage of the Act to Regulate Commerce, in 1887, with its rigid prohibition of undue discrimination. - - The consolidation of the classifications found expres- sion in the establishment of the Official Classification, which soon displaced the other classifications which had governed between the Mississippi and the Atlantic, and the Ohio and the Great Lakes.” Corresponding move- ments towards uniformity took place with the roads in western and southern territories. By 1889, the Western and the Southern classifications, as we know them today, had been established.” Since that date, the process of unification has been less noteworthy, though within the respective area of application of each classification, much has been done in the direction of removing exceptions and promoting uniformity. Moreover, the rules and regulations of the interstate classifications have recently approached uniformity rapidly. Nothing has been achieved, however, with regard to a further consolidation 8 In 1888, 87 roads were using the Official Classification exclusively, and 44 roads used one or two others. 9 Dunn, S. O., “Uniform Classification,” Railroad Age Gazette (Sept. 3, 1909), 414. DEVELOPMENT 7 of the main classifications into a single publication, though much consideration has been given to the matter by both the railways and the Interstate Commerce Commission. There is a feeling on the part of many that the present division into three territories corresponds to a real economic differentiation of the three regions covered. That this will not be a permanent obstacle to the forma- tion of a single national classification, is to be inferred, perhaps, from the partial assimilation of the rules of the three classifications that is already being brought about by the railways, under the stimulus of the Commission. CHAPTER II THE CLASSIFICATIONS 1. INTERSTATE CLASSIFICATIONS As stated in the previous chapter there are, in the United States, three interstate classifications governing the movement of freight." The Official Classification, with exceptions, governs freight shipments in the very important industrial area that lies east of Lake Michigan and the Mississippi River and north of the Ohio and the Potomac rivers. Most traffic men consider that this terri- tory includes all points within the borders of the New England Freight Association, the Trunk Line Associa- tion, and the Central Freight Association territories as shown on Maps 2 and 8.” However, for convenience in discussing the application of the classifications, Lake Michigan and the Illinois-Indiana State Line are some- times regarded as constituting the western boundary of Official Classification Territory. 1 Freight movement throughout the Dominion of Canada, both intra- provincial and inter-provincial, is governed by the Canadian Classification, with its exceptions. The Mexican Freight Classification, issued by the Mexican Classification Committee of the City of Mexico and approved . by the Department of Communications and Public Works of Mexico, is printed in both English and Spanish and governs shipments between the American-Mexican border and points in Mexico where the rates break on the border as proportional rates between the United States and Mexico. This classification separates freight into 12 classes numbered from 1 to 12. - 2 See the Atlas of Railway Traffic Maps referred to in the preface of this treatise. The Careful study of the maps is strongly recommended. 8 THE CLASSIFICATIONS 9 The Southern Classification, with exceptions, governs interstate freight movement in the area south of the Official Territory, and east of the Mississippi River. The Western Classification, with exceptions, governs inter- state shipments in the territory west of these two classifi- cation districts. The application of these classifications on shipments moving from one classification territory to another is discussed subsequently. The classes of the four interstate classifications, together with illustrative scales of rates, are shown below. TABLE 1. CLASSES AND ILLUSTRATIVE SCALES OF RATES OF INTERSTATE CLASSIFICATIONS Canadian . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 From Montreal to Ft. William.. 105 86 70 50 42 36 36 35 . . 35 Official . . . . . . . . . 1 2 R25 3 R26 R28 4 5 6 From Chicago to New York . . . 75 65 55 50 40 40 35 30 25 Southern . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 A B C D E H F From Chicago - to New Orleans 110 90 75 58 47 41 31 44 31 26 33 65 57 Western . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E From Chicago to Denver . . . . . 180 145 110 85 67 80% 63 54 47 40 The Official Classification itemizes the various articles of freight movement in six regular classes and three rules, making a total of nine classes. Rules 25 and 26 are virtually classes, but Rule 28 is merely an exception. Tn the Southern Classification there are thirteen classes. They are numbered from 1 to 6 and from A to H (omit- ting G). In the Western Classification there are ten classes, as there are in the Canadian, but in the former, & sº cº {º * © º wº g sº * sº, 5 * * * , tº tº * th * : 10 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION they are numbered from 1 to 5 and from A to E, instead of from 1 to 10 as in the latter. To the regular classes shown above, other classes are added by the use of multiples of the first-class rate. The Canadian and the Western classifications have six multi- ple classes. The multiples increase by halves from 1% times first class to 4 times first class. The Official Classi- fication also has six multiple classes from 11/4 times first class upward, like the Western, save that 3% times first class is omitted. The Southern Classification has five multiple classes. They are one-half of Class F and then the same as those of the Official. The exceptions to the Southern Classification contain classes J–X. These classes usually govern low-grade commodities moving in Southern Classification Territory and take the place of commodity rates quite largely. The interstate classifications are not promulgated by the carriers direct, but by classification committees com- posed of members made up of the officials of the rail- ways. The Official Classification is published by the Official Classification Committee, the Southern by the Southern Classification Committee, the Western by the Western Classification Committee, and the Canadian by the Canadian Freight Association.” Each of these freight committees, composed of a large list of railway officials, selects a permanent sub-committee of traffic men representing as many different communities and as wide an area as possible. The sub-committee consults ship- pers and carriers and does the actual work of construct- ing and revising the classification. The chairman and s Official—143 Liberty Street, New York; Southern—914 Grant Build- ing, Atlanta, Ga.; Western—Transportation Ruilding, Chicago, Ill. ; Canadian—314 Union Station, TOTOnto, Ont. THE CLASSIFICATIONS 11 the Secretary of the sub-committee are always ready to receive requests for changes or additions to the classifica- tion. These committees are now harmonizing the rules, the Carload weights, and the descriptions of items in the classifications as far as possible; and it is hoped that at an early date they may be able to unify the classes as well. Numerous changes are made in the items, in the Carload weights, and in the rules of these classifications every year. -. While the application of the classifications and the exceptions will be discussed in Chapters III-V of this treatise, it is necessary here to list the exceptions to the several classifications in the United States. Exceptions to the Official Classification are published by the Central Freight Association * and by the individual roads, not by the Official Classification Committee as might be ex- pected. There are a number of exceptions to the South- ern Classification, shown in the classification and pub- lished by the committee that publishes the classification. The exceptions are shown in the form of exception notes and are referred to in the tariffs by number. In Southern Classification No. 39 there are eighty-eight special exceptions, which apply only when referred to in the tariffs. The application of these exceptions is defi- nitely shown in the classification. They include the Florida exceptions, the Georgia exceptions, and the excep- tion sheet of the commission of South Carolina. The Southern Classification also includes the exceptions appli- cable to Southeastern Mississippi Valley Association Territory, to certain special junction points, such as the 4 Transportation Building, Chicago, Ill. Agent Eugene Morris's freight tariff No. 130-F, I. C. C. No. 370, or succeeding issues. 12 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION Western Tennessee Junction Points, and to the several carriers operating in the Southern Classification Terri- tory. The Florida exceptions, as shown in Note 19 of the Southern Classification, include only those items that differ from the Southern Classification. The Georgia exceptions, as shown in Note 20 of the Southern Classifi- cation, include the complete classification as published by the Railroad Commission of Georgia. The South Carolina exceptions, as shown in Note 53, include only the items that take a different class from that of the Southern Classification. The Western Trunk Lines through their agent publish rules, regulations, and exceptions to the Western Classi- fication, which apply to interstate shipments in Western Trunk Line Territory.” They also publish exceptions ap- plying within the state of Minnesota and between Wis- consin and North Dakota." The Trans-Missouri Freight Bureau publishes the Trans-Missouri rules, regulations, and exceptions to the Western Classification." The Southwestern Tariff Committee publishes exceptions to the Western Classification applicable (1) on traffic to and from points in Oklahoma; * (2) to and from points in Arkansas, Louisiana, and certain points in Okla- homa; * and (3) originating at or destined to points in Louisiana, Texas, and the Republic of Mexico, also Tex- arkana, Ark.-Tex.” The Court Tariff of Arkansas pro- vides exceptions to the Western Classification applicable 5 Agent W. H. Hosmer's I. C. C. No. A-340, or reissues. 6 Agent W. H. Hosmer’s I. C. C. No. A-230, or reissues. 7 Agent W. A. Poteet's I. C. C. No. 292, or reissues. 8 Agent F. A. Leland’s I. C. C. No. 928, or reissues. 9 Agent F. A. Leland's I. C. C. 916, or reissues. 10 Agent F. A. Leland’s I. C. C. No. 931, or reissues. THE CLASSi FICATIONS 13 within the state. Exceptions are also published appli- cable to traffic to and from New Mexico and Arizona. The Trans-Continental Freight Bureau publishes, in its tariffs, rules and regulations applicable to Trans-Conti- nental traffic; and the Pacific Freight Tariff Bureau pub- lishes exceptions to the Western Classification appli- cable to traffic in its territory.” 2. STATE CLASSIFICATIONS The following nine states prescribe classifications for freight: Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia. South Carolina publishes exceptions to the Southern Classifica- tion, and Arkansas prescribes exceptions to the Western. Six of these are in Southern Classification Territory and five in Western. The South Carolina Commission publishes the Southern Classification as a basis for the classification of South Carolina and makes only a small number of exceptions. Nine of the remaining ten states publish outright a classification covering freight moving wholly within those states.” In the arrangement of classes, the classifications issued by the states of the Southeast have naturally been mod- eled quite closely upon the Southern Classification and exceptions; and those issued by the states in Western Classification Territory have followed rather closely the classes of the Western Classification. The state classi- fications contain classes as follows: Arkansas 1–5 and A—E.; Florida, 1–6 and A–Z (except G and I); 11 Agent F. W. Gomph’s I. C. C. No. 119, or reissues. 12 For state classifications, write the railroad commissions or public Service commissions of the several States named. 14 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION Georgia, 1–6 and A–R (except G); Illinois, 1–10; Iowa, 1–5 and A–E ; Mississippi, 1–6 and A–W (except G., I, J, and U); Nebraska, 1–5 and A–E ; North Carolina, 1–6 and A–R (except G); South Carolina, 1–6 and A–U (except G); Texas, 1–5 and A–E ; Vir- ginia, 1–6 and A–T (except G). They govern ship- ments largely intrastate but are applied to bordering territory in some cases. The Illinois Classification, for example, applies between points in Illinois and certain points near the Illinois line in Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, and Wisconsin. CHAPTER III APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION 1. GENERAL STATEMENT In Chapter II mention was made of the four interstate classifications in the United States and Canada,” of the several state classifications throughout the United States, and of the exceptions to the interstate classifications. Since there are more than a dozen of these classifications, not including the exceptions, the problem of the appli- cation of the proper classification arises. A state classi- fication usually applies to all shipments moving wholly within the state. Also, a shipment moving wholly within Southern, Official, or Western territories is governed by the classification of the section within which it moves. However, when shipments cross a classification border, the problem is not so simple. All class tariffs filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission show on the title page the name of the controlling classification. Com- modity tariffs are also frequently governed by a classi- fication. That is, classifications always govern class ship- ments, and usually the rules and regulations of a certain classification govern commodity tariffs. If the rules and regulations of a classification apply to a commodity tar- iff, the title page of the commodity tariff gives the proper reference. 1 The Mexican Classification is not so intimately associated with American classifications as the Canadian. 15 16 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION When a shipment moves across a classification border on a through rate, one or the other of the two classifica- tions governs from origin to destination. However, if a shipment moves on a combination of two or more rates, two or more classifications may govern the shipment. For example, a shipment moving from Winnipeg, Man., to Tampa, Fla., is governed by four classifications: The Canadian Classification from Winnipeg to St. Paul, Minn., (if so routed), the Western Classification from St. Paul to the Ohio River Crossing through which the shipment may pass, the Southern Classification from the Ohio River Crossing to Jacksonville, Fla., or other Florida basing point, the Florida Classification taking precedence over the Southern from Jacksonville to Tampa. But however far a shipment may move on a through rate, it is governed by some one classification. For example, the Western Classification applies between Atlantic seaboard cities and Pacific Coast Terminals. Application of Classification on Title Page.—It is not necessary for the rate clerk to know what classification applies on every shipment. The application is shown on the title page of every tariff, except the few commod- ity tariffs that are governed by the rules and regulations of the tariff alone. On the other hand, the compiler of tariffs and the rate-maker must study the application of classifications very carefully. If a shipment moves by different routes between highly competitive points, it is usually the practice to apply the same classification by both routes. For example, a shipment moving from New York to New Orleans or Mobile is subject to the Official Classifi- cation whether it moves by water or by rail. In case the shipment is by water, it skirts the Southern Classi- fication Territory for a considerable part of the journey. APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION 17 If the shipment moves entirely by rail, it moves through a long stretch of the Southern Classification Territory. The competition of the rail and the water carriers for business to these points has made it necessary to have one classification govern business by all routes. Therefore, it can be easily seen that it is important for the railway traffic man to understand the general outlines of the application of the different classifications. Hence, a statement of the application of the several classifications and exceptions is here necessary. Since there are numerous exceptions to the several classifica- tions, and exceptions are also carried in the tariffs them- selves, the application of the classifications as here set forth is true only in the main. There are numerous exceptions which it will not be possible to mention in the present connection. The application in connection with particular tariffs will be given under the discussion of the application of tariffs in the treatises on rates.” * In preparing this and the two following chapters, the lectures pre- pared, some four years ago, by Mr. O. M. Rogers for the LaSalle Exten- Sion University, and published in pamphlet form, were found very hełą- ful in supplement to the publications of the classification committees. 18 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 2. OFFICIAL BoundARIES While the three interstate classifications apply pri- marily in their respective sections as outlined in Chapter II, they also govern through class rates on shipments that cross the borders of the three classification terri- tories. There is a practical unanimity among traffic officials that the Ohio and the Potomac rivers are used roughly as the dividing line between the Official and the Southern classification territories, but the western boun- dary of the Official Classification Territory is not so clearly defined. As stated in Chapter II, any one of three lines may be considered as the western border of Official Classification Territory. These borders are (1) the east- ern shore of Lake Michigan and the Illinois-Indiana State Line to the Ohio River, (2) a line roughly coincident with the western border of Central Freight Association Ter- ritory, as shown by the yellow in Map 8,” and (3) a line drawn from Chicago through Joliet, Peoria, and Spring- field, Ill., St. Louis, Mo., and Cairo, Ill. The last-named line from Chicago to Cairo, Ill., is really not a line but a zigzag border running through the central part of Illi- nois and marked by the junctions of the Western and Central freight association railroads. The more im- portant of these junctions are: Chicago, Joliet, Peoria, Springfield and Alton, Ill., and St. Louis. A list of them is shown in Appendix A of this treatise. This belt would seem to be the real dividing line between the two terri- tories. The carriers east of these junctions are members of the Official Classification Committee, while the carriers west thereof are members of the Western Classification Committee. Not unnaturally the eastern roads consider the Official s Railway Traffic Maps. APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION 19 Classification to extend as far west as the Central Freight Association Territory, as shown on Map 8.4 Freight moving wholly within this territory between any point as far east as New England and Trunk Line territories" and any point as far west as the western border of Central Freight Association Territory, is governed by the Official Classification. However, the western carriers may also well consider the Western Classification Terri- tory to extend as far east as the Illinois-Indiana State Line, since freight moving between points west of this line and points west of the jurisdiction of the Illinois Classification is governed by the Western Classification. The middle belt, which seems to be the more logical division between the two territories, is not generally recognized as the dividing line between the two classifica- tion territories by either the eastern or the western car- riers. In discussing the application of classifications between the three interstate territories we shall use the term “Of- ficial Classification Territory” to include approximately the areas of jurisdiction of the three freight committees known as the New England Freight Association, the Trunk Line Association, and the Central Freight Asso- ciation.” The zigzag border lying between Trunk Line Territory and Central Freight Association Territory known as the Western Termini of trunk lines, and in- cluding Buffalo, Pittsburg, Charleston (W. Va.), and Parkersburg (W.Va.), is also included in Official Classi- fication Territory. A list of these points is included in Appendix A. 4 Railway Traffic Maps. 5 Map 2 of Railway Traffic Maps. 6 Maps 2 and 3, Railway Traffic Maps. 20 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 3. GENERAL APPLICATION The Official Classification, subject to exceptions, gov- erns interstate shipments moving entirely within Official Territory. It also governs between Official Territory and eastern Canadian Territory, as will be described later; between Official Territory and Southern Territory, as will be explained in the chapter on the Southern Clas- sification; and to a considerable extent, between Official Territory and points west of Lake Michigan, as far as the St. Paul and Duluth rate points. It does not control, however, between Official Territory and points west of the west bank of the Mississippi River, except that, on shipments between Official Territory and Montana Com- mon Points (also certain other points in Idaho, Washing- ton, and Oregon), it applies on the shipments as far as the Missouri River, in the determination of proportions. It never governs on through shipments between Official Territory and that lying west of the Missouri River. Moreover, except between St. Paul rate points and pro- rating points on the west bank of the Mississippi River on the one hand and Official Territory on the other, and except as mentioned above in the determination of pro- portional rates east of the Missouri River when ship- ments are routed via the Missouri River Crossings, the Official Classification is not applied west of the Missis- sippi. 4. ILLINoſs AND VIRGINIA CLASSIFICATIONS Within the above-described borders of the Official Clas- sification Territory, the states of Virginia and Illinois prescribe their own classifications, these governing ship- ments moving wholly within their respective states. In addition, the Illinois Classification applies between all APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION 21 points in Illinois and points on the west bank of the Mis- sissippi River from St. Louis, Mo., to Dubuque, Iowa, in- clusive, and between points in Illinois and the stations in Indiana on the main line of the Chicago, Indiana & South- ern north of and including Terre Haute, Ind. The Illi- nois Classification also applies between points in Illinois and points in southeastern Wisconsin south of the right of way of the Chicago & North Western Railway, Mil- waukee to Jefferson Junction, and on and east of the right of way of the Chicago & North Western Railway, Jefferson Junction to Beloit, Wis., inclusive, and between these southeastern Wisconsin points and stations on the west bank of the Mississippi River, St. Louis Mo., to Burlington, Iowa, inclusive. The Illinois Classification applies also on traffic between stations on and adjacent to the Illinois–Indiana State Line in the state of Indiana (immediately east of Chicago) within the territory known as the Chicago Freight District in Indiana " on the one hand and stations in Illinois located at and west of the junctions of the Western and the Central freight associa- tion railroads on the other.” 5. BETWEEN OFFICIAL TERRITORY AND TERRITORY WEST OF LAKE MICHIGAN Between points in Central Freight Association Terri- tory west of the Illinois-Indiana State Line and points 7 The Chicago Freight District in Indiana includes that part of Indi- ana north and west of and including points On a line drawn from the Illinois-Indiana State Line through Shelby, San Pierre, North Judson, Knox, Hamlet, Plymouth, Warsaw, Milford Junction, New Paris, Goshen, Elkhart, and Granger to the Indiana-Michigan state line, also the part of Michigan lying on and west of the line of the Big Four Railway from Benton Harbor through Niles to the Indiana-Michigan state line. 8 A list of these points is given in Appendix A. 22 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION in Wisconsin and the upper peninsula of Michigan, the Western Classification governs, except where the Illinois Classification is applied to and from points in southeast- ern Wisconsin. Between points east of the Illinois–Indi- ana State Line and St. Paul and St. Paul rate points, the Official Classification governs where through rates are published. The Official Classification governs from Cen- tral Freight Association Territory east of the Illinois- Indiana State Line and from Western Termini of trunk lines on traffic destined to stations in Wisconsin and the upper peninsula of Michigan. The Official Classification also applies on traffic origi- nating in Trunk Line Territory, as shown on Map 2, and destined (1) to stations in the northern part of Wiscon- sin, such as La Crosse, Chippewa Falls, Eau Claire, Superior, T3ayfield, Ashland, etc., as also to stations on the Northern Pacific and the Great Northern railways, and (2) to stations in Wisconsin located on and adjacent to the west shore of Lake Michigan and on and east of the right of way of the Soo Line, Rugby Junction, Wis., to the Illinois-Wisconsin line. From Trunk Line Terri- tory to points in Wisconsin west of the Wisconsin Cen- tral as above described and south of La Crosse, etc., mentioned above, the Official Classification governs to Chicago, Milwaukee, or Manitowoc, and the Western Classification beyond. When traffic originates at stations in Wisconsin south- east of the line described below and is destined to Cen- tral Freight Association Territory east of the Illinois- Indiana State Line and Western Termini of trunk lines, the Official Classification governs through to destina- tion; when destined to Trunk Line and New England territories and the several provinces of eastern Canada, the Western Classification governs to lake ports, such as Kewaunee, Manitowoc, Milwaukee, or Chicago, and the APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION 23 Official Classification applies east of these junctions. The dividing line in Wisconsin is as follows: Beginning at the Wisconsin-Michigan state line directly north of Long Lake, Wis., on the Chicago & North Western Rail- way, it runs south with the railroad to, but not including, Northern Junction; thence west via an imaginary line directly north of the right of way of the same railroad to Wausau, Wis.; from this point following the course of the Wisconsin River until it meets the Chicago & North Western Railway again directly south of Baraboo, Wis.; thence via that road to Mendota, directly north of Madi- son, Wis.; and thence west by an imaginary line north of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway, to Prairie du Chien, at this point turning south (including stations on the right of way of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad) to Potosi, Wis. With certain exceptions, when traffic originates at sta- tions in Wisconsin located northeast of the above-de- scribed territory and is destined to Official Classification Territory east of the Illinois–Indiana State Line or to the provinces of eastern Canada, the Western Classification governs to the lake ports or Chicago, the Official Classi- fication east thereof. The exceptions are stations located in Milwaukee district on and east of the Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway, Rugby Junction, Wis., to the Wisconsin-Illinois state line, and also Green Bay ports and lake ports, such as Kewaunee, Manitowoc, Port Washington, Sheboygan, White Fish Bay, etc., when shipments are routed via across-lake line. 24 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION Wherever the Official Classification governs, as stated above, the exceptions to the Official Classification as pub- lished both by the carriers themselves and by the Cen- tral Freight Association take precedence over the Official Classification. The exceptions to the Western Classifi- cation, as published by the several freight associations in Western Territory, also take precedence over the Western Classification. The agents’ I. C. C. numbers of these exceptions were given in Chapter II. The applica- tion of these exceptions will be given more minutely in connection with the application of the tariffs and the classifications governing them. 6. BETwº EN OFFICIAL TERRITORY AND TRANs-MISSISSIPPI TERRITORY As a general rule it may be stated that between Official Classification Territory east of the Illinois–Indiana State Line and Trans-Mississippi Territory as described in Appendix A, the Official Classification controls when com- bination rates are used east of the rate-breaking points, the Western Classification applying west thereof. When through rates are published between Official Territory and Trans-Mississippi Territory, the Western Classifi- cation governs. Between Official Territory east of the Illinois–Indiana State Line on the east and points in Wisconsin, the northern peninsula of Michigan, and Min- nesota points taking St. Paul rates on the west, the Offi- cial Classification governs the through rates; but com- bination rates are based on the Official east of the rate-breaking points and on the Western west thereof. APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION 25 On traffic from Atlantic Seaboard Territory to Colo- rado Common Points via all-rail routes, the Official Classification governs to the Mississippi River or the Missouri River, and the Western Classification west thereof. On traffic between the same points via ocean- and-rail lines through either South Atlantic or Gulf Ports, the Western Classification governs through. However, from the Atlantic seaboard to Utah Common Points the Official applies to the Mississippi, and the Western beyond. Traffic moving between Official Classification Territory east of the Illinois-Indiana State Line and Trans-Missis- sippi Territory may take almost any route from the Gulf routes on the south to the Canadian routes on the north. It may pass directly through the Mississippi River Crossings,” St. Louis, Mo., to Dubuque, Iowa, through the Missouri River Crossings,” Kansas City, Mo., to Sioux City, Iowa, the Ohio River Crossings, Cincin- nati, Ohio, to Cairo, Ill., the Mississippi River Crossings below St. Louis, or other rate-breaking points, such as Chicago, Peoria, St. Paul, Port Arthur, Ont., Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., etc. The rates may break on any of these points, and the Official Classification applies east of the rate-breaking points, and the Western west thereof. The general rule is to route the shipment through the gateway that offers the lowest rates or the best service. Ship- ments from north Atlantic Seaboard Territory to the northern part of the Trans-Mississippi Territory nat- urally move more largely through the Upper Mississippi River Crossings, St. Paul, or the lake ports, while ship- ments between the southern part of Trans-Mississippi Territory and Atlantic Seaboard Territory usually move through St. Louis, Memphis, or the Ohio River Crossings. * A list of these crossings is shown in Appendix A. 26 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 7. BETWEEN OFFICIAL TERRITORY AND SouTHwBSTERN TERRITORY Through rates subject to the Western Classification are usually published from Central Freight Association Territory and Western Termini of trunk lines to the territory of the Southwestern Tariff Committee as shown on Map 6.” On traffic originating in Trunk Line Terri- tory” and transported via rail over standard lines reach- ing Chicago or Mississippi River Crossings north of the Ohio River, the Official Classification governs east of St. Louis or other established gateways and the Western Classification beyond. On traffic originating at Atlantic Seaboard cities sub- ject to Boston, New York, Philadelphia, or Baltimore rate basis, and destined to Arkansas Common Points, such as Little Rock, Fort Smith, Hot Springs, Malvern, Menton, etc., the Western Classification, with the excep- tions applicable to Arkansas traffic, governs through to destination when shipments are transported by lines op- erating north of the Ohio River or when received through Virginia ports or through Gulf ports, such as Galveston or New Orleans. The Western Classification applies from interior points in Trunk Line Territory where the freight charges to Boston, New York, Philadelphia, etc., do not exceed certain established rates. The rate clerk in looking up the proper classification for freight moving on through rates from Official Classification Territory to the territory of the Southwestern Tariff Committee must use caution in applying the exceptions to the Western Classification published for the different states and dis- 10 Railway Traffic Maps. 11 Map 2, Railway Traffic Maps. APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION 27 tricts by the Southwestern Tariff Committee. These exceptions were listed with their I. C. C. numbers in Chapter II. - 8. BETWEEN OFFICIAL TERRITORY AND TRANs-Missouri TERRITORY The official description of Trans-Mississippi Territory is given in Appendix A and is shown on Map 1. It in- cludes the territories of the Southwestern Tariff Com- mittee and of the Trans-Missouri Freight Bureau,” and certain territory west and north of these. The general statement has been made that on shipments between Of- ficial Classification Territory east of the Illinois–Indiana State Line and Trans-Mississippi Territory the Official Classification governs to the rate-breaking points and the Western west thereof. Originally, Trans-Mississippi Territory included the whole of the area between which and Official Territory east of the Illinois–Indiana State Line rates were made by combinations on the Missis- sippi River or other established rate-breaking points. Recently, however, this territory has been encroached on from the west by the publication of through rates in the Trans-Continental Tariffs, and the Western Classifica- tion applies where through rates are published (subject, of course, to exceptions made in the tariffs). 9. BETwPEN OFFICIAL TERRITORY AND CANADIAN TERRITORY Between Official Classification Territory and Canadian Pacific Terminals and intermediate points the Western Classification applies on through rates. Between Offi- cial Classification Territory and points in the western provinces of Canada east of the Pacific Terminal belt 12 Refer to Appendix A for description. 28 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION the Official Classification governs east of St. Paul or other junction points and the Canadian Classification west thereof. The western Canadian provinces referred to are Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Colum- bia, and points that have through rail connection north thereof. - Between Official Classification Territory and the prov- inces in eastern Canada, namely, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia, the Official Classification governs. The application of classifications between Of- ficial Classification Territory and Southern Territory will be discussed in the application of the Southern Classi- fication, and the application of classifications between Official Territory and Pacific Slope Territory 14 will be explained in the chapter on the Western Classification. 18 Map 1, Railway Traffic Maps, CHAPTER IV APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CLASSIFICATION 1. Bound.ARIES AND ExCEPTIONS The Southern Classification Territory may be roughly described as including the area that lies east of the Mis- sissippi River and south of the main line of the Norfolk and Western Railway, from Norfolk, Va., to Catletts- burg, Ky., and of the Central Freight Association Terri- tory from Catlettsburg, Ky., to Cairo, Ill." The Southern Classification applies on interstate ship- ments within the territory described above, subject to the exceptions carried in the classification itself and in the tariffs. The five state classifications from Virginia to Florida, including those of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, govern shipments moving wholly within those states. In addition to these state classifications, which take precedence over the Southern Classification, there are other interstate excep- tions prescribed by the individual carriers, and also two notable exceptions prescribed by two freight committees. The Associated Railways of Virginia and the Carolinas prescribe exceptions governing within the territory of that name, as shown on Map 5. These exceptions are carried in Note 4 of the Southern Classification No. 39. The Southeastern Mississippi Valley Association also 1 Map 8, Railway Traffic Maps. Southern Classification Territory is also shown on Map 1. 29 30 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION prescribes exceptions to the Southern Classification ap- plicable within its territory as shown on Map 5. The territory of the Southeastern Mississippi Valley Asso- ciation should be carefully distinguished from Missis- sippi Valley Territory. The exceptions of this associ- ation are carried in the Southern Classification as Note 42. The Florida exceptions are carried as Note 19, and the Georgia as Note 20, the South Carolina as Note 53, and the exceptions applicable to the western Kentucky Junction Points as Note 71. There are exceptions ap- plying to special points such as to the Mississippi and Western Tennessee Junction Points, and there are also those prescribed by the several carriers. Altogether there are some eighty-eight notes in Southern Classifica- tion No. 39. These various notes take precedence over the Southern Classification only where the tariffs make special reference to them; but the state exceptions apply on all state shipments, and on shipments into and out of the state where tariffs make reference to them. In applying classifications in Southern Territory, it is important to observe the numerous exceptions, as they generally make lower rates. In the rate tables of southern tariffs there is usually a column devoted to the applica- tion of classifications, in which there appears, opposite the rates, the number of the note in the Southern Classi- fication that is to be applied as an exception to that clas- sification. Where these numbers appear, the exceptions referred to take precedence over the regular classifica- tion, unless it be provided in the exception sheets, as is done in the case of the Georgia exceptions, that the ex- ceptions take precedence only where they make lower rates. The North Carolina and Virginia classifications are not carried in the Southern Classification as excep- APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CLASSIFICATION 31 tion notes. The commissions of these states publish the state classifications; but so, also, do the other states— South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. However, the exceptions of the last three states alone are included in the Southern Classification. - 2. GENERAL APPLICATION On shipments between Official Classification Territory and Southern Territory the Official Classification applies through to destination in a few cases; but the general rule is that the Southern Classification governs through, or that the Southern governs south of the Ohio River Crossings or the Virginia Gateways and the Official north thereof. That is, where through rates are pub- lished, the Southern Classification usually applies; where combination rates are published, breaking on the Vir- ginia Gateways or the Ohio River Crossings, the Southern governs south of the breaking point and the Official north thereof. It may also be stated in general that, between Southern Territory on the one hand and Trunk Line and New England territories on the other, through rates are usually published and governed by the Southern Classifi- cation. But between Central Freight Association Terri- tory and Southern Classification Territory the rates break usually on the Ohio River Crossings or the Virginia Gate- ways. These are general statements, however, and there are important exceptions. Between Southern Classification Territory and West- ern Classification Territory, almost the same general rule applies as between Official Territory and Western Terri- tory, as stated in Chapter III. Ordinarily, the Southern Classification governs east of the Mississippi or south of the Ohio, or other rate-breaking points, and the Western 32 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION west thereof. In the case of through rates, the Western usually governs. It may be stated as the more general rule that where through rates are published between Western Classification Territory and either Southern or Official Territory, the Western controls through to des- tination; and, where combination rates are applied, the Southern or Official controls east of the rate-breaking points, the Western west thereof. However, between Mil- waukee, Missouri River Crossings, and points in the state of Missouri on the one hand and Southern Territory on the other, through rates are based on the Southern Clas- sification. The above general statements of the application of classifications are true only in the main. It is necessary to divide Official Territory in order to discuss somewhat more closely the application of classifications, leaving the more detailed application of the classifications to the treatises on rates. In the following discussion of the application of the Southern and the Official classifications no reference will be made to the exceptions which have been mentioned above. These exceptions will be ex- plained clearly in connection with tariffs in Southern Ter- ritory. 3. BETWEEN KENTUCKY AND OFFICIAL TERRITORY On traffic originating in Trunk Line Territory, as shown on Map 2, and destined to stations in Kentucky east of the right of way of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad, south of Covington, Ky., to Middlesboro, Ky., inclusive, the Official Classification governs through to destination. This territory is shown in white on Map 5, lying east of the pink part of Kentucky. Shipments from Trunk Line Territory to Lexington, Ky., and sta- APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CLASSIFICATION 3.3 tions between Lexington and Winchester, Ky., inclusive, are also governed by the Official Classification. From Trunk Line Territory to all other points in Kentucky, excepting those on the south bank of the Ohio River, the Southern Classification governs through to destination. On traffic from the Western Termini of the eastern trunk lines and Central Freight Association Territory to points in Kentucky west of the main line of the Louis- ville & Nashville Railroad from a point immediately south of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Covington, Ky., to Middles- boro, Ky., the Official Classification applies as far as the Ohio River Crossings and the Southern Classification be- yond, except to points located immediately on the South bank of the Ohio River. To these points the Official Clas- sification governs. The Official Classification governs traffic originating in Central Freight Association Terri- tory 4 and at Western Termini of the eastern trunk lines,” and destined to stations on and north of the Chesa- peake & Ohio Railway, Lexington, Ky., to Hedges, Ky., inclusive. On traffic destined to stations on the Chesa- peake & Ohio Railway, from L. & E. Junction to a point immediately west of Lexington, Ky., the Southern Classi- fication applies. From points in Kentucky (except those on the Chesa-. peake and Ohio Railway, Lexington, Ky., to Ashland, Ry, and on the south bank of the Ohio River) to Official Territory, the rates usually break on the Ohio River and are governed by the Southern south thereof. 2 Map 8, Railway Traffic Maps. 3. A list of these points is shown in Appendix A. 34 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 4. BETWEEN GREEN LINE AND MISSISSIPPI VALLEY TERRI- ToRIES, AND TRUNK LINE AND NEw ENGLAND TER- RITORIES Between Green Line and Mississippi Valley territor- ies * and Trunk Line and New England territories * the Southern Classification generally governs through rates. As a rule through rates are published southbound, and, to some extent, northbound. In the case of combination rates, the Official applies north of the Virginia Gateways and the Ohio River Crossings, the Southern south of the same. The various exceptions of Green Line and Mississipi Valley territories take precedence over the Southern Classification on both through and proportional rates. The application of the various classification notes will be explained in connection with the south- ern tariffs. Through rates between Western Termini of eastern trunk lines on the one hand and Green Line and Mississippi Valley territories on the other are usually published subject to the Southern Classification. However, from Trunk Line and New England territories to Nashville and Memphis, Tenn., New Orleans and Port Chalmette, La., Mobile, Ala., Bristol, Va.-Tenn., and stations grouped there with, the through rates are gov- erned by the Official Classification. 5. BETWEEN GREEN LINE AND MISSISSIPPI VALLEY TERRI- TORIES AND CENTRAL FREIGHT ASSOCIATION TERRITORY Between Green Line and Mississippi Valley territories and Central Freight Association Territory,” through 4 Map 5, Railway Traffic Maps. 5 Map 2, Railway Traffic Maps. 6 Map 8, Railway Traffic Maps, APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CLASSIFICATION 35 rates are not usually published. Combination rates are usually applied, breaking at the Ohio River or the Vir- ginia Gateways; and the Southern Classification governs the proportion of the rates south of the Ohio River or the Virginia Gateways, and the Official north thereof. Of course, upon local shipments between Central Freight Association points on the one hand and Ohio River Cross- ings and Virginia Gateways on the other, the Official Classification applies. Between Chicago, Ill., Davenport, Iowa, Indianapolis, Ind., Milwaukee, Wis., Peoria, Ill., and almost all points in Illinois on the one hand and South- eastern Territory on the other, through rates are pub- lished subject to the Southern Classification. Also be- tween Central Freight Association points east of the Illi- nois-Indiana State Line and points, Memphis and south, along the Mississippi River to New Orleans, through rates are published, governed by the Southern Classifi- cation. Between Missouri River Points and St. Paul rate points on the one hand and Southeastern Territory on the other, through rates are not usually made, but combination rates on the Ohio River Crossings and other rate-breaking points are applied with the Western Clas- sification governing north, and the Southern south of the rate-breaking points. However, from the Missouri River Points," and places taking the same rates, to lower Mis- sissippi Valley points, Memphis to New Orleans, inclu- sive, along the Mississippi River, through rates are pub- lished with the application of the Southern Classification. There are also through rates from Missouri River Points to Green Line Territory with similar application. 7 A list of these points is given in Appendix A, CHAPTER V APPLICATION OF WESTERN CLASSIFICATION 1. Boun DARIES AND GENERAL APPLICATION In the preceding chapters, Western Classification Ter- ritory has been defined roughly as including the area west of Lake Michigan and the junctions of Central Freight Association Territory, Chicago, Peoria, to St. Louis, Mo., and west of the Mississippi River, south of St. Louis. Shipments moving wholly within this terri- tory are governed by this classification, subject to the state classifications and to the exceptions published by the several freight committees and by the individual car- riers. Moreover, the Western Classification applies on all shipments between points in Illinois and points west of the jurisdiction of the Illinois Classification. The Western Classification is also applied on proportional rates between Western Territory and Official and South- ern territories, as explained in the preceding chapters. It is also applied in almost all cases where through rates are published between Western Territory and either of the other territories. Where through rates are published by the Trans-Con- tinental Freight Bureau between Official Territory and Western Territory, and between Southern Territory and Western Territory, the Western Classification takes pre- cedence with the important exceptions stated in Chapter IV. The Western Classification is also applied between points in the United States and points in Mexico, and 36 APPLICATION OF WESTERN CLASSIFICATION 37 largely, also, between points in Western Territory and points in Canada. However, rates from eastern Cana- dian provinces to north Pacific Coast Terminals are gov- erned by the Canadian Classification. The Western Classification governs exports and imports through the Pacific ports from and to all parts of the United States where through rates are published; through the Gulf ports from and to Western Territory, excepting points in Illinois, points on the west bank of the Mississippi, Dubuque, Iowa, to St. Louis, Mo., and points on the west shore of Lake Michigan. On exports and imports through the Atlantic and Gulf ports, the Official governs to and from Official Territory and points as far west as St. Paul on through rates. The application of the Western Classification in detail will be set forth in connection with the tariffs of the several freight committees in Western Classification Territory. It is necessary here, however, to explain something of the application of the state classi- fications and the interstate exceptions in Western Classi- fication Territory.” 2. STATE CLASSIFICATIONS AND ExCEPTIONS TO THE WESTERN CLASSIFICATION In Western Classification Territory there are four state classifications if we include the Illinois Classification. They are the Illinois, the Iowa, the Nebraska, and the Texas classifications. Arkansas and certain other states also prescribe exceptions. In addition to these state pre- scribed classifications and exceptions, there are seven important interstate exceptions published by the several: ; freight committees within the Western Classification Terº...” : '': 1 For a more detailed application of classifications Appendix D of this treatise Should be COnSulted. 38 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION ritory. These exceptions apply only where tariffs refer to them as governing.” Circular No. 1-I, with succeeding issues, of the Western Trunk Lines contains rules, regulations, and exceptions to classifications. The tariffs applying wholly within Western Trunk Line Territory usually refer to this cir- cular as taking precedence over the Western Classifica- tion. This circular is also applied in tariffs from Western Trunk Line Territory to Trans-Missouri Territory, while Trans-Missouri Circular No. 1-D, or succeeding issues, is usually applied in the tariffs from Trans-Missouri Territory to Western Trunk Line Territory.” - Trans-Missouri Rules Circular No. 1-D, with succeed ing issues, contains rules, regulations, and exceptions to classifications, and applies to shipments within Trans- Missouri Territory 4 when referred to by the tariffs. It also applies to certain other tariffs published by the Trans-Missouri Freight Bureau. Circular No. 7-A, with succeeding issues, of the West- ern Trunk Lines contains rules, regulations, and excep- tions to Western Classification applying between points in Minnesota and also on interstate traffic between points in North Dakota and Wisconsin, as prescribed in Rule 5 of the circular. This circular prescribes that within Minnesota the rule of the Interstate Commerce Commis- sion that commodity rates take precedence over class rates does not apply where the class rates make a lower charge. Classification. Eacceptions and Rules, Circular No. 1-E, with succeeding issues, of the Southwestern Lines 2 The agents' I. C. C. numbers are shown in Chap. II, sec. 1. 3 Map 1 of Railway Traffic Maps shows Western Trunk Line Territory as lying west of Lake Michigan, Chicago, Peoria, etc., and east of the Missouri River. 4 This territory is defined in Appendix A. APPLICATION OF WESTERN CLASSIFICATION 39 contains exceptions to the Western Classification and rules and conditions governing traffic originating at or destined to points in Louisiana, Texas, and the Republic of Mexico, also traffic originating at or destined to Texarkana, Ark.-Tex., which moves under tariffs making specific reference to this circular. Southwestern Lines’ Classification. Eacceptions and Rules, Circular No. 2-M, with reissues thereof, contains exceptions to the Western Classification applicable on traffic governed by tariffs which make specific reference to this circular, between points in Arkansas and Louisiana and the following points in Oklahoma: Cameron, Cav- anal, Howe, Maney Junction, Monroe, Neff, Poteau, Potter, and Wister on the one hand and points shown in the tariffs on the other. Southwestern Lines’ Classification . Eacceptions and Rules, Circular No. 3-G, with succeeding issues, contains exceptions to Western Classification applicable on traffic to and from points in Oklahoma, in connection with tariffs which make specific reference thereto. The Pacific Freight Tariff Bureau publishes Eacception Sheet No. 1, with succeeding issues, containing exceptions to the Western Classification. It applies to tariffs, within Pacific Slope Territory and certain mountain territory east thereof, which refer specially to this exception sheet. TEST QUESTIONS These questions are for the student to use in testing his knowledge of the assignment. The answers should be written out, but are not to be sent to the University. CLASSIFICATIONS What is the purpose of a classification? Are all freight rates based on a classification? Name some commodities that take commodity rates. How many interstate classifications were there in 1887 ? . Name the five interstate classifications in North America at the present time. 6. Write the scale of classes for each of the four interstate classifications, omitting the multiple classes, that is, 1% times first class, etc. 7. Who promulgate and publish the four interstate classi- fications? * 8. How are the exceptions to the Official and the Western classifications published? 9. How are the exceptions to the Southern Classification pub- lished ? 10. Name the freight committees that publish exceptions to the Western Classification. 11. Name the states that prescribe freight classifications. : APPLICATION of OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION 12. In what way do classifications govern commodity tariffs? 13. What classification governs when a shipment crosses a border (1) on a through rate and (2) on a combination rate breaking at the border? 14. What classifications govern a shipment moving from Win- nipeg, Man., to Tampa, Fla...? 40 TEST QUESTIONS 41 15. Where does the rate clerk look to see what classification governs his tariff; 16. Why is it important for the tariff compiler and the rate maker to know the application of classifications? 17. Are there any official boundaries for the three interstate classifications? 18. Name the three lines that may be considered as the west- ern border of Official Classification Territory. 19. What reason might the western carrier offer as evidence that the Western Classification extends as far east as the Illinois- Indiana State Line? - 20. What evidence might the carriers in Central Freight Association offer that the Official Classification extends to the west bank of the Mississippi River? 21. Name the three freight committee territories that are within Official Classification Territory. - 22. State in a general way in what territory the Official Classification governs. - 23. What two states publish state classifications within the borders of Official Classification Territory 3 24. Discuss the application of the Illinois Classification between points in Illinois and points on the outside of the state. 25. State what the application of classifications is between Official Territory and territory west of Lake Michigan. 26. Discuss the application of classifications between Official Territory and Trans-Mississippi Territory. 27. Discuss the application of classifications between Official Territory and Southwestern Territory. 28. Discuss the application of classifications between Official Territory and Trans-Missouri Territory. 29. What classification governs between eastern Canadian points and Official Territory 2 30. What classification governs between Official Classification Territory and points in the western provinces of Canada east of the Pacific Terminal Belt” 31. What classification governs between the Pacific Terminal points in Canadian Territory and Official Territory? < * 42 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CLASSIFICATION 32. What are the northern and the western boundaries of Southern Classification Territory 33. Name the state classifications that govern in Southern Classification Territory. 34. What two important freight committees publish excep- tions to Southern Classification ? 35. How may the rate clerk know what classification applies to a certain rate in Southern Classification Territory 3 36. How does the tariff make reference to the exception notes of the classification? 37. Where are the exception notes to the Southern Classifica- tion carried? 38. Make a general statement of the application of the South- ern Classification. 39. Discuss the application of classifications between Official Territory and Kentucky. 40. Discuss the application of classifications between Green Line and Mississippi Valley territories on the one hand and Trunk Line and New England territories on the other. 41. Discuss the application of classifications between Green Line and Mississippi Valley territories on the one hand and Cen- tral Freight Association Territory on the other. APPLICATION OF WESTERN CLASSIFICATION 42. Discuss the general application of the Western Classifica- tion. 43. What important exceptions can you name to the Western Classification ? 44. Name the states that prescribe classifications in Western Classification Territory including Illinois. FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION º “-3 f : Q 94. on F, or A SERIEs of TREATIshis in AN INTERSTATE commRRCE AND RAILWAY TRAFFIC course ERNEST RITson pewsNur Professor of Railway Administratium The University of Illinois coMPARATIVE STUDY OF RULES OF THE CLASSIFICATIONS UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION (Non-Resident instruction) CHICAGO INT ERSTATE 1MERCE RAILWAY TRAFFIC COURSE Prepared under Editorial Supervision of Samuel MacClintock, Ph. D, - The subjects listed below constitute the basic material of a course in Interstate Commerce and Railway Traffic. This course is especially designed to meet the constantly growing demand for efficientiy trained men in railroad and industrial traffic work; to assist students to pass the exam- inations for government service under the Interstate Com- merce Commission; and to meet the demand for men com- petent to direet the work of commercial organizations and traffic bureaus. With the exception of the Atias of Railway Traffic Maps, the subjects listed below are covered in an average of approximately 200 pages each. - . Atlas of Railway Traffic Maps Freight Classification - Freight Rates: Official Classification Territory and East- ern Canada - - ‘. . . . . . Freight Rates: Southern Territory Freight Rates: Western Territory - - Publication and Filing of Tariffs º - Bases for Freight Charges, Reducing Freight Charges to a Minimum, Routing Freight Shipments, Freight Claims, The Bill of Lading, and The Industrial Traffic Department. Railway Organization, Statistics, and Accounting Express and Parcel Post . . * , Water Traffic and Rates Government Control of Common Carriers . . interpretation of the Act to Regulate Commerce Rulings of the Interstate Commerce Commission and Procedure before that body Business Law, I Business Law, iſ - The Law of Carriers of Goods Practical Traffic Problems LASALLE ExtENSION UNIVERSITY CHAPTER VI THE RULES OF THE CLASSIFICATIONS > \* º 1. INTRODUCTION Under the powers specifically conferred upon it by sec- tion 15 of the Act to Regulate Commerce as amended June 18, 1910, the Interstate Commerce Commission has been devoting much attention to the question of the re- vision of the classifications, and future editions of these . documents may be expected to represent, in some degree at least, the feelings of that body on the subject of classi- fication. An excellent illustration of the closeness of the supervision that the Commission seems likely to exercise over future classification is to be found in Opinion No. 2110, reported by Commissioner Meyer on December 9, 1912, under the title of “In the Matter of the Supervision of Western Classification No. 51, I. C. C., No. 9.”* A judicious exercise of the great powers possessed by the Commission should result in the improvement of classi- fication practice. The criticism of the Commission, in * * º the opinion just named, that there has not been sufficient & publicity in the past hearings of the classification com- - s mittees, is, doubtless, a valid one. During recent years, the carriers themselves have recognized the desirability of greater publicity and have done something in this direc- , tion, but the influence now being exercised by the Com- 125 I. C. C. Rep., 442 fr. 43 44 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION mission is certain to bring about a more intimate rela- tionship between the railroads and the shipping public in the readjustment of the classifications. Such intimacy of relationship will favor the attainment of uniformity of practice. At present, the attention of the railroads, in their effort to attain a higher degree of uniformity, is mainly concentrated upon the rules governing the use of the classifications. These rules were developed in the vari- ous classification territories as experience evidenced their desirability, with the result that numerous differences developed. The efforts of the uniform classification com- mittee of the railroads, in concert with those of the fed- eral commission, have done much, however, to bring about a substantial coincidence of the rules of the three leading classifications, so that the task of the writer to make clear existing differences is a much lighter one than it would have been a few years ago. The importance of these rules cannot be brought to the attention of the student of rail- way freight traffic too frequently. Many of them have a direct bearing upon the amount of charges to be paid on a shipment. It is necessary to note here, however, that the regula- tions for handling traffic are not always found in the gen- eral rules of the classifications. They are often found under individual items in the classification, in exceptions to classifications, and in tariffs. Usually the general rules in the classification apply only when other provi- sions are not made, so that a rule appearing elsewhere generally takes precedence over the rules of the classifica- tion. It is important, therefore, that the man who is making a shipment should know the provisions in the tariff and exceptions as well as the requirements con- RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 45 tained in the rules of the classifications applicable to the traffic in which he is interested. Exceptions to the Official Classification, for example, allow shipments originating in Western Classification Territory to be accepted when packed in a way that is in violation of the requirements of the Official Classification. Interstate shipments are not infrequently subject to the rules of more than one classification; this necessitates compliance with the various sets of rules in order to se- cure the lowest rate. In the subsequent analysis, there- fore, an attempt has been made to bring out clearly the differences between the rules of the three great classifica- tions. As far as practicable, the rules of Western Classi- fication No. 51, have been taken as the basis of the com- parison. Issues No. 39 of the Southern and the Official have been used for the rules of their respective territories. To facilitate the study of these rules they have been roughly grouped under the following heads: Carload shipments; less-than-carload and any-quantity ship- ments; packing, stage of manufacture, marking, and loading; heated, refrigerator, and tank cars; rules relating to description and acceptance of shipments; bill-of-lading conditions, charges, Rules 25, 26, 28 (Official); to-order shipments, etc. In this arrangement of topics, there is no pretense of any great nicety of grouping, but, for the purposes of the reader, it will be found sufficiently convenient. Constant reference should be made to the classifica- tions themselves, and, to enable this to be done conven- iently, the following table has been drawn up to indicate the rules, in each classification, that deal with the same subject. 46 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION Official Southern No. 39 No. 39 Rule NO. Rule No. 4 6 under items 2 14 3 20 4 * 5 19 5 and 27 24 3. t f 8 1 1 f 10 13 C.L. ratings, 12 10 7 15 15 22 15 10 Mixtures, 12 26 13 14 15 16 17 18 36 26 TABLE 2 CoMPARATIVE RULES OF WESTERN, SouTHERN, AND OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATIONS Western No. 51 Topic of Rule Rule NO. Misrepresentation and inspection Of property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 * Ratings conditioned on invoice and (leclared Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Property of extraordinary value. . 3 Freight of a damaging nature. . . . . 4 Carrier's agents not to act for Shippers or Consignees. . . . . . . 5 Carloads, definition, distribution, and minimum weights. . . . . . . 6 Marking freight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Ratings and specifications for packages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Articles subject or not subject to uniform bill of lading. . . . . . . . 9 Definition of term “nested”. . . . . . 10 Ratings on articles with no C. L. ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Rating on mixed carloads. . . . . . . 11 Articles requiring two or more cars 12 Single shipments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Combination articles . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Parts or pieces constituting a com- plete article . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Minimum charge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Gross and estimated weights . . . . . 17 Charges for L. C. L. not to exceed those for C. L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Bulk freight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Minimum charge for articles on Open CarS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Carload ratings in same item, brackets or “subject to Rule 21-B” . . . . . . . . . . . up tº e º e º e º º & 21 Loading and unloading C. L. an L. C. L. freight . . . . . . . . . • * * 22 Receipts “S. L. & C.” . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Freight in excess of full carloads 24 Empty packages returned . . . . . . . 25 i : RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 47 Western Official Southern Topic of Rule No. 51 No. 39 No. 39 Rule No. Rule No. Rule No. Implements On open Cars . . . . . . . . 26 f f Temporary blocking, racks, etc. 27 19 27 Temporary lining and flooring . . . 28 19 28 Refrigeration of Carload freight. . 29 12 29 Heated cars for Carload freight. . . 30 17 30 L. C. L. ratings not to apply on freight requiring protection. , 31 f 31 Tank Car regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 29 32 Advancing charges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 f 33 Guarantee of charges . . . . . . . . . . . 34 16 34 Demurrage, switching, storage, and terminal charges . . . . . . . 35 9 35 Commodity Vs. Class rates . . . . . . . 36 On COWeI’ 22 Charges on articles K. D. . . . . . . . 37 f + Freight consigned “to order” . . . . 38 f f Iron vs. steel articles. . . . . . . . . . . 39 f f Articles “in the rough, white, and finished” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 21 11 Freight subject to transfer . . . . . . . 41 f f Fibreboard, pulpboard, or straw- board boxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 2 9 Fare to be charged those in charge of property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + 18 # Articles not classified . . . . . . . . . . . # 23 5 Receipts for lumber, etc. . . . . . . . . f 24 f Formulas for making rates . . . . . . f 25, 26, 28 f Regulations for transportation of - dangerous articles . . . . . . . . . . f 30 39 Packing requirements for carboys f 31 8 Rating on freight in barrels ..... f 32 8 Ton Weight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f f 21 Rates on exhibits for fairs or ex- - positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f f 23 Reduced rates on returned ship- ments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f f 37 Cars not to be loaded in excess of safe carrying Capacity. . . . . . . f + 38 Shipments of oil and explosives via water lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . f f 40 Shipments hay, straw, empty bar- rels via water lines . . . . . . . . . f f 41 Extracts from U. S. statutes rela- tive to steamboat Service. . . . f # 42 * Eliminated. + No corresponding rule in this classification. + American Trailway Associatiºn Pules govern. 48 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 2. CARLOAD SHIPMENTS Carload Shipments and Minimum Weights.-There are no rules in any of the classifications that bear more directly on the amount of freight charges to be paid on shipments than those relating to carload shipments, and a careful study needs to be made of the various condi- tions specified in the rules of the three classifications. The Western Classification (Rule 6-A, Section 1), defines carload shipments as follows: “Except as provided in Rule 18, carload ratings apply only when a carload of freight is shipped from one station in or on one car (except as provided in Rule 24) in one day, by one ship- per for delivery to one consignee, at one destination. Only one bill of lading from one loading point and one freight bill shall be issued for such carload shipments. The minimum carload weight provided is the lowest weight on which the carload rating will be computed." By Rule 6-B, the specified minimum weights apply to all sizes of cars, except that certain premiums and deductions are made in the case of light and bulky articles designated as subject to Rule 6–B.” - Section 2 of the rule provides that upon such light and bulky articles, 36 feet (inside measurement) is to be taken as the standard length of car, and that, for each foot in excess of 36 feet, 3 per cent is to be added to the minimum 1 Rule 18 above referred to provides that the charge for less-than- Carload shipments must not exceed the charge for a minimum Carload of the same freight at the carload rating. It also provides that a charge for a car fully loaded must not exceed the charge that would accrue upon the same lot of freight if taken as a less-than-Carload shipment. These two rules give the shipper the option of billing shipments as Carloads or as less than Carloads to obtain the lowest charge. Rule 24 relates to the billing of freight in excess of full Carloads. These rules will be taken up more fully in their numerical order. 2 Whether loaded in box cars or on open cars. RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 49 weight, with a corresponding deduction in the case of cars less than 36 feet in length. A maximum of 142 per cent and a minimum of 91 per cent are fixed, all percent- ages to be based on inside dimensions. In applying premium and deduction charges, fractions of a foot, 6 inches or less, are disregarded. Under Rule 6–B, if a commodity taking a minimum car- load weight of 30,000 pounds in a 36-foot car requires a 50-foot car for its transportation, the minimum carload weight becomes 42,600 pounds, which is 142 per cent of 30,000. As already stated, this 42 per cent is the highest premium applying to any length and is used for cars over 49 feet 6 inches to and including 50 feet 6 inches. If the same commodity were loaded in a car 33 feet 6 inches, or under, the minimum carload weight would be 27,300, or 91 per cent of 30,000. A further paragraph of the rule (Section 3) covers the cases in which the carrier fails to furnish a car of the desired length. In substance, it provides that the carrier must not compel the shipper to pay excess charges on a car of a different size or kind from that ordered; suitable notations must be made upon the waybill and the bill of lading to show why a car (or cars) of different size from that ordered by the shipper was furnished. In connec- tion with this rule, Note 4 provides that the dimensions of cars are to be specified in the Official Railway Equip- ment Register which is now required to be filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission. |Rule 19 of the Southern Classification is, in effect, the same as Rule 6-A of the Western, except that the former limits carload ratings to freight not merely from one station, but also from the loading point of that station. Rule 24 of the Southern provides for a minimum carload 50 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION weight of 24,000 pounds, unless otherwise specified. In case the rates apply per net or gross ton, the minimum is 12 tons. When a minimum carload weight of more than 20,000 pounds is specified, such minimum is not affected by the length of the car used, but, for mini- ma of 20,000 pounds or less, the weights are increased in the case of cars exceeding 36 feet 6 inches in length, in accordance with a specified table. It will be found that the percentage of increase is much higher than the 3 per cent per foot provided for in the Western Classifica- tion. As an example, when the minimum weight for a commodity in a 36-foot car is 20,000 pounds, for a car over 36 feet 6 inches, but not over 38 feet 6 inches, the minimum is 22,000 pounds; if a car over 50 feet 6 inches in length is used, the minimum becomes 50,000 pounds. It should be noted that no charge is made for a car of extra length when the minimum is over 20,000 pounds, while, in the Western, the increase applies up to and including 30,000 pounds. No reduction is made in the Southern for cars less than 36 feet in length. Rule 24 of the Southern also provides that when live- stock is loaded in cars over 36 feet 6 inches in length, the minimum weight shall be increased in accordance with a given table. Cars over 36 feet 6 inches, but not over 38 feet 6 inches in length, take an increase of 5 per cent; cars over 38 feet 6 inches, but not over 40 feet 6 inches, 10 per cent, etc. The Official Classification (Rule 5-A) prescribes a minimum carload weight of 30,000 pounds for flat, gon- dola, stock, or box cars, which applies where there is no special provision in the classification. The minimum for tank cars is the maximum capacity of the tank, unless otherwise provided. The requirements for carload rat- RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 51 ings are the same as in the other classifications, but there is an additional statement that, when freight is loaded into cars by consignee, it will be subject to the car-service rules and charges of the forwarding railroad. It is fur- ther provided that railroad agents at forwarding points shall not sign shipping receipts marked “part carload lot” until the shipping receipt for the whole carload has been presented and the freight received. Only one orig- inal bill of lading for the whole carload is to be issued (Rule 5-B). Rule 27 (Sections B and C) protects the shipper from being charged more because the carrier did not furnish the car ordered. Rule 27-D provides that “Except when furnished by carrier in place of a shorter car ordered, if a car over 36 feet 6 inches in length is used by shipper for loading articles ‘subject to Rule 27,” without previous order having been placed by shipper with carrier for a car of such size, the minimum weight shall be that fixed for the car used.” The minima applying on cars of various lengths are given in Section F of this rule. It is provided that Rule 27 shall apply on articles taking a minimum weight up to and including 24,000 pounds. When the minimum car- load is 24,000 pounds for a 36-foot car, if a car over 36 feet 6 inches but not over 37 feet 6 inches is used, the minimum weight is raised to 24,720 pounds; cars over 50 feet 6 inches take a minimum of 48,000 pounds. The minima for cars of extra length, in the Official Classifica- tion, are materially higher than those in the Western. The minimum for a car over 50 feet 6 inches, on a 24,000 pound minimum, is 48,000 pounds in the Official, while in the Western it is only 34,080 pounds. The Western is the only one of the three classifications that provides for a deduction when a car less than 36 feet in length is 52 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION used. It will be noticed from the foregoing comparison that the Western makes additional charges for cars of extra length on commodities taking a minimum of 30,000 pounds or less, that the Southern rule is limited to a 20,000-pound minimum, and the Official to a 24,000-pound minimum. The marked difference in the amount of increase for each additional foot is also of great import- all Cé. - Mia!ed Carloads.-A carload rating generally applies to a shipment of a single commodity, but, under certain conditions, it may be secured upon mixtures of two or more commodities. The various regulations in regard to such mixtures have been the source of a great deal of discussion in the different parts of the country. One of the most important criticisms of Western Classification No. 51, as originally filed by the carriers, was that it pro- posed to curtail materially the privileges of mixture allowed by No. 50. The primary idea of the mixed-carload shipment is the provision of carload rates on a number of different articles that for some reason are ordinarily shipped at the same time. An example of a typical mixture may be found in Western Classification under the item, “Min- ing Machinery.” Under this heading are found not only machinery itself, but also cages, driers, screens, etc., articles that are used in connection with mining opera- tions. Mixtures allowed under the Southern and the Western classifications are based more or less definitely on this principle, while under the Official Classification mixtures of articles entirely unrelated to each other are allowed under certain limitations which will be explained later. In the treatment of mixed carloads, the Official is by far the most liberal of the classifications. RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 53 Rule 21 of the Western provides that “Unless other- wise specified in the classification, where two or more articles are mentioned in one item or bracketed items they may be forwarded in straight or mixed carloads at the rate shown, except as provided in paragraph B of this rule.” Paragraph B states that “Carload ratings shown in the classification for articles ‘subject to Rule 21-B” will not apply on straight carloads of the articles named. In such cases, the amount of the articles so designated which may be included shall not exceed 33 1/3 per cent of the total weight loaded in the mixed carload.” The total weight of the articles made subject to Rule 21-B must be shown separately by the shipper on the bill of lading. It should be noted that in the Western Classi- fication it is customary to enclose in brackets articles which may be shipped in mixed carloads. In the rules of the Southern no provision is made for mixtures. Articles which it is permissible to ship in mixed carloads are specified in the individual items. The Official Classification provides under Rule 10 that different articles shipped in carloads are to be charged at the carload rate applicable to the highest class or highest rated article. But if the aggregate charge upon the entire shipment would be less on the basis of carload rate and minimum carload weight for one or more of the articles, and of less-than-carload rate or rates for the other article or articles, the shipment must be charged accordingly (Section A). The meaning of Section A is that, unless Sections B and C would be violated in so doing, mixed carloads will be billed on the basis of the Carload rate and minimum weight that apply to the article taking the highest class or rate, unless the aggregate charge would be lower by using the rate and minimum 54 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION carload for one or more of the articles, and billing the other article or articles on the basis of the less-than-car- load rate at actual or estimated weight. For example, if there were five articles in a carload and the highest classed article in the shipment took third class, the ship- ment would be billed at third-class rate and at the mini- mum weight applicable to the article taking this rate, unless it were cheaper to bill three of the articles on this basis and the other two articles at the actual or estimated weight on a less-than-carload rate. Under Section B, should all the articles in the mixture take the same class or rate in carloads, the minimum car- load weight will be the highest specified for any of the articles. For example, if there are four articles in the mixture taking fourth-class rates but different minimum carload rates, the highest minimum weight applying on any of the articles governs. The rule that, for a mixture of articles of different carload ratings, the minimum car- load weight will be that provided for the article or arti- cles taking the highest rating is subject to the restriction that the actual weight of the article or articles taking this rating shall be 10 per cent of the highest minimum carload weight for any of the articles taking the highest carload class or rate. Articles that fail to meet this 10 per cent requirement cannot be included in the mixture, but must be charged separately at their less-than-Carload rate or rates (Section C). Section D of the rule provides that if the aggregate charge upon any mixed carload shipment of articles dif- ferently classified or rated in carloads is less, on the basis of the carload rate for the article or articles taking the highest class or rate, and on the basis of the highest carload minimum weight on any article in the shipment, than would accrue under Rule 10-C, the shipment will be RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 55 so charged. The notes appended to Rule 10 should be carefully observed. One of these notes provides that this rule is not to apply upon shipments of livestock in mixed carloads. Rules governing shipments of livestock in mixed carloads are found in the classification under the individual items. Another note provides that mixed car- loads of livestock and vehicles (either self-propelling or non-Self-propelling) will be subject to the minimum car- load weight provided for the livestock and will take the highest rate provided for either livestock or vehicles. It will be plain to the reader that the rules in regard to mixed carloads should be very carefully studied, and particularly so in case of shipments moving in Official Classification Territory. To make sure that the lowest rates are being applied, the charges for carloads consist- ing of two or more articles should be carefully computed to ascertain which combination allowed by Rule 10 pro- duces the lowest total charges. Many overcharges result from failure to compute properly the charges on mixed carloads. Freight in Ea:cess of Full Carload.—Where a consign- ment more than fills one car but does not provide the minimum weight for a second car, what rating shall the surplus carry? General practice provides for the applica- tion of the carload rating to the surplus quantity. The Western Classification (Rule 24) lays down the following conditions for freight, the minimum carload weight for which is 30,000 pounds or more. First, the shipment must be made from one station, except as provided in Section 5 of this Rule, by one shipper, in one day., . on one shipping order or bill of lading, to one consignee and tºº. tº * . & * > 56 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION destination. Second, each car, except the car carrying the excess, must be loaded to visible or marked capacity, and each car so loaded charged at actual or authorized estimated weight, subject to established minimum carload weight, and at the car- load rating applicable. The excess over the quantity that can be loaded in or on one car shall be charged, if loaded in one closed car, at actual or authorized estimated weight, and at the carload rating applicable on the entire shipment if loaded on one open car, at actual or authorized estimated weight and at the carload rating applicable on the entire shipment—subject to a minimum charge of 5,000 pounds at first-class rate. The rule authorizes the carriers to handle the excess through freight stations, if they so desire, and they may load other freight in or on cars carrying the excess. The waybill for each car, whether for the full load or for the excess, must show reference to the bill for each other car carrying the consignment. Specific restrictions are placed upon the application of the rule: it is not to apply when specific items in the classification provide other- wise; nor on bulk freight, livestock, furniture, lumber, articles taking lumber rates, sash, doors, blinds, scrap iron or junk; nor on freight, the character of which requires at the time of transportation either heated, refrigerator, ventilator, or tank cars, or cars specially prepared, either by the carrier or the shipper; nor on freight, the authorized minimum carload weight for which is less than 30,000 pounds. It is stipulated that freight in excess of full cars be marked as required for less-than- carload freight. Section 2 of Rule 24, Southern Classi- fication, gives the following instructions: (a) When a lot of freight (not in bulk and not including livestock), ::::: the specified minimum carload weight for which is more RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 57 than 20,000 pounds, is offered for shipment on one day by one consignor, for one consignee and destination, in quantities in excess of the amount that can be loaded into one box, flat, or gondola car, the following rules will apply in assessing charges. (b) The first car and all succeeding cars except the last must be fully loaded and charged for on the basis of carload rates, and at actual weight, but at not less than the established minimum weight per car, according to length, for each car used. (c) The remainder of the consignment if loaded into one box car shall be charged for at actual weight, and at the Carload rate, but if the remainder require a flat or gondola car, it shall be charged for at actual weight, and carload rate, subject to a minimum weight of 5,000 pounds. (d) In all cases the waybill for the car containing the part lot must give references to the billing covering the full car or cars. The final clause of Rule 24 stipulates that these provisions are not to apply on articles for which the specified minimum carload is 20,000 pounds or less, but that such articles, when shipped in excess of one full carload or carloads, shall be charged for, so far as the excess is concerned, as though the excess were a separate shipment. Rule 5-C of the Official provides that a part carload in excess of a full carload or carloads shall be charged at actual weight and carload rate, unless otherwise specified in the classification. Reference must be made on its waybill to the waybill for the full carload or carloads. There is an important note to this rule which stipulates that unless otherwise provided this rule will not apply to articles subject to Rule 27 (already explained), or to articles provided with a lower minimum carload weight 58 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION than 20,000 pounds, whether shipped in straight or mixed carloads, or to articles carried under the provisions of Rule 7-A, which is the rule relating to articles requiring two or more cars for transportation. Rule 5-C will not apply to articles subject to Note 6, given under the heading of “Iron and Steel” in the classification. This note is a special provision in regard to articles of iron and steel which on account of their length require two or Iſl()]^{2 Cà.I’S. Long Articles Requiring Two or More Cars.-In their provisions for the determination of minimum charges upon articles so long as to require two or more cars, the three classifications show considerable variation, and it is necessary to study very carefully the terms under which such material as structural iron, poles, etc., will be transported by the railways. The Western Classification (Rule 12) bases the mini- mum charge upon the minimum weights established for each car used, the actual charges being computed at car- load rates and actual weight. Should the article have no carload rating, or should the shipment be a less-than-car- load one of an article having a carload rating, the mini- mum is established on the basis of 5,000 pounds at first- class rate for each car used. The Southern Classification has a similar rule (Rule 12), varying only in the provision that, in the case of articles having no carload rating, the minimum charge is based on 4,000 pounds at the first-class rate for each car used. The corresponding rule (7-A) of the Official Classi- fication is very different, reading as follows: RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 59 “Unless otherwise provided in the Classifications when articles on account of length require two or more cars to transport them, the minimum charge for each series or lot shall be as follows: For the first car (the longest car in the series to be considered as the first car) the minimum weight provided for such articles in carloads; fifty per cent of such minimum weight for each additional car. In no case, however, (except as otherwise provided) shall the charge be less than 36,000 pounds for two cars, 48,000 pounds for three cars, or 60,000 pounds for four cars (actual weight to be charged for when the aggregate actual weight exceeds the specified minimum weights) at the carload rate.” The rule goes on to state that when the same consignor furnishes other freight for the same consignee, at same destination, and on the same cars, making the specified weight, the various articles shall be charged at the class rate in carloads, and at actual weight, unless otherwise provided. Where cars, carrying articles that, on account of their length, require two or more cars to transport them, are loaded to their full or safe carrying capacity, the minimum weight of 30,000 pounds, fixed by Rule 5-A, should govern, actual weight to be charged for when it exceeds the specified minimum weight. Note 2 of this rule provides that in no case shall the aggregate charge for a series of cars exceed the aggregate charge for the same number of single cars. Note 3 provides that when more than four cars are used, additional cars will be considered as a new series. Lumber, Forest Products, etc.—Rule 24-A of the Official provides that “Railroad agents at forwarding points will not tally shipments of Logs, Lumber, Shingles, Shooks, or other Forest Products in bulk or in bundle, 60 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION in carloads, nor issue shipping receipts or bills of lading therefor, which specify the number of pieces, bundles or feet said to be contained in the shipment, except that shipping receipts or bills of lading for export shipments may show the number of pieces, bundles or feet said to be contained in the shipment, provided the notation “Ship- pers load and count’ or “more or less’ appears thereon.’’ Rule 24-B provides that all shipments of logs and lumber for export shall be weighed at the American seaboard, and the through freights paid on the weight so ascer- tained, except that inland freight charges shall be paid on the basis of the carload minimum weight (or on actual weight when in excess of the minimum), as provided by the classification or commodity tariff under which the shipment is forwarded to the seaboard. In case the prop- erty is destined to a port where weighing is an incident of the disposal of the cargo, the custom of the port on the question is to govern as to the ocean charges only on the ascertained out-turn weight thereof. This rule does not appear in either of the other classifications. 3. LESS-THAN-CARLOAD AND ANY-QUANTITY SHIPMENTS Rates on Articles for which no Carload Ratings Are Shown.—Under Rule 11 of the Western Classification the classification shown in the less-than-carload column governs regardless of quantity shipped when no specific carload rates are named. The rule also prohibits the shipping of two or more articles in mixed carloads, at car- load rate, unless so provided for in the classification. Rule 12 of the Southern reads that “When neither ‘C. L.” nor ‘L. C. L.” is specified in the description of articles, the rating provided shall apply on any quantity.” In con- RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 61 nection with this rule, a definition of less-than-carload shipments is given: “When carload and less-than-car- load ratings are provided for the same article, the term “less-than-carload’ covers shipments in quantities less than the minimum weight provided for carloads.” A single shipment is also defined as “a lot received from one shipper, on one shipping order or bill of lading, at one station, at one time, for one consignee, and one destina- tion.” Two or more single shipments are not to be com- bined and waybilled as a single shipment; they must be carried as separate shipments. Rule 13 of the Official provides that “When no carload rate is specified for an article, the L. C. L. rate will be charged for any quantity of the article.” - Rates on Single Shipments.--In the rules treating of single shipments, of both the Western and the Southern classifications (Rule 13 in each case), it is specified that single shipments of freight will be charged for at actual or authorized estimated weight, and at the rating appli- cable, but, where a package contains freight of more than one class, the charge shall be computed on the less- than-carload or any-quantity ratings assigned to the high- est class freight contained in the package. The minimum charge prescribed by Rule 16 (for which see below) gov- erns, of course. These composite packages are similarly dealt with in Rule 15-A of the Official Classification." To make these rules specific, if there were 200 pounds of first-class freight and 200 pounds of fourth-class freight to be shipped at one time, proper packing would make it necessary to pay the first-class rate only upon 200 1 “Unless otherwise specifically provided in the classification, any package containing articles of more than one class will be charged for at the rate for the highest class article Contained therein.” 62 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION pounds and the fourth-class upon the other 200; whereas, if the whole 400 pounds were shipped in one package, the first-class rate would have to be paid on the whole ship- ment. Combination Articles.—According to the rules of all the three classifications, combination articles, such as a combination chair and stepladder, are charged for at the rate that applies to the article of the combination taking the highest rating, unless the combined article has a sep- arate classification. (Western, Rule 14; Southern, Rule 14; Official, Rule 15-A). Parts of Pieces Constituting a Complete Article.—Rule 15 of the Western provides that parts or pieces constitut- ing a complete article, received as one shipment, will be given the same rating as the complete article. Rule 15 of the Southern is the same. Similarly, Rule 22 of the Offi- cial, “When parts or pieces constituting one or more com- plete articles are offered to carriers for transportation on one shipping order and bill of lading at one time by one consignor, to one consignee and destination, they will be rated at the classification provided for the complete article.” The requirement as to one bill of lading which appears in the rules of the Western and the Official classi- fications, but not in those of the Southern, was inserted to avoid the liability of the carriers construing this rule to mean that, if different parts of the same article were . shipped at the same time, even though on separate bills of lading, the rate for the completed article might be assessed. Minimum Charge on Single Shipments of Less-than- carload Freight.—As regards the minimum charge per- missible on single shipments of less-than-Carload freight, the Western and the Southern classifications (Rule 16 in RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 63 each case) prescribe that this shall be the charge for 100 pounds at the class or the commodity rate assigned to the article, with the exception that, where the article is classi- fied above first class, the minimum charge shall be based on 100 pounds at the first-class rate. If the shipment contains articles of two or more classes, no one of which is classified higher than first class, the minimum charge shall be for 100 pounds of the article taking the highest rate; but, if any one of the articles is classified higher than first class, the minimum charge shall be for 100 pounds at the first-class rate. In no case shall the charge on a single shipment be less than 25 cents. Under the Official Classification the minimum charge is the same as the rate for 100 pounds at the first-class rate, no charge to be less than 25 cents (Rule 15-B). A further clause (15-C) provides that “A small lot of freight of different classes will be taken at actual weight, and at the class rate for each article, provided that the aggregate charge for the shipment shall not be less than 100 pounds at first-class rate and in no case shall the charge for the entire consignment be less than 25 cents.’’ The difference between Sections B and C should be care- fully noted. When there is a single shipment, the mini- mum will be 100 pounds at first-class rate; whereas, if there are several packages taking different classes, rates on each article may be used subject to the provision that the charge on the whole shipment is not to be less than 25 cents or 100 pounds at the first-class rate. The difference as to the minimum charge under the Western and the Southern as compared with the Official should be given attention. Under the two first-mentioned classifications, the minimum charge is based on 100 pounds 64 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION at the class or the commodity rate to which the shipment belongs, while in the Official the minimum charge is based on 100 pounds at the first-class rate. The differ- ence in these requirements may perhaps best be illus- trated by the fact that if a shipment consisting of 100 pounds of fourth-class freight should move between New York and Chicago, under the Official Classification rule, the charge would be 75 cents (the first-class rate), while under the Western and the Southern rules it would be only 35 cents. In shipping from one classification terri- tory to another, this difference should be kept in mind, especially if a considerable number of shipments involv- ing small weight are being made. Charge for Less than a Carload Not to Eacceed Charge for a Carload.—Sections 1 and 2 of Rule 18 of the West- ern Classification provide, respectively, “The charge for a less-than-carload shipment must not exceed the charge for a minimum carload of the same freight at the carload rating,” and that “The charge for a car fully loaded must not exceed the charge for the same lot of freight if taken as a less-than-carload shipment.” Thus, these two clauses make it possible for the shipper to have his charges based either on a carload or on a less-than-car- load rating according as one or the other gives a lower charge. In Section 2 of this rule, owners are required to load and unload all freight except as provided under Rule 24, which is considered in the previous section. In case shipments are tendered in less-than-carload lots, but the carload rate and minimum are applied as provided in Section 1, a charge of 11/4 cents per 100 pounds is to be made if the carrier’s agents do the loading or unloading. Rule 18 of the Southern is the same as Rule 18 of the Western, with the exception that owners are required to RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 65 load and unload bulk freight in carloads and all other car- loads of freight on which a specific carload rating is ac- corded. Rule Il of the Official provides that “In no case will the charge for a consignment of freight when loaded by shipper on or in one car be greater when computed at actual or estimated weight and L. C. L. rate than on basis of C. L. rate and minimum carload weight; nor will the charge for a full carload when loaded by shipper be greater at C. L. rate and minimum carload weight than on the basis of L. C. L. rate and actual or estimated weight.” Rule 18, Section 1, of the Western originally read as follows: “The charge for a less-than-carload shipment must not exceed the charge for a minimum car- load of the same freight at the carload rating, provided the loading is performed by the consignor and the un- loading by the consignee.” Under this rule it was some- times found cheaper to bill a shipment at the carload rate than at the less-than-carload rate, after the carrier had done the loading or unloading. This is in violation of the provision that shippers must do the loading and un- loading in order to secure the carload rate. The Inter- state Commerce Commission has ruled therefore that a charge for loading and unloading is proper in cases of this kind rather than to provide that L. C. L. rates are to be applied. Following this ruling the charge of 114 cents for loading or unloading was incorporated in Rule 18. Bulk Freight.—Rules 19 of the Western, 36 of the Southern, and 8 of the Official classifications provide that “Bulk freight will not be taken in less-than-carload con- signments unless so specified in the classification. Minimum Charge for Articles Loaded on Open Cars that Are Too Large to be Loaded Through Side Doors 66 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION of 36-Foot Cars.-By Section A of Rule 20, Western Classification, shipments (including freight returned for repairs), loaded on open cars, are subject to a minimum charge equal to that for 5,000 pounds at first class for each car used, and the following clause (Section B), provides that “When articles are loaded on a flat or gondola car on account of their being too bulky to be loaded in a box car through the side door thereof, they shall, unless otherwise specified in the classification, be charged at actual weight and class rate for each article, provided that in no case shall the charge for each article be less than 5,000 pounds at first-class rate. The same mini- mum is applied to articles that are too long to be loaded through the side doors. Rule 26, Section 2, of the South- ern reads, “If articles for which no specific carload rat- ings are provided require, on account of length, more than one car, actual weight shall be charged for the shipment at authorized ratings but not less than 4,000 pounds at the first-class rate for each car used.” Section 3 of the Southern rule provides that when articles are loaded on an open car, on account of being too long or too bulky to be loaded through the side door of a box car, they shall be charged at the actual weight and class rate for each article, provided that in no case shall the charge for each shipment for one consignee be less than 4,000 pounds at first-class rate. Rule 7-B of the Official provides that unless otherwise specified in the classification, when L. C. L. shipments of articles are loaded on a flat or gon- dola car on account of their being too bulky or too long to be loaded in a box car through the side door thereof, they shall be charged at actual weight and L. C. L. class rate for each article, provided that in no case shall the charge RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 67 for each article be less than for 5,000 pounds at first-class rate. - The important point to be noted in connection with these rules is that while the Western and the Official classifications specify a minimum charge based on 5,000 pounds at first-class rate, the Southern requires only 4,000 pounds. This is of especial importance in regard . to bulky articles, as they are often very light and the minimum weight is much in excess of the actual weight. 4. PACKING, STAGE of MANUFACTURE, MARKING, AND LOADING Classifications in Different Kinds of Packages and Proper Preparation of Shipment.—According to Rule 8 of the Western Classification, in the absence of specific provisions in the classification, shipments in crates take the next class higher than that for freight in boxes, and shipments in bales, bags, or bundles a class higher than that for freight in crates. Where the same rating is given to articles shipped in bundles or boxes, shipments of such articles crated take a similar rating. When no rating is shown for articles in boxes, the rating shown for the same articles in crates applies. Articles that have the same rat- ing when packed in crates or boxes take the next class higher if shipped in bundles, unless the classification provides otherwise. When not otherwise specified in the classification, the rating given on shipments in boxes applies to shipments in barrels or kegs, or drums, and vice versa. Shipments in basket-work packages or in boxes with slatted tops are ratable as if crated. Under this rule, containers are required to be of sufficient strength and security to afford proper protection to the freight contained in them. Containers must also enclose 68 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION the articles so that no ends or parts protrude, unless it is otherwise provided in separate descriptions of the ar- ticles. Articles that are easily broken must be protected by packing material in the container. The rule goes on to give specifications for different kinds of containers, such as boxes, crates, pails, barrels, etc., the details of which we do not reproduce here. Rule 8 of the Southern does not contain the first section of Rule 8 of the Western, but, in other respects, is quite similar. The Southern, it should be noted, defines the word ‘‘packed,” when no container is specified, as meaning that the article must be enclosed in a wooden box or a wooden or metal barrel, crate, or similar container. The term ‘‘packed in” means that the article in connection with which this term is specified must be protected within the container named, by or with partitions, wrap- pers, excelsior, straw, or other packing material that will afford adequate protection against breaking. Specifica- tions for articles in earthen ware apply also on such ar- ticles in stone ware. There is no rule in the Official which corresponds to Rule 8 of the Western and the Southern. Rule 2-D pro- vides that when articles are offered for transportation at the rating provided for racks or crates, the articles must be enclosed to an extent adequate to hold the frame- work together to protect the property during the process of transportation. Strips forming partial protection only to the articles will not be regarded as sufficient to entitle the property to the rating provided for when racked or crated. Carriers reserve the right to decline a shipment in an insecure package (Rule 2-E). Special attention should be given to these requirements, RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 69 as they are based on the desire of the carrier to reduce loss and damage as far as possible. Fibreboard, Pulpboard, or Strawboard Boases.—Rules 42 of the Western, 2-B of the Official, and 9 of the Southern contain technical specifications in regard to fibreboard, pulpboard, or strawboard boxes when used as containers. We shall not go into a discussion of these specifications, as they are hardly of interest to the ordi- nary traffic student. To shippers who use these pack- ages, they are, however, of the highest importance and should be carefully studied. Charges on Articles Knocked Down.—Where the clas- sification provides separate ratings for articles “set up” and “knocked down,” the charges on any article shipped K. D. should not exceed what would accrue on the ar- ticles when shipped S. U. This provision appears only in the Western Classification (Rule 37). Definition of the Term ‘‘Nested.”—The term “nested” is defined in Rule 10 of the Western Classification as meaning that two or more different sizes of the articles for which the nested specification is provided are enclosed each smaller one within the next larger, or that two or more of the articles are placed one within the other so that each upper article will not project above the next lower article more than one-third of its height. Nested ratings are not applicable to articles of different names or material, whether grouped in one description or shown separately, or nested or enclosed one within the other. Rule 10 of the Southern reads differently. “The term “nested,” used in package specifications in this Classifica- tion means that three or more different sizes of the article, for which the “nested’ specification is provided, must be enclosed each smaller within each next larger; or that 70 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION three or more of the articles, for which the nested speci- fication is provided, must be placed one within the other so that each upper article will not project above the next lower article more than one-third (1-3) of the height.” It is also provided in this rule that it cannot be applied to articles of different name or material. The difference in the requirements of the two classifications should be carefully noted. The Western allows two or more sizes of articles to be nested, while the Southern requires a mini- mum of three. This is a good example of the difference between the requirements of the different classifications in many cases. The Official does not give a definition of the word “nested,” and any two articles enclosed one within the other will take “nested” rating, unless other- wise provided. Rates on Shipments in Casks, etc.—Rule 32 of the Offi- cial provides that “Unless otherwise provided in the sep- arate description of articles, the ratings shown for freight in barrels or casks will also apply on such freight in hogsheads, pipes, puncheons, tierces, casks, barrels, half- barrels, quarter-barrels, sixth-barrels, eighth-barrels, kegs, or iron, steel or wooden drums.” The Southern (Rule 8, Section 9), but not the Western, makes a similar provision. Packing Requirements for Carboys.-The Official and the Southern classifications (Rules 31 and 8 [Section 12] respectively) require carboys containing articles not cov- ered by the regulation as to explosives and dangerous articles to be packed as follows: “The carboy must be completely enclosed in a strong wooden box or cylindrical iron case and so cushioned by proper packing material that the glass will not come in contact with the wooden or iron covering. If the neck of the carboy projects, it RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 71 must be protected by a wooden or metal hood securely attached to the box. When the hood is attached with nails or screws, they must not come in contact with the glass of the carboy.” This rule does not appear in the Western Classification. Ea:plosives and Dangerous Articles.—Regulations cov- ering the classification of these articles are covered by Interstate Commerce Commission regulations, which are not here given. Two of the classifications, the Official (Rule 30) and the Southern (Rule 39), make reference to these regulations, which should be carefully noted by shippers who handle this class of goods. Failure to com- ply with requirements of the regulations not only means that shipments are liable to be refused by carriers, but also that if accidents occur certain responsibilities may be placed upon shippers who have not complied with all the requirements. Empty Packages Returned.—Another rule appearing only in the Western Classification is the one (Rule 25) that requires the agent, when empty packages are offered for shipment at the rate provided in this classifi- cation for returned empty packages, to satisfy himself that they were used, when filled, in the transportation of a regular consignment, and that they are being returned to consignors of the original filled packages. If the agent has reason to believe that the packages when filled were originally forwarded by express, he will make a note to that effect on the waybill, and charge at the regular rate for new packages. The most familiar examples of ship- ments coming under this head are second-hand carriers such as empty beer barrels, half barrels, boxes, etc., re- turned to a brewery. Articles in the Rough, in the White, Finished.—“In the 72 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION rough’’ is interpreted by the Western Classification (Rule 40-A) as applying to articles sawed, hewn, planed, or bent before any further manufacturing process has be- gun. The Southern (No. 11) and the Official (No. 21) rules are the same, except that, in the case of the latter, the definition does not apply to articles in the rough which have been bent. The three classifications agree in de- fining “in the white” as applying to a commodity after the manufacturing process has begun (one coat of prim- ing is permitted but not paint or varnish). There is simi- lar agreement in applying the term “finished” to com- modities whose manufacture has been carried beyond the stages indicated by the above (Western, Rule 40; Southern, Rule 11; Official, Rule 21). Iron and Steel Articles.—Rule 39 of the Western pro- vides that “Ratings shown in the classification for ar- ticles made of iron will apply on the same articles when made of steel and vice versa.” The other classifications do not contain such a rule. Marking Freight.—The Western Classification (Rule 7, Section 1) prohibits the acceptance of freight to be transported at less-than-carload or any-quantity ratings, unless marked as prescribed. Section 2 of this rule says that “Each package, bundle or loose piece of freight must be plainly, legibly, and durably marked by brush stencil, marking crayon (not chalk), rubber type, metal type, pasted label tag, or other method which provides marks equally plain, legible, and durable, showing the name of the consignee and of town or city and state to which destined. “When consigned to a place of which there are two or more of the same name in the same state, the name of the county must also be shown. - RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 73 “When consigned to a place not located on the line of a carrier, it must also be marked with the name of the station at which the consignee will accept delivery. “When consigned ‘to order’ it must be so marked, and further marked with an identifying symbol or number which must be shown in the shipping order and bill of lading.” - The notes in connection with this rule regarding labels and tags should be carefully observed. Note 1 requires the label to be securely attached with glue or other good adhesive. Note 2 provides that tags must be made of metal, leather, cloth or rope stock or Sulphite fibre tag board sufficiently strong and durable to withstand the wear and tear of transportation. When a tag is tied, it must be attached through a re-enforced eyelet. If tags are attached to wooden pieces or wooden containers, they must be fastened at all corners and in the center with large-headed tacks or tag-fasteners; or tags may be tied to wooden pieces when freight would be injured other- wise. Tags ordinarily must be secured by a strong cord or wire, except that when they are tied to bundles or pieces of metal, a strong wire or a strong tarred cord must be used. A shipment that occupies the visible capacity of a car or weighs 24,000 pounds or more need not be marked (Section B). Marks must be compare l with the shipping order or bill of lading and corrected if wrong (Section C). All old marks must be removed (Section D). This provision should be carefully com- plied with, as many claims for loss arise because old marks have not been erased from packages. Freight in excess of full cars, except when such excess is the result of carrier's failure to furnish proper car ordered by shipper, must be marked as required for less-than-car- 74 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION load freight (Section E). Rule 7 of the Southern is substantially the same, except that in Section E no pro- vision is made whereby carriers may mark freight in excess of full cars when the carriers do not furnish the proper-sized car. The provisions of the Official Classifi- cation are practically the same as those of the Western and the Southern. There is one or two concessions in the matter of marking which are important in some cases. Articles shipped “loose or otherwise fastened together” need not have a mark on every piece or bundle. In case there are ten pieces, lots, or bundles, at least two should be marked. When more than ten, one for every ten should be marked, but not more than ten markings shall be required for any shipment. Each marking must show the total number of pieces, lots, or bundles in the entire consignment. Articles which are charged at less-than- carload rates, not being classified or rated in carloads, and are shipped loose in cars, in consignments of 30,000 pounds, or in cars loaded to the cubic capacity, need not be marked. Loading and Unloading Heavy or Bulky Freight.— Each of the classifications requires owners to load and unload such heavy or bulky freight, carried at L. C. L. ratings, as cannot be handled by the regular station em- ployees, or as must be handled at stations where the car- rier does not have sufficient loading or unloading facil- ities (Western, Rule 22; Southern, Rule 25, Section 2; Official, Rule 8-B). Loading Cars in Ea:cess of Safe Carrying Capacity.— Rule 38 of the Southern provides that cars must not be loaded in excess of their safe carrying capacity as pre- scribed by the rules of the various carriers. There is no corresponding rule on this subject in the other two RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 75 classifications. It may be said in connection with this that, as a rule, the carriers allow a car to be loaded to the extent of 10 per cent in excess of the stenciled capacity marked on the car. Implements on Open Cars.-This rule is found in the Western Classification alone and specifies that shipments of implements and other commodities loaded on open cars must have all easily breakable and detachable parts removed, boxed, and securely fastened to cars with metal straps or enclosed in implements. Temporary Blocking, Racks, Standards, etc.—An al- lowance not to exceed 500 pounds is granted by Rule 27 of the Western for “temporary blocking, racks, stand- ards, strips, stakes or similar bracing, dunnage or Sup- ports, not constituting a part of the car; when required to protect and make secure for shipment, property on flat or gondola cars, upon which carload ratings are applied, such material must be furnished and installed by the shipper and at his expense. Carriers will not be respon- sible for the removal or damage to such bracing, dunnage or supports, and it will be optional with them to remove or return to shippers if not taken by consignees.” Rule 27 of the Southern provides that temporary blocking, racks, etc., must be furnished and installed by the ship- per at his expense and the weight included with that of the property shipped. An allowance of the actual weight will be made, not exceeding 500 pounds, for dunnage, blocking, etc., when used to protect carload freight in closed cars, provided that in no case shall less than the specified minimum carload weight be applied. Rule 19 of the Official provides that “An allowance of 500 lbs. in weight per car will be made for racks, standards, strips, braces or supports used by shippers on flat or 76 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION gondola cars when loaded with carload shipments of lum- ber and forest products requiring their use for safe trans- portation,” and also that an allowance of not more than 500 pounds will be made for racks, etc., used by shippers on flat or gondola cars. In order to secure this allowance, the shipper must certify, on the shipping or- der, the actual weight of the material used. It is further provided that “An allowance of the actual weight but not more than 500 lbs. per car will be made for wooden dunnage, blocking or bracing material used by ship- pers in box, stock, ventilated, insulated or refrigerator cars with carload shipments.” In all cases above men- tioned, not less than the minimum carload weight will be charged for, and where more than 500 pounds of braces, etc., are used, they will be charged for at the same rate as the lading of the car. Under Section B of this rule, shipments of live poultry, when weighed at or near a point of origin, and loaded in box, stock, or live poultry cars may be granted an allowance of 1,500 pounds to cover feed, water, etc. No allowance will be made from weight ascertained at point of destination. In connection with the rules covering allowances for dunnage racks, etc., it should be understood that such allowances are not to be made for weights of packages but simply for such weights as are added to the shipment in order to keep the shipment in place on the car and as would not be required if the car were completely equipped to carry the consignment safely without such braces, racks, etc. - Temporary Lining and Flooring.—In the case of ship- ments carried under the Western Classification (Rule 28), “Temporary lining or flooring, when required, must be furnished and installed in cars by shipper and at his RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 77 expense. No charge will be made for the transportation of such material in the car with the freight it protects. Temporary lining or flooring, when reshipped by con- signee to the original consignor at point of origin of the freight will be returned at one-half (%) fourth-class rate.” Rule 28 of the Southern is the same except that it has no provision for the return of temporary lining or flooring to the consignee. Rule 19 of the Official makes an allowance of 1,000 pounds for linings placed by shippers in cars loaded with perishable property, provided that, in no case, less than the specified minimum carload weight is charged for. 5. HEATED, REFRIGERATOR, AND TANK CARS Freight in Heated Cars in Carloads.-Rule 30 of the Western Classification provides that “Ratings provided for freight in carloads do not obligate the carrier to fur- mish heated cars, nor to maintain heat in cars, for freight requiring such protection, except under conditions which the carrier’s tariffs provide. Stoves, used in cars, and the fittings and fuel therefor, must be furnished by shipper, and the fuel must consist of coal, coke or char- coal, unless otherwise permitted by regulations of individ- ual carriers. Stoves must be securely fastened and braced. Stove pipes must be run through a board, pro- tected with metal collar, securely fastened on one side of the doorway of the car, and secured clear of all wood- work, and fitted with an elbow and pipe projecting above the car not more than 24 inches. Woodwork, where exposed to the heat, must be protected by sheet metal. Shippers must provide men to care for fires. Carriers will pass one man free in charge of one to six cars for this purpose; no return transportation will be given. 78 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION Transportation will not be given to persons in charge of trees or shrubbery. No charge will be made for the transportation of stoves, fittings or fuel in the car with the freight requiring such protection. Stoves, stove fittings and lumber used in fitting up cars when reshipped by consignee to consignor at point of origin of the freight will be returned at one-half (1/3) fourth-class rate.” Rule 30 of the Southern states that rules governing the transportation of caretakers will be found in the individual tariffs of the carriers. The Southern does not allow for the return of stoves and lumber at the special rate provided in the Western. The provisions in regard to heated cars in this classification are the same as in the Western with the few exceptions above noted. Rule 17 of the Official provides that one or more men must accompany shipments to care for fire, sub- ject to the contract in regard to their passage. In the case of shipments of one or more carloads of perishable fruit and vegetables, one man to care for fire will be carried free. No free return passage will be given. With shipments of perishable property other than fruit and vegetables, the man or men in charge must pay full fare. Stoves must be carefully fastened down and braced to prevent upsetting. Stovepipes must be properly fast- ened, clear of woodwork, opening or openings fitted with metal collars, and all woodwork exposed to heat pro- tected by sheet metal. Coal, coke, or charcoal must be used for fuel instead of wood, when possible. Returned stoves will be charged for at regular rates. Refrigeration of Freight in Carloads.-Rule 29 of the Western is an important one to shippers of perishable freight, as it relates to the refrigeration of carload freight. Section 1 provides that “Unless otherwise pro- RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 79 vided, carload ratings do not include the expense of re- frigeration. Charges for refrigeration, when furnished by the carrier, will be found in the carrier’s tariffs.” Sec- tion 2 makes provision that “No allowance in weight will be made for ice or other preservative placed in the same package with the freight.” Section 3 provides that “When ice or other preservative is in bunkers of the car no charge will be made for its transportation; but if ice is taken by consignee, charges shall be made on ac- tual weight of the ice in bunkers at destination and at carload rate applicable on the freight which it accom- panies; if not taken by consignee it becomes the prop- erty of the carrier.” The fourth section provides that “When ice or other preservative is loaded in body of car with freight, provided the rules of the carriers do not prohibit such loading, no charge will be made for its transportation; but if taken by consignee, charges shall be made on actual weight of the ice or other preservative in car at destination and at carload rate applicable upon the freight which it accompanies; if not taken by con- signee it becomes the property of the carrier.” Rule 29 of the Southern is the same except as provided in a note under Section 3, which specifies that “Where shipments of fresh meat and other property, in refrig- erator cars, are made, requiring re-icing in transit, bills of lading therefor must show the points at which re-icing is to be done, which information must also be given on the original and memorandum way-bills and car cards. Bills for icing must show the number of pounds placed in the car at each point, date, car number and initials.” Rule 12 of the Official provides that “Railroad Com- panies may furnish at their own cost ice and salt when required for the protection of property not classified 80 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION lower than third class, either in less than carloads or car- loads, when loaded in refrigerator or other cars; except- ing that when cars are loaded by individual consignors the cost of icing will not in any instance be assumed by the carriers when the weight in each of such cars is less than 15,000 lbs. Consignors must furnish at their own cost ice and salt furnished for property classified less than third class, in less than carloads or carloads.” Note 1 of Rule 12 (Official) makes provision that “When ice or salt is furnished by consignors in connection with either C. L. or L. C. L. shipments and is in the package with the freight, charges thereon will be assessed on basis of actual weight at point of origin and at the rating pro- vided for the freight which it accompanies. If not in pack- ages with the freight and not in car bunkers, same will be billed at actual weight and at rate applying upon the property which it accompanies; if not in excess of 500 lbs. in weight at destination, freight charges will be made void by correction of delivering agent. When in excess of 500 lbs. in the car at destination, and not taken by consignee, ice and salt shall become the property of the carrier and no charges shall be assessed thereon. When in excess of 500 lbs. in the car at destination, and taken by consignee, freight charges shall be corrected by deliver- ing agent to basis of actual weight.” Note 2 provides that the foregoing rule and Note 1 will not apply upon shipments of dressed fresh meats and packing-house products requiring refrigeration. It is provided in Note 3 that the provision of the foregoing rule will apply upon shipments of fruits except when forwarded in pick- up cars. The icing charges on fruits of all kinds not forwarded in pick-up cars must be paid by the consignor or consignee, and the minimum charge therefor will be RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 81 $2.50 per ton of 2,000 pounds, fractions of a ton being charged for at a proportionate rate. Less-than-Carload Ratings on Freight Requiring Pro- tection against Heat or Cold.—Rule 31 of the Western (and of the Southern) provides that ‘‘Less than carload or any quantity ratings will not apply on freight requir- ing protection against heat or cold, and carried under refrigeration, or in refrigerator or lined cars, heater or heated cars, or cars otherwise specially equipped for such protection, except under the conditions which the car- rier’s tariffs provide.” The Official has no rule on this subject. It should be understood, however, that the reser- vation holds true in the Official Classification Territory, as carriers could not be expected to furnish such special service, except to a limited extent. Many of the carriers in the Trunk Line Territory have a regulation to the effect that bills of lading must not be accepted with nota- tions “liable to freeze,” “keep in warm place,” “refrig- erator car,’’ and the like. Tank Cars.--According to Western Classification, Rule 32, ratings on commodities in tank cars do not oblige the carrier to furnish such cars, in case the carrier does not own or has not made arrangements for supplying this equipment (Section 1), but, on private tank cars, prop- erly equipped, mileage at the rate of three-quarters of a cent per mile will be allowed on loaded and empty move- ment (Section 2). No mileage will be allowed on such cars switched at terminals, nor for the movement under empty-freight-car tariffs. Section 3 provides that “The weights and charges on shipments in tank cars shall be based on the full gallonage capacity of the tank, unless the weight carrying of the car trucks is less, in which case the actual weight subject to the weight carrying capacity 82 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION of the car trucks as minimum will govern.” Section 1 of Rule 32 of the Southern is similar to Section 1 of the Western rule. Section 2 provides that, except as provided in Section 5 of this rule or in the separate description of articles, actual weight shall be charged for freight in tank cars loaded full. Section 3 provides that when a tank is not full, charges shall be computed on the gallon- age capacity of the tank subject to Section 5 of this rule. The gallonage capacities of tank cars are shown in W. H. Hosmer’s I. C. C. A-241, Circular 6-E, with its sup- plements or reissues. Section 4 makes provision that the “weight for computation,” where published in the sep- arate descriptions of articles in tank cars, is to be used in computing charges when the tank is full and the actual weight is not obtainable, or when the tank is not full and the gallonage capacity is used to compute the minimum charges. Section 5 provides that tank cars are not to be loaded beyond the weight carrying capacity. In case the gallonage capacity is in excess of the weight carrying ca- pacity, the charges will be based on the carrying capacity of the car. Section 6 provides that the tank or gallonage capacity of tanks as referred to in this rule does not in- clude the capacity of the dome. Rule 29 of the Official contains a provision that carriers do not assume any obli- gations to furnish tank cars, while the remainder of this rule is given up to regulations in regard to the payment of the mileage charge of three-quarters of a cent a mile. RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 83 * 6. RULES RELATING TO DESCRIPTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF SHIPMENTS, BILL-OF-LADING CONDITIONS, RATES AND CHARGES (INCLUDING OFFICIAL RULES 25, 26, 28), To-ORDER SHIPMENTS, ETC. False Billing, False Representation, and Inspection of Property.—Rule 1 of the Western which covered this sub- ject has been eliminated. In Rule 6 of the Southern are quoted two sections of the Act to Regulate Commerce which show the penalties for false billing and false repre- sentation, and provide that agents of carriers are to in- spect property when they deem it necessary to ascertain the actual character of the property, and to collect charges in accordance with the correct description. Rule 4 of the Official simply states that agents shall ascertain proper description of the freight and shall not accept prepayment of the freight charges unless satisfied that the description is correct. Description of Articles.—Rule 2-A of the Official Clas- sification provides that as nearly as practicable contents of all packages must be stated in shipping receipts. When an article is differently classified when differently pre- pared or packed, the actual character must be specified; otherwise, it will be charged at the highest class named on each article. No shipment will be accepted when desig- nated on the shipping receipt as merchandise, sundries, fancy goods, P. H. P. (packing-house products), or struc- tural iron or steel. This rule appears only in the Official Classification. Elsewhere in the text we refer to the necessity of accurately describing shipments in order to secure the lowest rate. This may well be borne in mind in connection with this rule. - Articles Not Classified.—Official Classification, Rule 23, provides that, when articles not specifically provided for 84 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION or included under the heading of “Articles, N. O. S.” are offered for transportation, agents may bill same at rat- ings provided for analogous articles. Notations to that effect are to be made on the waybills and the facts re- ported at once to their general freight department in order that specific classifications may be provided there- for. Rule 5 of the Southern is almost identical with this rule except that it not only includes N. O. S., but also N. O. I. B. N. (not otherwise indexed by name). The Western does not include this regulation within its for- mal rules. This rule is of interest to the traffic man when shipping commodities for which a classification has not been made. To secure the lowest rates in such cases, the shipper should provide the agent with such information as he can with regard to the exact nature of the shipment in order that the lowest rate may be secured. Such cases should, however, be taken up with the carrier or with the classification committee so that a rating may be estab- lished. Ratings Conditional on Invoice or Declared Value.— When lower ratings are given on account of declared or invoice valuation, the Western Classification (Rule 2) instructs the agent to insert a release in the bill of lading, and to have the shipper sign it. All goods which can be shipped on a declared or invoice valuation are listed in this rule and forms of release for declared and invoice value are given. Rule 2 of the Southern Classification provides a form of special release which contains the agreed valuation and stipulates that it is to be written and signed by the shipper or owner upon the face of the bill of lading or shipping receipt. The Official Classifi- cation takes care of released valuations under the in- RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 85 dividual items in the classification and has no general rule on the subject. Acceptance of Property of Eastraordinary Value.— Bank bills, coin or currency, deeds, drafts, notes or valu- able papers of any kind, jewelry, postage or revenue stamps, precious metals or articles manufactured there- from, and precious stones are not to be accepted for trans- portation, unless it is otherwise provided (Western, Rule 3; Southern, Rule 3). The Official provides in Rule 14 that documents, specie, jewelry, or any articles of extra- ordinary value, not specifically provided for in the classi- fication, are transported, subject to the rates and regula- tions of the individual carriers. Freight Liable to Damage Other Freight or Equipment Not Accepted.—No freight that is liable to impregnate or otherwise damage equipment or other freight need be ac- cepted by the carrier. Such freight may be accepted and receipted for, subject to delay for suitable equip- ment, or may, for lack of suitable equipment, be re- fused. This rule has been the subject of much protest from the shippers of green hides. Rule 4 of the South- ern, which was identical with Rule 4 of the Western, has been eliminated from the classification. Rule 20 of the Official is identical with Rule 4 of the Western. Carrier’s Agents Not to Act as Agents of Shippers or Consignees.—Rule 5 of the Western provides that “Car- riers’ Agents must not act as Agents of shippers or con- signees for the assembling or distribution of freight.” In connection with this rule, Rule 6-A, Section 2, of the Western provides that “carload ratings will not apply on freight consigned to, or in care of Carriers’ Agents for the purpose of assembling, forwarding or delivering less- than-carload shipments in order to effect the application 86 . FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION of the carload ratings thereon. Less-than-carload rat- ings will be applied on the entire shipment.” Rule 20 of the Southern is identical with Rule 5 of the Western. Rule 19, Section 2, of the Southern provides that “Car- riers’ Agents at point of shipment must not accept freight to be carried at carload ratings for distribution to two or more parties by Carriers’ Agents at points of destina- tion.” Section 3 provides that “Agents at points of des- timation must deliver freight carried at carload ratings to one consignee only.” Section 4 states that “If Carrier’s Agent at destination distributes a carload shipment con- trary to the foregoing, less than Carload ratings will be applied on the entire carload.” Rule 5-B of the Official provides that railroad agents at forwarding points will not receive property in carloads to be distributed by rail- road agents to two or more parties; also that “delivering agents will deliver property only to consignee thereof or to the party or parties presenting consignee's written order, and will not recognize orders from consignor or consignee providing for distribution of carload ship- ments among various consignees or calling for split de- liveries according to brands, marks, sizes, or other iden- tification of packages, nor will railroad agents at deliv- ering points in any way act as the representative of the consignor or consignee for the distribution of carload shipments.” - Articles Classified Subject or Not Subject to Uniform Bill of Lading Conditions.—Rule 9 of the Western pro- vides that, unless otherwise provided, when property is transported subject to the provisions of the Western Clas- sification, the acceptance and use of the uniform bill of lading, straight or order, are required. If the shipper does not elect to ship under the uniform bill of lading RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 87 conditions, he should notify the agent, and if property is not carried subject to all the terms and conditions of the uniform bill of lading, but, at the carrier’s liability limited by common law and by the laws of the United States and of the several states, 10 per cent higher than the rate charged for property shipped subject to all the terms and conditions of the uniform bill of lading will be charged, subject to a minimum increase of one cent per 100 pounds. If the shipper gives notice that he does not accept all the terms and conditions of the uniform bill of lading, the bill must be so stamped. Rule 1 of the Southern provides that the reduced rates specified in this classification apply only on property shipped sub- ject to the conditions of the carrier’s bill of lading. Rule 1 of the Official also provides for the increase of 10 per cent when shipper does not ship subject to the uniform bill of lading conditions. Southern and Western classi- fications have a note providing how the rate is to be computed when property is shipped not subject to the terms and conditions of the uniform bill of lading. |Under the same rule, the Western and the Official pro- vide that the cost of insurance against marine risk is not to be assumed by the carrier unless specifically provided for in the tariff. Freight Receipted for as Shipper’s Load and Count.— This rule (No. 23) is peculiar to the Western Classifica- tion. It reads as follows: “Freight loaded by shipper and not checked by carriers must be receipted for Ship- per’s Load and Count.” The legality of such a notation on the bill of lading is treated in some detail in the treatise on “The Law of Carriers of Goods.” The Inter- state Commerce Commission allowed the rule to go into effect only because the subject was covered by pending 88 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION legislation of Congress fixing the liability of the carriers. Such a notation would not be binding in a great many cases. The liability of carriers under this rule should be studied in the treatise just mentioned and should be kept in mind in making shipments under the Western Classification. Charges Not Advanced to Shippers, Etc.—Rule 33 of the Western and of the Southern provides that no charges of any description will be advanced to shippers, owners, consignees, or agents thereof, nor to draymen or ware- housemen for shippers, owners, consignees, or agents thereof. The Official Classification does not cover this subject. Prepayment and Guarantee of Freight Charges.—The rules of the three classifications regarding prepayment and guarantee of charges are identical. Shipments not Iikely to realize, at forced sale, the amount of charges due at destination must be prepaid or guaranteed. A guarantee that charges will be paid at destination may be accepted by the local agent on approval of the general freight department of the carrier with which the freight originates. Full explanation is to be made on waybills. When charges due at destination are not paid on freight carried under guarantee, each carrier shall look to its immediate connection for reimbursement, initial carrier being finally liable (Western, Rule 34; Southern, Rule 36; Official, Rule 16). These requirements are most often applied in connection with household goods and the re- turn of second-hand packages such as old cement bags. In cases where it is desirable to avoid prepaying freight, carriers will usually accept a guarantee of freight charges from a reliable shipper and this course is generally fol- RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 89 lowed by shippers who handle shipments of this nature regularly. Official Rules 25, 26, and 28.-These rules are peculiar to the Official Classification and are in reality rules for the making of rates rather than for the laying down of conditions for the handling of traffic. Rule 25 specifies that on articles taking Rule 25 the rates will be made by taking 15 per cent less than the second-class rate, but the resulting rate must not be lower than that for third class. Rule 26 provides that articles taking Rule 26 are subject to rates made by taking 20 per cent less than third class, but not lower than fourth class. Rule 28 provides a table of amounts to be added to the fourth-class rate to make a rate for articles classed as Rule 28 in the classification. There are no similar rules in the other classifications. Rates on Eashibits for Fairs or Eaºpositions.—The Southern Classification gives special treatment to return- ing exhibits, in that it permits shipments that have been exhibited at national, state, county, or municipal fairs or exposition, and provided further that the reshipper via the same route, provided that they are returned within thirty days of the date of the close of the fair or exposition, and provided further that the reshipper files, with the agent of the transportation line at reship- ping point, a certificate of some authorized official of the fair or exposition that the shipment has been exhibited at the said fair or exposition and has not changed owner- ship. The above does not apply on racehorses used for races; regular rates in both directions must be paid on such. As already indicated, this rule is peculiar to the Southern Classification (Rule 22). Reduced Return Rates on Damaged Shipments.-Under the rules of the Southern Classification, “Articles broken 90 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION or damaged in transit, and ordered returned to shippers for repairs, or which, after being repaired, are reshipped to original consignee, in accordance with instructions from the proper official of the carrier, will be transported free of charge, provided that the shipment is returned by the same route by which it was originally forwarded. Reference to the original billing and also to such instruc- tions must be shown on the billing” (Rule 37). There are no corresponding rules of this nature in the Western or in the Official, but many of the individual carriers and agents make provision, in their individual tariffs, for the handling of damaged shipments at reduced rates. Demurrage, Switching, Storage, and Terminal Charges. —Rule 35 of the Western and of the Southern provides that “Rates shown in tariffs governed by the classifica- tions are subject, at the points of origin and destination, to the rules, regulations, and charges lawfully established by the carriers covering demurrage, switching, storage, and other terminal expenses, privileges, or facilities, also to the rules, regulations, and charges lawfully estab- lished by initial, terminal or intermediate carriers cov- ering diversion, reconsignment, demurrage, and other privileges or facilities afforded the shipment while in transit by the carriers.” Rule 9 of the Official is much briefer and reads as follows: “All property shipped in carloads shall be subject to the car service and track- age charges of the forwarding and delivering railroads.” Commodity Rates Take Precedence over Class Rates.— All three classifications state that the establishment of a commodity rate (carload or less-than-carload) removes the application of the class rate to or from the same point on that commodity (in carload or less-than-carload quan- tities, as the case may be), except when and in so far as RULES OF CLASSIFICATIONS 91 alternative use of class and commodity rates is specifically provided for by including in different sections of one and the same tariff such class and commodity rates, and by including, in each section of such tariff, the specific rule “If the rate in Section — of this tariff make a lower charge on any shipment than the rates in Section Of this tariff, the rate in Section will be applied.” (Western, Rule 36; Southern, Rule 22.) While the Official does not include this regulation in its numbered rules, it is to be found on the cover of the classification. Freight Consigned “To Order.”—The issue of bills of lading for a shipment consigned “to order” is not per- missible unless the name of the person, firm, or corpora- tion to whose order the shipment is consigned, is plainly shown after the words “to order.” Also the issue of bills of lading for freight consigned to the shipper’s order at one point, consignee to be notified at another point, is not permissible except where consignees are located at prepay stations or interior points, in which case freight must be consigned to an open station to be designated by the shipper. This rule (No. 38) of the Western Classi- fication is not included in the other classifications, but many of the carriers have such a provision in their tariffs. Weight of Tom.—The Southern Classification defines a ton as 2000 pounds, unless otherwise specified (Rule 21). This definition is not included in the Official or the Western, but, of course, is understood. Freight Subject to Transfer.—It is understood, of course, and is stated, in various publications of the indi- vidual carriers, that freight is subject to transfer en route, if found necessary or desirable by the carriers, but the Western is the only one of the classifications that includes the provision specifically in its rules. The rule goes on 92 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION to state that freight should be loaded in such a manner that it can be transferred and reloaded without injury (Rule 41). Shipments of Oil and Ea:plosives via Water Lines.— Rule 40 of the Southern provides that shipments via sea lines of camphene, chimogene, burning fluid, kerosene, naphtha, acids, spirits of turpentine, petroleum, gunpow- der, and all other explosives, and lime, will be taken only at owner’s risk by sail, or at steamer's option, and thence by rail through. CHAPTER VII TJNIFORMI CLASSIFICATION 1. THE TREND TowARD UNIFORMITY It has been pointed out in a previous chapter that, so long as the traffic of the railways was practically restricted to local business, there was no great incon- venience from the system of individual classifications. But, with the development of through business, much confusion resulted. There was no harmony in the classi- fications; marked differences prevailed both in the num- ber of classes employed as well as in the commodities included under each class. As many as thirty-three classes were used in some classifications." Both rail- roads and shippers realized the evil of the situation and earnest efforts were made to reduce it. The movement was accelerated, of course, by the process of railroad consolidation, which, commencing in the fifties, became increasingly frequent after the Civil War. A distinct step towards unification was made about 1882, when the “Revised Joint Classification,” the pred- ecessor of the present Western Classification, the “Middle and Western States Classification,” applying to what is now termed Trunk Line and Central freight association territories, as well as westbound and east- bound classifications applying to traffic between Atlantic points and the Middle West, were adopted. Before the 1 Annual Report, I. C. C., 1897, 62. 93 94 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION end of 1882, the “Joint Western Classification” had been put into effect, and each succeeding year saw its accept- ance by additional railroads. Interestingly enough, this classification was the outcome of an attempt made to secure an agreement between eastern and western roads on a uniform classification for westbound freight.” By the time the Cullom bill was brought before the United States Senate (1886), the number of classifications in the country had been reduced to about fifty. - This unification had been accomplished without the aid of legislative compulsion. The railroads, recognizing the desirability of the simplification, devoted much time and labor to its accomplishment. If the Interstate Commerce Act with its clauses concerning unreasonable discrimina- tion had never been placed upon the statute book, the movement would have still continued. Unquestionably, however, the passage of the Act accelerated it, and the day on which the Act went into effect was marked auspi- ciously by a most important step towards uniformity— the adoption of the Official Classification by the eastern carriers. By 1889 the Southern Classification had also been authorized by the railways concerned, so that the framework of the present classification system had been successfully completed. There can be no question but that the use of these gen- eral classifications greatly simplified the Federal Com- mission’s task of supervision, and, no doubt fully appre- ciating this fact, the Commission used its influence to bring about the complete consolidation of the three gen- eral classifications. In one of its earliest decisions, Pyle and Sons v. S. T. V. and G. Ry. Co., the Commis- 2 Dunn, S. O., “Uniform Classification,” Railroad Age Gazette (Sept. 3, 1909), 414. UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION 95 sion stated: “One of the many embarrassments con- nected with transportation of freight by railroads con- sists in the fact that there is such a lack of uniformity in the classifications of freight found in the different portions of the country.” ” The carriers proceeded to make an attempt to adopt a uniform classification. Soon after the Act was passed, representatives of both the eastern and western lines met in conference to see what could be done in the way of unifying the Official and the Western classifications, but traffic disagreements that ended in rate wars prevented any progress from being made. In the following year, Congress showed its disposition in the matter by a resolution of the House of Representatives to the effect that the Interstate Com- merce Commission should prescribe a uniform classifica- tion by January 1, 1889. By the end of the year, the railways had selected a standing committee of sixteen members, two from each of the eight associations. * A great deal of work was done by this committee, but the difficulty of the problem it had to solve is indicated by the withdrawal of the western representatives from its membership. The remainder of the committee con- tinued the work, and, finally, in June, 1890, recommended a classification based on eleven main classes plus five multiple first-class divisions. Dissensions again de- veloped as the Trunk Line Association withheld its approval. A subsequent recommendation, based on eight classes, was opposed both by that association and the Southern Railway and Steamship Association.” 8 31 I. C. C. Rep., 465; 1 I. C. Rep., 767. 4 Annual Report I. C. C., 1897, 63. 5 Dunn, S. O., Uniform Classification, Railroad Age Gazette (Sept. 3, 1909), 414. 96 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION The opposition of the trunk lines seems to have been based, in part, upon objectionable features in the pro- posed organization that was to have control of the new classification. They thought it unfair that they should be represented upon the proposed classification board by but six out of twenty-two members, when they were carrying three-fourths of the through tonnage of the country. They objected also that the new scheme gave final powers to the chairman and the board, whereas, under the existing system, the board simply made recom- mendations which were subject to the approval of the railroads. There was also a feeling that the time had not yet arrived when consolidation was desirable, that the needs of the three classification territories were still distinct enough to justify and demand different treat- ment in classification." In view of the steady interest that has been main- tained in the matter of uniform classification, and the likelihood of further action, a word or two in description of the organization of the supervisory board recom- mended in the report of 1890 by the uniform classifi- cation committee may not be out of place. The board of uniform classification, made up of members from the various classification districts, was to be given power to make final decisions by a vote of two-thirds of its membership. In addition to the general chairman, there was to be in each classification territory a district chairman, through whom applications for relief were to be presented to the board. Recommendations as to the ratings to be given new or analogous commodities were to be made to the board jointly by these district chair- 6 Annual Report, I. C. C., 1897, 64. UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION 97 men, and, further, required the approval of the chairman, the board being entitled to review the same if it so desired." - The lack of success of the uniform classification com- mittee was disappointing to the Interstate Commerce Commission because of its strong and persistent advocacy of uniformity, and, feeling now that persuasion was use- less, it reported to Congress, in December, 1891, that it did not feel justified in asking for the further efforts of the carriers “the same measure of indulgence” which, from time to time, it had previously suggested should be extended to them. Accordingly, the Commission urged that legislation be enacted which should compel the rail- roads to adopt a uniform classification within one year, or, in default of such action, should authorize the Com- mission or some other public authority to do so. * In annual report after annual report, this attitude was stead- fastly maintained, strong support being given by the National Convention of Railroad Commissioners. Finally, the railroads took up the problem again. A committee of fifteen traffic officers, five from each classi- fication territory, was appointed in 1907, and reported on March 31, 1908. While this committee failed to agree with the Commission that uniform classification was immediately practicable, it did express itself as of the belief that uniformity could “ultimately be worked out along intelligent and satisfactory lines.” A material improvement in the direction of assimilation of descrip- tion, minimum weights, etc., could be immediately brought about, the committee thought, and to accomplish this it recommended the appointment of a committee to prepare 7 25 I. C. C. Rep., 456. 8 Annual Report I. C. C., 1891, 33. 98 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION uniform rules, descriptions of goods, packing require- ments, and minimum carload weights. Accordingly, in April, 1908, a committee of twenty-one executive traffic officials was selected, which, in turn, organized a working committee of nine men, three from each of the classifica- tion territories, who gave their whole time to the task of revision. Since September, 1908, a great amount of work thas been done by this committee on uniform classification. Information has been sought at first hand; numerous con- ferences with shippers have been held. As the committee has reached agreement on the various points considered, recommendations have been made to the classification committees, which have again discussed them in open hearings. * - Meanwhile, Congress definitely conferred on the Com- mission power to regulate classification. The Hepburn amendment of 1906 had not specifically included control of classification under the powers of that body, though the language of Section 15 might have been regarded as sufficiently broad to cover the point. However, in the Mann-Elkins amendment of 1910, any possible doubt was removed by the provision that “Whenever, after full hearing * * * , the Commission shall be of opinion that * * * any individual or joint classifica- tions, regulations, or practices * * * are unjust or unreasonable or unjustly discriminatory, or unduly pref- erential or prejudicial or otherwise in violation of any of the provisions of this Act, the Commission is hereby authorized and empowered to determine and prescribe what individual or joint classification, regulation, or practice is just, fair, and reasonable, to be thereafter 9 Dunn, S. O., “Uniform Classification,” Railroad Age Gazette (Sept. 3, 1909), 415; 25 I. C. C. Rep., 457. UNIFORMI CLASSIFICATION 99 followed, and to make an order that the carrier or car- riers shall cease and desist from such violation to the extent to which the Commission finds the same to exist, * * * and shall adopt the classification and shall con- form to and observe the regulation or practice so pre- scribed.” In the case of classifications as in that of rates, the Commission was authorized to suspend their going into effect for ten months. Power to establish joint classi- fications was granted. In its report of the December following the passage of the Act, the Commission stated that the uniform classi- fication committee of the railways had made much prog- ress, that substantially all of the rules and regulations of the existing classifications had been unified, that upward of one-third of the articles enumerated had been given a uniform description, and that uniform minimum carload weights had been prescribed for a proportionate number. It would seem, however, that the Commission was impatient with the rate of progress, for, though the carriers were making “a sincere effort to harmonize as far as possible the conflicting features of the various classifications,” it felt that “the stimulus of requirement should be applied unless satisfactory results at an early date indicate that the desired uniformity will be brought about by voluntary action.” ” In the next annual report, dated December, 1911, the Commission proceeded to rec- ommend that the carriers should be required to adopt a uniform classification, and that representatives of the Commission should sit in the committee of the carriers preparing the same. As regards this last point, it is, to e = * > 10 Annual Report, I. C. C., 1910, 8. 100 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION tation to the Commission to send a representative to meetings of the classification committees.” 2. PRESENT PROBLEMs From the text of Commissioner Meyer's decision “In the Matter of the Suspension of Western Classification No. 51, I. C. C. No. 9,” ” it is clear that the Commission is quite dissatisfied with the general method of reaching uniformity applied by the Western Classification Com- mittee. Complaint is made that the test of uniformity adopted by the committee is itself variable, being some- times one classification, sometimes another, and again something entirely different from all of them. At the root of this complaint lies the obvious feeling of the Commission that the only acceptable method of estab- lishing uniformity is to recast the rules and reorganize the items of freight classification entirely anew, without relationship to existing classifications, except in so far as inherently correct principles happen to have been used in framing the latter. The Commission feels that, in this matter of re-classification, progress is hindered and obstacles to uniformity set up by the determination of the carriers to balance off the charges in such a way as to protect existing revenues.” “Classification and revenue,” says Commissioner Meyer, “should be con- sidered independently of each other.” There is no doubt that classification revision is persist- ently influenced by revenue considerations. Those con- cerned in the making of ratings are very apt, indeed, to :::::::Annual Report, I. C. C., 1911, 7. ; : 1325 I. C. C. Rep., 451. 13 25 I. C. C. Rep., 453. UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION - 101 keep the tariff and the tonnage report associated in their minds with the classification. A proposal to change an article from first class to second will cause the traffic man- ager to inquire, first of all, how much revenue he will lose thereby; and logic is apt to have to wait upon finance. The more so because in so complicated an act as that of classification construction, the subtlety of the logic may be very refined. After their experience in the Rate Advance Cases of 1910, it is not very surprising that the railroads should feel a reluctance to agree to a general, albeit logi- cal, readjustment of classifications, which might possibly result in lowered revenue unless the class rates were advanced; and there is no power resident in the Com- mission to assure the roads in advance of its approval of specific rates not yet framed. Moreover, any thor- ough-going readjustment is impeded by the fact that par- ticular business enterprises may suffer more or less material dislocation by the changes in ratings involved. Each shipper views such changes in classification from the standpoint of his personal interests, naturally fav- oring a downward movement, and generally opposing an upward. It is inconceivable that any readjustment of classification should be uniformly in the former direc- tion. As the executive committee on uniform classifica- tion reported: - It is evident that material advances and reductions would result from unifying ratings in the several territories, the effect of which on (railway) revenue cannot be determined until new rate scales are made to conform to the ratings of a uniform classi- fication, and applied to traffic moving during a representative period of time by individual carriers. As to the effect on trade: There are no statistics available to your committee prepared in such detail as would enable it to 102 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION determine with accuracy what proportion of the freight traffic of the country is now carried on the basis of classified ratings, but having in mind the fact that through freight rates fre- quently affect trade, it must be apparent that the numerous advances and reductions in rates which would result from a uni- form classification, could not fail to have influence upon the trade conditions of the country, the extent of which could not be determined until new rate scales are made to conform to the ratings of a uniform classification, and the mercantile and indus- trial interests of the country have applied them to their business. With the knowledge derived from three months of earnest work, exhaustive investigation, and thorough discussion, your committee expresses the belief that while establishment of a uni- form classification is impracticable at this time, it can ultimately be worked out along intelligent and satisfactory lines. 14 The difficulties of readjustment were amply illustrated in the hearings before the Western Classification Com- mittee prior to the publication of Western Classification No. 51. The tardiness of the railways in bringing about the simplification contemplated in the appointment of the uniform classification committee of 1907 must not be too hastily ascribed to neglect or wilfulness. The Commis- sion feels no doubt that it has exercised a great deal of patience in the matter, and that further delay is inexcus- able. A quarter of a century of urgent messages to Con- gress without attaining the end in view would be suffi- cient, no doubt, to irritate any administrative body. The progress made towards unification during the few years prior to the enactment of the Interstate Commerce Law of 1887 was so substantial that the Commission assumed at once that a single classification was well on the way towards accomplishment. It is likely that in 1887 it 14 Railroad Age Gazette (Sept. 3, 1909), 415. UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION 103 had hardly realized the seriousness of the obstacles in the way of this. Before dismissing the problem of uniform classifica- tion, a brief reference to certain general differences of construction may be of advantage. Attention has been directed already to the differences in the rules. There is a point in connection with the assignment of items to certain classes which deserves notice here. Shipments governed by the Western Classification are not classed at present lower than fourth class when shipped in less- than-carload quantities. In the Official Classification, a very small per cent of such shipments are classed at lower than fourth class, while, in the Southern Classi- fication, almost one-third of the less-than-carload ship- ments is in the fifth and lower classes. To harmonize these differences is a problem of the greatest difficulty. With the aid of the uniform classification committee the classification committees are endeavoring to do something towards its solution, but progress is not rapid. TABLE 3 Western . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E Official . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 R25 R26 R28 Southern . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 A B C D E H F Canadian . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 The classes are not the same for any two of the inter- State classifications. This is obvious from Table 3. The Canadian and the Western each have ten classes, but the last five classes of the Western are numbered by letters. The Official Classification has only six regular classes and three rules, while the Southern has thirteen regular classes, the first six being numbered by numerals and the last seven by letters. 104 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION In general, the class rates are less on the higher num- bered classes. In the Western Classification, however, Class-A rate is usually higher than the fifth-class rate. The rates in the Official Classification usually descend from Class 1 to Class 6, and Rules 25, 26, and 28 fall between the other classes. Rule 25 is 85 per cent of the second-class rate, but not lower than the third-class; Rule 26 is 80 per cent of the third-class rate, but not lower than the fourth-class rate, while Rule 28 provides for arbitra- ries over the fourth-class rate, as shown in the table con- tained in the classification. The rates governed by the Southern Classification, however, do not descend class by class from the first to the thirteenth class. Table 4 con- tains a comparative presentation of the order of the classes arranged according to the amount of the rates between different points. From St. Louis to New Orleans the order is different in a number of cases from that from Atlanta to New York. That is, the class rates of this classification territory are not arranged in a regularly descending scale, nor are the amounts of the rates in different tariffs arranged in the same order. For example, from St. Louis to New Orleans Class B is in the seventh order, and from Atlanta to New York Class B is in the ninth order. Obversely, from St. Louis to New Orleans Class E is in the ninth order, and from Atlanta to New York it is in the seventh. These statements mean that the same classes could be used with different general levels of class rates and with different relations of amounts of the rates for the several classes. That is, a uniform classification does not necessarily force uni- formity (either absolute or relative) of rates. UNIFORMI CLASSIFICATION 105 TABLE 4 COMPARATIVE AMOUNT—ORDER OF CLASSES BETWEEN DIFFERENT POINTS GOVERNED BY THE SOUTHERN CLASSIFICATION - Order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 || 2 | 3 || 4 5. 6|| 7 || 8 || 9 |10|11||12 || 13 Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1| 2 || 3 | H | 4 || 5 || B | 6 || Eſ Aſ C. A F | D Rate + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90| 75|| 65|57 |50|40|38|35|28||25 ||25 |22% |20 Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 2|3|4|H|5|E| 6|B C D 4F|A Rate * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126|108|95|81| 76|66|64|54|53|45 4444 41 * From St. Louis, Mo., to New Orleans, La., M. P. Washburn’s Tariff, I. C. C. No. 86. * From Atlanta, Ga., to New York, N. Y., E. H. Hinton's Tariff, I. C. C. No. A-65, - To secure uniformity of railway freight classification in the United States requires, it will now be understood, that the three existing classifications be remodeled in five different respects, viz., (1) description of items, (2) rules and regulations, (3) minimum carload weights, (4) number and designation of class divisions, and (5) assign- ment of items to these divisions. Much has been done towards unification of the rules and of description of items. Greater correspondence in the minimum carload weights is apparent. But the final step, the adoption of identical divisions, containing identical items, is the diffi- cult part of the problem of uniformity. Of course, this assimilation of the class divisions of the three classifica- tions would not necessarily mean an identity of rates; the railways in the eastern, southern, and western sections of the country would still be able to fix both the general level of class rates and the relation of the classes with a cer- tain regard to the business needs of their particular sec- tions. But the inconvenience that would result would probably cause an insistent demand for special treatment, and the simplification of classification would seem to lead inevitably to a complexity of commodity tariffs. Of late years, the annual number of commodity tariffs 106 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION has decreased, but, when extensive classifications were first employed, there developed at the same time a con- siderable number of exceptional tariffs. If this was true of unification within the smaller areas of the present interstate classifications, it is more than likely that the unification of these classifications into a single one would give rise to an amazing litter of exceptional ratings and commodity tariffs. The larger the area of application of a classification, the less flexible it can be and, therefore, the more urgent the demand for exceptional treatment. The increase of simplicity in class tariffs brought about by uniform classification would be apt to be counter-bal- anced by an increase of complexity in commodity tariffs. Perhaps the most feasible method of constructing a uni- form classification would be to base the grouping of each item upon that of the classification in whose area its traffic importance happened to be the greatest, the needs of other areas being taken care of by commodity tariffs. Such a method of procedure would enable the change to be made with the minimum amount of disturbance to existing business relations. But one may be permitted to express a doubt as to whether the change would be worth the trouble. The mere labor of overhauling the classifications, involving the reconsideration of the tariffs interlocked with them,” would be enormous. The gain in simplicity over the rate system as a whole would be ques- tionable. Of course, such complications as at present occur in the case of traffic passing from one territory to another would disappear, but it is not at all clear that the discriminations associated with these inter-classifi- cation arrangements would not be largely continued by 15 Ripley, W. Z., Railroads: Rates and Regulation, 347. UNIFOR \} ("}_ASSIFICATION i07 the aid of special tariffs. In any case, in so far as the discriminations are unreasonable, they are subject under the existing system to the control of the regulating authorities. The writer does not mean to take the position that existing classification arrangements are beyond criticism. There is reason, perhaps, to doubt whether such unifi- cation as has taken place in the past has always been based upon adequate consideration of economic equity, whether particular interests have not been over-ridden, whether the prosperity of some districts has not been arti- ficially promoted at the expense of others. Even the geographical adjustment of the established classification territories might be challenged. It is easy to take for granted the economic justification of such a classification as the Western, yet a brief survey of the extremely varied commercial and industrial conditions of the extensive territory west of the Illinois-Indiana State Line and the Mississippi River south of Cairo, Ill., readily gives rise to a query as to the adaptability of a single classification to such a variety of conditions. In each of the present classification territories, districts of more or less marked industrial differentiation have been treated alike for the purposes of classification. But in spite of inconsistencies, of indefensible differences, between one classification and another, of unduly complex applications, the system as a whole appears to have been brought, by experiment, to a certain degree of agreement with actual economic conditions. The classifications as originally framed may have been crude and arbitrary but time and experience have enabled them to be fairly well adjusted to their business environments, and business arrangements have been built upon them as a basis. This process of adjust- 108 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION ment has lessened considerably the original shortcomings of the system. During the past five years, the influence of the Interstate Commerce Commission has been exerted to induce the railways to overhaul the respective classifi- cations more critically than ever, excising unnecessary differences. There is reason to hope that, gradually, some of the more complicated applications may be simpli- fied out of existence. As the country becomes more thickly populated, economic relations more closely inter- woven, greater similarity of industrial conditions is likely to develop even in this wide land, and thereby the way made clear for a further application of the principle of uniformity in classification practice, without incurring the evil of an excessive resort to exceptional ratings. 3. EARLY UNIFORMITY PROBABLE The trend of events, however, indicates that this grad- ual evolution of uniformity will not take place. The rail- ways will probably be compelled to adopt a uniform classification within a very few years. The whole pro- cess of adjustment will have to be gone over again, unless the Commission and the railways become endued with the wisdom of the gods enabling them to see in advance the many points of friction that can possibly arise out of a new consolidated classification. Numerous business relations will be likely to be kept in a state of greater or less disturbance until, again, time and experience have demonstrated the conditions favorable to a state of rest. The immediate gain to be secured from a single classifi- cation may seem very definite. The writer is of the opinion that it has been over-estimated, and that the possibilities of simplification of the present three-part system have been under-estimated. He feels that the UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION 109 varying industrial conditions of the country still favor adherence to the existing plan in its main features; he fears that the imposition of a made-to-order uniform classification would bring with it grave risk of a mal- adjustment, the insidious effects of which would be all the more serious because a clear vision of the same would be readily obscured by the complexity of economic action and reaction. On the other hand, it is a weighty argument in favor of the change that for twenty-five years the Inter- state Commerce Commission has steadily maintained its desirability. This is shown very clearly in the various utterances of that body, a summary of which we take pleasure in quoting from the decision concerning Westeril Classification No. 51, to which reference has been made on several preceding pages. The quotation will conclude the present chapter. Speaking for the Commission, Mr. B. H. Meyer says: - In its first annual report, 1887, this Commission commended the work of the roads in reducing the number of classifications as “extremely important and useful,” but emphasized the necessity of a single classification for the entire country. Repeated men- tion of the importance of unification was made by the Commis- sion in its succeeding annual reports. Its desirability was recog- nized and urged again and again by state railroad commission- ers assembled in their annual conventions, by shippers’ organiza- tions throughout the country, and by railroad officials themselves. After the act took effect, unjust discriminations and other grievances, resulting from disagreeing classifications, were among the first complaints requiring investigation. In Pyle dº Sons v. E. T. V. dº G. Ry. Co., 1 I. C. C., 465, the Commission said: One of the many embarrassments connected with transportation of freight by railroads consists in the fact that there is such a lack of uniformity in the classifications of freight found in the different por- tions of the country. In another case where the Commission was called upon to 110 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION investigate classifications it was declared (referred to on page 55 of the seventh annual report, 1893)— The inconsistencies in the treatment of such shipments by different carriers under different classifications, and frequently by the same carriers where different classifications are used for different destina- tions, have been a source of constant annoyance to the community, and Have constituted one of the little things the multiplication of which has tended to create and intensify a feeling of irritation against railroads and their managers. The whole matter is in a state of elaborate and unjustifiable confusion. In its seventh annual report to Congress, 1893, page 55, the Commission declared: Our experience in making investigations and administering the law affords many illustrations of the confusion and injustice which comes as the direct effect of a varying, diverse, and conflicting arrangement. The field of interchange of products has so extended that the products of every section reach the markets of every other section of the country. The margin of profit upon all is so narrow that an error in rates as the result of differing classification takes away profits and brings vexations and loSSes. In its eleventh annual report, 1897, page 70, the Commission said: That the present diversity results in many discriminations and losses can not be doubted, and there is no single step that may be taken by the Carriers which will go so far to secure the establishment of stable rates as the adoption of a single and comparatively fixed classification. These are but a few of the many declarations the Commis- sion has made upon this subject. As often as it has had occasion to refer to the subject of a uniform basis for rate schedules over the whole country, whether in annual reports, opinions rendered, correspondence had, or personal conferences, it has not failed to emphasize the importance and indeed the necessity for such uniformity. It has been the opinion of the Commission from the begin- ning that the work of unification could best be undertaken by the carriers themselves. During the early years when the move- ment toward uniformity seemed to give promise for the estab- lishment of a single classification for the entire country, the Commission was quite insistent that the railroads should not be interfered with in the work. In its second annual report, 1888, in summing up its conclusions on this subject, the Commission said: UNIFORML CLASSIFICATION 111 So long as carriers appear to be laboring toward unification with reasonable diligence and in good faith it is better that they should be encouraged and stimulated to continue their efforts than that the work should be taken out of their hands. The Commission comments as follows, in its fifth annual report, 1891, page 28, upon the resolution offered in Congress in 1888: The failure of this resolution to pass the Senate was a circumstance which the Commission did not regret, since it appeared then, as it does now, that the action desired could be taken by the railway authorities themselves, if they could within any reasonable time be induced to act, with much less risk of injury to the financial interests of the carriers and of the public than would attend the efforts of the Commission Or any other public agency to establish a uniform classification. In its attitude toward the proposed uniform classification of 1890 the Commission was extremely liberal, as is evidenced by the following extracts from its annual report of that year: For a considerable period, therefore, after the new classification shall be given effect it must be expected that modifications will from time to time be made as the practical application to the business of the Country shall make plain the necessity or the justice of changes. It is also to be expected that many objections will go beyond criticism of particular features and that those who have insisted from the first that uniform classification was impracticable will not immediately cease from urging that view warmly and earnestly, so that possibly it may appear for a time as if the business public condemned the work. But temporary opposition of at least the interests affected is a necessary attendant upon any considerable reform in railway service, and the agreement upon a uniform classification, however defective the work may at first appear to be, is of itself, as the Commission believes, in Some sense a reform, because it brings the carriers together on a com- mon platform and fixes in the minds of managers the fact that the question involved is no longer one of making a common classification but of perfecting it. For reasons stated in the report, and which would be obvious with- out stating, it is but reasonable and just to the carriers endeavoring to effect this reform that great patience on the part of the people be invoked while the new classification is being put in ſorce and is having its first effect on the business of the country. It is very plain that large numbers of Shippers, and to some extent whole Sections of the Country, must be disappointed in the rating of their articles, and that many interests must for a time necessarily sacrifice something to the g(\lneral good. Any such work is only accomplished by numerous coln- |rºmises of divergent interests, and it is reasonably to be expected that there will be found in every section of the country those who believe 112 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION that the changes have been made in the wrong direction, with the con- sequent result that their own interests suffer from the modi- fications in classification which injure where they should have helped them. All such complaints will no doubt have due attention, but when the work is perfected and the business of the Country has had time to adapt itself to uniform classification, there is every reason to believe the advantages to the country at large and to business interests in every section will be so great and so obvious as to COmpel universal acknowledgement. Upon the failure of adoption of the uniform classification proposed in 1890, the Commission, in its fifth annual report, 1891, stated that: “It does not feel justified in asking for further efforts of the carriers the same measure of indulgence which from time to time it has heretofore suggested should be extended to them, and which was thought to be required in the public inter- est,” and recommended to Congress the passage of an act “requir- ing the adoption within one year from the date of its passage of a uniform classification of freight by the carriers subject to the act to regulate commerce, and providing that if the same be not adopted within the time limited, either this Commission or some other public authority be required to adopt and enforce a uni- form classification.” It has been the attitude not only of the Commission, but also of state railroad commissioners, as expressed in resolutions adopted at their annual conventions, and of ship- pers, that the country can not without legislative inducement expect uniformity within a reasonable time as the result of volun- tary action of railway officials. This Commission has, however, continued to be of the opinion that the practical experience of the carriers gives them a special fitness for the task. Thus we find the following expression by the Commission in its eleventh annual report, 1897, pages 68 and 69: It is evident that the carriers themselves, by mutual concessions and through voluntary and harmonious action, can accomplish this reform with much less loss, embarrassment, and friction than will pre- Sumably result if COngreSS Or SOme delegated tribunal establishes a class- ification for them. It was therefore with distinct interest and satisfaction that the Commission noted the definite steps recently taken by carriers to establish a standard classification which should take the place of the existing separate classifications. After commenting upon the work done in revising rules, regulations, and descriptions, the Commission, in its annual report for 1910, says: UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION 113 The question of determining a uniform number of classes for rate assignments is recognized as a more difficult and intricate problem, and it is realized that a somewhat longer time will be necessary for consid- eration and adjustment to this feature of uniformity. It was thought proper by the Commission to suggest to the carriers that as rapidly as any of the features of uniformity were determined upon by the uniform committee the same should be incorporated in the existing classifications, as under this plan an increasing degree of uniformity may be gradually accomplished. The Commission has always realized that the difficulties and work connected with the establishment of a uniform classifica- tion, or even approximating a uniform classification, are very great. It has constantly been recognized that the final adjust- ment of a uniform classification must necessarily be the arrange- ment of a great number of compromises. On pages 32 and 33 o its fourth annual report, 1890, the Commission said: - It was perfectly obvious that the merging could not be effected by the voluntary action of the railroad authorities which had made the classification without very great concessions being made on every side— concessions the necessary effect of which must be, while lowering the relative rates upon some articles of commerce, to very considerably increase them upon others. Not only would the roads be affected thereby, but every section of the country would of necessity be com- pelled to resign something of the advantage which before it has enjoyed in respect to its special products or industries; and it could not be expected to assent to this willingly until it should be made to see that adequate compensation was made in other directions. It would not be enough that the completion of such a work could plainly be seen to be of national importance and politic and useful for the people as a whole, but it must also be evident to any particular section that it lost nothing by its accomplishment. Even when this was obvious, the local interests unfavorably affected by the unification must be expected to oppose it vigorously. On the other hand the Commission has said In re Advances in Rates on Locomotives and Tenders, 21 I. C. C., 103: While every effort conducive to uniformity of classification is to be commended, it does not follow that that result should be attained by accepting as a standard a classification prescribing a rate which when applied to a given commodity or territory becomes unreasonable. It was further recognized by the Commission that: When unification is finally accomplished, whether by the voluntary action of the carriers themselves or as a result of compulsory legis- 114 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION lation, there must be a transition period while the country is being familiarized with it when some degree of embarrassment and dissatis- faction is to be expected and when large demands will be made upon the patience and forbearance of the general public while business is adapting itself to the working of the new order of things. [Fifth annual report, 1891, page 34.] Although recognizing that there are great difficulties to be overcome, the Commission has constantly maintained the view that unification is practical. That this is entirely practicable is demonstrated by the great ad- vance which has already been made toward uniformity, and by the fact that such progress could not have been attained without the subordination of business and carrying interests in various localities to the commercial and transportation Conveniences of the Country at large. The accomplishment of uniform classification involves only a continuance of the work upon the line of rendering individual interest and local advantage subservient to the general welfare. That this will not require any real sacrifice or injury is proven by the absence of any proposition to retrace a single step in the work which has been done toward securing uniformity; on the contrary, all interested parties Concede the great desirability, and most commercial interests urge the necessity, of a single freight classification. [Eighth annual report, 1894, page 35.] In its eleventh annual report, 1897, page 67, the Commis- sion says: But these difficulties are not insurmountable to men of long exper- ience in work of this sort, and it is believed that the great mass of freight articles could be fairly grouped by them in a single classification. They would take into account whether commodities were crude, rough, or finished; liquid or dry ; knocked down or set up; loose or in bulk, nested or in boxes, or otherwise packed ; if vegetables, whether green or dry, desiccated or evaporated ; the market value and shipper's repre- sentations as to their character; the cost of service, length and direc- tion of haul; the season and manner of shipment; the space occupied and weight; whether in Carload or less-than-Carload lots; the volume of annual shipments to be calculated on ; the sort of car required, whether flat, gondola, box, tank, or Special ; whether ice or heat must be fur- nished; the speed of trains necessary for perishable or otherwise rush goods; the risk of handling, either to the goods themselves or other property; the weights, actual and estimated; the carrier's risk or Owner's release from damage or loss. All these circumstances, bewilder- ing as they appear to a layman, are comparatively simple to the expert; and the considerations which have retarded the adoption of a uniform classification have had little to do with difficulties of this description.16 16 25 I. C. C. Rep., 459-64. TEST QUESTIONS These questions are for the Student to use in testing his knowledge of the assignment. The answers should be written out, but are not to be sent to the University. RULES OF OFFICIAL, SouTHERN, AND WESTERN CLASSIFI- CATIONS 1. Under what circumstances will carriers accept property of extraordinary value? 2. Is there material difference in the specifications of the three classifications in regard to additional weight for extra- length cars? 3. Which classification allows a deduction in weight for cars less than 36 feet long 3 4. Is Rule 8 of the Western important in showing how lower rates may be obtained? 5. Does the use of the uniform bill of lading affect the rates charged ? 6. When no carload rates are provided for an article, what rate will be used ? 7. Compare the rules of the three classifications in regard to articles requiring two or more cars on account of length. 8. How are parts or pieces constituting a complete article to be billed 3 9. Wherein do the minimum charge requirements differ ? 10. Is Rule 18 of the Western important in billing carload freight? 11. What important difference is there between the West- ern and the Southern in regard to minimum charge on shipments loaded on open cars? 12. Discuss the requirements in regard to billing mixed car- loads. 13. Can all freight in excess of full carloads be billed at car- load rates under Rule 24 of the Western ? 14. What allowance is made in regard to weight of racks, braces, etc., used to hold freight in place in a car? 15. Discuss the rules in regard to refrigeration of freight in Carloads. 115 116 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 16. Who must provide men and fuel for heated cars? 17. Will the carriers as a rule accept less-than-carload freight requiring protection against heat or cold 2 18. How may the prepayment of freight charges be avoided when the classification has such a requirement? 19. Do carriers as a rule undertake to furnish tank cars? 20. What steps should be taken to secure the lowest rate possible for an article not classified in the Official? 21. If an article is not classified, what steps should be taken to bring about proper classification? 22. If rules governing the movement of freight do not appear under the general rules in a classification, where else may they be found ! UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION 23. What progress has been made toward a uniform classi- fication since 1887 ? 24 Name five problems in the unification of the present inter- state classifications. - 25. Discuss the most important and difficult problems. 26. In the scale of rates between Chicago and New Orleans shown in Chapter I, does the charge for the different classes de- scend regularly from Class 1 to Class F2 27. What has been the attitude of the Commission toward a uniform classification ? 28. Discuss the feasibility of the adoption of a uniform classi- fication at the present time. Give your own views; do not fol- low the treatise unless your views coincide with those of the author. FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION JJN 23 1926 | \, , - ONE OF A SERIES OF TREATISES IN AN INTERSTATE COMMERCE AND RAILWAY TRAFFIC course. ERNEST Ritson DEwsNUP Piuſeusof uſ Railway Adiniuintration º The University of Illinois t . . . . part s PRINCIPLES OF FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION RATE THEORY (Non-Residen } nstruction CHICAGO INTERSTATE commerce AND A*, Prepared under Editorial Supervision of -. Samuel MacClintock, Ph.D, The subjects listed below constitute the basic material of a course in Interstate Commerce and Railway Traffic. This course is especially designed to meet the constantly growing demand for efficiently trained men in railroad and industrial traffie work; to assist students to pass the exam- inations for government service under the Interstate Com- merce Commission; and to meet the demand for men com- petent to direct the work of commercial organizations and traffic bureaus. With the exception of the Atlas of Railway Traffic Maps, the subjects listed below are COvered in an average of approximately 200 pages each. Atlas of Railway Traffic Maps Freight Classification Freight Rates: Official Classification Territory and East- ern Canada - Freight Rates: Southern Territory - Freight Rates: Western Territory Publication and Filing of Tariffs Bases for Freight Charges, Reducing Freight Charges . . . to a Minimum, §. Freight Shipments, Freight Claims, The Bill of Lading, and The Industrial Traffic Department. - Railway Organization, Statistics, and Accounting Express and Parcel Post - - Water Traffic and Rates Government Control of Common Carriers Interpretation of the Act to Regulate Commerce Rulings of the Interstate Commerce Commission and Procedure before that body . . . . . . . . . Business Law, I Business Law, iſ The Law of Carriers of Goods. Practical Traffic Problems LASALLE ExTENSION UNIVERSITY CHAPTER VIII PRINCIPLES OF FIREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 1. CARLOAD v. LESS-THAN-CARLOAD LOTs (a) Special Ratings for Carloads Allowed One of the most obvious features of a freight classifica- tion is the application of its ratings to both carload and less-than-carload consignments. Early in its history, the Interstate Commerce Commission went on record as acknowledging the propriety of special ratings for articles carried in carload lots. Thus in Harvard Co. v. P. R. R. Co., it stated: “That a reasonable, fair, and just difference may be made in proportion to quantity hauled of the same article in a full carload and in less- than-carload lots, and that respective rates may be charged upon such according to weight is a principle that has been openly recognized by the Commission. That a rate-maker may, and in fact should, take into con- sideration * * * such controlling conditions, in pre- paring a classification, as bulk and space occupied, the weight of the article as compared with its dimensions, its value, whether it can be so loaded into a car as to make a full carload, and whether as a matter of fact, it is hauled in carloads as well as in less than carloads, are each and all true.” 1 Obviously, the principle upon which reduced ratings 14 I. C. C. Rep., 32. 117 118 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION for carload shipments rest is that of cost of service. The direct costs of transportation are lower for a carload shipment than for a similar volume of the same kind of traffic made up of numerous consignments from several shippers. In general, the loading and unloading facilities required are of the simplest description, and the loading and unloading of the car are at the expense of the shipper and consignee. * On such grounds, current practice justifies the differentiation in rating, but it must be borne in mind that this differentiation can be made only in the most approximate kind of way. For one reason, the interval between the carload and less-than- carload grouping has no significance until interpreted into dollars and cents by the rate schedule. So long as the classification is not associated with a specific rate schedule, there are neither absolute values nor precise relative values attaching to its classes. * Even when so interpreted, since the limitation of the number of groups compels the inclusion, in each group, of commodities appreciably different as regards their convenience of 2 Business Men’s League of St. Louis v. A. T. & S. F. R. R. Co., 9 I. C. C. Rep., 345.-“The carriers further justify these differentials by difference in cost of service. It is obvious that the actual expense of handling less-than-Carload business is greater than it is for car- load traffic. The Carload is generally loaded and unloaded by the shipper, while the less-than-Carload is handled by the carrier. In the former Case there is but One entry for each Carload, while in the latter there are from 25 to 150 in Case of each car which must be extended upon all books where a minute of the transaction is entered. The expense of providing station facilities is very much greater in the case of less-than-Carload than Carload business.” 3 That is, if the classification groups be taken as a whole. The groups higher than first class have a definite relation to the first class, of course, and such a rule as No. 25 or No. 26 of the Official Classification establishes a relation between the groups immediately COncerned. PRINCIPLES 119 movement by the carrier, the specific rate ultimately applied to the group by the rate schedule can be no more than an average, and, at that, largely estimated because of the peculiar intricacy of operating expendi- tures. If the reduced operating costs of the carrier constitute a justification of the low ratings assigned to carload ship- ments, why should not the principle be carried out to a logical completion and still lower ratings be granted to commodities shipped in trainloads? Should a train- load consist of cars destined to various points and there- fore required to be reclassified in the freight yards, the reduction of operating costs is not sufficiently great, perhaps, to justify a difference in rating, but where the trainload is billed to a single consignee at one point of delivery there is unquestionably a very appreciable saving to the carrier in the expenses of handling the same. Cost- of-service considerations are overruled and trainload ratings refused, however, on the ground that they would be opposed to public welfare in that they would facilitate the control of industries, in which such shipments were practicable, by a few large concerns, and consequently give rise to monopolistic agreements inimical to the con- sumer. But even single carload ratings have favored the large concern as against the small one, the difference being only one of degree. The domination of the large business does not appear to be lessened materially by the present system; possibly its development would pro- ceed more rapidly in the future were trainload rates operative. A classification without any carload ratings is con- ceivable. If public welfare is a sufficiently important consideration to overrule adjustment to cost of serviće: ::: 120 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION is such welfare best served by a carload system or by an any-quantity system of ratings? The total revenue of the carriers being assumed to remain undisturbed, the any-quantity ratings would lie between the present less- than-carload and carload ratings. Wholesale distribu- tion would be discouraged, retail encouraged. The com- petition of the small producer with the large one would be stimulated. The jobber whose present business is built upon his ability to take advantage of a carload rate to his own town, thence distributing locally by less- than-carload consignments, would suffer, his business falling partly into the hands of the manufacturers themselves who would tend to assume, more largely, the distribution of their own products, and partly into the hands of the jobbers at the points of import of foreign goods. On the whole, the disadvantages of this arrange- ment to the country at large would not be compensated by the advantages attributable to the reduction of the number of intermediaries engaged in the work of distri- bution. (b) When a Commodity Entitled to Carload Rating A system allowing carload ratings having been estab- lished, when should a commodity be regarded as entitled to such a rating? An interesting discussion of this point by Commissioner B. H. Meyer is herewith reproduced: We desire here to direct attention to the fundamental ques- tion, “When is a commodity entitled to a carload rating 2'' Western Classification No. 50 gave mousetraps a carload rating, and No. 51 denies it. No. 50 denied a carload rating to caraway seed, and No. 51 grants it. No. 50 granted a carload ... rate on bird seed and No. 51 denies it. In No. 51 there are car. ; : : 49ad ratings on shoe pegs and dog-biscuits, while No. 50 contained PRINCIPLES 121 no such ratings. Upon what basis should such questions be decided ? It is apparent that a manufacturer who can ship mouse- traps by the Carload has an advantage over the manufacturer who can not do so to the extent of the difference between the Carload and the less-than-Carload rate minus the cost of loading and unloading. The mousetrap being an article of general use, but restricted volume of demand, can conceivably be manufac- tured in many localities to supply a local market. Shipments by the local manufacturer to nearby distributing points would naturally be in less-than-Carload quantities and at less-than-car- load rates. If, now, a distant manufacturer can secure carload rating and ship into this local territory through his jobbers, he may possibly drive the local man out of the field, and to that extent and in this respect, the carload rating leads directly to concentration. On the other hand, a denial of carload rating on mousetraps might prevent a superior kind of trap from being introduced in territories which are now provided with only an inferior trap, locally manufactured and sold at a high price. Assuming that people are entitled to the best quality of mouse- trap at the lowest price, the conclusion follows that the car- load rating of mousetraps has a tendency to improve the quality of traps and to reduce their price to the users. This is without reference to the desirability of exterminating mice, a considera- tion of which in this connection, would open the door to many controversial fields. The conclusion in which argumentative considerations re- lating to this question reach a point of equilibrium appears to be this, that a carload rating should be established for a com- modity when that commodity can be offered for shipment in Carload quantities, unless public interests or other valid consid- erations require the contrary. We have in view primarily the territory affected by Western Classification and the practices heretofore in effect in that territory. It might be suggested that there should be a reasonable prospect of a minimum number of carloads within a certain period of time, but this leads to arbi- trary limitations when such limitations are not inherently neces- sary. Assuming a proper relation between carload and less- 122 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION than-Carload rates, the establishment of Carload ratings when- ever carload quantities are offered will, we believe, meet the needs of new and growing lines of industry without discrimi- nation.* (c) Minimum Weights The problem of carload rating involves the determina- tion of the minimum weights that shall be regarded as constituting a carload. In a general way, such minima are related to car capacity, so that a lower minimum is established for light and bulky commodities than for heavy. Clearly a discrimination of this kind is neces- sary. A car that will hold fifty tons of coal will not accommodate half, or nearly half, that quantity of hay. Full carloads of crated eggs and of steel bars represent very different weights indeed. While car capacity largely determines the carload minimum that shall be applied to each commodity given such a rating, the two are not necessarily identical. This may be due in part to differing car capacities, though the rules dealing with the increase of the minimum weight in the case of extra- length cars provide for some adjustment of such dif- ferences, but it is also due to the willingness of the carriers to make concessions that are likely to stimulate this class of business. Moreover, though recent years have witnessed an upward movement in carload minima, it is probably true that these minima have not kept pace with the expansion of average car capacity. The varia- tion in car capacity and the fact that the minima are, in general, not kept levelled up to the weight of actual full loads has allowed a certain amount of elasticity in the use of minima, within the limits of which adjustments have been made for purely commercial reasons. Com- 4 25 I. C. C. Rep., 464-465. PRINCIPLES 123 modities practically identical for transportation purposes have been assigned different minima, because, in the one case, a relatively high minimum was perfectly compatible with the customary conditions of shipment, whereas, in the other case, such a minimum would severely handicap the shipper on account of the nature of his trade. On the same commodities there are, frequently, differing minima imposed by the various existing classifications. As a rule, these variations accord with real differences in the conditions of sale and distribution, though it is not easy to trace the connection in some instances. The competition of carriers operating under diverse classifications has exercised appreciable influence upon the relations of carload minima to car capacities. The point at which the carload minimum is fixed is obviously a matter of great interest both to carrier and shipper. The higher that the minimum can be fixed without retard- ation of the flow of traffic, the more economically the carrier is able to handle the traffic. To the shipper, on the other hand, the high minimum may mean traffic restriction, on account of his enforced resort to the higher rates of the less-than-carload schedule, or, if not that, greater complications in the sale and distribution of his product. The average shipper is therefore in favor of a low minimum. The interests of the shipper and the railway are, in this matter, apparently in opposition." To move a given body of traffic, the railway would prefer large, heavily loaded cars and few of them, the shipper small, lightly loaded cars and many of them. The case, however, is not quite as simple as this, inasmuch as the large shippers are more favorably disposed toward the large car with high minimum than the small shipper, on 5 Dewsnup, E. R., Freight Car Efficiency, Proceedings of Western Railway Club (1908). 124 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION account of the fact that such a minimum is likely to handi- cap their smaller competitors. Of course, in so far as the benefit of permanent operating economies is distributable to the customers of the railway in the form of reduced rates, the large car and the high minimum load, favoring, as they do, more economical handling, are of ultimate advantage to the shipper, but, here again, the smaller shippers, unable to make use of carload rates by reason of the high minima, are still handicapped, and the larger shippers secure the benefits of the reduction. The danger of pushing requirements based on operating considera- tions to a point where they militate against perfectly free competition needs to be borne in mind. (d) Spread Between C. L. and L. C. L. Ratings The previous discussion calls our attention, very natur- ally, to another important feature in the determination of classification ratings, namely, the spread that should be allowed between carload and less-than-carload ratings. In Opinion No. 2110, In the matter of the Suspension of Western Classification No. 51, Commissioner Meyer urges the establishment of just relations between carload and less-than-carload quantities in accordance with some consistent principle. “All the different factors which enter into the establishment of a rate,” he says, “should be considered in the establishment of this classification and tariff schedule relationship. One of these elements which appears to be overlooked so frequently, judging by what is reflected in Table 5, is the difference in the cost to the carriers of conducting the carload and the less-than- carload traffic. This cost should be ascertained as ac- curately as possible, and due weight given to it in deter- PRINCIPLES 125 mining the classification and rates for less-than-carload quantities as compared with carload quantities.” " TABLE 5. CoMPARISON OF SPREAD BETWEEN C. L. AND L. C. L. RATES UNDER WESTERN CLASSIFICATION NO. 51 WITH THAT OF NO. 50. 1. TABLE BASED ON No. 51 WESTERN CLASSIFICATION Showing class rates on articles named L. C. L. and C. L. from Chi- cago, Ill., to Denver, Colo., Omaha, Neb., and St. Paul, Minn. Rates given are computed by applying No. 51 to existing rate schedules. From Chicago, Ill. To Denver, | To Omaha, | To St. Paul, Colo. Neb. Minn. º COMMODITY * tº ºn #3 § 3. #: tº Kº #: §§§ Q , --> +3. 3 +2 || --> Q , --> • #3 # ### # #3 # - §3 §3 | #5 Coffee (L. C. L., 4th. .. 85 | . . . . . 32|, ... . . 25|.... . e & e s tº t e º a e ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ) C. L., 5th.... 67 |78.82] 27|84.37| 2080. e L. C. L., 4th..] 85 |..... 32|, ... . . 25|.. * ... ." C. L. E......|40 47.05, 1850. 1852. º . . m * (L. C. L., 1st..|180 |.....] 80]..... 60)..... Pºsº Pº: 'Yo. L., 5th. ... 67 ||37.22, 27|33.74. 2038.33 Iron castings (over 100 pounds in bundles) L. C. L., 3d...]110 ! . . . . . . 45|..... 40|..... e Q & © º C. L., 5th. . . . . 67 |60.90 27|60. 20|50. L. C. L., D1... 360 |..... [160] ..... [120l. ... Powder, common black... }. ... so . . ." ... L. C. L., 3d. . [110 |..... 45|..... 40ſ. ... . Rakes, horse. . . . . . . . . . . . . C. L., A. . . . . . . 80% 73.18 32.71.11 25|62.5 Scythes L. C. L., 2d. ..., |145 |..... | 65|..... 50|..... • * ~ e e c e º 'º e º e º e º 'º ) C. L., A......] 80%|55.51| 32|49.23| 25|50. Threshers L. C. L., 1st. . 180 |..... 80]. ... . . 60)..... • * c e º 'º º ºs e º e º & © tº C. L., A. . . . . . . 80% |44.72: 32|40. 25|41.66 825 I. C. C. Rep., 467. 126 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 2. TABLE BASED ON No. 50 WESTERN CLASSIFICATION. Statement showing class rates on articles named L. C. L. and C. L. from Kansas City, Mo., to Denver, Colo., Oklahoma City, Okla., and Topeka, Kans., also the relative percentages. at the present time. Rates are those in effect From Kansas City, Mo. *ś" | #3. "º". Quantity o: *H oH COMMODITY ði, 3 g | #3 | # 2 | #3 || 3 g | # ###|##| ###|##|###|# °| #| * * | #|* ~ | #: LCL.IIIHF-ºf-35-tºis 240 it e e o 'º e º 'º e º º • S-Z's a–se 3 tº e º ſº © e tº º e e º e Conduits, cement C. L., E. . . . . 30 |46.1 23 ||37. 5% |36.6 Iron Castings (less than (L. C. L., 1st. .125 |.... 95 |.... 29 |.... 100 pounds) . . . . . . . . . . . . C. L., 5th. . . .] 50 |40. 46 |48.4|10 |34.4 Iron Castings (over 100 (L. C. L., 4th. 65 |.... 62 |.... [15 |.... pounds) . . . . . . . . tº e & e g º e a C. L., 5th. . . .] 50 |76.9| 46 |74.1/10 |66.6 L. C. L., D1..|250 |.... [190 |.... [58 |.... Powder, common black....}c, i.i.H., ; , ; ; , , ; , L. C. L., 3d. . 80 |.... 74 [.... [19 |.... Rakes, horse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. L., A. . . . . . 70 |75. 48 |64.8|12 |63.1 L. C. L., 2d. . .100 ! .... 82 |.... [24 |.... Scythes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. L., A. . . . . . 60 |60. 48 |58.5|12 |50. * L. C. L., 1st. [125 |....| 95 [....[29 |.... Threshers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. L., A. . . . . . 60 |48. 48 |50.5|12 |41.3 Coffee L. C. L.,4th..ſ 65 .... 62 |.... [15 |.... * e º e e s e e s tº e g º e º º e º e º º C. L., 5th. . . .] 50 |76.9| 46 |74.1/10 |66.6 Fibre packing boxes, N. O. S., (L. C. L., D1. .250 |.... 190 |.... |58 |.... empty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. L., 4th. ...} 65 |25. 62 |32.6/15 |25.8 Burial cases, Caskets, etc., (L. C. L., 2d... 100 |.... 82 |.... 24 |.... boxed. . . . . . . . . © e º e º e s e e is C. L., 3d. . . . . 80 |80. 74 |90.2|19 79.1 tº * tº e L. C. L., 4th. 65 |.... 62 |.... [15 . . Cement, building. . . . . . . . . . . 9 gº º g C. L., C. . . . . . . 40 ||61.5| 32 51.6| 8 |53.3 Gas burners and attach- L. C. L., 3d. . . 80 |.... 74 |.... 19 | . . . . ments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. L., 5th. . . .] 50 |62.5| 46 62.1]10 |52.6 L. C. L., 2d. . [100 |.... 82 |.... [24 -postS, bronze. . . . . . . . . 9 is s e e Lamp-postS, bron C. L., 4th. . . . 65 |65. 62 |75.6|15 62.5 e - L. C. L., 4th. , 65 . . . . . 62 |. ... [15 |. Pyrites. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 © gº º y C. L., D. . . . . . 35 |52.6] 26 |41.9 7 |46.6 L. C. L.,1% ..|187%|.... 142%|.... 43%|. Lamp and carbon, black. . . 2 2 : * * * * p C. L., 2d. . . . . 100 |53.3| 82 |57.5|24 |55. L. C. L., D1. .250 |.... [190 |.... [58 Pontoons, wooden or steel. . © e Q y % L., 8d. . . . . 80 |32. 74 |38.9|19 |32.7 PRINCIPLES 127 The language of the Commissioner would seem to indi- cate that just relations between carload and less-than- carload ratings are attained only when differences between the two ratings are equalized with the actual dif- ferences in cost of operation. There is much to be said in favor of the idea that, after the general position of a com- modity in the classification grouping is determined by whatever combination of considerations is regarded as proper for this purpose, any further modification for a Carload grouping should take into account only actual dif- ferences of cost to the carrier. But the idea is not capable of being applied in exact fashion. As previously stated, the very nature of a classification requires that the costs considered should be averaged and the classification rates may be very dissimilar to that ac- tually obtaining in this or that part of the territory to which the classification applies. The computation of such averages would be by no means easy, and the refinement of analysis of operating expenses that would be necessary would be such as hardly to facilitate uniformity of treat- ment. The discrimination that sometimes occurs under ex- isting classification practice would be apt to continue, the nature of which is aptly described by Professor W. Z. Rip- ley. Referring to a case in which the less-than-carload rate was 60 per cent greater than the carload, he says: “Two results of such discrimination are possible. In the first place, the large shipper is enabled to undersell his smaller competitor and perhaps to drive him out of that class of business. This may take place as between two dealers, both located in the South and buying their sup- plies from New York. The second result is that under such rates it is impossible for the manufacturer or northern jobber to sell direct from New York to the 128 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION retailer in the South in competition with the provincial jobber there located, who ships his goods in at the cheap carload rate and distributes them thereafter. The prob- lem thus concerns at the same time both the small local shipper or dealer, as against a more formidable pro- vincial competitor; and also the remote jobbers as a class against the whole group of local middlemen.” " 2. CARLOAD MIXTURES A question of considerable practical importance in the fixing of carload ratings is the liberality that should be shown in the treatment of carload mixtures. The rail- ways of the Official and the Western Classification terri- tories, respectively, have viewed the matter very differ- ently, as pointed out in a previous chapter. In the hear- ing before the Commission regarding the suspension of Western Classification No. 51, a most animated discus- sion took place with reference to the propriety and desir- ability of inserting in that classification a general per- mission for mixtures such as is granted by Rule 10 of the Official Classification. The arguments advanced pro and con are worth repetition. They are given, for- tunately, in epitomized form in the decision of the Com- mission, No. 2110, from which the following is taken: In support of the rule it was alleged that from a transporta- tion standpoint not a single objection can be raised to a car- load rate for mixed carloads. It was asserted that a carload rate is fundamentally a quantity rate based on economy in handling, that this is the only factor to be considered in making a carload rate, and that this economy is as absolutely a factor in the handling of a mixed carload of two or more commodities as it 7 Ripley, W. Z., Railroads: Rates and Regulation, 327. PRINCIPLES 129 is in the handling of a carload of one commodit: . The miscel- laneous nature of the contents of the car, point of origin, point of delivery, ownership of contents, how, where, or by whom sold or bought, whether manufactured, bought, or sold by one or more parties, whether one party or another is permitted to sell or buy were declared not proper factors to consider in the making of a carload rate nor in the granting of the privilege of mixing a carload of various commodities at a carload rate. Mixed car- loads were declared to be, in fact, carloads, and therefore entitled to a carload rate. From a commercial standpoint it was argued that the objectors to the rule are not entitled to an adjustment of rates and application of rules that will afford them protection against outside competition, that rates should not be built on the theory that they are entitled to a monopoly of the trade in their section. It was further contended that to allow one shipper to mix one class of goods and not to allow another shipper to mix another kind of goods, provided both shipments come under the well-established rule that justifies the making of carload rates— namely, economy in handling—constitutes a discrimination. Specific mixtures are generally especially suited to certain inter- ests and may not meet the needs and requirements of other shippers and receivers of freight. It was stated that there is no substantial difference between the equipment of western roads and roads operating in official classification territory where the rule has been in force for a long time, without any apparent hardship to the carriers, such as would result from nonintelligent or extraordinary mixtures, necessitating the use of expensive equipment for articles which should move in cheap cars. It was further stated that it should be borne in mind that the rate and the minimum must be taken together, and that the highest rate and the proper minimum are actually paid by the shipper, and that the shipment is entitled to a carload rate even where the commodity, which governs as to rate and mini- mum, constitutes but a small portion of the carload. In supple- ment 8 to official classification No. 38 the rule has been amended as shown above so as to require that the commodity which shall 130 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION govern as to rate and minimum shall equal at least 10 per cent. of the entire shipment. It is alleged, however, that such a provi- sion would exclude the privilege of mixing in many instances when it ought to be accorded. In regard to the centralization of distribution, feared by the opponents of the rule, it was asserted that there is no territory where industry and commerce are more equally and properly divided and disbursed than in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and those states which grew under the mixed-carload rule. #: jºk :}; Sk 3. * #: :: $ # # :}; $: $ #: :: Opponents of the rule alleged that the present specific mix- tures do not necessitate the employment of any different equip- ment than would be employed if you shipped each of the component parts in that mixture by straight carloads, but that under the proposed rule the carrier may be required to accept any mixture which the most extraordinary shipper may thrust upon it, such as would necessitate putting a commodity which Ought to go into a cheap car in an expensive car. The mixture of furniture and pig iron was used as an illustration. To require a carrier to use more expensive equipment than is necessary was declared to be virtually lowering his rate on the article so trans- ported, in that its earnings are decreased. r The non-intelligent mixture, such as would increase the car- riers’ risk, due to damage to freight, was mentioned as another reason for not allowing absolute freedom of mixtures. While it was recognized that such mixtures would seldom occur, it was argued that a rule should not be so formed as to give anyone the power to perpetrate a wrong, even though it be improbable that this power be exercised. . It is often contended that the rule under consideration is unfair, in that the shipper, by loading a less quantity than the prescribed minimum of commodity taking a higher rate but lower minimum, can secure the shipment at a lower cost than if the lower rate and its minimum or the less-than-Carload charge were applied. In answer to the argument that the denial of universal mix- ture would result in discrimination, it was stated that those who feel themselves discriminated against have the privilege of PRINCIPLES 131 appealing to the carriers or to the Commission, in the proper way, to have formulated a specific mixture rule that will cover their situation. - w The opponents of the rule further stated that its application to western territory would result in a concentration of distribu- tion for the entire western country at Chicago. Emphasis was laid on the fact that the Commission is not formulating rules as it would if it were beginning with a virgin situation, entirely untrammeled by any preexisting conditions, but that we are dealing with a mass of rates that have already been established and with communities which have grown up under certain conditions. With the building of the west dis- tributors have come westward, great business and great estab- lishments have been erected and have their foundation in the transportation situation that has prevailed. Disastrous effects would result to the trade of these western jobbers, it was asserted, if the rule were applied. From an economic standpoint, it was argued that it is to the best interests of society that each community should have within it all the elements necessary to its well-being, and that conse- Quently too great concentration of distribution is undesirable, even though such concentration might result in lower prices. The conclusion of the Commission on the matter was as follows: Considering the facts of record and giving due weight to the arguments on both sides, we express the view that the some- what general restriction and elimination of mixtures in No. 51 was a mistake and contrary to the best interests of the carriers themselves as well as of the public. In many former proceed- ings our attention has been forcefully directed to expensive terminals which carriers are obliged to maintain, especially in large cities. A great proportion of such terminal properties is devoted to freight service. Great warehouses and correspond- ingly expensive loading platforms and accessory facilities are given up to less-than-Carload shipments. Every consolidation of these individual packages, or groups of packages, into car- load quantities saves not only storage and handling facilities but 132 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION also car space. The latter is especially important during times of car shortage. The committee which worked out No. 51, even though it nowhere expresses it in so many words, was obviously aiming constantly at a better utilization of car space. A liberal- ization of mixtures in the classification and the resulting con- solidation of small shipments into carload lots will tend directly to a better utilization of car space and the saving of investments in railway terminals and their operation.8 Without denying the correctness of the general atti- tude of the Commission on this point, one may be allowed to doubt whether its argument in support of the same is particularly impressive. How far a better utilization of car space is actually secured by the mixture, provision is not shown convincingly. To the extent to which the application of the rule means the conversion of minimum carloads into capacity carloads, or, at any rate, loads nearer to capacity, the contention of the Commission must be accepted. But this represents only a part of the field of operation of the rule, the greatest usefulness of which to the shipper consists in the permission it gives to make carload consignments (minimum ones possibly) out of what would otherwise be entirely less-than-carload shipments. Certainly, more carloads are thus provided, yet it is somewhat of an open question whether the cars employed are more effectively utilized than where the freight, as less-than-carload consignments, is passed over the platforms of the freight houses. And it goes without saying that unclassified statistics of the average lading of carload shipments and of less-than-Carload shipments do not prove anything. Moreover, when loading and unloading delays are taken into account, as Surely they 8 25 I. C. C. Rep., 469-471. PRINCIPLES 133 should in considering the effective use of car space, this part of the argument of the Commission does not gain in strength. As regards economy in the matter of freight terminal expenditures, it would be interesting to have data as to the extent to which the operation of Official Rule 10 has enabled these expenditures to be curtailed. Generally speaking, such facilities are not so finely adjusted to the traffic that the withdrawal of what would hardly be likely to be a heavy proportion of the total less-than-car- load traffic would much reduce capital terminal expenses. Unless the Commission is so optimistic as to anticipate the development of a system of spediteurs (forwarders) taking over practically the whole of the freight at present handled over the platforms, freight stations of some sort would still have to be provided, and team-track accom- modation would have to be expanded, so that the saving in dollars and cents might very easily turn out to be disappointing in amount. It would have been more satisfactory to have had the Commission frankly base the entire argument on the best interests of the public, though, even from this point of view, there is room for difference of opinion. With the privilege of mixing, the small jobber at the provincial distributing point is better able to compete with the large jobber. Where straight loads alone are given carload ratings, the former is at a very decided disadvantage. Where the jobbing trade has been one of direct relation- ship of jobbers at a central distributing point, say Chi- cago, to retailers at provincial points the putting into effect of a universal mixture rule will tend to change the nature of the trade and lead to the establishment of local jobbers in places of advantageous situation. There may 134 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION be still further readjustments of trade. The Chicago jobber has built up his trade with the retailers probably on the basis of the carload rate from New York to Chi- cago plus the less-than-Carload rate from Chicago to the retailers. But the local jobbers may now find it more con- venient to ship his mixed carloads not from Chicago but from New York. There may be a transfer of trade from Chicago to New York in those lines of jobbing in which the carload-mixture privilege can be used effect- ively. 3. PACKING REQUIREMENTs Even in a brief treatment of the principles of classi- fication, some reference to packing requirements is de- sirable, for these are playing an important part in pres- ent classification practice. Poor methods of packing are of much concern to the carriers, affecting them in four im- portant ways: (1) in the case of less-than-carload ship- ments, they increase the difficulty of handling the com- modity, in loading and stowing into car, in unloading and storing; (2) they increase the risk of damage; (3) they reduce the effective utilization of car capacity; and (4) they thereby cause a reduction of gross revenue earnable, as well as, by reason of (1) and (2), an increase of operat- ing expenditures. In the decision of the Commission on Western Classi- fication No. 51, it is stated that “The propriety of in- creasing the rating upon an article when it is offered loose or in bundles with practically no protection as com- pared with the rating of the same commodity when boxed or otherwise fully protected cannot be questioned. A package which is less desirable from a transportation standpoint deserves to be given a higher rating than PRINCIPLES 135 one which is more desirable. The approval of this rule, however, does not sanction disproportionate and arbi- trary increases in the rating of an article when offered in a less desirable package. There should be some rela- tion between the increased rating and the increase in the risk, difficulty of handling, and other proper consid- erations.” ” Whatever basis may be adopted for the distribution of commodities among the various groups of a classifica- tion, the differentiation of the grouping of the same com- modity accordingly as it is more or less conveniently and securely packed seems reasonable. Undoubtedly, arbi- trary distinctions should not be made, though it is not always easy to be quite confident of the precise interval of grouping that is justified by the conditions. Certainly, in the more complicated cases, some latitude of adjust- ment needs to be left to the carriers, and the proper in- terval determined upon the results of experience. 4. GENERAL PROBLEMs Before closing this chapter, some reference to the more general aspects of the problem of freight classification is desirable. “Classification is an art or a science in itself,” the Inter- state Commerce Commission * has recently said. Cer- tainly, in the history of classification practice, the art of compromise has been much in evidence. It would not be a great violation of truth to say that the freight classi- fications of this country have been built up without very consistent application of any fixed principle. Classifica- 9 25 I. C. C. Rep., 608. 10 25 I. C. C. Rep., 453. 136 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION tion and rate systems have been plastic. A system has been crudely arranged to suit passing needs, has been changed here and there, one time or another, to suit eco- nomic exigencies; the product of expediency, it has be- come inevitably a complex of compromises underlying which it would be difficult indeed to trace a theoretically scientific adjustment. The considerations of value of service and cost of service so often described as the bases of classification are not infrequently antagonistic to each other. The carriers have been anxious to classify the articles of transportin such a way as to favor a maximum revenue, and, in attempting to do this, they have naturally paid especial attention to the values and uses of com- modities. But the group assignments that would have been made if these considerations alone had governed the classification have often been disturbed by the com- petition of carriers with one another in the haulage of particular commodities, this being particularly obvious where such carriers have operated under differing classi- fications. Modifications have also been brought about by consideration of the industrial relations of commodities. The group assignment of an article in the unmanufac- tured state has been influenced by the traffic possibilities of the finished product. Undoubtedly, the value of the service of transporta- tion in one form or another has influenced the construc- tion of classifications markedly. Its application, however, has not been regarded very favorably by the public, which has demanded an adjustment based on some other con- sideration than that of the carriers’ income. This adjust- ment has been provided by a modification of the grouping, made with regard to the cost of the service rendered by the carriers in the transportation of specific commodities. PRINCIPLES - 137 While there would be a certain coincidence between one grouping of commodities on the basis of value of service and another on the basis of cost of service, numerous points of conflict are inevitable. In practice, it works out generally that, while the general location of the com- modity is determined by value of service, the precise group to which it is assigned is fixed by reference to cost of service. Of course, cost of service is not capable of such determination as would provide a logically de- fensible basis for a classification of any refinement of grouping. As indicated in a previous part of the present discussion, its application can be only of the most approx- imate character. The weights that should be assigned to the various factors of cost are not self-apparent. Take a common case such as the following: There are two commodities, one of a market value of $100, of fairly fragile nature, occupy- ing 8 cubic feet of space, and moving in considerable vol- ume, the other of a value of $55, not very fragile, occupy- ing 15 cubic feet of space, and moving in very restricted volume. Shall they be placed in the same group? If not, how many groups apart? There is no easy mathematical or logical solution of such a problem, no scientific for- mulae or rules which can be used to establish an unde- niably correct grouping. Scientific rating in such cases is more of an aspiration than of a reality, in spite of the most learned consideration upon the balancing of the vari- ous factors involved. Cross classifications are never very remarkable for their logic. What is done is to assign arti- cles of similar freight characteristics to the same classes. Of course, logically it would still be necessary to justify the grouping with reference to other commodities until finally some fundamental principles of assignment were reached. 138 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION Many of the attempts to justify ratings consist of a reference to other commodities. In classification adjust- ment, nothing is easier than to reason in a circle. But such refinement of logic can be dispensed with. Freight classification originated in a haphazard sort of way, and, in rough and ready fashion, it has been hewed and trimmed into shape to fit in with the business require- ments of the time moderately well. The process has been unscientific, but, though economic expediency has been, at bottom, the guiding principle, the product embodies a great deal of experience. It is, perhaps, neither one thing nor another, but it represents a working compro- mise between the various interests involved. The trim- ming will always have to be continued, and, at present, there is no evidence of the development of tools of pre- cision with which to do it. Probably, the end of economic justice is to be met approximately by an acceptance of the past results of classification adjustment as, in general, satisfactory, needing only a smoothing out of the rough ends, which can be managed, sufficiently well for practi- cal purposes, by an application of the method of analogy with a judicious but not over-nice regard to the direct expenses of handling. “Classification,” said the Inter- state Commerce Commission in Forest City Freight Bureau V. A. A. R. R. Co., “is not an exact science, nor may the rating accorded a particular article be deter- mined alone by the yardstick, the scales, and the dollar * * *. At best it is but a grouping, and when the approximation resulting from it is not found to cause the exaction of an unreasonable or discriminatory charge it will not be disturbed.” 11 11 18 I. C. C. Rep., 205. CHAPTER IX THE PROBLEM of RATE-MAKING AND THE RATE Policy of THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE CoMMISSION The preceding discussion of the principles of classi- fication has indicated what is really the fundamental problem of rate-making. Shall rates as a whole be ad- justed on the basis of (1) value of service or of (2) cost of service or of both? Which method of adjustment more nearly meets the demands of economic justice? 1. CoST of SERVICE If one turns to the decisions of the Interstate Commerce Commission for an answer to this question, a composite adjustment would appear to be favored. But even with the Commission, there has been some shifting of em- phasis. Thus, in its first annual report, value of service is regarded as a method of apportionment of rates best suited to the interests of the country because it favors the enlargement of commerce and the extension of com- munication, advantageous to the railroads because it facilitates the building up of a large business, just to property owners because they are made to pay in some proportion to benefits received. The use of cost of serv- ice as the basis of apportionment is regarded as unde- sirable, even if it were practicable, because it tends to restrict within very narrow limits the commerce in arti- cles whose bulk and weight is large as compared with 139 140 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION their value." But, twenty odd years afterwards, a very much more favorable attitude toward the use of cost of service is evident. In. Opinion 1509, dealing with the advances in rates by the western carriers, the Commis- sion, referring to certain cost statements placed before it, expressed itself as follows: These figures as a whole are among the most suggestive to which the consideration of the Commission has been directed. They appear to make it possible to overcome the one hitherto insuperable objection which has been raised against the primary basing of rates upon cost. This is the effort in all the great business enterprises of our time—to know what a unit costs the plant. In all such cost figures there are arbitraries of many kinds and varying importance. These must be criticised, checked, corrected, and compared through a number of years before they may be said to be in any sense reliable. But there is no scientific achievement without the drudgery of detail, long delay, and many tiresome comparisons, tests, and analyses. What can a certain transportation plant render a certain serv- ice for ? What is the lowest figure at which transportation can be sold and some profit made? These are very fundamental questions to which too little attention has been paid. We see from the figures at hand how slight is the actual transportation cost itself compared with the full return which must be made to care for and sustain the great going machine which gives the service. Once we have learned the comparative costs for various services, it is not fanciful to say that a schedule of rates may be made which will approach justice as between services. Supplement cost with scientific classification of freight, giving their due to all the various factors, such as value, bulk, and hazard—especially to value—adding return for use of plant, and we have something certainly more nearly akin to reason than the hazard of a traffic manager, no matter how benevolently inclined. Such a theory gives force to every factor 1 First Annual Report, I. C. C., 30-32. PROBLEM OF RATE-MAKING 141 which the Supreme Court has said should be considered in the fixing of rates for public utilities. The investor would have his return, the value of the property would be cared for as a part of the rate, though this return would of course vary with the rates as at present, one service making a larger return to capital than another.” Professor Hammond has ably traced this trend of rate policy as manifested in the decisions of the Commission, though drawing a little bolder contrast, perhaps, than the facts actually justify. In the early decisions of the Commission, and indeed in the very report (First An- nual) to which reference has been made, there is to be found recognition of cost of service as an element in rate-making. But the disposition to place more and more reliance upon cost considerations is indubitable. Nor is it surprising. Legal and semi-legal bodies are always embarrassed by the absence of a concrete standard of equity and inevitably tend towards the adoption of one. The utterances of certain economists are likely to en- courage this movement. Professor Hammond, for in- stance, expresses himself in the following emphatic Iſla IllſleI’: The great advantage which cost of service has over value of service is that it furnishes a concrete standard of measurement. It states a quid pro quo as a reason for making the charge. It is the standard of reasonableness which has been adopted in all our economic relations. To make charges less than costs would mean that other commodities or other industries would have to make up the deficiency, or else the railroads of the country would run at a loss. To charge more than costs, on the other hand, would mean that the railway industry was forcing other industries to surrender to it a portion of their legitimate earn- 220 I. C. C. Rep., 362. i42 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION ings. The fact that it is universally accepted in other transac- tions as a test of reasonableness explains why the commission has naturally turned to a consideration of costs when the equity of a given rate has been brought in question, and it also explains why railway officials have naturally made cost of service their defense whenever their rates have been attacked.” The somewhat vague statement that cost of service is the standard of reasonableness which has been adopted in all our economic relations seems to be phrased so as to convey the idea of deliberate choice of cost as the de- terminant of prices. But, at any specific moment, the rela- tion of price to cost is the accidental result of the friction of demand and supply. It is very variable; there is no fixed ratio such as could be justifiably used by an official regulator for the establishment of equitable prices. Over long periods the normal value is determined by cost of production, says the economist, but he points out at the same time that this value is a changing one. The normal value of the past ten years is not neces- sarily the normal value of the next ten years, and an attempt to fix future prices upon the basis of the economic relations of the past might readily lead to gross mal-ad- justment. It may seem a somewhat strange remark to make, but yet really an obvious one, that the theory of normal value, resting as it does upon the hypothesis of perfectly free competition by no means presumes that the relationship between cost and exchange value estab- lished under actual competitive conditions is the one most to be desired. It is quite possible that some other adjust- ment of prices might be more advantageous to the com- munity. 3 Hammond, M. H., Railway Rate Theories of the Interstate Oom- merce Commission (Harvard University, 1911), 187. PROBLEM OF RATE-MAKING 143 However, it is not profitable to pursue such a discus- sion, because the term cost of production is used by the economist in a sense that brings in an element of such complex variety as to render impracticable the applica- tion of cost as a sufficient measure in itself of the justum pretium, the just price. When the economist says that long-period values are determined by cost of production, the term “cost” is intended to include not merely the primary costs, such as ordinary labor and material, and the secondary costs, overhead charges for instance, but also the profits that are essential to the maintenance of productive effort, in the particular direction considered, at such a pitch as will insure the greatest expansion con- sistent with the development of other parts of the in- dustrial organism to which equally effective capital and labor are applied. The actual out-of-pocket expenses * in- curred in producing a certain quantity per annum of a commodity are matters of fact and not of opinion. It is a somewhat different matter with profits. Though an industry must secure a certain rate of profit to maintain itself or to achieve further progress, this rate is far from being a constant. It varies from period to period. The actual rate of profit earned by an industry during any particular series of years may be as different from the normal rate as the market price is from the normal ex- change value. The fact that an industry has been earn- ing 5 or 10 per cent during the present decade cannot be accepted as evidence of a reasonable rate of return. Nor can we assume that the relation of the rate of profit of one industry to that of others during this period, sup- posing that it was reasonable, indicates the reasonable 4 Expenses to which a carrier would not be put if a shipment did not move. 144 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION relation for any other period. Economic relations are always in a state of change, with society organized as at present. Risks change, the degree of managerial ability required alters, social estimation of an industry changes. Determine, if your administrative regulator of prices can do so, the economically equitable profit for today, and tomorrow the rapid course of economic change will make its application questionable. We do not have to disagree with Professor Hammond when he says that to charge more than costs would mean that the railway industry was forcing other industries to surrender to it a portion of their legitimate earnings, but it is a truism that has no practical significance in the matter of the determination of a reasonable rate. Moreover, it is to be observed that, in the railway in- dustry, cost-of-service rates would call not merely for the determination of the proper variation of the earnings of management from one economic moment to another, but also for their distribution, in justifiable proportion, over many diverse services. In an industry producing but a single kind of commodity, there is apparent logic in prorating upon each unit of commodity the same share of earnings of management, the conditions of production of one unit being substantially those of another, but we do not infer thereby that the same pro-rate could be properly applied to the unit of production of any other industry. Now the acts of transportation are not of a uniform nature; they may be grouped to a certain ex- tent, but there still remains a considerable number of groups substantially different in economic character, that is, in the proportion of capital goods required per unit of transportation produced, in the business risks involved, in the skill of management required. Consequently, a PROBLEM OF RATE-MAKING 14.5 very distinct problem presents itself, namely, as to the share of the profits that each of these different units should contribute. Thus if it be granted that, under per- fect competition, charges would become adjusted to cost of service, and would result in a maximum of advantage to both sellers and consumers of transportation services, the use of that principle for the regulation of rates is not thereby rendered practicable. As one of the most acute students of the theory of railway rates has said, “” ” * with regard to a system so complex, how can we ascertain in the absence of competition what charges would be fixed by competition? The attempts to do so for railway rates have often proved ludicrous. They remind one of the pretension sometimes made by politicians to tell us what some dead chief—Mr. Gladstone or Lord Beaconsfield—would have thought about a meas- ure which was never before them. * * * As Pro- fessor Pigou says, “It is plain that anything in the nature of exact imitation of simple competition is almost impos- sible to attain. * * * A considerable gap between the ideal and the actual is likely to remain’.” " One of the ablest American writers upon this subject, Professor Ripley, of Harvard University, while main- taining that “for an indispensable public service like transportation, conducted under monopolistic conditions, the ideal system of charges would be to ascertain the cost of each service rendered, and to allow a reasonable mar- gin of profit over and above this amount,” yet urges that there are insuperable objections to the application of the principle alone. “Such cost,” he says, “is prac- tically indeterminate, being joint for all services in large 5 Edgeworth, F. Y., Contributions to the Theory of Railway Rates, IV, Economic Journal (Oxford University) XXIII, 18-19. 146 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION part, as we have seen: " it is highly variable, being per- haps never twice the same, as circumstances change from time to time; cost is unknown until volume is ascertained, and volume is ever fluctuating; the cost of service, obvi- ously, could never be ascertained until after the service had been rendered, while, of course, the schedule of rates must be known in advance, in order that the shipper may calculate his probable profits; and, finally, the principle of increasing returns, flowing from the dependence of cost upon volume of traffic, imposes such an incentive for development of new business, which in turn depends for its volume upon the rate charged, that cost of service is subordinated at once to other considerations in prac- tice.” 7 When one examines the decisions of the Interstate Commerce Commission to discover in what manner that body has employed the cost-of-service principle in the determination of reasonable rates, it is at once clear that its use has been within definitely restricted limits. In the early case of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company,” the Commission said: While cost, as has been said, is an element to be taken into account in the fixing of rates and one of the very highest impor- tance, it cannot, for reasons well understood, be made the rate basis, but it must in any case be used with caution and reserve. This is not merely because the word “cost’’ is made use of in different senses when applied to railroad traffic, it being often used to cover merely the expense of loading, moving, and un- 6 Elsewhere (p. 55), he states that approximately two-thirds of the total expenditures of a railroad and more than one-half of the actual operating expenses are independent of the volume of traffic. 7 Ripley, W. Z., Railroads: Rates and Regulation (1912), 168-169. 81 I. C. C. Rep., 31. PROBLEM OF RATE-MAKING 147 loading trains, but also because, in whatever sense the word may be used, it is quite impossible to apportion with accuracy the cost of service among the items of traffic. . . . Any attempt to apportion the cost, therefore, would at the best and under the most favorable circumstances only reach an approxi- mation. This is so well understood the world over that the proposition which from time to time is made in other countries to measure the charge of the carrier by the cost of the carriage solely, have always been abandoned after investigation. The general attitude of the Commission is made clear in its decision of 1905 in the case of the Cattle Raisers’ Association of Texas v. Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railway Co., et al.” Therein it is urged “In determining a reasonable rate the cost of performing the service, as has been just observed, is one element in that rate, and cost of movement is an important item in arriving at the entire cost of service. The commission has uniformly held that it was proper to look into the divisions which carriers receive for the purpose of ascertaining the cost of movement since it must be assumed that the railroad would not transport freight ordinarily for less than the cost of the movement, but the division while material testimony for that purpose is not of necessity a standard of comparison by which to estimate a reasonable rate.” In its application of the principle of cost of service, there- fore, the Commission has not concerned itself with total costs, but simply with costs of movement and, even in doing this, it has been content with a somewhat rough method of comparison rather than to attempt a strict apportionment of such expenses. Professor Hammond says: 911 I. C. C. Rep., 296. 148 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION The members of the Commission have, of course, never pre- tended that they could ascertain the exact proportion of the fixed and operating expenses assignable to a given commodity. Such has not been the purpose of their investigations, nor the tenor of the decisions. The attempt has not been made to apportion the charges, as the Commissioners say, “strictly to the cost.” But cost of service has nevertheless been used as a means of determining the reasonableness of rates in four dif- ferent classes of cases. (1) When a rate higher than the ordi- nary could be justified on the ground that some special service has been performed or a special obligation incurred by the carrier. (2) Where a rate complained of was judged as to its reasonableness by comparing the ascertainable costs of trans- portation with those incurred in transporting other commodi- ties whose rates were believed to be reasonable. (3) Where comparison was made with costs on other roads or on other parts of the system. (4) Where the costs of shipping commodities in car load lots were compared with those incurred in shipping less than car load quantities. 10 2. VALUE OF SERVICE Underlying this partial use of the cost-of-service prin- ciple, there appears a free acceptance of the so-called value-of-service principle. The rate theory of the Com- mission seems to assume a general allocation of charges according to considerations of value. More often than not the value of the commodity is taken as indicative of the value of the service. The general rate scheme being thus established, the precise position of the com- modities embraced within it is determined by free com- parison of the relative conditions of transportation on the basis of the expenses of actual movement. That the 10 Hammond, M. H., Railway Rate Theories of the Interstate Com- merce Commission, 43-44. PROBLEM OF RATE-MAKING 149 Commission, in spite of the prominence it has given to cost items, does not wish to deny the fundamental im- portance of value-of-service considerations is evident from its argument in the following decision, a compara- tively recent one. Discussing a proposal to advance rates on coal from the West Virginia fields to Lake Erie ports for transporta- tion by vessel beyond, the Commission defines its attitude in the following words: We meet in this case the interesting question which for the first time is presented to the Commission—the right of a carrier to increase its rates upon a large volume of traffic solely because such traffic does not bear a certain proportionate share of the return which the carriers make upon their stock. It is to be noted, (1) that there is no claim that the carrier under present rates does not receive full return upon the value of its prop- erty, (2) if the proposed rates go into effect and the present volume of traffic to the lakes is maintained the return at present received will be much increased, (3) the carrier does not pro- pose to reduce its rates upon any coal or other commodity, and (4) it would appear to follow that whenever a carrier finds that it is carrying traffic which does not yield its proportionate share of fixed charges and dividends as it may always do as long as freight is classified it may increase the rates on such traffic up to the point where all traffic, and this means each particular kind of traffic, yields the same net return above cost of its movement to the carrier. This contention, however, the president of the Norfolk & Western disavows. Being asked, “Do you think that if the aver- age cost of doing all the business on a railroad is taken into con- sideration, and it is shown that any class of business like the coal business is paying something less than that average cost or only slightly more, it would follow that those rates are too low 2° he replied, “I think this, that when the individual commodity and rate are taken, and it is demonstrated that over a certain section of the line on which that particular commodity is transported 150 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION under identically the same conditions, the same plant is em- ployed, with a condition that prevails as it does in this particular instance absolutely alike for a large percentage of the tonnage handled over a particular part of the railroad, as we are under- taking to show here, I believe that the principle that I have enunciated is a correct one and that the business of this com- pany can be done in that way without injury to any of the interests. I do not mean to carry out this principle on every kind of traffic over every line of road, but I am trying to show that here is a case where it can be done, and it is the only equitable basis on which this rate ought to be made.” Counsel for the Norfolk & Western, in their brief comment upon his statement as follows: “Thus Mr. Johnson is not contending that over an entire railroad system on the numerous and varied classes of traffic and commodities the basis which he has men- tioned should apply. On this particular division, however, he compares lake-coal traffic with similar traffic and finds that what his company receives from the lake rates is very much less than on any other classes of its coal traffic or on any other similar commodities. Again, Mr. Johnson states that he does not contend as an abstract proposition, applied to an entire system, that no class of traffic can under any circumstances be carried for less than its full share of the cost of operating and maintaining the railroad, but he does contend that where a comparison is made of lake coal with the other coal traffic, and it is discovered that the lake coal returns a very much smaller revenue than the other coal traffic, this is material matter and one which justifies an advance in the lake rates.” tº Is a rate unreasonable because it does not pay its full share of taxes, fixed charges, and dividends? At the end this is the question to which we come in this case. The carriers themselves having fixed these rates under the mandate of the law that they shall fix just and reasonable rates, have they justified higher rates by showing that the existing rates which they had fixed fall somewhat short of meeting all the related expenses which the carrier must bear, not only for transporta- tion but to secure an adequate return upon its property? Let us see where this doctrine would lead. If a carrier may raise PROBLEM OF RATE-MAKING 151 all rates to a basis where each will bear its share of cost, includ- ing all costs, and no lower rate is reasonable, then it must follow that all rates are unreasonable which yield to the carrier a greater return than such cost. Under such theory what would be the rate on tea or silks, or high-priced horses, or delicate machines? Is there to be no classification of freight excepting upon the basis of cost of transportation plus insurance risk? If so the tariffs of every railroad in the United States must suffer a revolutionary change. In all classification consideration must be given to what may be termed public policy, the advan- tage to the community of having some kinds of freight carried at a less rate than other kinds. And this is the true meaning of the phrase “what the traffic will bear.” It expresses the consideration that must be shown by the traffic manager to the need of the people for certain commodities. He accordingly imposes a higher rate upon what may be termed luxuries as com- pared with that imposed upon those articles for which there is a more universal demand. He also gives consideration to the fact that the rate so imposed enters into the ultimate price to the consumer to but a small degree when the article is one of high value, and that those in the community who can afford to purchase such articles can well afford to pay a rate greater than that which could reasonably be imposed upon the general public for commodities of common use. In this sense what the traffic will bear and the value of the service are analogous. No one would claim that a carrier was violating its duty under the law in charging three times the rate upon oriental rugs that it imposed upon cotton. This would not be undue discrimination as between commodities, even though it costs no more to trans- port the rugs than it did the cotton, assuming both to be car- ried at the owner’s risk, for the one does not compete with the other, and one may reasonably bear a higher rate than the other upon public grounds. It must be, therefore, that this Commis- sion, under the amendment to section 1 passed by Congress in 1910, giving to us the control of freight classification, has power to determine the reasonableness of the differences that are made between the rates made applicable to the various kinds of com- modities transported. We may not say that a rate shall be fixed 152 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION so as to meet the requirements or needs of any body of shippers in their efforts to reach a given market, nor may we establish rates upon any articles so low that they will not return out-of- pocket cost. Neither could we fix an entire schedule of rates which would yield an inadequate return upon the fair value of the property used in the service given. There is, however, a zone within which we may properly exercise ‘‘the flexible limit of judgment which belongs to the power to fix rates.” These are the words of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, 206 U. S., 26. There is no flexible limit of judgment if all rates must be upon a level of cost, and out of every dollar paid to the carrier must come a fixed amount of return for capital invested. The recognition of such a doctrine has never been suggested either by Congress or the Supreme Court. A just and reason- able rate must be one which respects alike the carriers’ deserts and the character of the traffic. It cannot be a rate that takes from the carrier a profit and thus favors the shipper at the car- rier’s expense, nor is it one which compels the shipper to yield for the transportation given a sum disproportionate either to the service given by the carrier or to the service rendered to the shipper. The words “just and reasonable’’ imply the applica- tion of good judgment and fairness, of common sense and a sense of justice to a given condition of facts. They are not fixed, unalterable, mathematical terms. Their meaning implies the exercise of judgment, and against the improper exercise of that judgment the Constitution gives protection, at least as far as the carriers are concerned.” (a) Minimum Rate Apparently, out-of-pocket expenses are regarded as the basis of the minimum rate, but the maacimum rate is to be determined upon grounds of public welfare. The Commission seems to have held consistently to the fore- going conception of the minimum rate, as is indicated 11 22 I. C. C. Rep., 617-18 and 623-24, PROBLEM OF RATE-MAKING 153 in the following quotation from one of its earliest decisions, that of the case of the New York group milk rates (September, 1888). It is said by way of argument that there is an inherent injustice in carrying the product of one locality at a less rate than that of another which lies nearer to the common market, because in that case the nearer shipper pays a part of the expense of transporting the freight of his rival a longer dis- tance upon the same train. The result does not necessarily follow, however. In cases where the rate is sufficiently high to afford a reasonable profit upon each portion of the traffic by itself, there are no losses upon the longer portion of the route to be made up by overcharges upon the remainder. Although the product of the most distant locality may yield a substan- tially less measure of profit than that of the nearer, neverthe- less the traffic which pays the least profit to the carrier may pay its own entire transportation expense, and perhaps a good deal more. In that event there is nothing in its transportation which is saddled upon other commodities and the smaller profit which is made from the longest haul helps to support the facili- ties which the carrier is enabled to maintain for the common benefit of the entire route covered.” The explanation of such discrimination is to be found in the nature of railway investment. The plant has to be provided in advance, the fixed charges upon the capital invested have to be met, whatever may be the amount of traffic offered. If a railway has not reached its traffic capacity, then any additional freight that can be secured at rates greater than the additional expenses actually incurred contributes so much towards fixed charges and surplus. If the railway refuses to accept the freight, obviously the burden of fixed charges weighs more 12 N. W. Howell et al. v. N. Y., L. E. & W. R. R. Co. et al., 2 I. C. C. iłep., 272. 154 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION heavily upon each unit of traffic. There are, of course, limitations to the application of such rates. A railroad connecting A and Z might be able to secure certain traffic at Z for A provided it made sufficiently low rates, but if the traffic secured through quotation of these low rates in- volved capital expenditures which the surplus between the revenue received and the actual expenses of handling did not cover, traffic from intermediate points might be called upon to bear the difference. There would be, under such conditions, a legitimate question as to whether the rates from Z to A were not unreasonably low.” (b) Maazimum and Reasonable Rates The minimum rate level being fixed, how about the maximum? Shall the traffic manager be allowed to fix such maximum with reference only to his own estimate of public welfare? The question is answered by the Commission in its decision regarding the advances in rates made by the western carriers, and in order that its attitude may be clearly understood, quotation is made at length. In his evidence before the Commission, Mr. E. P. Ripley, president of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company, defined a reasonable rate as one that the traffic would bear and still move most freely, enabling the products and manufactures of one part of the country to be used to the utmost possible extent in the other. Upon this definition, Commissioner Lane, on behalf of his colleagues, made this comment: 13 Adequate treatment of this aspect of rate adjustment is impracti- cable in the present treatise. The reader is recommended to consult A. T. Hadley’s Railway Transportation, pp. 116-117, and Chapter VII of Pro- fessor Ripley’s book on rates (see a preceding note). PROBLEM OF RATE-MAKING 155 This is the latest, the most modern, and the most liberal defi- nition of this much-abused phrase. Indeed, it is so liberal that it is impracticable unless properly qualified. Mr. Ripley would not have us understand that a railroad is an eleemosy- nary institution. To say that a reasonable rate is one under which the traffic will most freely move is to say that it is the rate which casts the least burden upon the shipper. The rate that will carry the traffic farthest for the smallest amount of money—the lowest possible rate. But all of the time there is present in the mind the necessity of securing out of all of such rates not only the cost of transportation, which Mr. Ripley regards as negligible, but an adequate return upon the value of the property used. While this definition, therefore, sounds to the ear most philanthropic, it was doubtless not intended to convey any more subtle or philosophic meaning than this: That an individual rate should not be made with reference to the cost of the service to the railroad, nor should it be made with regard to the return which it would yield to the capital invested in the plant. It should be made so low that as great a body as possible of that character of traffic should move, but all the time there must be borne in mind the fact that out of its aggre- gate rates the property must be made to pay. This is the American system of railroad rate making. “What the traffic will bear” may mean “all that the traffic will bear.” If it means that the rate must be measured by the amount that the shipper is willing to pay under necessity, it is extortion. On the other hand it may mean the least return for which the carrier can afford to transport the traffic. This theory of rate making seems to be that there is a certain amount of traffic which can be developed; that there is a cer- tain volume of traffic which is to be moved, or which can be moved; that the rate should not be so high as to prevent any of this traffic from moving, nor should it be a lower amount than the carrier can obtain and still permit the freest possible movement. Such definition apparently makes the rate entirely a matter of judgment as to which there may be error. And, carried to its last degree, it permits indefinite discrimination |between individuals, as well as between communities, for if 156 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION the rate is to be made so as to permit the freest possible move- ment one shipper may not be able to extend his market at the rate given to another. Therefore he is entitled to a rebate. And the more distant community may not be able to compete with the nearer community for a common market. And there- fore it is entitled to a lower rate than its more advantageously situated competitor. The experience of the commercial world led to the enactment of the act to regulate commerce which interfered with the full application of this theory, and we, of course, assume that Mr. Ripley stated his principle of rate making, not only with the limitation we have already noted— that rates were to be made so that, as a whole, they yielded adequate return to the carrier—but with the further limitation that they must be subject to the prohibitions of the law. Mani- festly, under this principle all that stands between the shipper and extortion is the wisdom and the good sense of the traffic manager who makes the rates. If, in his judgment, it is advisa- ble to carry a small volume of traffic upon a high rate, rather than a large volume of traffic upon a low rate, there is noth- ing to interfere with this decision, and all the consequences affecting the country at large, excepting now the right of appeal to the Government as represented in this Commission. Rates being made upon this theory, the function of the traffic manager is that of a statesman; he determines Zones of pro- duction and consumption, the profits of the producer and the cost to the consumer; he makes his rates, if he so pleases, to offset and nullify the effect of import duties and determine the extent and character of our foreign markets. To make rates for transportation based solely upon the ability of the shipper to pay those rates is to make the charge for transportation depend upon the cost of production rather than upon the cost of carriage—to measure a public service by the economies practiced by the private shipper. This neces- sarily gives to the carrier the right to measure the amount of profit which the shipper may make and fix its rate upon the traffic manager's judgment as to what profit he will be per- mitted. This theory entitles the railroad to enter the books of every enterprise which it serves and raise or lower rates se- PROBLEMI OF RATE-MAKING 157 without respect to its own earnings but solely with respect to the earnings of those whose traffic it carries. This is not regu- lation of railroads by the nation, but regulation of the indus- tries and commerce of the country by its railroads. That nothing stands in the way of extortion excepting the fair-mindedness of the railroad traffic manager is illustrated in this case by the examination of the traffic manager of one of the leading roads. He was asked why the present first class rate from Chicago to Kansas City should not be raised from 80 cents to $2.40, and corresponding increases of 200 per cent made upon all the other class and commodity rates. His first answer was that some of the commodities would not move under such increased rates. Being told to assume that class traffic at such rate would move, his answer was: The business conditions have adjusted themselves to the 80-cent rate. It would be a wrench to ask any 300 per cent raise on that 80-cent rate, and having existed on that 80-cent rate, we do not need 300 per cent of that 80-cent rate to continue to exist. We do not want to see any wrench in commercial conditions. We would ask, “Is it decent and fair and proper,” and these considerations would appeal to us. Being asked, further, to assume that one man owned all of the roads in that territory, could you give any reason why rates should not all be raised to the class basis, or increase them 200 per cent, the traffic manager answered: ſes; because the advance would be too great of itself. It would be a shock to my sense of propriety—a shock to my sense of justice. And that was the ultimate word. Rates are no higher than they are, not because there is any maximum standard based upon the cost of the service or the return to the carrier, but because to increase them would not be “fair or decent or proper”—in short, would not appeal to the conscience of the traffic manager. And this same witness was unwilling to acknowledge that his judgment of what was proper, reasona- ble, or just should be subject to review by this Commission or by any other tribunal—a position which may fairly be charac- terized as a modern extension of the ancient principle of divine right.14 158 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 3. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS In its details, the preceding argument is open to criti- cism, but this we shall forego as inappropriate to the purpose of the present discussion. Taking the statement in combination with other utterances of the Commission, we can now make more complete our preliminary explana- tion of the rate theory that seems to underlie the Com- mission’s decisions viewed as a whole. Our earlier statement was that the rate theory of that body seemed to be based upon the assumption of a general arrange- ment of charges according to considerations of value, the precise adjustment of each rate within the general scheme being determined by reference to the actual movement expenses of the commodities concerned. Ex- panding this, we may now say that the Commission would have the reasonableness of the general level of rates determined by reference to the financial return produced in its relation to the present value of the railroad. So far as individual rates are concerned, it would have no rate fixed at less than the out-of-pocket expenses in- curred in moving the traffic for which it is quoted. The excess which a rate might reasonably carry beyond such expenses it would have fixed with regard to the value of the commodity, the precise adjustment being made, as noted above, according to the expenses of handling the commodity as contrasted with those of other comparable articles of transport. This is a somewhat chastened ver- sion of the doctrine of charging what the traffic will bear, 14 20 I. C. C. Rep., 349-351 (In re Investigation of Advances in Rates by Carriers in Western Trunk Line, Trans-Missouri, and Illinois Freight Committee territories.—Decided February, 1911). PROBLEM OF RATE-MAKING 159 but the identity is not altogether lost, and the Commission feels, no doubt, that it insures liberty of rate-making with- out license. The rate theory of charging what the traffic will bear has been much misunderstood, perhaps by both opponents and supporters. There is nothing inherently vicious in the doctrine as some would have us suppose. It presumes a system of price-making that, under perfect competition, would conduce to maximum advantage. In fact, under such conditions, prices would inevitably become related to cost of service, but, be it noted, not to the costs actually incurred by this or that particular producer but to those normally necessary to production, due allowance being made for those differential rates of minimum profit that would be necessary to induce the flow of a normal Supply of the various kinds of ability adapted to the different tasks of entrepreneurial * control. In other Words, under a perfectly competitive price regime, prices would rest upon a basis of differential profits. In the attempt to regulate prices of monopolistic systems so as to bring them as nearly as possible into correspondence with those that would prevail under freely competitive Systems, the naturally variant nature of the profit element of price is often lost sight of. The very nature of rail- ways prevents the development of perfect competition, the conditions are those of partial monopoly, and there is no assurance that the principle of charging rates that the traffic can bear will be applied so as to produce the maximum of advantage. But we are equally lacking in 16 An entrepreneur is more than a manager. He builds a business, Entrepreneurial is here used in the same manner as managerial would be - º º employed if the control of a manager Were under Consideration. 160 |FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION the assurance that any artificially constructed system of so-called cost rates would bring about this happy state. Again, repeating the words of Professor Edgeworth, “with regard to a system so complex, how can we ascer- tain in the absence of competition what charges would be fixed by competition?” ” After a most rigorous inves- tigation of the considerations that should be taken into account this eminent writer concludes, “I am * * * confirmed in the deduction that discrimination accom- panied with a moderate control is likely to be better, both for the customers and the monopolist, than monopoly for- bidden to discriminate.” The exaltation of the principle of cost of service to a place of prime importance in the determination of reasonable railway rates would lead, inevitably, to economic rigidity. While this might not be of disastrous moment in a country in which no further growth was realizable, an unchanging condition of in- dustry having been reached, it would certainly be a most serious result under the changing conditions that are characteristic of modern industry. So far as the internal adjustment of the rate system is concerned, cost of Service plays a useful part in questions of relativity. For instance, there is hardly any more useful conception in the actual practice of rate-making than that of variation of rate with distance, but, applied without discrimination, it is capable of becoming a most mischievous doctrine. As the Commission itself has said, “Many circumstances sometimes enter, and sometimes compel a carrier to make rates on one line proportionately less than are made on another. The volume of business, the strength of com- 10 Economic Journal, XXIII, 18. PROBLEM OF RATE-MAEKING 161 peting forces, the direction of traffic, the convenience of exchange, the relations of carriers to each other and a multitude of other circumstances, have or may have an important bearing.”.” But as long as the cost-of-service principle is applied to rate adjustment with full recog- nition of its particular function and of its limitations, so long, in other words, as its application is not allowed to restrict improperly the field of operation of that “dynamic force” ” described as the value-of-service prin- ciple, practical rate-making is likely to be benefited rather than otherwise. The recognition of the fundamental importance of the value-of-service principle does not mean that any kind of extravagance in rate-making is justifiable. It infers discrimination, but it is a discrimination based upon economic welfare, not upon the bias of favoritism. It seeks rates that will facilitate the physical distribution of existing goods, but not merely this; properly conceived and applied, it considers the future development of commerce. Certainly, under a system of private manage- ments, each railroad will think in terms of its own terri- tory rather than in terms of the country at large, and, to this extent, there will be a failure to secure the theoretical maximum advantage. It is not unreasonable, however, to suppose that the greater extent to which the stimulus of regional competition is likely to be felt under these conditions will be a compensating advantage. A value- of-service rate system, then, should not be interpreted as demanding the imposition of the highest rates under 17 Re La Cross Manufacturers & Jobbers Union v. The C. M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 1 I. C. C. Rep., 629. 18 To borrow Professor Ripley's phrase. | 62 * FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION which traffic will move, the popular conception of the sig- nificance of charging what the traffic will bear, but rather as calling for a schedule of rates under which existing trade will move freely, and future trade be actively stimulated. The logic of the system is not destroyed if its internal adjustment is required to be arranged in accord with the principles (1) that each unit of traffic should provide some surplus beyond the actual out-of- pocket expenses incurred in moving it; (2) that, no other adjustment being indicated by the facts of the case, the relativity of particular rates should be determined with reference to the costs normal to the movement of the specified traffic under the given conditions. Though not always interpreted with satisfactory consistency, the system is substantially that recognized both in the practice of the railroads, and in the body of decisions through which the Interstate Commerce Commission has exercised its power of regulation. The value-of-service principle, it need hardly be said, does not infer the absence of regulation. If railroad traffic managers could be depended upon always to make accurate analysis of economic conditions and to fix their rates with unswerving fidelity to the economic considera- tions thus revealed, governmental regulation of rates would, no doubt, be unnecessary. Since we must presume, however, that railroad officials like other mortals are “prone to err,” the value-of-service system is naturally associated with some arrangement for the correction of errors of judgment palpably militating against its most efficient operation. But the method of regulation applied must justify itself by securing correction without dis- turbance of the balance of the system, or interference with the smooth working of its various parts. - TEST QUESTIONS These questions are for the student to use in testing his knowledge of the assignment. The answers should be written out, but are not to be sent to the University. PRINCIPLES OF FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 1. What is one of the most obvious features of freight classification ? 2. On what principle of classification is difference between C. L. and L. C. L. ratings based? 3. What is the strongest objection to trainload ratings? 4. What would be the probable effect of the establishment of any-quantity rating 2 5. What does Commissioner Meyer say as to when a com- modity is entitled to a carload rating? 6. Are carload minima always determined by the physical capacity of the car? 7. Discuss the relation between C. L. and L. C. L. ratings. 8. What is the difference between the treatment of mixtures in the Official and the Western classification? 9. In your opinion should the provisions of Rule 10 of the Official Classification be applied throughout the country, and why? 10. What has the Interstate Commerce Commission said in regard to the restriction and elimination of mixtures in West- ern Classification No. 51? 11. Does the Interstate Commerce Commission sanction dif- ferences on account of packing? 12. How have value of service and cost of service theories been modified in actual practice in making classifications? THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM of RATE-MAKING 13. What two principles are discussed in regard to rate- making? 14. What is the attitude of the Interstate Commerce Com. mission as to cost of service in rate-making? 163 164 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 15. Discuss in brief the author's attitude in regard to cost of service in rate-making. 16. What attitude does the Commission take in regard to value of service in rate-making? 17. Discuss briefly the basis for the establishment of mini- mum rates. 18. How did President Ripley define a reasonable rate? 19. What in brief did Commissioner Lane say in regard to this definition ? 20. What are the author's conclusions as to how the Com- mission would have a rate fixed ? 21. What are the author's conclusions in regard to cost of service in rate-making? BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES 1. CLASSIFICATIONS, ExCEPTIONS, ETC. Interstate classifications, issued by classification committees mentioned in the footnotes of this treatise. State classifications, issued by state railroad and public service commissions. Exceptions to the classifications, issued by agents of railway associations. See Quarterly Supplement of the Official Rail- way Guide, published by the National Railway Publication Company, 75 Church St., New York. It contains lists of railroad and public service commissions, railway associations, etc., (50 cents a year). Note also the Official Railway Guide, issued monthly by the same company ($1 a copy). Eacceptions to Official Classification, Central Freight Associa- tion, Transportation Building, Chicago. Circular No. 1, or reissues, Western Trunk Line Committee, Transportation Building, Chicago. Trans-Missouri Circular No. 1, or reissues, Trans-Missouri Freight Bureau, Midland Building, Kansas City, Mo. Territorial Directory No. 3, or reissues, Central Freight Asso- ciation, Transportation Building, Chicago. Territorial Directory No. 1, or reissues, Western Trunk Line Committee, Transportation Building, Chicago. Southwestern Lines’ Territorial Directory No. 1, or reissues, Southwestern Tariff Committee, Century Building, St. Louis, Mo. Trans-Missouri Territorial Directory No. 1, or reissues, Trans- Missouri Freight Bureau, Midland Building, Kansas City, MO.1 1 Any of the preceding references may usually be obtained by pay- Olent of a moderate price. 165 166 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION 2. REPORTS AND DECISIONS OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCH CoMMISSION, ETC. The best source of material for a study of freight classification is found in the decisions of the Interstate Commerce Com- mission, from 1887 to the present time (in 28 volumes). These are published under the title of Interstate Commerce Reports, Vols. 1-11, the Lawyers’ Co-operative Publishing Company, Rochester, N. Y., $4.00 per volume; Vols. 12-28, Government Printer, Washington, D. C., $2.00 per volume for Vols. 12 and 13, $1.50 per volume for Vols. 14-28. Attention is called to the decision of the Interstate Commerce Commission in the matter of the Suspension of Western Classification No. 51, 25 I. C. C. Rep., 442-609 (Opinion No. 2110)—an able treatment of uniformity and other subjects of classification by Commissioner B. H. Meyer. Annual Reports of the Interstate Commerce Commission, Gov- ernment Printer, Washington. Railways in the United States in 1902. Special report of Inter- state Commerce Commission, Part II, 1903. Proceedings of the Annual Conventions of the National Asso- ciations of Railway Commissioners, Government Printer, Washington, D. C., contain instructive articles and reports on uniform classification and other classification subjects. Annual Reports of the several state railroad and public service commissions that have prescribed state classifications. Report of the United States Industrial Commission, Wols. IV, IX, and XIX. Various references. Reports of the Uniform Classification Committees. These are difficult to obtain. 3. LEGAL HANDBOOKS AND OTHER VolumES AND ARTICLES CON- TAINING REFERENCES TO RAILWAY CLASSIFICATION Peirce, E. B., Digest of Decisions Under the Act to Regulate Commerce, 1887 to 1908. Barnes, H. C., Interstate Transportation. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES 167 Lust and Merriam, Digest of Decisions Under the Interstate Com- merce Act, 1908—June, 1912. * 3% iſ: # & Dunn, S. O., Uniform Classification (a series of four articles, Railroad Age Gazette, Vol. XLVII), 1909. Johnson and Huebner, Railroad Traffic amd Rates, Vol. I, chap- ter xvii. McPherson, L. G., Railroad Freight Rates, chapter ix. Meyer, B. H., Railway Legislation in the United States, chap- ters ii and iv of Part III. Ripley, W. Z., Railroads: Rates and Regulation, chapter ix. Strombeck, J. F., Principles of Freight Classification. 4. RATE THEORY Acworth, W. M., Elements of Railway Economics. Clark, J. M., Standards of Reasonable mess in Local Freight Dis- criminations (Vol. XXXVII—1910—of the Columbia Uni- versity Studies in History, etc.). Dunn, S. O., American Transportation Question. Hadley, A. T., Railroad Transportation. Hammond, M. B., Rate Theories of the Interstate Commerce Commission. Hearings before the Senate (Elkins) Committee, 1905, (U. S.) Senate Document 244, 1906. Johnson, E. R., American Railway Transportation. Noyes, W. C., American Railroad Rates. Ripley, W. Z., Railroads: Rates and Regulation. * *: * * $º: Dewsnup, E. R., Rate-making and Rate-reforming (article in Railway World), 1910. Edgeworth, F. Y., Contributions to the Theory of Railway Rates (article in Economic Journal), 1912-13. Johnson and Huebner, Railroad Traffic and Rates. Robinson, M. H., Railway Freight Rates (article in Yale Re- view), 1909. - Taussig, F. W., Contribution to the Theory of Railway Rates (article in Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. V; also in Railway Problems, W. Z. Ripley). APPENDIXES | The next section of this treatise consists of appendixes devoted to territorial descriptions and an exposition of technical traffic terms and abbreviations. Many of these descriptions and defini- tions are not to be found outside the circulars and tariffs of the carriers, if at all. The traffic man will find these appendixes exceedingly useful. º68 one of a series of TREATIsrs in an INTERSTATE - COMMERCE AND RAILway TRAFFIC Course. Fºruſessor uſ Railway Adluluisirailuri ‘. . . . The University of Illinois ( Non-Resident Inauction) CHICAGO INTERSTATE commerce RAILWAY TRAFFIC course '. Pºpuld und. Edicial superiºn of - - Samuel MacClintock, Ph.D. The subjects listed below constitute the basic material of a course in Interstate Commerce and Railway Traffic. This course is especially designed to meet the constantly growing demand for efficiently trained men in railroad and industrial traffic work; to assist students to pass the exam- - inations for government service under the Interstate Com- merce Commission; and to meet the demand for men com- petent to direct the work of commercial organizations and traffic bureaus. With the exception of the Atlas of Railway Traffic Maps, the subjects listed below are covered in an average of approximately 200 pages each. - - Atlas of Railway Traffic Maps Freight {Tlassificatinn - . . . . . Freight Rates: Official Classification Territory and East. ern Canada . . - - Freight Rates: Southern Territory Freight Rates: Western Territory Publication and Filing of Tariffs - - Bases for Freight Charges, Reducing Freight Charges - to a Minimum, Róisting Freight Shipments, Freight Claims, The Bill of Industrial Traffic Department. - Railway Organization, Statistics, and Accounting Express and Parcel Post Water Traffic and Rates Government Control of Common Carriers Interpretation of the Act to Regulate Commerce Rulings of the Interstate Commerce Commission and Procedure before that body - Business Law, I - Business Law, ºf - The Law of Carriers of Goods Practical Traffic Problems LASALLE EXTENSION UNIVERSITY - Lading, and The . . . . . . . . . º APPENDIX A TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS; The traffic man needs a convenient directory of territorial traffic terms, and the following alphabetical list has been pre- pared for his use. Should the reader desire to be kept in touch with all changes in these terms, he may procure the publications named below. - (1) Territorial Directory No. 3, or reissues, Central Freight Association, Transportation Building, Chicago; (2) Territorial Directory No. 1, or reissues, Western Trunk Line Committee, Transportation Building, Chicago; (3) Southwestern Lines’ ... Territorial Directory No. 1, or reissues, Southwestern Tariff Committee, Century Building, St. Louis, Mo.; (4) Trans- a Missouri Territorial Directory No. 1, or reissues, Trans-Mis- … souri Freight Bureau, Midland Building, Kansas City, Mo.; . (5) Exceptions to Official Classification, Central Freight Asso- ciation, Transportation Building, Chicago; (6) Circular No. 1, or reissues, Western Trunk Line Committee, Transportation Building, Chicago; (7) Trans-Missouri Rules Circular No. 1, or reissues, Trans-Missouri Freight Bureau, Midland Building, Kansas City, Mo. It is not necessary to give tariff numbers in requesting these publications; but they are usually sent to inter- ested shippers only, except where the price of the publication is enclosed. 1. AssociateD RAILwAYs of VIRGINIA AND THE CAROLINAs TERRITORY (Map 5 and description on back thereof) 2. ATLANTA SUBDIVISION TERRITORY - (Or Carolina Territory South of Walhalla) º (Map 5) Atlanta Sub-Territory is divided into (1) Carolina Territory South of Walhalla and (2) Atlanta Sub-Territory proper. The 169 170 APPENDIX back of Map 5 contains descriptions of these territories and the map shows them in colors. 3. ATLANTA SUB-TERRITORY (Map 5 and description on back thereof) For a complete list of stations see Section 1 of “Southeastern Territory” of this appendix. 4. CALIFORNLA TERMINALs The California Terminals take the same Trans-Continental rates and are used as a basis for Trans-Continental rates to and from ‘‘Intermediate Points.” The current list as contained in Trans-Continental Freight Bureau West-Bound Tariff No. 1-M is shown below. CALIFORNIA: Alameda Compton Ferry Point Alcatraz Corbin Fitchburg Ambrose Coronado Fleming Antioch Coronado Heights Florence Ardmore County Farm Fruitland Avon Crockett Fruitvale Bay Point Cudahy Garnsey Bells Dodsworth Gaspur Benicia Dolanco Gateley Berkeley Dolores Giant Bird Dominguez Glen Fraser Bixby Dupont Granger Blume Dwight Hercules Brighton Beach Earl Hermosa Beach Bruce East Oakland Hobart Burnett East San Pedro Hyde Park Centinela East Wilmington Hynes Central Avenue Eckley Inglewood Cerritos Oil Spur Elftman Kohler Christie Elmhurst Krieger Clay Pit El Segundo Lawn Clearwater Emery Livny TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 171 CALIFORNIA—Continued. Long Beach Paraffin Selby Los Angeles Peoco Seminary Park Los Medanos Peyton Seventh St. Luzon Pinole Shellmound Lynwood Pittsburg Slauson McAvoy Port Costa Sobrante Mail Dock Posen So. San Francisco Maltby Potter South Vallejo Manhattan Beach Power Stege Marmarosa Prince Stockton Martinez Race Track Stockyards Marysville Redo Sunnyvale Melrose Redondo Beach Tent City Mococo Redwood Terminal Island Mountain View Rheem Thenard Muir Richmond Tormey Nadeau Park Richmond Belt Rºy Torrance National City (all points) Tillman N. C. & O. Junction Rodeo Tweedy Nevada Dock Rowley Vallejo Junction Nichols Sacramento Vernondale Nitro Salt Works Vigorit Nobel San Diego Wine Hill Oakland San Francisco Watson Oakland Wharf San Jose West Alameda Ocean Avenue San Leandro West Berkeley Oleum San Pablo Western Pacific Opaco San Pedro Mole Ostend Sand Pit Western Street Otay Wells Santa Clara Wildasin Otay Wells Junction Schindler Wilmington Pacheco Schmidt Wiseburn Pacific Siding Seaside Workman PacSteel Sedan Zinc 172 APPENDIX 5. CANADIAN FREIGHT Association 1 (Map 2) Comprising the Stations named below in NEw BRUNswick ONTARIO NEWFOUNDLAND PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND NOVA SCOTIA QUEBEC NEW BRUNSWICK–All stations. NEWFOUNDLAND–All stations. NOVA SCOTIA—All stations. ONTARIO-All stations, except: Barclay Fort William Murillo Bonheur Gilbert Neebing Braid Hawk º Niblock Buda Ignace Oxdrift Busteed Ingolf Port Arthur Dinorwic Kalmar Raith Dryden Raministikwia Savanne Dyment Keewatin Tache Eagle Kenora Upsala English MacMillan Vermilion Bay Finmark Minnataki Wabigoon Westfort PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND–All stations. QUEBEC-All stations. 6. CAROLINA TERRITORY 1 (Map 5) Comprising the stations named below in GEORGIA TENNESSEE NoRTH CAROLINA VIRGINIA SouTH CAROLINA GEORGIA—Stations as follows: Blue Ridge Kyle Rabun Gap Dillards Mineral Bluff Sweet Gum Galloway Mountain City 1 Territorial Directory No. 3, or re-issues, by the agent for the car- riers of the Central Freight Association (Chicago). TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 178 NoRTH CAROLINA—All stations except those shown on page 253. SouTH CAROLINA–Stations as follows: *. Abbeville Acton Ada Adams Adamsboro Adams Crossing Adger Airlee Alcot Allens Spur Alston Altamont Alton Aman Ammons Anderson Angelus Argyle Ariel Ashland Atkins Auburn Autun Ayers Barksdale Bascomville Bates Belton Bennett Bennett Siding Bennettsville Berrys . Bethune Betts Mill Beverly Bingham Birch Bishopville Blackburn Blacksburg Blackstock Blair Blaney Blenheim Blue Brick Siding Blythewood Bonham Bookman Borden Bowlin Boykins Breeden Brent Bristow Brownsville Bryant Buck’s Swamp Buffalo Buffalo Lick Springs Calhoun Camden Camden Crossing Camden Jet. Campobello Campton Cana Cane Savannah Cantys Carharrt Carlisle Carters Cross Roads Cartersville Cash Cassatt Catawba Catawba Jet. Cato Causey Cedar Springs Central - Chandlers Siding Chappell Cheddar Cheraw Cherokee Falls Cherry’s Crossing Chesnee Chester Chesterfield China Christman Claremont Clayton Clements Cleveland Clifton Clinton Clio Clover Clyburn Clyde Cold Point College Spur 174 APPENDIX SOUTH CAROLINA—Stations—Continued. Coker & Edwards Cokers Collins Siding Columbia Congaree Congaree Gravel Pit, Conquest Converse Cornwell Coronaco Cothran Courtenay Cowpens Croburk Cross Hill (Harris Springs) Crosswell Dalzell Darlington Darraugh Dawkin De Kalb De Loach Delphia Delta Denver Dillon Dinber Dixie D. McL. Bethea's Spur Donalds Doncheno Donoho Doves Drake Dubose Due West Dunbar Duncan Durants or Bells Crossing Durants Spur Dyson Easley Eastover East Spartanburg Ebenezer Edgmoor Elberry Elgin Ellerbee Elliott Enola Enoree Evans Evans Mill Evansville Everetts Excelsior Fallis Fair Forest Fairwold Filbert Fishing Creek Spur Fitz Hugh Fletcher Fletcher’s Gin Fletcher’s Mill Florence Floydale Floyds Fork Fort Lawn Fort Mill 41 Mile Siding Fountain Inn Frost Fudges Fulton Gaffney Galavon Gandy Gantt Garlington Gary Genoa Gibson Siding Gillespie Glenn Springs Godsey Golden Grove Goldville Gopher Grace Gramlin Gray Court Great Falls Greenville Greenwood Greer Gregory Guess Guthries Hagood Hamer Hammond Hancock Hares Siding Harmony TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 175 SOUTH CAROLINA-Stations—Continued. Hartsville Heath Springs Helen Helena Hellams Herbert Herndon Hicklin Hickory Grove Hickson Hodges Hollis Holmesville Honea, Path Hoovers Siding Hope Hubbard Hyatts Iceman Mill Indian Siding Inman Irby Islay Jacobs Jalopa James James Crossing Jefferson Jonesville Jordania Junction Faolin Works Felly Kemper Keowee Kershaw Rilgore Killian Kimberly Kinard Kings Creek Knox Kollocks Lacey’s Spur Lamar Lancaster Lando Landrum Landsford Laney Lanford Latham Latta Laughlin Laurens Law’s Lawson Layton Brick Siding Leeds Leland Leslie Lester Lewis Libby Liberty Lides Little Rock Littleton Lockhart Tockhart Jet. Long Cane Loring Lota Lowrys Lucknow Lugoff Lumber Luna Lydia Lykes Lylesford Lynchburg McBee McColl McColl's Siding McConnells McCoys McDaniels McDonald McGill McInnes McKennon McKeown McLaurens McLaurin’s Mill McNeills Maddens Madeline Mallory Malta Mannville Maple Mills Maple Swamp Marburg Marietta Marion Marion County Lumber Co. Marlboro Mars Bluff 176 APPENDIX SOUTH CAROLINA-Stations—Continued. Mascot M. & S. Jet. Mauldin May Mayesville Mayo Mays Meadows Melier’s Meredith Middendorf Miller Minturn Monarch Montague Mont Clare Montgomery Montrose Mt. Crogan Mountville Mount Zion Mullins Munster Neals Shoals Newberry New Market Newport Newtonville Nichols Ninety-Six Nitrolle Norris Norton Oak Grove Oakvale Ogden Old Point, Old Town Omohundro Ora Orrs Oswego Owings Pacolet Pageland Pages Mill Palmetto Paris Parker Parks Patrick Pauline Peak Pee Dee Pelzer Pendleton Phinneys Pickens Piedmont Pierces Pleasant Hill Pomaria Pride Prosperity Red Bluff Red Point Remberts Renno Richburg Ridgeway River Falls Fivers Riverside Riverview Robins Neck Rock Hill Rockton Rocky Bluff Roddy Rodman Roebuck Rogers Rowells Royster Ruby Ryttenburg St. Charles St. Charles Lumber Co. Salak Saluca Sandy River Sandy Springs Santuc Scotts S. A. L. Crossing Seals Segars Sellers Seneca Sharon Sharp Shaw's Quarry Shelton Shepard Sheriff Shoals Jct. Sigsbee Silver Street Simpson Simpsonville TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 177 SouTH CAROLINA-Stations—Continued. Sims Smallwood Smith Smithboro Smyrna Society. Hill Southern Ry. Jet. Southern Crossing Spalding Spartanburg Spartanburg Jet. Spearman Spence Springdel Squires State Farm State Park (Formerly Dent) Stockton Stone Stoneboro Stornoway Strickland Strother Sumter Swandale Switzer Syracuse Tabor Tatum Taylor Thicketty Thompsons Timmonsville Tirzah Todd's Still Toxaway Travelers’ Rest Unika Siding Union Van Wyck Walhalla Wallaceville Wateree Bridge Waterloo Watson’s Brick Yard Watson's Siding Weddell Wedgefield TENNESSEE--Stations as follows: Afton Alnwick Alpha Amarco Amerine Apalachia Armona Athens Austral Avoca Azah Bearden Benton Binfield Blevins Bluff City Bluffton Black Oak Block Boone Welch Wellford West Anderson Weston West Union Westville Wheelers White Oak Whites Whitestone Whitmire Wilburn Williamstown Winnsboro Winona, Woodruff Woods Woodward Wylie Wysacky Yorkville Young Zemps Zion Boyd Boyd's Creek Briceville Bridgeport Bristol Browns Buckeye Buladeen Bulls Gap Burnett 178 APPENDIX TENNESSEE--Stations—Continued. Burnetts Butler Calhoun Cambria Cameron Carnegie Carpenter Carter Caryville Caswell Chandler Charleston Chestnut Ridge Cheston Childers Chuckey Clear Springs Cleveland Clinton Coal Creek Coile Concord Copperhill Copper Ridge Crabtree Craigmar Dante Dedies Delano Del Rio Denton Disney Doe Dove Ducktown Duncan Earhart Ebenezer Edwina, Elizabethton Elkanah Elk Valley Embreeville Englewood Erwin Etowah Fagin Farmer Fishery Fish Springs Ford Fordtown Friendsville Garber Gillman Gouge Grady Gray Greenback Greeneville Gudger Hager Hall Hamilton Hampton Hartford Hass' Mill Heiskell Helmar Hemlock Henderson Hodges Holland Hubbard Hunter Indian Ridge Ismond Jacksboro Jefferson City Jena Johnson City Jonesboro Katherine Keenburg Keplinger Kimberlin Kincaid Kincaid Spur Kingsley Kingsport Kiser Knapp Knoxville La Follette Lanceville Leadville Lenoir City Lilac Limestone Limestone Cove Little River Lost Cove Loudon Louisville Loves McCains McGhee McFarland McMahan McMillan McMullens TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 179 TENNESSEE--Stations—Continued. Madisonville Maple Siding Marbleton Marion Anna Marmor Martel Maryville Mascot Maymead Meadow Melrose Mentor Midway Miller Milligan Mohawk Morristown Mosheim Mountain City. Mt. Olives Mt. Vernon Naillon Neubert Neva Newcomb New Market Newport Newport Jct. Niota Nonaburg North Fork Oak City Offutts Okolona Oster Oswego Pactolus Paint Rock Pardee Point Patty Peak Philadelphia Piney Flats Pioneer Plank Pleasant Grove Powell Probst Rader Rankin Reagan Red Ash Reeves Reliance Renfroe Revilo Riceville Riverside Roan Mountain Rockford Roe Rorex Roseberry Zinc Works Russellville Ryburn Sadie Sanford Sawton Scottville Sevierville Seymour Shell Creek Shouns Siam Singleton Soldier South Fork South Knoxville Sowles Stamfiel Straw Plains Sunshine Swastika Sweetwater Sycamore Shoals Talbott Tasso Taylors Telford Tellico Plains Titus Toms Townsend Turley Turtletown Unaka Springs Unicoi Valley Forge Vance Wasper Westal Wonore Walland Washington College Watauga Wautauga Point Welwyn West Knoxville West Myers 180 APPENDIX TENNESSEE--Stations—Continued. Wetmore White Pine White Rock Whitesburg Wilbur Adams Grove Aiken Summit Alberta Alexanders Alms House Altavista Alton Angle Antlers Apple Arey Arral Arringdale Ashley Axton Back Bay Bannister Barksdale Baskerville Bassett Blaine Bocock Boones Mill Boxwood Boydton Boykins Bracey Branchville Bratten Brinkley Brodnax Wilson’s Station Wilton Springs Wiltshire Winner VIRGINLA—Stations as follows: Brookneal Buffalo Jet. Buffalo Lithia Springs Bufords Burgess Burnt Chimneys Burts Siding Butterworth Butts Road Caleb Capron Carlisle Carrsville Carson Cascade Casey Cashie Lumber Co. Siding Charlie Hope Chase City Chatham Chatmos Christie Clarion Clarksville Clarkton Clover Cluster Springs Cochran Corapeake Jct. Witt Wolf Creek Woolridge Wyncote Courtland Creeds Critz Cross Roads Crystal Hill Crystal Springs Cypress Dahlia. Dan River Danville Dauntless Davis Delaware Denniston De Witt, Dinwiddie Dip Drakes Branch Drewryville T)rol Dry Fork Durmid Edgerton Edgewood Electric Eley Elwood Emporia Esmon Evington Fall Creek TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 181 VIRGINIA—Stations—Continued. Fentress Ferrum Finchley Finneywood Fishburn 49 Mile Siding 55 Mile Siding Fontaine Forbes Foremans Fort Mitchell Foxes Franklin Franklin Jet. Freeman Galveston Garst Gisnal Glade Hill Gladys Goebel Grandy Gray Green Bay Green Plain Greer Gretna (formerly Franklin Jct.) Grizzard Hagood Handsom Henry Herbert Hewetts Hickory Ground Hilda Hitchcock Mill Holland Homeville Houston Hugo Hurt Huske Isaac Ives Jarratt Jeffress J. L. Jennings Kempsville Keysville Kibler Filby Koehler Kress La Crosse Ladysmith Lanahan Land Lawrenceville Lawyers Leaksville Jct. Lees Mill Leigh Lennig Lone Jack Lumberton Lummis Lusks McBride McGuffin McKenney Martinsville Mason Mayo Mays & Crowder Spur Meadowfield Meherrin Milk Landing Modat Montview Mossingford Motley Munden Point Naruna Nathalie Nelson Newbill Newell News Ferry Newsoms Nichol Noding Northwest Nurney Oak Hill Ockward Old South Quay Ontario Ory Otter River Pace Patrick Springs Paynes Pedigo Pen Hook Pettys Philpott Pierce & Aker 182 APPENDIX VIRGINIA—Stations—Continued. Pittsville Pleasant Ridge Pleasant Shade Pope Pretlows Prilliman Princess Anne Court House Providence Jct. Pungo Purvis Racume Randolph Rawlings Reams Redwood Reigate Ridgeway Ringgold Riverview Roanoke Brick Co. Rocky Mount Rorer Mines Rustburg Rux St. Brides Sandy Level Saunders Saxe Scottsburg 72 Mile Siding Siddon Skelton Skipwith Skitts Soudan South Boston South Clarksville South Emporia South Hill South Quay Spencer Starkey Stella. Stewarts Stokesland Stony Creek Story Stuart Sutherlin Sycamore Tanwood Taylor Taylorsyde Thorp Siding Tolley Toshes Trego Turner 22 Mile Siding 39 Mile Siding Union Hall Union Level Uptons Urguhart's Spur Vabrook Vey Windrew Virgilina Waller Wallers Ward Springs Warfield Wassett Wertz Whaley Whitehurst Whittle Wilson Lumber Co. Winfall Wolf Trap Wrights Yale 7. CAROLINA TERRITORY SOUTH OF WALHALLA (Or Atlanta Subdivision Territory) (Map 5) For a complete list of stations see Section 2 of “Southeastern Territory” of this appendix. t TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 183 8. CENTRAL FREIGHT ASSOCIATION TERRITORY 1 (Map 8) Comprising the stations named below in ILLINOIs MICHIGAN ONTARIO INDIANA MISSOURI PENNSYLVANIA IOWA NEW YORK WEST VIRGINIA KENTUCKY OHIO WISCONSIN MARYLAND including prorating points subject to the Official Classification and Exceptions thereto ILLINOIS—All stations except: Alden Hebron Rockton Buena Vista Latham Park Roscoe Davis Lawrence Roscoe Siding Dakotah McConnell Ruby Durand Millbrig Scioto Mills Galena on C. & N. Orangeville Shirland W. Ry. Red Oak Winslow Genet Rock City INDIANA-All stations. IOWA—Stations as follows: Ballinger Columbus Jct. Garden City Bard Dubuque (Louisa Co.) Beck Davenport Gordon's Ferry Bellevue Elrick Jet. Grandview Bettendorf Fairport Green Island Bricker Folletts Hahn’s Switch Buffalo Fosterdale (for- Huron Bullard merly Foster) Kemper Burlington Ft. Madison Keokuk Camanche Fredonia Kingston (Des Cascade (Des Fruitland Moines Co.) Moines Co.) Galland Latty Clinton Garland LeClaire 1 Territorial Directory No. 3, or re-issues, by the agent for the carriers of the Central Freight Association (Chicago). 184 APPENDIX IOWA—Stations—Continued. Letts Linwood Lyons Macuta Mediapolis Middle Lock Montpelier Montrose Mooar Morning Sun Muscatine Newport Oakville Pleasant Creek Pleasant Valley Princeton Round House Sabula Sandusky Shaffton KENTUCKY—Stations as follows: Altamont Amanda Ashland Ashland Jet. Augusta Beagle Beckett Bellefonte Bellevue Bradford Brent Broshears Bruce Buena Vista Buffalo California Carntown Carrs Carter Catlettsburg Clyffeside Concord Covington Davis Dayton Deep Cut Dover Edgington Fair Grounds Fayette Fire Brick Foster Frost Fullerton Garrison Georgetown Glenn Gray’s Branch Greenup Henderson Hermann Higginsport Hoist Ivor K. C. Jot. Latonia Lexington Limeville Little Fork Lloyd Shoecraft Shopton Sperry Spring Grove Summit (Muscatine Co.) Tile Works Wiele Wapello West Keithsburg Wever Louisville L. & N. Jot. Manchester Maysville Melbourne Mentor Mt. Savage Newport New Richmond Normal Norton Oneonta Owensboro Paducah Paris Pence Pike Crossing Poplar Quincy Red Brush Riverton Rock Crusher Rock Springs Rome Ross TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 185 KENTUCKY—Stations—Continued. Ruggles South Ripley Russell Springdale St. Paul Sullivans Sand Hill Tannery Siloam Taylor Silver Grove Trace Smith's Creek Upper Bruce South Portsmouth Utopia MARYLAND–Stations as follows: Buffalo Run Geices Friendsville Kendall MICHIGAN (Lower Peninsula)—All stations. Vanceburg Walton Water Works Wellsburg Willow Grove Winchester Wright Wurtland Selbysport MICHIGAN (Upper Peninsula)—Stations as follows: Manistique Menominee Manistique Wharf St. Ignace MISSOURI-Stations as follows: Alexandria Ashburn Busch Canton Clemens Dunsford Gregory Hannibal Helton Huiskamp Ilasco La Grange Lamb La Motte Louisiana Love NEw York—Stations as follows: Abbott’s Road Angola Ashville Athol Springs Bay View Beach Ridge Belleview Bemus Point Big Tree Black Rock Blasdell Bonita Brainard Brocton Buffalo Buffalo Creek Buffalo Dock Buffalo Jet. South Manistique Thompson Munger’s Switch Reading St. Louis Santuzza Saverton West Quincy White Rock Buffalo Lake Cambria Cassadaga Cattaraugus Cemetery Chautauqua Cheektowago Cherry Creek Clifton 186 APPENDIX Clover Bank Clymer Colburn Cold Spring Collins Concord Conewango Dayton Depew Derby Dewittville Driftwood Dunkirk East Buffalo East Buffalo Stock Yards East Buffalo Transfer East Hamburg Ebenezer Echota, Eden Centre Eden Valley Elk Elwood Park Falconer Falconer Jet. Farnham Fentonville Fluvanna Forestville Forks Forsyth Fredonia Frewsburg Gales Gerry NEW YORK–Stations—Continued. Gifford Glenewen Gowanda Greenhurst Griffith Hamburg Hamburg-on-the- Lake Hartfield Hodgeville Hoffman Hurlburt Indian Church International Jct. Irving Irwin Jamestown Kellogg Kennedy Kensington Lackawanna Lake View Lakewood Lancaster Laona La Salle Lawtons Lewiston Lighthouse Point Lily Dale Little Valley Lockport Main St. (Buffalo) Maple Springs Mapleton Markhams Martinsville Mayville Midway Park Moons Murphy’s Niagara Falls Niobe Nixon North Collins North Evans North Tonawanda Nortons Onoville Panama Peeks Siding Pendleton Centre Pennsylvania R. R. Jet. Perrysburg Persia Phillips Mill Point Chautauqua Pomfret Portland Pratts Prospect Quaker Bridge Randolph Red House Ripley Roberts Road Roland Salamanca Sanborn Sand Siding Sheridan Sherman Silver Creek TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 187 NEw York—Stations—Continued. Sinclairville Smith’s Mills South Dayton South St. (Brocton) Starr Farm State Line (Chau- tauqua Co.) Steamburg Summerdale Suspension Bridge OHIO—All stations. Tunesassa Lumber Co., Nos.1 and 2. Van Buren Waite's Crossing Walden Avenue (Buffalo) Wanakah Warner Waterboro Water Valley Watt’s Flats Westfield ONTARIO-Stations as follows: Ainslie Allanburg Alvinston Amherstburg Appin Appin Jct. Arkwood Arner Attercliffe (Monck Co.) Aylmer Bairds Ballsville Bartonville Beachville Beamsville Belle River Belmont Black Creek Blenheim Blenheim Jet. Blytheswood Bothwell Brandy Creek Brantford Bridgeburg Brigden Brookfield Brownsville Burford Burgessville Buxton Cainsville Canfield Canfield Jet. Caradoc Cayuga Cedar Springs Chantler Charing Cross Chatham Chautauqua Jet. Chippawa Churchs West Perrysburg West Salamanca West Seneca, Weyer Whitmier Williamsville Winchester Woleben Wolf Run Wooglin Wurlitzer Coatsworth Comber Cooks Copetown Corinth Cornell Corunna Courtland Courtright Crumlin Currie Darling Road Darrell Decewsville Delhi Diltz Dorchester Dresden Dufferin Dumfries Dundas Dunnville 188 APPENDIX ONTARIO-Stations—Continued. Dutton Eastwood Eberts Eddy’s Eden Edgars Edward Ekfrid Ellaton Elmstead Ennett Essex Falls View Fargo Fenwick Fletcher Fonthill Forrestville Fort Erie Garnet Glanford Glanworth Glencoe Glen Rae Glenwood Gobles Gordon Governor’s Road Grassies Griffin’s Grimsby Hagersville Hamilton PIarley Harrietsville Harrisburg Harrow Hatchley Hawtrey Haycroft Hewitt Highgate Holmesdale Humberstone Hyde Park Jet. Ingersoll Inwood Iona Jarvis Jeanettes Jeanette's Creek Jerseyville Jordan Kent Bridge Kerwood Kimballs Kingscourt Jct. Kingsmill Kingsville Komoka Lake Shore Jct. La Salette Lawrence Leamington London Longwood Lowbanks Lynden Lynn Valley Lythmore McGregor Maidstone (for- merly Maidstone Cross) Mandaumin Marshfield Marshville Melbourne Melrose Merlin Merritton Middlcmarch Middlemiss Middleport Middletown Line Mineral Springs Montague Montrose Montrose Jct. Mooretown Moulton Mt. Brydges Mt. Elgin Mt. Pleasant Mt. Vernon Muirkirk Mull Muncey Nelles’ Corners Netherby Newbury New Canaan New Durham New Sarum Niagara Falls Niagara Jet. TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 189 ONTARIO-Stations—Continued. Niagara - on - the Lake Nixon North Appin North Bothwell North Chatham North Glencoe North Newbury North Thamesville Northwood Norwich Oakland O'Dell Oil City Oil Springs Oldcastle Onondaga Ontario Heights Ostrander Otterville Ouvry Paquette Paris Patton’s Siding Paynes Pelton Berry Petrolia. Petrolia Jet. Piggotts Pike Creek Pleasant Ridge Port Burwell Port Colborne Port Dalhousie Fort T) over Point Edward Port Lambton Port Robinson Port Rowan Port Stanley Prairie Siding Princeton Puce Putnam Queenston Ramapo Ranges Renton Renwick Richardson Ridgetown Ridgeville Ridgeway Ringold Rodney Rond Eau Rosslyn Ruscomb Ruthven Rymal St. Anns St. Catharines St. Clair St. Clair Jot. St. Davids St. George St. Joachim St. Thomas St. Williams Salford Sandison Sarnia. Sarnia Tunnel Scotland Seneca Sea Cliff Park Shedden Sherks Shipyard Shrewsbury Silverdale Simcoe Smithville Sombra Souterville Southwick Southwold Springfield Springford Stamford Staples Stevensville Stoney Creek Stoney Point Straffordville Strathroy Stromness Summit Suth-Innes Taylor Tecumseh Thamesford Thames River Thamesville Thorold Tilbury Tillsonburg Townsend Tupperville Vanessa 190 APPENDIX ONTARIO-Stations—Continued. Victoria Walsh Whitebread Victoria Park Wanstead Whites Vienna Waterford Wigle Willa Nova Watson Wilkie Winemount Waubuno Windham Vittoria Wawanosh Windsor Vosburg Weidmans Winona, Wainfleet Welland Woodslee Walkers Welland Jet. Woodstock Walkerville West Lorne Wyoming Walkerville Jet. Westminster Yarmouth Wallaceburg Wheatley Zorra PENNSYLVANIA—Stations as follows: Ache Jct. Allegheny (Chest- Anderson Jct. Acheson nut St.) Anderson Road Acme Coke Works Allegheny (Locust Andrico Acme Ovens (Penn. St.) Annandale Coke Co.) Allegheny (North Antram Acosta Ave.) Apollo Adah Allegheny (Preble Ardara Adams Ave.) Arden Adamsville Allegheny (South Arensberg Adelaide Ave.) Argyle Agentine Allegheny Valley Armstrong Aiken (Allegheny Brick Co. Arona Co.) Allenport Arnold Akeley Allison Arnold City Aladdin Allison No. 1 Works Arrel Albion Allison No. 2 Works Aspinwall Alice Mines Allison Park Atchison Alicia (Fayette Allsworth Atlantic Co.) Alpsville Atlantic Colliery Aliquippa Alverton No. 2 Allegheny Amasa Atlantic Mine Allegheny (Ander- Ambridge Atlantic Refinery son St.) Anderson Colliery No. 36 TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 191 PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Atwells Crossing Aultman Avalon Avella Avonmore (Westmoreland Co.) Baden Bagdad Bagdad Colliery Baggaley Bailey Point Baird Bakerstown Bamford Banksville Banksville Jct. Banning Barber’s Barking Barnes Crossing Bartley Baum Beachley Mine Beadling Beans Mills Bear Lake Bear Run Beatty Beatty, Colliery Beaver Beaver Falls Beaver Road Beeks Run Beechmont Belle Bridge Belle Valley Belle Vernon Bellevue Ben Avon Benicoll Bentleyville Besco Bessemer Bessemer Transfer Best Siding Bethany C o ke Works Bethel Biddle Bidwell Big Bend Big Meadow Run Bishop Bitner Bitner Coke Works Bittner Ovens Blackburn Black Diamond Black Lick Blackstone Colliery Black’s Run Blairsville Blairsville Inter- section Blairsdell Jct. Blue Stone Quar- ries Blythedale Boggsville Bolivar Bonnie Brook Boquet Border Borland Boston Boswell Boughton Bovard Bower Hill Boyce Boyer Works Brackenridge Braddock Bradenville Braeburn Branch Branchton Brandon Braznell Brent Brevard B rew ster Mine No. 1 B rew ster Mine No. 2 Bridgeville Bridgewater (Beaver Co.) Brier Hill Brier Hill Works Brightwood Brilliant Brinker Brinkerton Broadford Broadford Jot. Brown Brownfield Browning Coke Co. 192 APPENDIX PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Brownsdale (Al- legheny Co.) Brownsville Brownsville Con- struction Co. Siding Brownsville Jct. Brownsville Road Brownsville Works Bruceton Bruin Brush Run. Ovens Bryant Buchanan Buckeye Buena Vista Buffington Works Buhls Bulger Bunola Burchinal Ovens Burdine Burgettstown Burrell Bute Butler Butler Jet. Butler Transfer Cabot California Callery Calumet Cambridge Springs Camden Campbell (Alleghe- ny Co.) Cannellton Canonsburg Carbon Carbon Brick Co. Carbon Center Carbon Centre Carlton Carmona Carnegie Carney Mine Carter Carter Iron Co. Casselman Castle Shanon Catfish Cecil Cedar Creek (Westmoreland Co.) Celia Centreville (Craw- ford Co.) Centreville (Washington Co.) Century Coke Co. Siding Chambers Chambersville Champion Works Charleroi Charlestown Cheat Haven Cherry Valley Chester Mine No. 2 Cheswick Chewton Chicora Childs(Fayette Co.) Christy Park Church Hill Clairton Clare Works Claridge Clarksburg Clark's Crossing Clark’s Mills Clarksville Claysville Claytonia Clevers Cliff Mine Cloe Clokey Clyde Colliery Coal Bluff Coal Centre Coal Valley Cobham Cochran’s Mill Cochranton Coffey's Crossing Coffman Works Cokeburg Coke Works Coleman Colfax College Collier Collinsburgh Colonial Colliery No. 1 Colonial Colliery No. 2 Colonial Colliery No. 3 TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 193 Colonial Colliery No. 4 Colonial No. 296 Columbus Colza Concord Conemaugh Confluence Confluence & Oak- land Jet. Conneaut Jct. Conneaut Lake Conneautville Connellsville Connellsville (New Haven) Connellsville (West Side) Connellsville Transfer Consolidation No. 114 Consolidation No. 115 Consolidation No. 116 Continental No. 2 Continental No. 3 Continental Works No. 1 Conway Cool Spring Copeland Coral Coraopolis Corry Colliery PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Corry Junction Corydon Coulson Coulter County Home (Allegheny Co.) County Home (Westmoreland Co.) Courtney Courtney's Mills Coverts Cowan Cowansburg Cowanshannoc Crabtree Crafton Craigsville Cramer Colliery Cramer, Joseph Cranesville Crayton Creekside Creighton Crescent Mine No. 35 Cribb Cribbs Siding Cross Crossland Crossland Ovens Crouches Crows Nest Col- liery Crystal Ovens Culmerville Cummings Cunningham Curtisville Cyrilla Colliery, Daniels Run Darent Darlinton Darnley Davidson Siding Dawson Dawson Run Dearth Works Debold Demmler Denbeau Denny Denny Colliery Derby Derry Derry Colliery No. 2 Dewey (Armstrong Co.) Dexter Transfer Dexter (Alleghe- ny Co.) Dick Dickerson Run Dicksonburg Dilworth Colliery Dinsmore Dixmont Donald No. 1 Works Donald No. 2 Works Donald No. 3 Works Donnelly Donohoe Donora 194 APPENDIX PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. D or oth y Coke Works Dorothy Works Dotter Doughty Douglass Downieville Drake Dravo Dravosburg Dudley Duffs Dumas Dunbar Duncan Dundale Dun l a ps Works Dunlevy Dunn’s Eddy Duquesne Duquesne Wharf Duvall E. & P. Transfer Eagle Rock Eagle Transfer East Brady Eastbrook East California East Carnegie East Charleroi East Connellsville Works East Fredericktown East Greensburg East Liberty East Millsboro Creek East New Castle East Olivet East Pittsburgh EastBice's Landing East Riverside East Roscoe East Sandy Eberhardt Eclipse Economy Edenborn Edenburg Edgecliff Edgewater Edgeworth Edna Colliery Edri Eighty-four Eisaman E le an or No. 4 Works Elfin wild Elgin Elizabeth Elk Creek Elk Creek Siding Elk Lick Coal Co. Ellrod Ellsworth Ellwood City Elm Grove Ovens Elrama Elwood City Elwood Jet. Emblem Emery Ovens Emlenton Emma Emmenston Emsworth End of Andrews Run Branch End of Avonmore Branch End of Axle Works Branch End of Baileys Run Branch End of Bessemer Branch End of Black Legs Creek Branch End of Boyer Run Branch End of Braiden- ville Branch End of Brinker Run Branch End of Brush Creek Branch End of Bull Run Branch End of Cokeburg Branch End of Fair- chance Branch End of Grind- stone Branch End of Hunker Branch End of Indian Run Branch End of Jamison Branch No. 2 TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 195 End of Keister Branch End of Lyons Run Branch End of Mahoning Branch End of Branch End of Morrell Branch End of New Flor- ence Branch End of Overton Branch End of Peter’s Creek Branch End of Ruffsdale Manor Branch End of Shoonmaker Branch End of Stoneville Branch End of Streets Run Branch End of T a r r Branch End of Tearing Run Branch End of Turtle Creek Branch End of Unity Branch End of Westmore- land Branch End of Wynn Branch Enlow PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Enoch Enon Enterprise C o ke Works Erie Ernest Espyville Essen Etna Euclid Eureka Evans Evans City Everson Ewing’s Export Exposition Park Fairbank Fairchance Fairchance Trans- fer Fair Haven Fairmont Fairmont W a 1 1 Plaster Co. Fairmount Fair Oaks Fairview Fallston Farrell Fayette City Federal Feldner Fenelton Ferguson Ferris Fetterman Ficht Fieldmore Springs Filbert Works Finleyville Finley Works Firestone Fishers Siding Fitz Henry Flanigan Fleming Quarry Floreffe Foley's Siding Fombell Footedale Forbes Road Forest Grove (Al- legheny Co.) Ford City Fort Hill Ft. Pitt Foster (Amstrong Co.) Foster Co.) Foustwell Foxburg Frances Mine Francis Francis Works Franklin Franklin Ovens Fredericktown Fredonia, Freedom Freeport Fretts Works (Venango No. 1 196 APPENDIX PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Frick Friedens Frisco Frye Fuller (Fayette Co.) Fulton Run Jet. Fulton Run Tipple Gallatin Gamble Gans G. a r d n e r A ve. Yard Garland Garver's Ferry Garwood Works Gascola Gastonville Gates Gawango Geiger Geneva Genuine Connells- ville Coke Co. George Gibsondale Gibsonia Gibsonton Gilbert Gilkeson Gill Hall Gilmore Ovens Gilpin Colliery Girard Gist Gladden Glade Glassmere Glassport Glen Glencairn Glenfield Glen Osborne Glenover Glenshaw Glenwood Glynden Godfrey Goehring Goff Goss Mine Grace Siding Graceton Grand Valley Grant City Grapeville Gratztown Gray Grays Landing Great Belt Greene Jct. Greenlee Greenock Greensburg Greensburg liery No. 2 Greenville Greenwald Greer Gregg. Griffin No. 1 Works Griffin No. 2 Works Grindstone Grove City Col- Grovedale Groveton Guffey Guyasuta Guys Mills (Alle- gheny Co.) Gwendolen Hackett Haddon Colliery Hadley Hahntºwn Hall Hallston Hamil Hamilton Co a 1 Mining Co. Hammondsville Hanlin Hannastown Harbison Harbison - Walker Refractories Co. Harbor Bridge Harbor Creek Harmarville Harmonsburg Harmony Harmony Jet. Harrison Harrison City Harrisville Hartstown Harwick Hawkins Hays Hays Connection Haysville TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 197 PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Hazel Kirk Hazelwood Hazen Heath Hecla Hecla No. 1 Hecla No. 3 Helen Hemlock Hempfield Colliery No. 1 Hempfield Colliery No. 2 Henlein Henry’s Bend Henry Siding Herbert Works Herman Herminie Hermitage Herrs Island Hewitts Hickman Hickman Run Jet. Hickory High House Highland Hill Hilliard FIill’s Hillside Hillsville Himebaugh Hoboken Holsopple Home Homer Homer City Homestead Homestead Trans- fer Homewood Hooker Hooks Hoovers Distillery Hooversville Hoover Works Hope C h u r ch (formerly Hope Church Brick Co.) Hope Mills Hopwood Horn Horners Siding Horning Horse Shoe Bottom Hostetter Houston Houston Jct. Hoytdeal Huff Hulton IHulton Ferry Humphrey Hunker Hunter Huron Huron Colliery Husband Huston Huston Run Delivery Huston Run Mine Hutchinson Hutchinson liery Hyde Park Hydetown Idlewood Ifield Imperial (Allegheny Co.) Indiana Indian Creek Industry Inghams Iola Coal Works Iron Bridge Irvineton Irwin Isabella Isle Islein Islein Mine No. 4 Jackson Jackson Centre Jacksonville Mine Jet. Jacobs Creek Jamestown Jamison: Jamison Colliery No. 1 Jamison Colliery No. 2 Jamison Colliery No. 3 Jamison Colliery No. 6 Col- 198 APPENDIX PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Jamisonville Kisner, J. M. & Leesburg Jeanette Bros. Leetsdale Jeffreytown Kittaning Legionville Jenner Knob Mine Leisenring Jerome Mines 1 and Knopp Leisenring No. 1 2 Koppel Leisenring No. 2 Jimtown Kremis Ovens Johnston Krings Leith Johnstown La Belle Lemont Josephine Lachman Lemont Ovens No. 1 Junction Transfer Lafayette Mine Lemont Ovens No. 2 Juneau Lakeville Leon Works Juniata. Ovens Lambert Lick Run Jct. K. O. Jot. Landstreet Liggett Kanty Lane Ligonier Mine No. 2 Karns Landon Limner Mine Katherine Works Langdon (Anspach) Kaylor Lardin Lincoln Siding Keeling Large Lincolnville Keenan Large Distillery Lindencross Reepville Larimer Linesville Keister Latrobe Linn Kelly Latrobe Colliery Listie |Kendall No. 2 Listonburg Kennard Latrobe - Connells- Little Leckrone Kennerdell ville Colliery Works Kent Laughlin Jct. Litton Siding |Kenwood Lavinia Litzenberg Siding Keppel Lawrence Jet. Livermore Kepple's Siding Layton Lock No. 3 Reystone Store Lead Works Lock No. 5 Kimmel Leasdale Lockport (Indiana Co.) Leasure Siding Locust Rimmelton Le Boeuf Logans Finder Mine Leckrone Logan’s Ferry Rinzua Leckrone Ovens Logansport FCiskiminetas Jct Tueechburg Lone Tree TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 199 PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Longview Lottsville Lovell Lowber Lower Hillville Low Phos. Low Phos. Works Loyalhanna Lucas Lucasville Lucerne Jct. Lucerne Mines Lucesco Colliery Lynces Jct. Lyons Lytle's Siding McAbee McBride McCalmont McClintock McClure McConnell’s Mill McCoy McCune McDonald McGuggin McIntyre McKean McKeefrey Works McKeesport McKees Rocks McKelvey Hine Co. Mackin McLaughlin Madison Magee Magnus Maher Thomas Colliery Mahoning Mahoningtown Mammoth Mancha Manor Manorville Manown Maple Glenn Maple Ridge Mine Marguerite Marianna Marion Center Marion Jct. Markleton Mars Marshall Marshalsea Martin(Fayette Co.) Martin Works (Fayette Co.) Marwood Masontown Masontown Glass Co. Maxwell Meadow Lands Meadville Meadville Jot. Meharg Mercer Mercer Jot. Mercer Road Merrill Merritts Merrittstown Mesta Machine Co. Metcalf Midland Midway Mifflin Mifflin Jet. Mifflin Mine No. 1 Mifflin Mine No. 2 Milbell Milesville Milford (Somerset Co.) Millburn Miller (Westmoreland Co.) Miller Farm Millers Millers Grove Millsboro Millsboro Works (Bessemer Coke Co.) Milltown Millwale Mill Village Millwood Monaca. Monarch (Leisenring No. 3) Monastery Coke "Works Monessen dº • 2 e * * 200 APPENDIX PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Monongahela Monongahela City Monongahela Clay Mfg. Co. Monongahela Jet. Monroe Monterey Montgomeryville Montour Jet. Moon Run Moores Moores Jot. Moorhead Morado Moravia Morewood Morewood Coke Works Morgan Morganza Moro Mine Morrell Morrellville Morrison Siding Moser Run Jet. Mosgrove Mostoller Mountain Mine No. 1 Mountain Mine No. 2 Mt. Braddock Mt. Pleasant . Mt. Pleasant-Con- ...: ; ; nellsville Coke Co. : * : *-* Mt. Royal Cemetery Moyer Moxham Moxham Siding Mullins Munhall Murraysville Mutual Myoma Nadine Naomi Nashua Nat’l Car Wheel Co. Natrona. Nealy’s Negley Branch Nellie Mines Nelsons Bridge Nesbit Run Jet. Neshannock Falls Neville (Neville Island) Neville Island New Alexandria New Alexandria Colliery No. 1 Ne W Alexandria Colliery No. 2 New Alexandria Colliery No. 3 New Brighton New Castle New Castle Jct. Newcomer Newell (Fayette Co.) New Florence New Galilee New Kensington Newlinsburg Newport New Salem New Stanton Newton Newtown New Wilmington Nichola Nilan Niles Nobles Noblestown Noeline North Bessemer North East North Girard North McKees Rock North Oakland North Rochester North Sewickley North Star North Warren O. & B. Short Line Jet. Oak Oakdale Oak Hill Oak Grove Oakland Oakmont Oak Tree Ocean Colliery No. 2 Odell Ohio Pyle Oil City Oil Well Supply Co. No. 6 TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 201 PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Old Home Works Old Junction Oleopolis Oliphant Furnace Oliver Oliver No. 3 Oneida Option Orient Oriental Powder Co. Branch Osgood Outcrop Overton Branch Jet. Pack Saddle Paddock Siding Paint Creek Painter Palanka Palmer Pardoe Parke (Allegheny Co.) Parker Parkers Landing Parkers Siding Park Gate Parkwood Parnassus Parshall Works Parshall Works Paynes Pechin Penn No. 1 No. 2 Pennine Penn Manor Shaft Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 Penn Manor Shaft No. 5 Pennside Pennsville Percy Perryopolis Pershing Peter’s Creek Peter's Creek Col- liery Nos.1 and 2 Peter’s Creek Col- liery No. 3 Peterson Petroleum Center Petrolia Phillips Mine Phillipston Pierce Pike (Allegheny Co.) Pine Creek Pinkerton Pioneer Pitcairn Pittsburgh Pittsburgh (Birmingham) Pittsburgh (Butler St.) Pittsburgh (Duquesne) Pittsburgh (Grant St.) Pittsburgh (Penn. St.) Pittsburgh (Point Bridge) Pittsburgh (Produce Yard) Pittsburgh (16th St.) Pittsburgh (22d St. Produce Yd.) Pittsburgh (26th St.) Pittsburgh (29th St.) Pittsburgh (33d St.) Pittsburgh (34th St.) Pittsburgh (43d St.) Pittsburgh (54th St.) Pittsburgh (South Side) Pittsburgh (South Side) (Carson St.) Pittsburgh (South Side) (12th St.) Pittsburgh (South Side) (23d St.) Pittsburgh (U. S. Yards) 202 APPENDIX PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Pittsburgh Coal Co. (First Pool Mine No. 1) Pittsburgh Coal Co. (First Pool Mine No. 2) Pittsfield Platea Plum Creek Plummer Works P. McK. & Y. Connection Point Marion Polk Portersville Port Royal (Westmoreland Co.) Prentice President Presto Pretoria Mines 2 and 3 Primrose Princeton Pulaski Pymatuning Quaker Falls Quaker Valley Quarry Queen Jet. Quemahoning Jet. Rachel Mine (Allegheny Co.) Rachel Mine (Washington Co.) Raccoon Radebaugh Rainey Rainey Clay Works Rainey Jet. Rainey, W. J. Ralph Ralphton Ralph Works Rand Randolph Mine No. 1 Rankin Ray Colliery Raymilton Rea Reading Jet. Reading Mines Nos. 3 and 4 Ready, David Red Bank Redd’s Mill Red Haven Redmond Redstone Jct. Redstone Ovens Reduction Reed Reed Jet. Reflectorville Reilly Reissing Remaley Renfrew Rennerdale Reno Republic Revere Rhodes Summit Ribold Ribold Jet. Rice's Landing Riceville Ridgeview Park Rillton Rimerton Rist River Coal Siding Riverside Riverton (Allegheny Co.) Riverview Roach Roaring Run Robb Robbins Roberts Robinson Rochester Rockdale Rockford Rockland Rockmere Rock Point Rockwood Ronco Rook Roscoe Rose Point Rosston Rostraver Rothruck Rouseville Rowena Rowes Run TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 203 Royal Royal Coke Works Ruffsdale Rugh Rumbaugh Rural Ridge Russell Russellton Ruth Rye Rynd Farm Saegertown St. George St. Joe St. Vincent St. Xavier Salem Salina Saltsburg Salt Spring Bottom Samson Sand Rock (Fayette Co.) Sandy Creek Sandy Lake Sandy Lick Sappor Ovens Sarah Sarah Furnace Sarver Saunders Savan Scenery Hill Sta- tion Schenley Schollard Scottdale PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Scott Haven Scotts Searight Works Selkirk Seward Sewickley Shadeland Shadyside Shafton Shamrock Works Shaner Sharon Sharpsburg Sharpsville Shaw Jot. Shaws Shelocta Shenango Sheridan (Allegheny Co.) Shermansville Sherrick Sherwin Shields Shingiss Shire Oaks Shoaf Shoaf Ovens Shoup Shousetown Simmons, A. M. Simpson Sinns Sipes Sipesville Siverly Smiley Smiley Ovens Smith Smithdale Smithfield S. & M. Jet. Smiths Ferry Smithton Smithville Smock Snowden Social Hall Solon Works Somerfield Somers Somerset South Brownsville South Carnegie South Duquesne South Heights South Oil City South Red Bank Sowash Spartansburg Spencers Spur Springboro Spring Creek Springdale Springfield Stambaugh Standard Standard C o ke Works Starbrick Star Jot. Star Mine Star Mines Starr Crossing 204 APPENDIX PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Sterling Sand Co. Sterling Works Stewarton Stewart's (Allegheny Co.) Stewart's Siding Stilleys Siding Stobo Stockdale Stokes Stonesboro Stony Point Stony Run Stoops Ferry (Allegheny Co.) Stoughton Stoyestown Strangford Stringtown Strum Struthers Studa Sturgeon Sugar Creek Sugar Run Summit (Crawford Co.) Summit (Erie Co.) Summit (Fayette Co.) Summit Transfer Sumner Sumner No. 1 Sumner No. 2 Sumnerville Sunshine Passing Siding Sunshine Works Superior Colliery No. 2 Suter Swanville Swissvale Sygan Tarentum Tarr Taylorstown T. C. R. R. Jet. Templeton Terminus P. M. & S. R. R. Terral Texas Siding Thaw The Large Distill- ing Co. The Leon Works Thomas (Indiana Co.) Thomas (Washington Co.) Thomas Ovens Thompson Thompson Colliery Thompson-Connells- ville No. 1 Works Thompson-Connells- ville No. 2 Works Thornburg Thorn Crossing Thornton Jct. Tidioute Tinstman Tionesta Tippecanoe Tip Top Titusville Torpedo Tower Hill No. 1 TWOrks Tower Hill No. 2 Works Trafford Transfer Trauger Traveskyn Tremont (Fayette Co.) Treveskyn Trotter Trotter Ovens Trunkeyville Tryonville Tub Run Tunnelton Turners Turtle Creek Two Lick Tylerdale Udell Unamis Undercliff Union City Uniontown United TJnited Works No. 2 United Works No. 3 Unity Universal Upper Hillville TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 205 PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. Upper Middletown Vigilent Mine No. Wesley Ursina 34 West Alexander Ursina Jet. Vista West Apollo Utica. Volant West Bellevue Utley Volcano West Belt Jet. Valcourt Wahls West Bridgewater Valencia Waterford West Brownsville Valley Camp Wadsworth West Brownsville Valley Camp Col- Walford Jet. liery Walker West Brownsville Valley Mines Walker’s Mill Jet. Scales Valley Mines Nos. Wallace West Columbia 1, 2 and 3 Wallace Jot. West Elizabeth Valley Works Walnut Bend West Elwood Jet. Vance Walnut Hill West End (Pitts- Vance Mill Jct. Walsall (Engle- burgh) Vanderbilt side) Westford Wandergrift Waltersburg West Hickory Vandergrift Distil- Waltz West Homestead ling Co. Wampum Westland Vandergrift Siding Warner West Lebanon Van Emman Warren West Liberty Van Kirk Washington West Middlesex (Allegheny Co.) Waterford West Middletown Van Meter Watson West Monessen Van Port Watsons Run W º est Mosgrove Van Voorhis Watters © West Newton Venango Watts Mills Verners Watts Transfer West, overton Verona Weaver West Pittsburg Versailles We ayer 's Old West Pittsburgh Vesta Coal Co. No. 3 Stand West Rochester Vesta Colliery No. 5 Webster West Saxonburg Vesta No. 4 Wells Creek West Springfield Veteran Works Wendel West Union Vienna (Edna Mine No. 2) West Vernon 206 APPENDIX PENNSYLVANIA—Stations—Continued. West Winfield Wilmington Jct. Wynn Works No. 1 West Yough Trans- Wilson York Run fer Wilson Creek Jet. York Run Jet. Wharton Wilson’s Yough R. R. Jet. Wheatland Winthrop Yough slope Mine Wheeler Wittmer Youngsville Wºme Jet. Woodell yº ite Wood Hill OW16 r wº Woodlawn * Colliery WhitSett Jot. Woodleigh Zanchi Wick Woodrow Zediker Wick Haven Wood Run Zelienople Wildwood Woodward Zeno Wilkensburg Wurtemburg Zimmerman Willock Wyano (Ralphton Mine Willow Grove Wylandville No. 6) Wilmerding Wylie WEST VIRGINIA—Stations as follows: Accoville Aurora Mine Ben Lomond Acme Carbon Ballard Bens Run Black Co. Bane Benwood Adamston B. & N. Jot. Benwood Jot. Agnes Barboursville Benton Ferry Air Shaft Barnestown Big Creek Altman Barrackville Billings Alum Creek Barrs Black Betsey Angerona Baxter Black Horse Annabelle Mine Beale Blennerhassett Apple Grove Beech Bottom Blue Sulphur Arbuckle Beech Grove Mine Springs Archer Beech Hill Bluetom Arroyo Beechwood Board Tree Ashford Belle Boggs Run Mine Ashton Belleville Boomer Atenville Belmont Bradys TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 207 WEST VIRGINLA—Stations—Continued. Branchland Brewster Bridge No. 51 Bridgeport Bristol Brooklyn Jet. Brosia Brounland Brown Brown City Brownsdale Brydon Brushton Buſſalo Burton Cairo Calders Calvert Cameron Cannelton Captina Carbondale Carnegie Natural Gas Co.'s Siding Carter Castlebrook Car- bon Co. Catawba Cedar Grove Central Ceredo Chapmanville Charleston Chester Chestnut Hill Clarington Clarksburg Clarksburg High Grade Shale Brick Co. Clausson Mine Clifton Clothier Clover Coffman Colfax Collier Congo Consolidation No. 21 Consolidation No. 23 Consolidation No. 24 Consolidation No. 25 Consolidation No. 26 Consolidation No. 27 Consolidation No. 28 Consolidation No. 29 Consolidation No. 30 Consolidation Nos. 32 and 61 Consolidation No. 33 Consolidation Nos. 34 and 63 Consolidation No. 35 Consolidation No. 36 Consolidation No. 38 Consolidation No. 40 Consolidation No. 41 Consolidation No. 42 Consolidation No. 45 Consolidation No. 47 Consolidation No. 48 Consolidation No. 49 Consolidation No. 50 Consolidation No. 51 Consolidation No. 52 Consolidation No. 54 Consolidation No. 55 Consolidation No. 56 Consolidation No. 57 Consolidation No. 58 Consolidation No. 59 Consolidation No. 62 Consolidation No. 65 Consolidation No. 66 Consolidation No. 67 Consolidation No. 68 Consolidation No. 70 Cook Coal & Coke Co. Mine Cora Cornwallis Cottageville Cox Landing Craneco Crawford's Cross- ing Cresaps Cresaps Grove Crown City Ferry Crown Coal Co. Crow Summit Culloden Dam 15 Ohio River Dam 28 Ohio River Dam 26 Ohio River Dam 26 Jct. Dana T)anville Dartmont Davenport Davis T. B. Mine 208 APPENDIX WEST VIRGINIA—Stations—Continued. Davisville Delta Mine Denver Dickinson Dimension Lumber Co. Dobra. Dola. Downs Duckworth Dukes Dunbar Duncan Dunlapville Earling Eaton Eden Park Edmund Elk Ellenboro Elm Grove Elwell Emmons End of Line Engle Run Enterprise Erie Mine Ethel Eureka Evans |Flverson Fairmont Fairmont Foundry Co. Fairmont Indus- trial Co.'s Ex- tension Jct. Fairmont Steel Co. Fairmore Mine Fallen Timber Fanco Farm Farnum Fayette Mine Federal Jet. Ferrell Ferrellsburg Fetterman Flemington Flemington Mine Flower F. M. & P. Jot. Foley Follansbee Folsom Forks of Coal Fort Branch Foster Foundation Co. Siding Fowler Friendly Fry Fuqua Gallipolis Ferry Galmist Gaston Jct. Gauley Bridge Gay Mine Geo. Lilly Gill Girard Mine Girard Mine No. 2 Glendale Glendale Mine Glen Easton Glen Falls Glen Ferris Glenns Run Glenwood Globe Glover Gap Godbys Grafton Graham Grant Town Grape Island Graysville Great Scott Mine Green Bottom Greenview Greenwood Guyan Brick Co. Guyandot Guyandotte Guyandotte Tie Hoist Gypsy Hammett Siding Hammond Haning Hannibal Harewood Harless Harold Mine Harris Ferry Harry B. Mine Hartford Harts Hartzell Hastings TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 209 WEST VIRGINIA—Stations—Continued. Haywood Henderson Henlawson Hepzibah Hero Mine Highland Hickman Run Jct. Hitchman Mine Hoard Holden Hollidays Cove Hollyhurst Homestead Hood Lumber Co. Hopkins Hornbrook Hoult Hudson School Fur. niture Co. Hugheston Humphrey Hundred Huntington Hurricane Hutchinson (Logan Co.) Hutchinson (Marion Co.) Hutchinson Coal Mines Hutchison Indian Industrial School Inez Institute Irving Island Creek Mines Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Ivy Branch Jacksonburg Jamison Coal & Coke Co. No. 8 Jamison Coal & Coke Co. No. 9 Jayenn Jeffrey Joe Creek Julian Justus-Murphy Co. Kanawha (WoodCo.) Kanawha City Kellar Kelleys Kellogg Kenilworth Kenova Kilarm Jet. Kilarm Mine Kingmont Kingmont Mine Kings Rings Creek Kitchen Kohinor Coal Co. Lamps Lattin Lazearville Leach Lee Creek Leon Leroy Lesage Letart Levi Lewis Limestone Lincoln Linden Mine Little Falls Littleton Liverpool Lock Seven Logan Logan Planing Mill London Lone Cedar Longacre Long Dale Long Reach Long Run Lory Loudenville Low Gap Lumberport McConnell MacCorkle McCoy McMechen McMillan Madison Maggie Magnolia Brick Co. Malden Manbar Mann Mannington Maken Marion Planing Mill Co. 210 APPENDIX WEST VIRGINLA—Stations—Continued. Martha Marting Mason City Matamoras Maud Maxon Meadowbrook Meadowdale Meldahls Mendota. Mercers Bottom Metz Meyercord Midkiff Millender Millersport Ferry Millwood Milton Minnie Monarch Monitor Monongah Monroe Mine Montana Moores Morgan Morgan Mine Morgansville Morgantown Morris Moscow Mound Moundsville Mt. de Chantel Murray Murrayville Muses Bottom Myrtle Nancy's Run National Mine Neibert New Cumberland Newell New England New Era New Haven New Martinsville N. Y. Mine Nicolette Nobles North Pole North View Norway Nursery O'Gara Mine Ona. Opekiska Oral Ottawa Overholt Mine Paden City Palatine Branch Jet. Parchment Park Parker Run Mine Parkersburg Park Timber Co. Siding Peach Creek Pearl Town Peck’s Mill Pennois Pennsboro Peter Cave Fork Petroleum Peytona Phoenix Mine Pine Grove Plainfield Pleasant View Plymouth Poca. Pohick Point Mills Pt. Pleasant Pond Creek Porter’s Falls Portland Powell Creek Powhatan Price Proctor Pure Oil Co. Racine Ralumco Ramage Ranger Raven Rock Ravenswood Raymond City Reader Red House Reedy Reid’s Sand Siding Rex Reynoldsville Rinehart Ripley Ripley Landing Riverdale TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 2ll WEST VIRGINIA—Stations—Continued. Riverside Riverview Rivesville Roach Robey Robinette Robinson Coal Co. Rock Creek Rockdale Rochester Rolfe Rollman Roneys Point Rose Bud Rose Bud Mine Roseby Rock Rosemont Rosemont Mine Round Bottom Rum Creek Jct. Rumer Runkle Russell Siding St. Albans St. Marys Salama, Salem Salt Rock Sand Creek Sand Lick Mine sand Lick R. R. Jet. Sand Switch Sandyville Sattes Scary School House Scott Seaman Selbe Selman Seth Shamrock Sharples (Formerly Beech) Sheridan Sherman Shinnston Short Creek Short Line Jct. Shrewsbury Silver Run Silverton Simon Simpson Sistersville Six Mile Smithburg Smithers Smithfield Smith's Wye South Charleston South Cresaps Southern Carbon Co. South Rivesville South Ruffner Sparlin Spelter Spencer Spencer’s Siding Spilman Spring Hill Spring Run Sproul Stafford Mine Star City (Shriver, P.O.) Steelton Sterling Stewart Stollings Stone Branch Stone House Stone Siding Superior Sydnor Sylvester Mine Teays Ten Mile Terminal Jot. Theo. Bush Lumber Co. Thompson Thompson Mine Toll Gate Tom’s Creek Triadelphia Tri-State Gas Co. Turkey Run Uffington Underwood Upper Falls Utility Siding Valley Falls Walz Siding Van Camp Van Worhis Vaucluse Veto Vienna Virginia 212 APPENDIX WEST VIRGINIA—Stations—Continued. Virginia-Buffalo Co. Wendell Mine Volcano Jet. Waldo Mine No. 1 Waldo Mine No. 2 Walker Wallace Wanda. Washington Watson Watson Siding Watts St. Station (Charleston) Waverly Webster Wells Wellsburg Wells Pit Wells Siding West Charleston West Clarksburg West Columbia West Hamlin West Huntington West Siding West Union Wheeling Wheeling Jet. Wheeling Natural Gas Co.'s Siding Whitman Whittaker Wierton Wilfong Willard Mine Willard Mine Jct. Wisconsin–Stations as follows: Algoma Bartel Bay View Becher St. (Milwaukee) Belgium Berryville Bristol Brookfield Bushington Caledonia Calhoun Camp Lake Carrollville Casco Casco Jet. Cedar Grove Chestnut St. (Milwaukee) Chickory Switch Cleveland Clyde Colgate Corliss County Line Cudahy Decker’s De Pere Dillman’s Dover. Drucker Duplainville East Elm Grove EIm Grove Williamstown Willow Grove Willow Island Wilson Wilsonburg Witcher Wolf Summit Woodland Woodruff Woodville Worthington Wyatt W. M. Yates Crossing York York Mine Yuma. Zalia Ephraim Fish Creek Forestville Fox River Franksville Gatliff Granville Green Bay Hadfield Honey Creek Ives Kansasville Rewaunee Renosha Kenyon Kildare Lake TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 213 WISCONSIN–Stations—Continued. Lake Beulah Lannon Layton Park Lindwerm Luxemburg Manitowoc Maplewood Marinette Menomonee Falls Mequon Milwaukee Milwaukee Shops Milwaukee Stock Yards Mosel Mukwanago National Home New Franken Newton North Avenue (Milwaukee) North Milwaukee Oakwood Oconto Oostburg Peshtigo Pleasant Prairie Port Washington Racine Racine Jct. Ranney Rio Creek Rock Jet. Rugby Jet. St. Francis Salem Sawyer Seven Mile Creek Sheboygan Shore Line Siding No. 6 Silver Lake Silver Springs Sister Bay Somers South Milwaukee Stone Quarry Sturgeon Bay Sylvania Templeton Trey Or Truesdell Two Rivers Ulao Union Grove Vernon Washington Island Waukesha Wauwatosa Weeden’s West Allis Wheatland Whitefish Bay Wiswell Woodworth 9. CHICAGO FREIGHT DISTRICT IN INDIANA The Chicago Freight District in Indiana includes that part of Indiana north and west of and including points on a line drawn from the Illinois-Indiana State Line through Shelby, San Pierre, North Judson, Knox, Hamlet, Plymouth, Warsaw, Mil- ford Junction, New Paris, Goshen, Elkhart, and Granger to the Indiana-Michigan state line; also the part of Michigan lying on and west of the line of the Big Four Railway from Benton Harbor through Niles to the Indiana-Michigan state line. 10. CHICAGO JUNCTION POINTS As Defined in Exceptions to the Official Classification Blue Island . . . . . . Bradley . . . . . . . . . Broadview . . . . . . . © tº e º e * c e º º . . . . Ill. Calumet Park . . . . . . . . III. ” Chicago 9 3 Chicago Heights . . . . . . 9 3 e s e e e º e º 'º e e g º e 214 . APPENDIX CHICAGO JUNCTION POINTs—Continued. Coster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ill. Kankakee . . . . . . . . . . . . Ill. Dolton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Kensington . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 East Joliet . . . . . . . . . . . 2 y Matteson . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Gibson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ind. Momence . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Gibson Yard. . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Momence Transfer. . . . . 5 y Grand Crossing. . . . . . . Ill. Peotone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Hammond . . . . . . . . . . Ind. Riverdale . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Hartsdale . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 South Chicago. . . . . . . . 2 y Harvey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ill. Steele . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Hawthorne . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 West Hammond. . . . . . . 5 y Highlands . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 West Pullman. ... . . . . . 5 3 Joliet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 - 11. CHICAGO SWITCHING DISTRICT The Chicago Switching District is the territory on and within the following described boundary: Commencing at Lake Michi- gan at a point directly east of Clarke Junction, Ind., thence southwestwardly through Calumet, Ind., to Grassile, Ind., inclu- sive; thence via the Indiana Harbor Belt Railway and C. I. & So. Ry. to and including Osborn, Ind. ; thence via the N. Y. C. & St. L. Ry. to Hammond, Ind., inclusive; thence south of the M. C. Ry. to Liberty, Ill., inclusive; thence on and via the Indiana Harbor Belt Railway to Dolton, Ill.; thence southwest to and including Harvey, Ill. ; thence northwest through Blue Island, Ill., inclusive, on and via the Indiana Harbor Belt Rail- way through Chicago Ridge, Argo, and McCook to LaGrange, Ill., inclusive; thence north through Broadview, Bellewood, Pro- viso, and Melrose Park to Franklin Park, Ill., inclusive; thence on and via the M. St. P. & S. S. M. Ry. to Des Plaines, Ill., inclu- sive; thence southeast on and via C. & N. W. Ry. to Chicago city limits; thence east along the Chicago city limits to Lake Michigan, including Weber and Glenwood Ave., stations on the Mayfair cutoff of the C. & N. W. Ry. 12. ColoraDO CoMMON POINTS Colorado Springs, Denver, Pueblo, and Trinidad are the most important of these points, but some tariffs list more than 400 stations as taking the Colorado Common Point rates. TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 215 13. EAST MISSISSIPPI RIVER CROSSINGs (1) As Defined in Exceptions to the Official Classification 1 ILLINOIS: East Burlington East Clinton East Dubuque East Fort Madison East Hannibal East Keokuk East Louisiana East St. Louis Fulton Keithsburg Quincy Rock Island Savanna (2) As defined in Western Trunk Lines Circular No. 1 and ILLINOIS: Alton East Burlington East Clinton East Dubuque East Ft. Madison succeeding issues. East Hannibal East Louisiana East St. Louis Keithsburg Moline Quincy Rock Island Savanna 14. EAST OF ILLINOIS-INDIANA STATE LINE As defined in Trans-Missouri Rules Circular No. 1, or reissues, includes points shown below CONNECTICUT-All points. DELAWARE-All points DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA—All points. INDIANA—All points, except: Aetna Alco Buffington Calumet Clark Jet. Colehour Dyer East Chicago East Hammond Gary Gibson Grasselli Griffith Hammond Hartsdale Highland Hessville Hobart Indiana Harbor Maynard Osborn Pine Republic Robertsdale Roby Saxony Shed-Field 1 These crossings are shown on Map 1, Railway Traffic Maps. 216 APPENDIX INDIANA-Continued. State Line Tolleston Wan Loon Whiting KENTUCKY—As follows: Aden Anchorage Ashland Ashland Junction Augusta Broshears Buena Vista Carrs Catlettsburg Chilesburg Concord Covington Denton Dover E. K. Junction Enterprise Ewington Farmer Frankfort Frost Garrison Gates Greenup Hawesville Henderson Kilgore L. & E. Junction Leon Lexington Limeville Louisville Manchester Maysville Mentor Midland Morehead Mt. Savage Mt. Sterling Netherland Newport New Richmond Olive Hill Also all points in the following states: Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan (South- ern Pen.) New Brunswick Newfoundland New Hampshire New Jersey New York Nova Scotia Ohio Pennsylvania. Wolf Lake Olympia Owensboro Paducah. Pine Grove Preston Quincy Riverton Ross Russell Salt Lick Shelbyville Soldier South Portsmouth South Ripley Springdale Stepstone Uniontown Vanceburg Wellsburg Winchester Province of Ontario Province of Quebec Rhode Island Vermont Virginia West Virginia The same definition of this term is given in Western Trunk Lines Circular No. 1 and succeeding issues. TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 217 15. EAST OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER As defined in Trans-Missouri Rules Circular No. 1, or reissues, includes all points in the following states ALABAMA MARYLAND OHIO CONNECTICUT MASSACHUSETTS PENNSYLVANIA DELAWARE MICHIGAN PROVINCE OF ONTARIO DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI PROVINCE OF QUEBEC COLUMBIA NEW BRUNSWICK RHODE ISLAND FLORIDA NEWFOUNDLAND SOUTH CAROLINA GEORGIA NEW HAMPSHIRE TENNESSEE ILLINOIS NEW JERSEY VERMONT INDIANA NEW YORK VIRGINLA KENTUCKY NORTH CAROLINA WEST VIRGINIA MAINE dº, NOVA SCOTLA WISCONSIN 16. EAST OF WESTERN TERMINI As defined in Western Trunk Line Tariff No. 1, or reissues, includes all points in the following states CONNECTICUT NEW BRUNSWICK PROVINCE OF ONTARIO DELAWARE NEW HAMPSHIRE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT of ColumEIA NEw JERSEY RHODE ISLAND MAINE NEW YORK VERMONT MARYLAND NOVA SCOTIA VIRGINIA MASSACHUSETTS PENNSYLVANIA WEST VIRGINIA 17. ForT SMITH (ARK.) GROUP OF STATIONS As defined in Southwestern Lines’ Territorial Directory No. 1 Apex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ark. Denman . . . . . . . . . . . . Ark. Arkoal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Doubleday . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Bashe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Excelsior . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Bonanza . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Fenn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Branner . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Fidelity . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Burma. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Ft. Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Cameron . . . . . . . . . . . Okla. Greenwood . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Cavanal . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Gunther, No. 1 . . . . . . . . 3 y Cedars . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ark. Gunther, No. 2 . . . . . . . . 9 y Dallas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Hackett . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 218 APPENDIX Fort SMITH (ARK.) Group of Stations—Continued. Harp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ark. Oak Park . . . . . . . . . . Ark. Hartford . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Patterson . . . . . . . . . . Ark. Hartford Junction. . . . . 2 3 Poteau . . . . . . . . . . . . Okla. Hill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3 Potter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Hoffman . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Prairie Creek . . . . . . . Ark Howe . . . . . . . . . . . . . Okla. Shaft Six . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2 Hoye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ark. Smokeless . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Huntington . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 South Ft. Smith. . . . . . 5 y Jenson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 Van Buren . . . . . . . . . . 5 2 Maney Jet. . . . . . . . . Okla. Ward Mansfield . . . . . . • . . . . Ark. (Sebastin County)... ?” Midland . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Williams . . . . . . . . . . Okla. Montreal . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Williams Spur . . . . . . Ark. Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . Okla. Wister . . . . . . . . . . . . Okla. Neff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y 18. EASTERN COLORADO AND WYOMING As defined in Trans-Missouri Rules Circular No. 1, or reissues, includes the following points Ackerman . . . . . . . . . . Colo. Bovina. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Colo. Akron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 Brandon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Altvan . . . . . . . . . . . . Wyo. Bristol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Amherst . . . . . . . . . . . Colo. Bronco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Amity . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wyo. Brush . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Arcola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5 Buchtel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .” Arlington . . . . . . . . . . Colo. Buckingham . . . . . . . . . 5 y Arriba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ” Burlington . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Atwood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Byron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Avondale . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5 Caddoa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Balzac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Calhan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Barr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Camden . . . . . . . . . . . . . Baxter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . } } Campstool . . . . . . . . . Wyo. Beethurst . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Carpenter . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Beta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • ? Casa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Colo. Bethune . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Catherine . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Big Bend . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Castile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Boone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Channing . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 219 Cheraw . . . . . . . . . . . . Colo Chico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Chivington . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Cornelia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Crest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5 Delite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Derby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Diston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . } % Eads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Eckley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5 Elder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Eno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 * Fenton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Fergus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 y Flagler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 Fleming . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Fort Morgan . . . . . . . . . 3 y Fowler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5 Fowler Spur . . . . . . . . . y y Galatea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 Galien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Genoa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Goodale . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Granada . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Gravel Pit Spur. . . . . . . 5 y Grote . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Grover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Hadley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Halls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Hartman . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Hasty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Haswell . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Hawley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Hayden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, 2 Hays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Haxtun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Hereford . . . . . . . . . . Wyo EASTERN COLORADo AND WYOMING—Continued. Hillrose . . . . . . . . . . . . Colo. Hilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Holly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . } }. Holyoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . y P Hudson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y P Hyde . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Inman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2, Karl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . } } Keenesburg . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Keesee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 x Keota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 Kilburn . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Kings Center . . . . . . . . . 9 x Klink . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y P Koen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Kornman . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Kremis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Kreybill . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 LaFayette . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Laird . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y La Junta . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Lamar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Laura . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 y. Las Animas . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Limon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Lodi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Lolita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Lubers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y McClave . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Manzanola . . . . . . . . . . . 3 x. Markham . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 y Marlman . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 x Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Mattison . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92. May Valley . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 Melonfield . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Merino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y 220 APPENDIX EASTERN COLORADO AND WYOMING—Continued. Messex . . . . . . . . . . . . . Colo. Shelton . . . . . . . . . . . . Colo. Millwood . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5 Shelton Jct. . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Minto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Sheridan Lake . . . . . . . y y Morse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Sligo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Nepesta . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Stein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Newdale . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Sterling . . . . . . . . . . . . . y y Nowles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Stoneham . . . . . . . . . . . . y y Numa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 y Story . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y y Nyberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Stuart ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Olney Springs . . . . . . . . 3 y Stratton . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Ordway . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Sugar City . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Otis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Sugardale . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Padroni . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Swink . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Paoli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 3 Tampa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Parrish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Tip Top . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Peetz . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... '" Tonville . . . . . . . . . . . . . y y Pinneo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Towner . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Platner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Trowel Branch . . . . . . . 7 y Prowers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Pultncy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Vallery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Ramah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Vineland . . . . . . . . . . . . } % Randall . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Vona ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 y Raymer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Warwick . . . . . . . . . . . . y y Resolis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Waveland . . . . . . . . . . . .” Riley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Weitzer . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Riverdale . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Wiggins . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Rixey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Willard . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Robb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Wiley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y y Roberta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Winston . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Rocky Ford . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Wray . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Roggen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Xenia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Schramm . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Yuma. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " Seibert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 221 (Map 5) 19. GREEN LINE TERRITORY 1 Comprising the stations named below in ALABAMA FLORIDA GEORGIA MISSISSIPPI NORTH CAROLINA SOUTH CAROLINA TENNESSEE VIRGINIA ALABAMA–All stations except stations named on page 227. FLORIDA—All stations except Pensacola. GEORGIA—All stations. MISSISSIPPI-Stations as follows: Aberdeen Jet. Acker Amory Arklet Becker Belmont Bigbee Black Creek Brewer Burnsville Burnt Cut Cauhorn Chancellor Dennis Gatman Glens Golden Gravel Siding Greenwood Springs Holcut Houston’s Mill Indian Mound Iuka Junction City Kewaunee Leedy Log Spur McCrary Neil NoRTH CAROLINA-All stations. SouTH CAROLINA-All stations. TENNESSEE--Stations as follows: Nettleton New Hope Paden Plantersville Quincy Russell Smith's Spur Steens Strickland Theadville Tishomingo Toomsuba Walker Wilcox Wise’s Gap Dresden, Gleason, Ralston, and all other stations except stations in Mississippi Valley Territory. Alexanders Alms House Altavista Alton Angle Antlers VIRGINIA—Stations as follows: Adams Grove Aiken Summit Alberta 1 Territorial Directory No. 3, or re-issues, by the agent for the carriers of the Central Freight Association (Chicago). 222 APPENDIX VIRGINIA—Stations—Continued. Apple Arral Arringdale Ashley Axton Bannister Barksdale Baskerville Bassett Blaine Bocock Boone’s Mill Boxwood Boydton Boykins Bracey Branchville Brinkley Bristol Brodnax Brookneal Buffalo Jot. Buffalo Lithia Springs Bufords Burgess Burnt Chimneys Burt's Siding Butterworth Butts Road Capron Carlisle Carrsville Carson Cascade Casey Cashie Lumber Co. Siding Charlie Hope Chase City Chatham Chatmos Christie Clarion Clarksville Clarkton Clover Cluster Springs Cochran Corapeake Jct. Courtland Critz Cross Roads Crystal Hill Cypress Dahlia Dan River Danube Danville Dauntless Davis Delaware Denniston De Witt Dinwiddie Dip Drakes Branch Drewryville T)rol Dry Fork T)urmid Edgerton Edgewood Electric Eley Elwood Emporia ESnon Evington Fall Creek Fentress Ferrum Finchley Finneywood Fishburn Fontaine Forbes Fort Mitchell 41 Mile Siding 49 Mile Siding 55 Mile Siding Foxes Franklin Franklin Jct. Freeman Galveston Garst Gisnal Glade Hill Gladys Grandy Gray Green Bay Green Plain Greer Gretna (formerly Franklin Jct.) Grizzard TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 223 VIRGINLA—Stations—Continued. Hagood Handsoms Harmony Henry Hickory Ground Hilda. Hitchcock Mill Holland Homeville Houston Howes Hugo Hurt, Huske Isaac Jarratt Jeffress J. L. Jennings Keysville Kilby Koehler Kress La Crosse Ladysmith Lanahan Lawrenceville Lawyers Leaksville Jct. Lees Mill Leigh Lennig Lone Jack Lumberton Lummis Lusks McBride McGuffin McKenney Martinsville Mason Mayo Mays & Crowders Spur Meherrin Modat Montview Mossingford Motley Naruna Nathalie Nelson Newbill Newell News Ferry Newsoms' Nichol Noding Northwest Nunn Nurney Oak Hill Ockward Ontario Ory Otter River Pace Patrick Springs Paynes Pedigo Pen Hook Pettys Philpott Pierce & Aker Pittsville Pleasant Shade Pope Preston Pretlows Prilliman Providence Jet. Purvis Racume Randolph Rawlings Reams Redwood Reigate Ridgeway Ringgold Rocky Mount Rorer Mines Rustburg Rux St. Brides Sandy Level Saunders Saxe Scottsburg 72 Mile Siding Skelton Skipwith Soudan South Boston South Clarksville South Emporia South Hill Spencer Starkey Stella Stokesland Stony Creek 224 - APPENDIX VIRGINLA—Stations—Continued. Story 22 Mile Siding Ward Springs Stuart 28 Mile Spur Warfield Sutherlin 39 Mile Siding Wassett Sycamore Union Hall Wertz Tanwood Union Level Whaley Taylors Urguhart's Spur Whittle Taylorsyde Vabrook Wilson Lumber Co. Tolley Vey Winfall Toshes Windrew Wolf Trap Trego Virgilina Wrights Turner Wallers Yale 20. Junctions OF WESTERN AND CENTRAL FREIGHT ASSOCIATION - ROADS As defined in Exceptions to the Official Classification Alton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ill. Granite City . . . . . . . . . Ill. Ashland . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Hammond . . . . . . . . . . Ind. Beardstown . . . . . . . . . . 3 5 Jacksonville . . . . . . . . . Ill. Bloomington . . . . . . . . . y 3 Joliet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Blue Island . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Kankakee . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 Calumet Park . . . . . . . . 3 y Kewanee . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Chapin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Ladd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 y Chenoa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Litchfield . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ’’ L’Ostant . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Coster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 y Mackinaw City . . . . . Mich. Crandall . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Manistique . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Decatur . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Manitowoc . . . . . . . . . . Wis. Dwight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Marinette . . . . . . . . . . . y 3 East Hannibal . . . . . . . . 3 * Mattoon ... . . . . . . . . . . Ill. East Joliet . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Mazon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 East Louisiana. . . . . . . . 2 3 Menominee . . . . . . . . Mich. East St. Louis . . . . . . . . ’’ Milwaukee . . . . . . . . . . Wis. El Paso . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Morton Jct. . . . . . . . . . . Ill. Essex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 Neoga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Gardner . . . . . . . . . . . . . ” Paxton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5 Gibson . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ind. Pekin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 2 Gilman . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ill. Peoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 9 TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMIS 225 JUNCTIONS OF WESTERN AND CENTRAL FREIGHT ASSOCIATION ROADS—Continued. Reddick . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ill. Springfield . . . . . . . . . . . Ill. Santa Fe Jct. . . . . . . . . 3 y Streator . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Seneca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Taylorville . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Shattue . . . . . . . . . . . . . y y Venice . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Smithboro . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Zearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . y y Sorento . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y 21. MEXICO COMMON POINTS A list of these points is given under “Southwestern Tariff Committee Territory” of this appendix. * 22. (SouTHEASTERN) MISSISSIPPI WALLEY TERRITORY (Map 5 and description on back thereof) This territory should be distinguished from Mississippi Valley Territory; the latter is a rate adjustment territory, and the former a freight association territory. 23. MISSISSIPPI VALLEY TERRITORY 1 (Map 5) Comprising the stations named below in ALABAMA KENTUCKY MISSISSIPPI ARKANSAS LOUISIANA TENNESSEE ALABAMA—Stations as follows: Alabama. Port Coden Dwight Barker Cotton Crary Eddy Mills Crichton Eight Mile Bayou La Batre Crichton Pine Escatawpa Bradley Products Co.'s Faith Burbank Switch Farnell Choctaw Deer Park Freiburg Chunchula Delchamps Froshinn Citronelle Duff Fruitdale 1 Territorial Directory No. 3, or re-issues, by the agent for the carriers of the Central Freight Association (Chicago). 226 APPENDIX ALABAMA-Stations—Continued, Government St. Grand Bay Gulfcrest Irvington Kauffman Kennedy Kushla Lamberts Langdon Lloyd Louis Mann Mauvilla Mertz Mobile M. & B. S. Jet. Moffett Spur Neely Neshota Padgett Parker Paynes Pierce Pigford Prichards Prosser Oak Grove Orchard Rendell Rolston Russell St. Elmo ARKANSAs—Station as follows: Helena KENTUCKY—Stations as follows: Almo Arlington Ballard Jot. Bardwell Barlow Benton Berkeley Boaz Bondurant Cayce Clayburn (Graves Co.) Clinton Columbus Crutchfield Dexter Dodds East Cairo Elva Filmore Florence Fulton Futrell Glade Grafton Hardin Hazel (State Line) Heath Hickman Hickory Iola Jordan Sans Souci Beach Semmes Sidney South Orchards Sulphur Springs Tacon - Taylor Theodore Three Mile Creek Venetia Vinegar Bend Waleys Whistler Williams Wilmer Wood Spur Yellow Pine Kemp's Kevil Krebs La Centre Laketon Laketon Sand Pit Lang Ledford Maxon Mayfield Miller's Spur Moscow Murray Oaks Oakton Owens TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 227 KENTUCKY—Stations—Continued. Pryors Shucks Switch South Columbus State Line Stubbs Thurman Tobacco Tyler Viola Water Valley LOUISIANA-Stations as follows: Abel Abita Springs Addison Albany Alcazar Almedia Alsen Alton Amite Amos Angelina Angie Angola Anson Arcola Arlington Baines Baker Barmen Baton Rouge Battle Bayou Paul Bayou Sara Belle Helene Belle Point Belmont Benton Berry Bingen Blankston Spur Bogalusa Bolivar Bolivar Jet. Bonfuca Bonn Bradleys Brakel Brandon Breckwaldt Brittany Brockdale Brooks Brookview Brothers Brown Bruder Bruns Bullion Burnside Burtville Busby Lumber Spur Bush Campbells Carville Catalpa Central Chattsworth Chef Menteur Claiborne Wells Wickliffe Winford Wingo Clifton Clinton Coburn (Tangipa- hoa Parish) Colomb Park Convent Corbin Cornland COsun Cottage Farm Covington Crespo Cumnock Cutrer’s Daniels Day Denham Dolson Doyle Dreyfous Dunbar Dutch Bayou Dyson Eagle East Kentwood Edenborn Elvina Essen Ethel Fallon 223 APPENDIX Florenville Flukers Folsom Forest Glen f'ranklinton Frellsen Frenier Fulda. Gambles Spur Gardere Garyville Geismar Genesee Gentilly Georgeville Getreu Giblin Gills Spur Goodbee Good Hope Goodwin & Strick- land Spur Gourier Gramercy Grangeville Graves Greenlaw Gullets Gurley Guzman Hackley Hamilton Hammond Hanson City Harahan Helvetia Hermitage LOUISIANA-Stations—Continued. Hester Hill's Switch Holden Home Honey Island Hoods Howells Huggins Humphries Hygeia (Formerly Todd) Independence Irene Irvings Isabel Jackson Road Jefferson Jenkins Johnson Jones Karp Kassel FCeller Kelspur Kemp Kenner Kenner Jet. Kents Mill Kentwood Kleinpeter Konstanz La Branch Lacombe Lake Catherine La Place Laurel Hill Lee LeeScreek Lewiston Lily Lindsay Little River Little Woods Longwood Lutcher Luzon McElroy McGehee McHugh McManus Magee Malarcher Manchac Mandeville Manheim Manske Maryland Mason Micheaud Millards Milneburg Mitch Montegut Montpelier Montz Morgan Morgans Mt. Airy Mt. Herman Mount Houmas Murdock Natalbany Neckar TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 229 Nettie New Orleans Newsom's Nichols North Baton Rouge North Shore North Slidell Norwood Nott Oak Hill Oaklawn Oakley 106 Mile Spur Oneida (jnville Ormond Ory Ozone Park Paloma Patterson Paulina Pearl River Pecan Grove Pfalzheim Pico Pigott’s Pineacre PineCliff Pine Grove Pine Grove Wye Plettenburg Ponchatoula Poolsbluff Port Chalmette Port Hudson Powells Price LOUISIANA-Stations—Continued. Prospect Ramsay Rapidan Rearwood Red Bluff Remy Rescue Reserve Rhodes Rhyne Richardson Riddle Rigolets |Rio Roberts Rose Roseland Rost Ruddock St. Elmo St. Gabriel St. Joe St. Johns St. Mary St. Rose St. Tammany Salmens Sarpy Sauve Seabrook Sellers Sharp Sharpsburg Shiloh Shrewsbury Scanlon Scotland Siegen Slaughter Slidell Sniders Spur Soest Sorrento South Point Southport Jct. Southwood Sport Spring Creek Stafford Stein Stern’s Factory Stevensdale Store No. 8 Store No. 21 Story Strader Strothers Sun Sunny Hill Talisheek Tangipahoa Terre Haute Tickfaw Tie Spur Timberton Timberton Jct. Trest Uncle Sam Union Varnado Velma Viavant Victoria Vidalia 230 APPENDIX LOUISIANA-Stations—Continued. Villere Front Virgin Wagram Wakefield Waldeck Walker Walsh MISSISSIPPI-Except stations shown on page Warnerton Weber Welcome Welham Platform Whitman Wilhelm Wilmer TENNESSEE--Stations as follows: Allens Alturia Arlington Atoka Atwood Augustus Aubon Bailey Bartlett Baskerville Bellevue Bells Bemis Berclair Bethel Big Hatchie Bolivar Braden Bradford Brighton Brownsville Bruce's Brunswick Buntyn Burkitt Cades Capleville Carroll Cedar Grove Chewalla Clamore Clay Cobbs Collierville Conger Cordova. Covington Crockett Curve Cypress Denmark Dresden Dyer Dyersburg Eads Ellendale Falcon Ferguson & Palmer Spur Finger Finley Flippin Wilson Wilton Witten Woodhaven Woodland Wortham Zachary Zona 260. Forest Hill Forty-Five Fowlkes Fruitland Fruitvale Gadsden Galloway Gardner Gates Germantown Gibbs Gibson Gilmore Gleason Grand Junction Greenfield Greer Grover Gwin Guys Halls Harris Hatchie Henderson Heneks Henning TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 231 TENNESSEE--Stations—Continued. Henry Hickory Valley Hickory Withe Hillside Hilltop Humboldt Idlewild Imperial Ina Jackson Jones R. C. Jet. Keeling Kenton Kerrville Laconia La Grange Latta Lawrence Leewood Lenow Lenox Lucy McConnel McKenzie McNairy Mandles Malesus Markham Martin Mason Master Medina. Medon Melrose Memphis Mengelwood Mercer Middleburg Middleton Milan Millington Minonk Miston Moffat Montgomery Park Morris Spur Moscow Mullins National Cemetery Neely Newbern New Tipton Normal School Oakfield Oakland Oakville Obion Paris Park Davis Pea, Point Perry Phillippy Pierce Pinson Piperton Pocahontas Polk Pomona Proctor City Puryear Race Track Raine Ralston Ramer Rialto Richwood Ridgely Ridgeway Ripley Rives Robinson Rogers Springs Rossville Routon Rutherford St. Elmo Saulsbury Selmer Shandy Sharon Shepards Shoffner Sitka Somerville South Fork Springdale Stanton State Line Stevens Jct. Stinger Switch No. 5 Teague Templeton Terrell Tiger Tail Tiptonville Toone Trenton Tresevant Trimble 232 APPENDIX TENNESSEE--Stations—Continued. Troy Wells Woodland Mills Union City West Woodstock U. S. Fire Works White Wrights Co. Whiteville Wynnburg Vildo Whitlock Yale Wade Williston Youngs Warren Wilson 24. MISSOURI RIVER CROSSINGs 1 Proportional rates from territory east of the Illinois-Indiana State Line to Montana and other Trans-Mississippi Territory apply only on shipments moving through these crossings. Sioux City, Ia., is not a river crossing, but it is accorded the privilege of proportional rates in competition with Omaha, Neb. Armourdale . . . . . . . . Kan. Omaha . . . . . . . . . . . . . Neb. Atchison . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 Pacific Jet. . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Council Bluffs . . . . . . . . Ia. St. Joseph. . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Kansas City. . . . . . . . . Kan. Sioux City . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Kansas City. ... . . . . . . Mo. South Omaha . . . . . . . Neb. Leavenworth . . . . . . . . Kan. Sugar Creek. . . . . . . . . . Mo. Nebraska City. . . . . . . Neb. 25. MISSOURI RIVER POINTS As Defined in Trans-Missouri Rules Circular No. I and Succeed- ing Issues. Agency Ford . . . . . . . . Mo. Bean Lake . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Amazonia. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Beverly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Amory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 5 Bigelow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Armour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 California Jet. . . . . . . . . Ia. Armourdale . . . . . . . . Kan. Camden Point. . . . . . . . Mo. Atchison . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Corning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 s Avondale . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Council Bluffs . . . . . . . . Ia. Bartlett . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ta. Coverdale . . . . . . . . . . Ran. 1 Territorial Directory No. 3, or re-issues, by the agent for the carriers of the Central Freight Association (Chicago). TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 233 Craig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Culverton ............ 2 3 Curzons. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y DeKalb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 Dearborn . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Edgerton Jct. ... . . . . . . 92 East Leavenworth. . . . . 9 3 Farley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Folson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Forbes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Forest City . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Fortescue . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Fort Leavenworth. ... Kan. Frazier . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Gashland . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Gower. . • e e 5 y Greenwood . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Halls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Hamburg. . . . . . . . . . . .Ia. Harbo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Harlem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Haynies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Hovey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Iatan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Island Park . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Kansas City . . . . . . . . Kan. Ransas City . . . . . . . . . Mö. MISSOURI RIVER POINTS-Continued. 26. MISSOURI RIVER POINTS As Defined in Exceptions to the Official Classification Armourdale. . . . . . . . Kan. Atchison . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 Council Bluffs . . . . . . . . Ia Kansas City . . . . . . . . Kan. Kansas City . . . . . . . . . Mo. Leavenworth ........Kan. Nebraska City . . . . . . Neb. Kenmoor . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Langdon. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Leavenworth ........Kan. Linden. . . . . . . . . . . ... Mo. McPaul . . . . . . . ... . . . . Ia Missouri Valley ..... . . .” Napier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Nashua. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .” Nebraska City . . . . . . Neb. Nishnabatna . . . . . . . . . Mo. Nodaway. . . . . . . . . . . . .” Omaha . . . . . . . . . . . . . Neb. Onawa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Pacific Jet. . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5 Parkville. . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Payne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Percival . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Phelps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Platte City . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Plattsmouth . . . . . . . . Neb. Rulo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y St. Joseph . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Settles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . '’ Sioux City . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Smithville . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. South Omaha. . . . . . . . Neb. Omaha . . . . . . . . . . . . . Neb. Pacific Jet. . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. St. Joseph . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Sioux City . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. South Omaha . . . . . . . Neb. Sugar Creek . . . . . . . . . Mo. 234 APPENDIX 27. MoMTANA COMMON POINTS Anaconda Dawson Mares Austin Deer Lodge Mill Creek Avon Dempsey Mullan Birdseye Dough Jet. Race Track Blossburg Elliston Ross Boulder Garrison Schiffman Boyd Gregsons Silver Bow Bradley Hackney Stuart Butler Helena “ Walkers Butte Kohrs Warm Springs 28. MoMTGOMERY SUB-TERRITORY (Map 5 and description on back thereof) For a complete list of stations see section 3 of “Southeastern Territory” of this appendix. r 29. NEw ENGLAND FREIGHT Association TERRITORY 1 (Map 2) Comprising the stations named below in CONNECTICUT NEW HAMPSHIRE RHODE ISLAND MAINE . NEW YORK VERMONT MASSACHUSETTS - CoNNECTICUT-All stations. MAINE–All stations. MASSACHUSETTS-All stations NEW HAMPSHIRE—All stations. NEW YORK–As follows: Brookview Claverack - Ghent Buskirk Eagle Bridge Harrison Canaan East Buskirk Hoosick Chatham East Chatham Hoosick Falls Chatham Centre East Shagticoke Hoosick Junction 1 Territorial Directory No. 3, or re-issues, by the agent for the carriers of the Central Freight Association (Chicago). TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 235 NEW YORK–Stations—Continued. Hudson Niverville Shagticoke Johnsonville North Hoosick Troy Lansingburg Petersburg Upper Hudson Larchmont Manor Port Chester Valley Falls Mamaroneck Pulvers Van Hoesen; Mechanicsville Rennselaer Walloomsac Mellenville Reynolds West Valley Falls Melrose Rye White Creek RHODE ISLAND–All stations. VERMONT—All stations. 30. NoFTH PACIFIC COAST TERMINALS Trans-Continental Freight Bureau West-Bound Tariff No. 4 contains the list of these terminals shown below: Aberdeen . . . . . . . . . Wash. Everett . . . . . . * * * * * Wash. Albina . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ore. Factoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9 Anacortes . . . . . . . . . Wash. Fremont . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 3 Astoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ore. Fulton . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ore. Ballard . . . . . . . . . . . Wash. Georgetown . . . . . . . Wash. Beatty . . . . . . . e º & º º Ore. Graham. . . . . . . . . . . . Ore. Bellingham . . . . . . . . Wash. Great Northern Dock.. Black River . . . . . . . Wash. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wash. Black River Jet. . . . . . . 9 y Hoquiam . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Blaine. . . . . . . . . . . . Wash. Interbay . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Bothell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Kenton . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ore. Brooklyn . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Kirkland . . . . . . . . . . Wash. Bruun. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ore. Latona . . . . . . . . . . . . Wash. Burlington . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Laurelhurst . . . . . . . . . Ore. Cosmopolis . . . . . . . . Wash. Linnton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Doernbechers . . . . . . . . Ore. Lowell. . . . . . . . . . . . Wash. Dupont . . . . . . . . . . . Wash. Montavilla . . . . . . . . . . Ore. Earlington . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 North Portland . . . . . . . .” East Portland. . . . . . . Ore. O. & W. Terminal...Wash. Edgewater . . . . . . . . Wash. Ocosta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Edmonds. . . . . . . . . . . . .” Olympia. . . . . . . . . 236 APPENDIX NoBTH PACIFIC CoAST TERMINALs—Continued. Portland . . . . . . . . . . . Ore. Portsmouth . . . . . . . . . . Raymond. . . . . . . . . Renton . . . . . . . . . . . . . s Richmond Beach. . . . . . St. Johns . . . . . . . . . . . Ore. Seattle . . . . . . . . . ... Wash. Seattle Piers . . . . . . . . . South Aberdeen . . . . . . . South Bellingham .... . . South Bend . . . . . . . . . . South Tacoma. . . . . . . . Stockdale . . . . . . . . . . . Ore. Tacoma. . . . . . . . . . . . Wash. Tacoma Wharf . . . . . . . 2 3 University Park. ..... Ore. Vancouver . . . . . . . . Wash. Webster . . . . . . . . . . . . Ore. West Aberdeen ....Wash. Whitwood Court . . . . Ore. Wilburton . . . . . . . . . Wash Willbridge . . . . . . . . . . Ore. Woodinville . . . . ... Wash. Wood Spur . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 31, NORTHWESTERN TERRITORY 1 CANADA—All points in the Provinces of Alberta, British Colum- bia, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. IDAHO-All stations, except when routed via Missouri River Crossings. (See list above.) MICHIGAN (Upper Peninsula)—Stations as follows: Abbittosse Carp Switch Agate Chesbrough Agnes Choats Anthony Clark Baltimore Clarksburg Barclay, Coburg Basco Congo Bergland Covington Berst Craigsmere Bessemer Crozier’s Mill Bessemer Jet. Dorais Black River Dublin Blemers Duke Bruces Crossing Dunham Camp Francis Emerson Erickson Erlandson Ewen Fair Oaks Falls Siding Foy Gale Gem Gillet Gogebic Groesbeck Hartley’s Hutula 1 Territorial Directory No. 3, or re-issues, by the agent for the carriers of the Central Freight Association (Chicago). TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 237 MICHIGAN (Upper Peninsula)—Stations—Continued. Interior Ironwood Jumbo Keeler Kenton King Lake Kitchi Eroll Lake Gogebic Leo Lewis Maki Marenisco Matchwood Montreal Morgan Murphy Murphy Pit Nestor Nestoria Nobles North Bessemer Onyx Opal Paquette Paulding Paynesville Perch Peshims Pilgrim Planter Pryor Ramsay Robbins Robinson St. Collins Sandhurst Schriver Siding No. 339 Sidnaw Siemans Silberg Sherry Spur No. 2 MINNESOTA—All stations except Adrian Ash Creek Beaver Creek Bigelow Bruce Ellsworth Hills Ranaranzi Luverne Magnolia Manley Org Spur No. 3 Spur No. 7 State Line Sylvania Thayer Thomaston Tioga Topaz Trout Creek Tula, Tula, Pit, Vermilac Verona Wakefield Wall Watersmeet Watton Wellington Whipple Williamson Woodroy Yucon Round Lake Rushmore Steen Warner Worthington MONTANA—All stations except when routed via Missouri River Crossings. (See list above.) NoFTH DAKOTA All stations. OREGON−All stations except the following when routed via Mis- souri River Crossings (see list above): Arcadia, Cairo, Hunt- ington, Mallett, Nyssa, Ontario and Vale. 238 APPENDIX SouTH DAKOTA-All stations except Annie Creek Siding Englewood Anthony’s Apex Ardmore Argentine Argyle Avalon Aztec Belle Fourche Bench Mark Benclare Berne Black Hawk Blacktail Bonesteel Booge Brandon Brennan Bucks Buena Vista Buffalo Gap Burke Burke's Siding Calcite Canton Central City Chilson Corson Crown Hill Custer Dallas Deadwood Dewey Dumont East Sioux Falls Edgemont Elk Point Elmore Erskine Este Evans Siding Fairburn Fairfax Fairview Galena Galena Jet. Gardner Garretson Gregory Harrisburg Havens Hermosa Herrick Hill City Holloway Hot Springs Hudson Iron Creek Y. Ivanhoe Jefferson Jones Juno Spur Keystone Kirk Lead Level Siding Loring Lucile Spur McCook Marietta Maurice Mayo Millers Minnekahta MO]] Mystic Nahant Nemo Oelrichs Oreville Piedmont Pluma Portland Pringle Provo Rapid City Reckford Redfern Roubaix Rowena Rumford Runkel St. Charles St. Onge Savoy Shindlar Sioux City Smithwick Spearfish Stage Barn Canyon Sturgis Terry Tilford Trojan (formerly Portland) Underwood Valley Springs Wasp No. 2 Spur West Nahant Whitetail Summit Whitewood Woodville TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 239 WASHINGTON.—All stations. WISCONSIN–Stations as follows: Albertville Alder Alma Almena Allouez Altamount Altoona Amery Amnicon Anderson Mills Angus Anson Appalonia. Arnold Ashland Ashland Jot. Athelstane Athens Atwood Spur Augusta Avoca Badger Mills Baldwin Barksdale Barnum, Barron Barronett Bateman Bay City Bayfield Bear Trap Beebe Beldenville Bell Belle Center Bellinger Bennett Benoit Bena Benson Berg Park Bibon Birch Birchwood Blanchard Bloomer Blueberry Blue River Bluff Creek Bluff Siding Boardman Boscobel Boyceville Boyd Boylston Brick Yard Spur Bridgeport Brill Bruce Brule Brunet Burkhardt Butternut Cable Cable Pit Cadott Cameron Campbell Mill Campbells Spur Campia Canton Carlson Caryville Catawba Cedar Cedar Falls Central Ave. Centuria Chapman Chaseburg Chelsea Chetek Chequamegon Jct. C. St. P. M. & O. Jct. Chippewa Falls Chippewa Mine Cirkle Spur Clarks Clayton Clear Lake Clubine Jct. Cobban Cochrane Coda Colfax Comfort Comstock Coon Valley Cornell Cotton County Line Crocker Spur Cumberland Curlew Cusson Cutter Cylon 240 APPENDIX WISCONSIN–Stations—Continued. Dallas Danube Dauby Dedham Deer Park Defer Deronda Dewey Donald Downing Downsville Dresser Jet. Drummond Dunnville Durand Eagle Point Earl Eau Claire Edith Edminister Spur Eliot Eleva Elk Mound Elmwood Ellsworth Emerald Enderline Engoe Ester Fall Creek Fennimore Fifield Fleming Foaches Foresman Forest City Foxboro Frederic Galesville Gays Mills Gile Gilman Girard Jet. Glen Flora Glenwood Glidden Glover Gordon Gotham Grand Crossing Grand View Grantsburg Grimpo Gurney Hager Hammond Hannibal Hanson & Johnson Spur Hatch Haugen Hawkins Hawthorne Hayward Hazel Park Headquarters Henderson Hersey High Bridge Hillsboro Hillsdale Hines Holcombe Hopkins Houghton Howard Hornersville Hoyt Hudson Hudson City Hughey Hurley Huser Spur Ingram Ino Ipswich Iron Belt Iron River Itasca Jewett Jewett Mills Jim Falls Joel Jump River Kennan FCero Kimball Kipling Knapp Koll Kruger La Crosse Ladysmith La Farge Lake Nebagamon Lakeside Lampson Lancaster Laree Larsen Spur Le Claire TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 241 WISCONSIN–Stations—Continued. Lehigh Lenawee Leonards Liberty Linderman Lone Rock Luck Lynch Lytles Maiden Rock Maple Marengo Marshland Marston Martel Mason Maxwell McDougal Spur McVickers Medford Mellen Menomonie Menomonie Jet. Merit Middle River Midway Mikana Milltown Mineral Point Crossing Minong Mondovi Morse Moquah Muscoda Muskeg Narrows Neally Nelson Nettleton Ave. New Auburn New Richmond North La Crosse Northline Nye Odanah Ogoma Onalaska O’Neill Orrville Osceola Osseo Park Falls Pearson Pembine Pence Pennington Pepin Perley Petersburg Phillips Phillips Spur Phipps Pike River Pikes Pine Creek Platteville Pokegama Pokegama Jet. Poplar Porters Mills Poskin Lake Prairie du Chien Prentice Prentice Jct. Prescott Prescott Road Price Rath Reedstown Red Cedar Requa Rhodes Rice Lake Richardson Richland Center Rickard Spur Ridgeland Ritan Spur River Falls Roberts Rock Crusher Rockmont Rosedale Rusk Rustone Spur St. Croix Falls St. Croix Spur St. Louis Salmo Sanborn Sand Spur Sarona Saunders Sauntry Savoy Saxton Schneider Spur Sedgwick Seeley Severance 242 APPENDIX WISCONSIN–Stations—Continued. Shell Lake Sioux Slag Pile Spur Slowbridge Soldiers Grove Solon Springs Somerset Soudan South Range South Superior Spider Lake Spooner Spring Brook Spring Green Spring Valley Spur No. 68 Spur No. 91 Spur No. 104 Spur No. 130 Spur No. 146 Spur No. 148 Spur No. 152 Spur No. 161 Stanley Stanton Starr State Line Stearns Steele Twin Bear Stinnett Twin Bluff Stitzer Upson Steuben Van Buskirk Stockholm Victor Stoddard Viola Strauman Viroqua Strickland Wabash Strum Walbridge Summit Wascott Superior Washburn Superior (EastEnd) Waster Spur Sutherland Wauzeka Sweden Wentworth Teegarden Werley Thornapple Westby Thorpe Westboro Tony West Superior Topside Weston Trainor Weyerhauser Tramway Wheeler Trego White River Trempeleau Wiehe Trevino Wildwood Truax Wilson Turtle Lake Winne-Boujoun Tuscobia Woodman Twentieth Ave. Woodville 32. OHIO RIVER CROSSINGS As Defined in Exceptions to the Official Classification Brookport . . . . . Cairo . . . . . . . . . . Cincinnati . . . . . . Evansville . . . . . . Gale . . . . . . . . . . Jeffersonville . . . . . . . Joppa . . . . . . . . . . © º e º & e e º e $ Ill. Thebes Transfer. . . . . . . • e tº e º 'º Ill. Louisville . . . . . . . . . . . Ky. 3 y Madison . . . . . . . . . . . . Ind. . ...Ohio Mounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ill. . . . . Ind. Mt. Vernon. . . . . . . . . Ind. • & © e & Ill. New Albany. . . . . . . . . . .” . Ind. Thebes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ill. TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 243 33. PRORATING PoſNTS IN Iowa AND MISSOURI As Defined in Exceptions to the Official Classification 1 Alexandria. . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Ashburn . . . . . . . . . . . . . .” Ballinger . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Bard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •’’ Beck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Bellevue . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Bettendorf . . . . . . . . . . . y 3 Bricker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 × Buffalo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Bullards . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y . Burlington . . . . . . . . . . . } % Busch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Camanche . . . . . . . . . . . . * * Canton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Cascade . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Clemens . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Clinton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Columbus Jct. . . . . . . . . 2 y Davenport . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Dubuque . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Dunsford . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Edgewood . . . . . . . . . . . ” Elk River Jet. . . . . . . . . Ia. Elrick Jet. . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Fairport . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Folletts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Fort Madison . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Fredonia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5 Fruitland . . . . . . . . . . . . y 3 Galland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Garden City . . . . . . . . . 3 2 Garland . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5 Gordon's Ferry . . . . . . . 2 3 1 Shipments from these points eastbound and to them westbound are governed by the Official Classification. Grand View . . . . . . . . ..Ia. Gregory . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Green Island . . . . . . . . . Ia. Hahn’s Switch . . . . . . . 2 y Hannibal . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo Helton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Huiskamp . . . . . . . . . . . . y 7 Huron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Ilasco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Kemper . . . . . . . . . .e. s is e e Ia. Keokuk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Kingston . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 La Grange . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Lamb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 y La Motte . . . . . . . . . . . . } } Latty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Le Claire . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Letts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Linwood . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Louisiana. . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Love . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Lyons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia McCune . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo Macuta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Mediapolis . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5 Middle Lock . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Montpelier . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Montrose . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Mooar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ? ) Morning Sun . . . . . . . . . 5 y Mungers Switch . . . . . Mo. Muscatine . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Newport . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 244 APPENDIX PRORATING PoſNTS IN Iowa AND MISSOURI—Continued. Oakville . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Shoecraft . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Pleasant Creek . . . . . . . . .” Shopton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Pleasant Valley . . . . . . . 3 y Sperry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Princeton . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Spring Grove . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Ralls Jct. . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. Summit . . . . . . . . . . . . . } % Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 * Tile Works . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Round House . . . . . . . . . Ia. Wiele . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Sabula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Wapello . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 St. Louis . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. West Burlington . . . . . . .” Sandusky . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. West Keithsburg. . . . . . y 5 Santuzza . . . . . . . . . . . . Mo. West Quincy . . . . . . . . Mo. Saverton . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Wever . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. Shaffton . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ia. White Rock . . . . . . . . . Mo. 34. RIO GRANDE CROSSINGs Brownsville, Tex.; Eagle Pass, Tex.; El Paso, Tex.; Laredo, Tex., are the Rio Grande Crossings. 35. SouTHEASTERN BASING POINTS 1 Albany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Brunswick . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Alapaha . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Cartersville . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Americus . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Cedartown . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Andalusia. . . . . . . . . . . . Ala. Charleston . . . . . . . . . S. C. Anniston . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Chattanooga. . . . . . . . Tenn. Apalachicola . . . . . . . . Fla. Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . Ala. Arlington . . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Conyton . . . . . . . . . . . Tenn. Athens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Cordele . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Atlanta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Cranbery . . . . . . . . . . N. C. Augusta . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Dawson . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Barclays . . . . . . . . . . . Ala. Dublin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 * Bainbridge . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Emory Gap . . . . . . . Tenn. Beaufort . . . . . . . . . . . S. C. Ensley . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ala. Bessemer . . . . . . . . . . . Ala. Eufaula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 Birmingham . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Fernandina . . . . . . . . . Fla. Bristol . . . . . . . . . . . . Tenn. Fitzgerald . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. 1 The more important points only are shown (unofficial). TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 245 SOUTHFASTERN BASING PoinTs—Continued. Fort Gaines . . . . . . . . . Ga. Pell City . . . . . . . . . . . Ala. Fort Valley . . . . . . . . . . y y Piedmont . . . . . . . . . . . . '’ Gadsden . . . . . . . . . . . . Ala. Pitts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Gainesville . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Quitman . . . . . . . . . . . . . } } Greenville . . . . . . . . . . Fla. River Jet. . . . . . . . . . . Fla.: Harriman . . . . . . . . . Tenn. Roanoke . . . . . . . . . . . Ala. Hawkinsville . . . . . . . . Ga. Rome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Jacksonville . . . . . . . . . Ala. St. Paul . . . . . . . . . . . . Va. Jacksonville . . . . . . . . . Fla. Savannah . . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Johnson City . . . . . . Tenn. Sparks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Knoxville . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Sylacauga. . . . . . . . . . . Ala. La Grange . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Talladega. . . . . . . . . . . . . .” Live Oak . . . . . . . . . . . Fla. Tallahassee . . . . . . . . . . Fla. Macon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Tampa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 5 Milledgeville . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Thomasville . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Moneston ... . . . . . . . Tenn. Tifton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Montgomery . . . . . . . . Ala. Valdosta . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 Moultrie . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Walland . . . . . . . . . . Tenn. Nashville . . . . . . . . . . Tenn. Washington . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Newman . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Waycross . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Ocilla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3 Wellington . . . . . . . . . Ala. Opelika . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ala. West Point . . . . . . . . . . Ga. Ozark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Worth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . } % Palatka . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fla. 36. SouTHEASTERN FREIGHT ASSOCIATION TERRITORY (Map 5 and description on back thereof) 37. SOUTHEASTERN MISSISSIPPI VALLEY ASSOCIATION TERRITORY (Map 5 and description on back thereof) This territory should be distinguished from Mississippi Valley Territory. The latter is a rate adjustment territory, and the former a freight association territory. 246 APPENDIX 38. SouTHEASTERN TERRITORY 1 (Map 5) 1. Atlanta Sub-Territory Comprising the stations named below in ALABAMA GEORGIA TENNESSEE FLORIDA SOUTH CAROLINA ALABAMA–Stations as follows: Abanda. Bath Springs Buek Adams Battelle Buffalo Alabama City Belle Mina Bush Albertville Bensyde Bynum Alexandria Benjamin Caldwell Allen Bennett’s Carara Alpine Berneys Carara Junction Alton Berwick Carlisle Altoona Blake Carpenter Alverson Spur Blanche Cedar Bluff Anderson Blanton Cedar Grove Andrews Blue Pond Cedric Angel Bluffton Champion Anniston Blum Chandler Springs Appleby Boaz Chase Argo Bolivar Chelsea Argyle Borden Springs Chepultepec Arkwright Bostick Cherokee Mills Ashland Boyds Tank Chesterfield Atkinson Bradford Chestnut Attalla Bridgeport Chinneby Aughtman Bristow Choccolocco Bailey Brompton Citico Barclay Brownsboro Clairmont Springs Barclays Bruce Cliff Barnaby Buckie Coal City 1 Territorial Directory No. 3, or re-issues, by the agent for the carriers of Central Freight Association (Chicago). TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 247 ALABAMA-Stations—Continued. Cobb City Coe Coe Jct. Coldwater Collbran Collinsville Comet Compton Congo Cooks Cook’s Springs Coosa Valley Cragford Cropwell Crudup Crump’s Tank Curry Cusseta Daisy Dale Dallas Dambrmann Danway Davis & Crump De Armanville Deerhurst Dickert Dixiana Dolcito Duke East Alabama Jet. Eden Edwards Edwardsville Elko Emauhee Erin Ewing Fackler Farill Parley Five Points Flat Rock Forsythe Fort Payne Frog Mountain Fruithurst Gadsden Glass Glencoe Grasmere Grays Graystone Greenbrier Greens Griffin & Ackers Guiss Gullahorn Gunter's Landing Guntersville Gurley Hammond Mines Harbin Hardwick Harpersville Harrison Heflin Helena Hester Highland Hilton Hobbs Island Hollingsworth Hollywood Huntsville Inland Inman Ironaton Iron City Ivalee Jacksonville Jamestown Jenifer Jester Johnson Spur Kaolin (De Kalb Co.) Keener Renny Ketona Rillian Kiowa Rirk Kribs Kymulga Ladiga La Fayette La Garde Landers Lane Lanett Laney Langdale Langdon Larkinsville Lawrence Leatherwood Leba Ledbetters Leesburg Lehigh 248 APPENDIX ALABAMA-Stations—Continued. Lehigh No. 2 Lester Lewins Lily Flagg Lim Rock Lincoln Lineville Little River Littleton Lock Loop Lorne L. & N. Crossing McCalmont McClendon McCulloh IMcElderry McFall McGinty Mackey Madison Malone Markstein Merrelton Moody’s Spur Moore’s Cut Moragne Morris Mine Spur Mountainboro Mt. Jefferson Mt. Pinson Moxley Mud Creek Munford Murrycross Muscadine Nelson Nolan Nottingham Nowlin Oakland Oden Odenville Ohatchie Oneonta Osanippa Owens Oxford Paint Rock Paint Rock Bridge Palestine Palmers Pana Parsons Patterson |Peavy Peeples Pell City Piedmont Pleasant Gap Porterville Prescott Price Prices Pyriton Quarry Spur Queenstown Ragan Ragland Ramsay Rayburn Read’s Mill Reeseville Remlap Rendalia Renfroe Richardson Riverside Riverview Roanoke Robersons Spur Rock Run Rock Spring Rock Spring Quarry Romega Roper Round Mountain Rylands St. Clair St. Ives Sanie Savage Siding Schuler Scotia Scottsboro Seddon Selfville Shawmut Sherbrook Shocco Siding 71 Siding 75 Siebert Silver Run Slackland Sligo Spring Garden Springville Standing Rock Steele TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 249 ALABAMA–Stations—Continued. Stemley Stevens Stevens Gap Stevenson Stockdale Strouds Sycamore Taff Tait's Gap Talladega Tecumseh Tecumseh Pump Siding Tokio Tredegar Trussville Tumlin Gap Turkeytown Turner Upton Valley Head Valley Mines Warners Spur Vigo Village Springs Wadley Waldo Walker Crossing Walton Warners Water Works Spur Watkins Watts Mill Weathers Weaver Welch Wellington Westover Whites Whites Mill Whitney Williams Wilsonia Wimberley Windsor Woodall Woodville Woolfolk Wyeth City Wynn Yamme Yellow Creek Zuni FLORIDA—All stations except those in Montgomery Sub-Territory. GEORGIA—All stations except those shown on pages 174, 256, 260. SouTH CAROLINA-Stations as follows: Adams Run Allendale Almeda Appleton Armstrong Ashepoo Ashepoo Crossing Ashley Jet. Ashton Averills Backfields Barrons Barton Bashan Beaufort Beech Island Behling Beldoc Bennett Berry Hill Beslau Bidgood Blakes Bowers Brabhams Brennan Browns Brown’s Hill Brunson Bryans Bulow Bulow Mines Burton Bush’s Caldwell Camp Branch Cannons Cave Charleston Cherokee Colleton Coopers 250 APPENDIX SOUTH CAROLINA–Stations—Continued. Coosaw Coosawhatchie Copes Cordes Cowden Coxes Crockettville Croghans Cross Roads Cummings Davidson Drawdys Drayton Dunneman Dupont Early Branch Ehrhardts Ellenton Ellis Estill Ethel Fairfax Fechtig Ferebee Flyville Frampton Fraziers Furman Gannons Garnett Geraty Gifford Goodrich Goshen Grays Grays Hill Green Pond Greens Spur Grimes Govan H. & B. Jet. Hampton Hankinson Hardeeville Harrison Hattieville Hethington Hoffs Hollywood Horris Island Road Jackson Jacksonboro James Island John’s Island Kathwood King Kline Lamb's Jct. La Roache Lena Lightsey Lodge Long & Bellamy Luray Luther McCants McGibson McLeod & Son Magnolia Magwood Maners Spur Martins - Mathis Meggetts Mileys Millers Millett Moores Gravel Pit Moselle Myers Okeetee Olar O’Learys Padgetts Padgetts Mill Parkers Ferry Pecan Pine Crossing Pineland Platts Pon Pon Port Royal Purysburg Quigley Rantowles Ravenel Ravenel Platform Rhodes t Richardson’s Rickenbockers Ridgeland Ritters Ruffin Rump St. Andrews Salkehatchie Sanders Savannah River Pit Schofield Scotia TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 251 SOUTH CAROLINA–Stations—Continued. Seabrook Seigling Sheldon Smithville Smoaks Standard Steel Creek Stokes Stono Storage Strouds Sycamore Tarboro Tavora Ten Mile Thayers Tillman Tomotley Toogoodoo Towles Twigg Ulmers Valentine Varnville TENNESSEE--Stations as follows: Alton Park Apison Black Fox Blue Springs Boyce Chattanooga Chickamauga Citico Conasauga Cravens East Chattanooga Etna Mines Hinch Howardville Jersey Kings Bridge Ladds Lookout McCarty McDonald Marble Switch Ocoee Oldfort Ooletewah Shellmound Sherman Heights Voorhees Walterboro Wappoo Warrens Weekley’s Spur Welch White Hall Williams Yemassee Yenome Yonge's Island Youmans Southern Exten- sion Yards Summit Tenngo Thatcher Tucker Springs Tyner Vulcan Wauhatchie Weatherley Wells Whiteside Whorley Winter Spur SouTHEASTERN TERRITORY-Continued (Map No. 5) 2. Atlanta Subdivision, Sometimes Called Carolina Territory South of the Walhalla Line GEORGIA Comprising stations in NORTH CAROLINA as follows: SouTH CAROLINA 252 APPENDIX GEORGIA—Stations as follows: Air Line Alto Anandale Arcade Armour Arnoldsville Attica Auburn Avalon Ayersville Bairdstown Baldwin Bedingfield Bellton Belmont (Hall Co.) Belt Jot. Berkeley Bethlehem Birmont Bogart Bowman Bowersville Braselton Buford Campton Candler Canon Carl Center Chamble Clarksboro Clarksville Clayton Cleveland Colbert Comer Commerce Cornelia Crawford Cross Keys Currahee Dacula Dady Spur Deadwyler Deercourt Deerland Park Demorest Dewy Rose Doraville Duluth Dunlap Dunwoody Eastanollee Edgewood Ethridge Evans Ficklin Flowery Branch Gainesville Gillsville Gloster Goodwin Crossing Goss Grayson Gresham Habersham Hall Harper Hartwell Heardmont Hillman Hills Holders Hollywood Hoschton Howells Huff Hull Hutchings Inman Park Jefferson Joy Kirkwood Klondike Lavonia Lawrenceville Lexington Lilburn Little River Loganville Lula Luxomni McFaul's Spur McLeroy Martin Martinez Mathis Maxeys Maysville Middleton Mina Monroe Montreal Morris Siding Mt. Airy Mulberry Murray Hill Spur Naida. New Holland New Timothy TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 253 GEORGIA—Stations—Continued. Nicholson Norcross North Decatur Oakwood Oconee Heights Oglesby Ottley Pearle Pendergrass Pittman Pratt's Spur Redstone ROSwell Royston Russells NORTH CAROLINA-Stations as follows: Brown’s Spur Clarendon SouTH CAROLINA—Stations as follows: Adams Adrian Aiken Alcolu Allens Andrews Apia Arthur Ashleigh Ashley Phosphate Attaway Aynor Badham Balentine Bamberg Earber Sanitarium Sells Sharon Smithonia Sneads Statham Stephens Suwanee Sweet Water Tallulah Falls Tallulah Lodge Talmo Thurmack Tiger Toccoa. Emerson Mt. Tabor Barnes Barnwell Barr Batesburg Bath Bayboro Baynham Beard Bell Benbow Berlin Bethel Siding Blackville Blakely Bonneaus Bordeaux Tucker Turnerville Wanna Wallace’s Mill Walker Park Walker’s Mill White Sulphur Wiley Wilson’s Mill Winder Winn’s Spur Winterville Woodville Yonah Roseland Wards Bowyer Bradley Branchville Britton Broadway Brockinton Brogden Bulls Burton’s Mill Byrd Cades Cades Siding Calhoun Falls Cameron Canes Mill Cannon's Crossing 254 APPENDIX Carolina Lumber Mfg. Co. Carris Cayce Centenary Chaffee Chapin Checkley Brothers Childs Clark Clarks Hill Clearwater Coal Chute Connor Conway Cool Springs Copes Cordova Coward Creston Crof.ty Dargan Lumber Co. Davis Dawson Deans Denmark Dixiana Dolcy Donora Dorange Dorchee Dorchester Drainland Dunbarton Du Rant Earle SOUTH CAROLINA–Stations—Continued. Edgefield Edisto Edmund Edwards Effingham Elko Elloree Elsie Ethion Eulonia Eureka Eutawville Felder Ferguson Fersmers Siding Fifty-Eight Fishburn Floyds Fogle Forreston Fort Motte Four Holes Fowle Fredonia. Gadsden Gapway Garrick Garris Gaston Georgetown Georgetown Jet. Gilbert Glenn Gourdins Graniteville Graves Greeleyville Gresham Hamburg Harbin Harby Harleyville Harvin Heinemans Hemingway Henry Hester Hibernia Hilda Hilton Hix Holly Hill Homewood or Grantzville Hopkins Howard Howe Howells Hutto Immaculate Mines Ingleside Inglewood Irmo Iva Jamison Java Johnson Johnsonville Johnston Jordan FGaolin Kent Kings Crossing Kingstree TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 255 SOUTH CAROLINA–Stations—Continued. Kingville Kirby Kneece Koonce Ladson Lake City Lake View Lanes Langley Latimer Leapharts Lebama Lee Leesville Lesesne Siding Levi Lexington Lincolnville Little Mountain Livingstone Lone Star Loraine Loris Lowndesville Ludgate McBeths McCormick Macedon McLeod Madison Malphus Manchester Manning Meads Melons Meriweather Midland Park Midway Millard Millard Jet. Milledgeville Milligan Mims Mixson Modoc Moncks Corners Monetta Montmorenci Morrisville Morson Mt. Carmel Mt. Holly Moy Myer's Mill Myrtle Beach Naval Station Neeces Nesmith New Zion North Oakley Oakwood Olanta One Mile Siding (City Water Works) Orangeburg Otranto Otside Ott Packsville Parkhill Parks Parksville Parlers Paroda Jet. Peerless Mines Pelion Perry Petigru Pine Island Pinewood Plum Branch Poston Pregnall Prevost Privateer Privetts Rains Rayflin Read Phosphate Works Reevesville Remini Reynolds Rhett Richland Ridge Spring Ridgeville Riley Rittenburg Spur Robbins Roseland Rowesville Rush St. George St. Matthew St. Paul St. Stephens Sallys Salters 256 APPENDIX SOUTH CAROLINA-Stations—Continued. Saluda Samaria Sampit Sanford Santee Sardinia Sato Saxon (Water Works) Scarborough Sid- ing Scranton Seaboard Lumber Co. Seivern Seloc Shelley Shuler Silver Simons Singleton Sixty-Six Slighs Smith’s Mill Snellings South Atlantic Oil Mill Southern Crossing Sparrow Spigener Springfield Squires Starr Steedman Stilton Stones Strawberry Styx Summerland Summerton Summerville Summit Sumpter Jet. Sunnybrook Swansea Taft The Farms (formerly Lar- sons) Thigpen Thor Tindall Tionesta Toumey Trenton Trexler Lumber Co. Trio Troy 22 Mile Spur Vances Vaucluse Verdery Wagener Walker Waller Ward Warrenville Warsaw Wateree Watts Week Wellings Mill Wells West Andrews West End Westminster Weston Whaley White Pond White Rock Williams Willington Williston Wilson’s Mill Windsor Woodford Woodlawn Woodstock Yale SouTHEASTERN TERRITORY-Concluded (Map No. 5) 3. Montgomery Sub-Territory Comprising stations in FLORIDA GEORGIA as follows: ALABAMA MISSISSIPPI TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 257 ALABAMA–All stations except those shown on pages 227 and 248 and the following points on the N. C. & St. L. Ry. : Bass Bell Factory Bobo Card Chase Clark Coalton Deposit Elkwood Harvest Lax Mercury FLORIDA—Stations as follows: Alford Argyle Aycock Barrineau Park Barth Bear Head Betts Bluff Springs Bohemia Bonifay Brent Buckeye Campbellton Campton Cantonment Caryville Century Chattahoochee River Chipley Compass Lake Cottage Hill Cottondale Crestview Cypress Deerland De Funiak Springs Eleanor Escambia Esto Everett Fountain Galliver Galt City Gonzalez Gothic Goulding Graceville Grand Ridge Greenhead Gull Point Harold Harp Holts Jacobs Lake Merial Lakewood Laurel Hill McDavid Macon Majette Marianna Mill Bayou Milligan Millville Jet. Mitchell’s Spur New Market Normal Plevna Ready Toney Milton Molino Mossy Head Mulat Muscogee Nixon Noma Olive Panama City Paxton Pensacola Pine Barren Ponce de Leon Pringle Quintette River Junction River Side Roberts Round Lake Saunders Sawlor Sneads Southport Steele City Svea Sweetwater Unji Vicksburg 258 APPENDIX FLORIDA—Stations—Continued. Washington West Pensacola Wausau Westville Welchton Wynnlum GEORGIA—Stations as follows: Columbus Fort Gaines MISSISSIPPI–Stations as follows: Aberdeen Jet. Gatman Acker Glens Amory Golden - Arklet Gravel Siding Becker Greenwood Springs Belmont Holcut Bigbee Houston’s Mill Black Creek Indian Mound Brewer Iuka Burnsville Junction City Burnt Cut Kewaunee Cauhorn Leedy Chancellor Log Spur Coke McCrary Crandall Neil Davis Nettleton Dennis Yniestra. Youngstown New Hope Paden Pine Ridge Plantersville Quincy Russell Shiloh Smith's Spur Steens Strickland Theadville Tishomingo Toomsuba Walker Wilcox Wise's Gap 39. SOUTHWESTERN TARIFF COMMITTEE TERRITORY 1 TEXAS - (Map 6) Comprising the stations named below in ARKANSAS MEXICO LOUISIANA OKLAHOMA ARKANSAS–All stations. LOUISIANA-All stations, except stations shown on page 229. 1 Territorial Directory No. 3, or re-issues, by the agent for the carriers of Central Freight Association Territory (Chicago). TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 259 MEXICO—Common Points as follows: Agua Nueva (Coahuila) Amecameca . Amozoc Apizaco Atlixco Atzacoalco Barrientoo Bermejillo Buena Vista (Coahuila) Bustilloo Calera (Durango) Carneros Casa Colorado Cazedero Celaya Cerro Gordo (Mexico) Chihuahua Cholula Ciudad Juarez Cobian Conejos Cordoba. Cuantitlan (Mexico) Culiacan Durazno El Carmen (Puebla) El Castillo El Rio (Coahuila) Empalme Encantada (Coahuila) Escalon Esperanza (Puebla) Fresno (Chihuahua) Garcia (Nuevo Leon) Gloria Gran Canal Hercules Hornos Huehuetoca Irolo Ixtlahuaca (Mexico) Jalapa (Vera Cruz) La Compania La Griega La Junta (Chihuahua) Leal - Lecheria Linares Llano (Chihuahua) Los Charcos Los Cocas Mal Paso Marfil Mariscala Matehaula Mena (Tlaxcala) Merida Mesa (Chihuahua) Mexico Minaca Monterey Munoz (Tlaxcala) Nogales (Sonora) Nopola (Hidalgo) Noria (Coahuila) Oaxaca Otumba Ozumba (Mexico) Pachua Palomas (Chihuahua) Parral Paso del Toro 260 APPENDIX MEXICO—Common Points—Continued. Pedernales (Chihuahua) Polotitlan Puebla, Puenta de Ixtla Queretaro Ramos Arispe Rio Blanco Rosendo Marquez Salamanca Salas Salinas (San Luis Potosi) Saltillo San Andres (Chihuahua) San Andres (Puebla) San Antonio (Chihuahua) San Blas (Sinaloa) San Cristobal (Mexico) Sandoval (Hidalgo) San Geronimo (Oaxaca) San Juan (Coahuila) San Luis Potosi San Marcos (Puebla) San Miguelito (Vera Cruz) San Pedro (Coahuila) Santa Ana (Tlaxcala) OKLAHOMA—All stations. TEXAS–All stations. Santa Eulalia Santa Isabel (Chihuahua) Santa Julia Santa Lucrecia Santa Rita (Hidalgo) Santa Sabina Sauceda (Coahuila) Tabalaopa Temosachic Teocalco Teoloyucan Tepa Ticul Tlalnepantla (Mexico) Toluca - Torreon Torres (Sonora) Trancoso Trasquila Tulacingo Tultenango Vente de Cruz Viesca Zacatecas Zitacuaro 40. TEXARKANA POINTS List of points taking same Territorial Application as Texarkana, Ark.-Tex. (1) Arkansas Points Acorn Anderson Arcadia Allene Arden Arkinda TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 261 Ashdown Austin (Drab P. O.) Avon Spur Barkers & Ligh- ton Spur Bates Bear Creek Junc- tion Bellaire Belton Bingen Black Diamond Blovins Bookers Spur Box Factory Spur Boyd (Miller Co.) Bradfords Bryan Carr Kingsworthy Spur Cauthron Clear Lake (Little River Co.) Clear Lake (Miller Co.) Clipper Spur Coaldale Combs Spur Comet Compton Conley Coulter Cove Deaneville DeQueen Dian ARKANSAS–Points—Continued. Doddridge Dolph Dotson Eagleton Foreman Fort Lynn Fouke Fruit Junction Fruita. Fulton Gillham Grannis Gravel Pit Guernsey Hatfield Hatton Highland Homan Hon. Hope Horatio Howard Hudson Johnson Kiblah Kilgore Rings (Sevier Co.) Lippton Long McCaskill McNab Mandeville Matthews Maxwell (Pike Co.) Mena Mena South Switch Mineral Mineral Springs Morris Ferry Murfreesboro Nashville Neal Springs Norvell Ogden Oliver Orchard Siding Orton Ozan Packard Spur Paroloma Pattsville Paup Pleasure Island Post Pipe Co. Spur Potter Powers Brairie Oil & Gas Co. Spur Ravanna Red Bluff Redland (Dixon P. O.) Richmond Rich Mountain Rich Mountain Wye Roberts (Miller Co.) Robertson Spur Schaal Sheppard 262 APPENDIX ARKANSAS–Points—Continued. South Orchard Planting Co. Spur Sprudel Stranger Sweet Home Taylor & Cook Lbr. Co. Spur Texarkana, Ark.- Tex. Thrasher Tokio (Hempstead Co.) Vandervoort Wade Waldron (2) Oklahoma Points Washington White Cliffs Wickes Willard Wilton Winthrop Womacks Wortham and from the Oklahoma points named below: Fogels Spur Forrester Heavener 41. Hodgens Page (Map 1) Perry (Le Flore Co.) Thomasville TEXAS COMMON POINT TERRITORY 42. TrANS-MISSISSIPPI RIVER TERRITORY 1 (Map 1) ARIZONA—Stations as follows: Aguila Alicia Alrich Alta Alto Anita Apache Apex Arey Arizona City Audley Bawtry Bernardino Biddle Block Bloxton Blue Bell Bon Bouse Branaman Brills Buchan Bunkers Burns Butte Bylas Calumet Calva Cavot Cerbat Chiricahua Clifton Clune Cochran Ariz. and Colo. Jet. 1 Territorial Directory No. 3, or re-issues, by the agent for the carriers of Central Freight Association Territory (Chicago). TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 263 ARIZONA—Stations—Continued. Conconino Coledon College Peak Congress Cordes Coronado Corta Creamery Crook Crown King Cunningham Davern Deer Trail Denny Divide Dome Douglas Drury Duncan Eloy Enid Erman Escala Eugenie Fields Florence Flores Forepaugh Forrest Frankenburg Frisco Galena. Gila Gilbert Gilsons Glade Golden Grand Canyon Guthrie Haeckel Hansen JCt. Helena Henrietta Hereford Higley Holmes Hopi Hull Humboldt Iron King Junction Kelvin Kendall Kennard Kim Lancha Land’s Crossing Lee Lewis Springs Linskey Lirim Lockhart Lowell McQueen Marana Marrs Middleton Mineral Mobile Mohawk Station Moores Spur Morenci Naches Naco Navajo Osborn Pan Parker Patagonia Patio Pearce Peck Peterson Pica. Piedra. Pinal Pitt Poland Jet. Polvo Prairie Price Prieta Providence Puntenney Queen Creek Rankin Red Lake Riverside Russell Saddle Salome Servess Sheldon Shope Silicia Silverbell Simon Smith Solomon South Siding Springs 264 APPENDIX ARIZONA—Stations—Continued. St. David Stark Stoval Sunshine Talklai Tanque Theba Thomson Tinnaka Tombstone Topock Tufa. Turkey Creek Twelve Mile Spur Twin Buttes R. R. Jct. Union Utting Waile Vanar ARKANSAS–All stations. COLORADo—All stations. IDAHO-All stations when routed via Missouri River crossings (named as defined in Exceptions to the Official Classification). Iowa–All stations except the following: Ballinger Bard Becks Bellevue Bettendorf Bricker Buffalo Bullards Burlington Camanche Cascade (Des Moines Co.) Clinton Columbus Jct. Davenport Dubuque Elk River Jet. Elrick Jot Fairport Folletts Fort Madison Fredonia. Fruitland Galland Garland Grandview Green Island Gordons Ferry Hahn’s Switch Huron Kempers FCeokuk Kingston (Des Moines Co.) Lainsville Latty Le Claire Letts Tuinwood Vicksburg Warren Webster Wenden Willaha, Winkleman Wood Spur Wooley - York Zellweger Lyons Macuta Mediapolis Middle Lock Montpelier Montrose Mooar Morning Sun Muscatine Newport Oakville Patterson Pleasant Creek Pleasant Valley Princeton Round House Sabula Sandusky Shaffton Shopton TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 265 Iowa–Stations—Continued. Sperry Wapello Tile Works West Burlington Wiele KANSAS–All stations. MEXICO—All stations. MINNESOTA—Stations as follows: Adrian Hills Ash Creek Kanaranzi Beaver Creek Luverne Bigelow Magnolia Bruce Manley Ellsworth Org MISSOURI–All stations except the following: Alexandria Helton Ashburn Ilasco Busch La Grange Canton Lambs Clemens La Motte Dunsford Louisiana Gregory Love Hannibal West Keithsburg Wever Round Lake Rushmore Steen Warner Worthington Munger’s Switch Reading St. Louis Santuzza Saverton West Quincy White Rock MonTANA—All stations when routed via Missouri River crossings (shown above as in Exceptions to the Official Classification), except the following: Anaconda Bradley Austin Butler Avon Butte Birdseye Dawson Blossburg Deer Lodge Boulder Dempsey Boyd Dough Jet. Elliston Garrison Gregsons Hackney Helena. Rohrs Mares 266 APPENDIX MONTANA—Stations—Continued, Mill Creek Mullan Race Track Ross Schiffman Silver Bow NEBRASKA–All stations. NEW MEXICO—All stations. OKLAHOMA—All stations. OREGON−Stations as follows when routed via Missouri River crossings (shown above as in Exceptions to the Official Classi- fication): Arcadia Cairo Huntington Mallett Nyssa SOUTH DAKOTA-Stations as follows: Annie Creek Siding Anthony’s Apex Ardmore Argentine Argyle Avalon Aztec Belle Fourche Bench Mark Benclare Berne Black Hawk Blacktail Bonesteel Booge Brandon Brennan Bucks Buena Vista Buffalo Gap Burke Burke's Siding Calcite Canton Central City Chilson Corson Crown Hill Custer Dallas Deadwood Dewey Dumont East Sioux Falls Edgemont Elk Point Elmore Englewood Erskine Este Stuart Walkers Warm Springs Ontario Vale Evans Siding Fairburn Fairfax Fairview Galena Galena Jet. Gardner Garretson Gregory Harrisburg Havens Hermosa, Herrick Hill City Holloway Hot Springs Hudson Iron Creek Y Ivanhoe Jefferson Jones TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 267 SouTH DAKOTA—Stations—Continued. Juno Spur Oelrichs Sioux Falls Keystone Oreville Smithwick Kirk Piedmont Spearfish Lead Pluma Stage Barn Level Siding (Note Portland Canyon B) Pringle Sturgis Loring Provo Terry Lucile Spur Rapid City Tilford McCook Reckford Trojan (formerly Marietta Redfern - Portland) Maurice Roubaix Underwood Mayo Rowena Valley Springs Millers Rumford Wasp No. 2 Spur Minnekahta Runkel West Nahant Moll St. Charles Whitetail Summit Mystic St. Onge Whitewood Nahant Savoy Woodville Nemo Shindlar TEXAs—All stations. UTAH-All stations. WYOMING—All stations. 43. TrANS-MISSOURI TERRITORY The Trans-Missouri Freight Bureau has jurisdiction over all freight traffic which has both origin and destination in the states of Kansas and Nebraska and in Missouri, west of Marshfield, Sedalia, and Pleasant Hill and south of the main line of the Mis- souri Pacific Railway, upon all freight traffic originating within the territory just described and destined to points outside, except Trans-Continental traffic; also upon all traffic to and from Colo- rado and Utah having origin and destination east of a line drawn from Cheyenne, Wyo., to Trinidad, Colo. Map 1 of Railway Traffic Maps shows the borders of this territory. 268 APPENDIX 44. TRUNK LINE ASSOCIATION TERRITORY (Map 2) Comprising the stations named below in DELAWARE NEW YORK DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PENNSYLVANIA MARYLAND - VIRGINIA NEW JERSEY WEST VIRGINIA DELAWARE-All stations. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA—All stations. MARYLAND–All stations except those shown in Central Freight Association Territory. NEW JERSEY—All stations. NEW YORK–All stations except those shown on pages 187 and 236. PENNSYLVANIA—All stations except those shown on page 192. VIRGINIA—All stations except those shown in Green Line Territory. t WEST VIRGINIA—All stations except those shown on page 208. 45. UTAH COMMON POINTS Ogden and Salt Lake City are the two chief common points, but there is a varying list of points that take the Ogden-Salt Lake City rates or arbitraries over. Every tariff carries its own list of points that take the Ogden-Salt Lake City rates or arbitraries OWer. 46. VIRGINIA GATEWAYS The Virginia Gateways through which freight moves between Southern territory and territory north and west thereof are shown below. Alberta. Tynchburg Portsmouth Altavista Meherrin Richmond Brookneal Norfolk Roanoke Burkeville Petersburg St. Paul Jarrat Pinner’s Point Suffolk. Kilby TERRITORIAL TRAFFIC TERMS 269 47. VIRGINIA COMMON POINTS 1. As defined in Exceptions to the Official Classification. Alexandria. . . . . . . . . . . Va. Newport News . . . . . . . Va. Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Norfolk . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5 Berkley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Buchanan . . . . . . . . . . . . } } Petersburg . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5 Buena Vista . . . . . . . . . . 2 7 Phoebus . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Burkville . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Pinner’s Point . . . . . . . 2 3 Charlottesville . . . . . . . . 2 3 Portsmouth . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Clifton Forge . . . . . . . . 2 > Richmond . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Doswell . . . . . . . . . . . . . .” Roanoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Farmville . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 y Salem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5 Fort Monroe . . . . . . . . . y 3 Smithfield . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2 Glasgow . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 South Glasgow . . . . . . . 9 3 Gordonsville . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 Staunton . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Hampton . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Suffolk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Kilby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Waverly . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 × Lynchburg . . . . . . . . . . . } } Waynesboro . . . . . . . . . . y 7 Lexington . . . . . . . . . . . . y 9 West Point . . . . . . . . . . 9 y Manchester . . . . . . . . . . y 5 and several hundred stations taking some rates as named in east- bound guide books and billing instructions. This list has rate significance in connection with eastbound rates only. 2. The Virginia Common Points named above and some 800 other stations are grouped in two rate groups for westbound rates. Map 9 shows the two groups as the Lexington group and the Virginia Cities group. 48. WESTERN TERMINI POINTS As Defined in Exceptions to the Official Classification. Allegheny . . . . . . . . . . . Pa. Corry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pa. Ashland . . . . . . . . . . . . Ry. Dunkirk . . . . . . . . . . . N. Y. Bellaire . . . . . . . . . . . . Ohio East Buffalo . . . . . . . . . y y Black Rock . . . . . . . . N. Y. Erie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pa. Buffalo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . y 2 Huntington . . . . . . . W. Va. Buffalo Jet. . . . . . . . . . . } } Irvineton . . . . . . . . . . . . Pa. Charleston . . . . . . . W. Va. Kenova. . . . . . . . . . . W. Va. 270 APPENDIX WESTERN TERMINAL POINTS-Continued. Niagara Falls. . . . . . .N. Y. Salamanca. . . . . . . . . . N.Y. North Tonawanda. . . . . 3 5 Suspension Bridge. . . . . .” Oil City . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pa. Titusville . . . . . . . . . . . . Pa. Parkersburg . . . . . W. Va. Wheeling . . . . . . . . . W. Va. Pittsburgh . . . . . . . . . . Pa. 49. WESTERN TRUNK LINE TERRITORY (Map 1) In the restricted meaning of the term, Western Trunk Line Territory lies roughly west of Lake Michigan and the Junctions of the Western and Central Freight Association roads, Chicago to St. Louis, as listed above; east of the Missouri River and western border of North Dakota; and south of the Canadian border. However, the Western Trunk Line Committee has a wide jurisdiction and overlaps in tariff publication much of the surrounding territory. On the other hand, the Central Freight Association and other freight committees in tariff pub- lication invade Western Trunk Line Territory. Northwestern Territory overlaps on the north, and Central Freight Associa- tion Territory on the east. The restricted borders of this terri- tory are shown on Map 1 of Railway Traffic Maps. APPENDIX B TECHNICAL TRAFFIC TERMIS Many technical terms and phrases readily understood by the trained traffic man are not clear to those who are not versed in the phraseology employed in the traffic world. For the bene- fit of such, there is shown below a list of the more common terms and phrases used in connection with freight traffic, together with the definitions applicable to them. No attempt is made to col- lect a complete list of traffic terms, and the definitions are necessarily brief. The reader will find most of these terms thoroughly explained in the texts. Basing Point—This term has a technical use in connection with the basing point system of rates in the Southeast, and it has a more general meaning in connection with rates in other parts of the country. (1) In the technical use of the term Atlanta is a typical basing point. For example, rates from New York to territory surrounding Atlanta are made up of the rate to Atlanta plus the rate from Atlanta to the point nearby. (2) New York is a basing point not in the technical sense explained above, but only in the general sense in which the term is used. The points in the vicinity of New York take the New York rates, not the New York rates plus the local between the point nearby and New York. Basing Rate—A rate to or from a point or points used in con- structing rates to or from the surrounding territory. For ex- ample, all points in the territory surrounding New York City take the New York rates or specified amounts over the New York rates. In this case the New York rates are the base rates. Bill of Lading—A receipt given by the carrier for freight re- ceived. A bill of lading also contains the conditions under which the shipment is to move. (See the treatise on “The Bill of Lading.’’) 271 272 APPENDIX Bond of Indemnity—A bond filed with a carrier relieving it from liability for some action for which it would otherwise be liable. For example, a bond of indemnity is often filed by a shipper with a carrier when a bill of lading has been lost. Car, Private—(1) A car devoted to the use of some official of the railway, sometimes called official car; (2) A car owned by some individual or company not a carrier, generally used for hauling some commodity of a special nature. The most common examples of owners of private car lines are the packing house, the coal mining, the oil, and the fruit companies. Carrier, Intermediate—A carrier forming a part of the through route between point of origin and point of destination but not originating or delivering the traffic. Carrier, Issuing—A carrier which issues tariffs alone or jointly with other carriers Carrier, Participating—A carrier taking part in the movement of freight under a tariff to which it is a party through proper COn CllrrenCe. Charges, Advance—Charges which accrue on a shipment previous to the time that it is billed. These charges may repre- sent not only transportation charges, but storage, switching, etc. Charges, Fiaced—Charges which do not vary with the volume of traffic. For example, the right of way and to a large extent the road-bed and terminals entail a fixed charge. Charges, Minimum—See minimum charge. Claim, Relief—A claim filed by a freight agent with the auditor, asking to have a certain item or items which are not collectible taken out of his account. Classification—A publication in which all articles of freight are listed and certain classes assigned to them from which the rates are determined by reference to a tariff. Complaint, Formal—A complaint filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission in accordance with the procedure required by that body. This term is explained more fully in the treatise on Procedure in Interstate Commerce Cases. Complaint, Informal—A complaint filed in an informal man- ner, usually by letter or a mere statement of conditions complained of. This term is explained more fully in the treatise on Procedure in Interstate Commerce Cases. TECHNICAL TRAFFIC TERMS 273 Concurrence—A legal form filed with the Interstate Com- merce Commission showing that the carrier filing it concurs in all rates of the kind specified which are made by the carrier mentioned in the concurrence. . Carload, Minimum—The least weight on which carload rates may be secured. Damage, Concealed—Damage which is not apparent until ship- ment is unpacked. For example, the contents of a case may be entirely broken, and the fact not be apparent until it is un- packed. Demurrage—The amount charged for the use of cars or ves- sels when detained beyond a certain stipulated time. Demurrage, Reciprocal—A demurrage agreement by which the consignee is allowed credit for unloading cars in less than the stipulated time allowed for unloading. Density of Traffic—The average number of tons or persons car- ried over a mile of railroad. Differential—Amount added to or subtracted from certain specified rates to make rates to (1) other points (intermediate or beyond) or (2) the same points via differential routes. Diversion—The changing of the destination of a shipment from its original destination. Division—The portion of the through rate accruing to each of the carriers party to the rate. Dunnage—(1) Material used to keep the freight in place in a car or vessel or to protect it in any way, or (2) an allowance of a certain reduction in rate or weight made by the carrier to the shipper who furnishes the dunnage to protect a shipment. Eacceptions to Classification—Publications showing rules, minimum weights, etc., which govern the movement of traffic and usually take precedence over the classifications. Fast Freight Line—A through freight line over two or more roads. (For a classification of fast freight lines and an explana- tion of their workings, see the treatise on “Railway Organiza- tion,” etc.) - Freight—In railway parlance the transportation charges on a shipment. Gateway—Important point through which business moves to point beyond or on which the rates break. This term is most 274 APPENDIX commonly used in connection with the Virginia Gateways and the Trans-Continental Gateways. Guide Book—A freight publication containing instructions for billing of freight, rate bases, lighterage rules, etc. Indea: Tariff—(1) A carrier's tariff index contains a list of tariffs, circulars, etc., promulgated by or participated in by the carrier. (2) An agent's tariff index includes a list of his publications. - Long-and-Short-Haul Clause—The clause of the fourth sec- tion of the Act to Regulate Commerce prohibiting a carrier from charging more for a short than a long haul, over the same line, except by permission of the Commission. Loss, Concealed—LOSs which occurs in packages, but which is not apparent until the shipment is unpacked. Maacimum Rates—(1) Rates prescribed by a commission which may not be exceeded by carriers. (2) In Texas the term “maxi- mum rates’’ signifies the highest rates prescribed for any distance. The class rates for 245 miles are, in this sense, the maximum rates. For example, the rates for 600 miles are the same as for 245, provided both origin and destination are within Texas Common Point territory. The Texas rates begin with those for 10 miles and increase until the maximum rates are reached (at 245 miles). The Texas rates are both maximum and minimum rates. That is, they are absolute and may not be either less or more than the Commission prescribes. Milling in Transit—The privilege of stopping grain, lumber, etc., for milling and of reshipment on a low through rate from origin to destination. Minimum Charge—The least charge for which the smallest amount of freight or express will be carried. Minimum Rates—(1) Rates below which carriers agree they will not charge, or rates below which a commission prohibits carriers from reducing rates. (2) Through rates which do not apply when a combination makes lower rates. On Combination—Rates are made “on combination” when two or more rates are added together to make the total charge on a through haul. For example, the class rates from Chicago to Atlanta are made on the Ohio River combination, TECHNICAL TRAFFIC TERMS 275 Operating Ratio—The ratio that the operating expenses bear to the earnings. For example, if a railway earns a hundred million dollars and expends for operation seventy million dol- lars, the operating ratio is 70 per cent. This ratio is found by dividing the expenses by the earnings: 70,000,000——100,000,000 =70-100, or 70 per cent. Point, Basing—See Basing Point. Power of Attorney—Legal authority given by one carrier to another or to an agent to issue tariffs for it. - Prepaid—A term used to indicate an amount paid to the for- warding agent toward the cost of transporting the consignment to destination. Private Car Line—A company which owns cars and rents them to railways. Privilege, Transit—See Transit Privilege. Pro Number—The receiving agent usually numbers the way- bills in the order of their receipt, beginning with the first of each month. This pro number is placed on the waybill in addi- tion to the waybill number given by the forwarding agent. Rates, Basing—See Basing Rate. Rates, Class—Class rates are those subject to a classification. Rates, Combination—Rates constructed by adding together two or more separate rates. - Rates, Commodity—Rates on specific commodities. Rates, Joint—Rates applying from a point on a line of one carrier to a point on a line of another, or between points on the lines of different carriers. Rates, Local—Rates applying on the lines of one carrier only. Rates, Proportional—Rates applying as a proportion on a part of the route of shipment. Ratio, Operating—See Operating Ratio. Reconsignment—Change of consignee or destination. Reconsignment Privilege—The privilege of changing the des- tination of a shipment and of applying the lower through rates. Tariffs: Agency—A tariff issued by an agent for the common use of two or more carriers. Basing—A tariff containing basing rates only. 276 APPENDIX Class—A tariff containing class rates only. Commodity—Atariff containing commodity rates only. Distance—A tariff containing distance or mileage rates. Individual—A tariff issued by a carrier under its own I. C. C. number. Interstate—A tariff applying on interstate traffic. Intrastate—A tariff applying on intrastate traffic only. Joint—A tariff containing joint rates. Lawful—A tariff constructed and filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission in accordance with the law and the regulations of the Commission. Local—A tariff containing local rates. Proportional—A tariff containing proportional rates. Switching—A tariff containing charges and regulations for switching service. Tom-Mile Charge—The unit used as the general average rate for purposes of comparison. It is the average charge for carry- ing one ton of freight for one mile and is computed by dividing the total freight revenues of a carrier by the total number of ton-miles. Transit Privilege—Allowance for a low through rate on freight stopped enroute for milling, bailing, or other purposes. Waybill—A waybill is a document describing property to be transported by a railway, specifying consignor, consignee, serv- ice which has been and is to be performed, and the charges thereon. It accompanies the property to destination and is often forwarded to the general office as a record for the accounting department. APPENDIX C ABBREVIATIONS FREQUENTILY USED IN TRAFFIC PUBLICATIONS Bbl. =barrel. Bdl.–bundle. B. O. =buyer's option. C. I. F.—cost, insurance, and freight. % =care of. C. L.–carload. - C. O. D.-collect on delivery (indicating that charges are to be collected on delivery). C. P. A.-certified public accountant. C. R. =carrier’s risk. Cwt.=hundredweight. D1, or 2T1=double first class. E. B.Eeastbound. e.g.—for example. Est.-wt.=estimated weight. F. O. B.-free on board (at a certain point)—indicating that there are to be no charges for drayage or other form of trans- portation up to the point designated. F. A. S.-free alongside, G. F. D.-general freight department. G. O. =general office. G. S.–general specials—a term used to designate general special commodities in classification of express matter. Hhd.=hogshead. H. P.-horsepower (of engines). Ib., ibid.-ibidem (in the same place)—a term referring to a preceding footnote or other reference. I. C. C. Rep.–Interstate Commerce Commission Reports. Num- bers following this abbreviation refer to pages; those pre- ceding, to volumes; e. g., 26 I. C. C. Rep., 135 should be read 277 278 APPENDIX Volume 26 Interstate Commerce Commission Reports, p. 135. I. C. Rep.–Interstate Commerce Reports. The first 11 volumes of the decisions of the Commission are published by one of the publishers with the word “Commission” omitted and are referred to by the above abbreviation to distinguish these reports from the other edition. i. e.–that is. K. D.-knocked down—a term used to indicate that an article of freight or express is partially or entirely taken to pieces and packed in a more or less flat form. - K. D. C. L.-knocked down in carloads. K. D. L. C. L.-knocked down in less than carloads. L. C. L.-less than carload. 24 Mass. 218–Volume 24 of Massachusetts Court Reports, page 218. Other court reports are referred to similarly. M.=one thousand. N. E. S. =not elsewhere specified. N. O. H. P.-not otherwise herein provided. N. O. I. B. N.—not otherwise indexed by name—a term used in classification to designate articles which have not been specific- ally named. N. O. S.–not otherwise specified. Nstd., Nested=articles that are packed one within another. O. R.-owner's risk—a term indicating that the shipper relieves the carrier from part of the risk of transportation. O. R. B.-owner’s risk of breakage, meaning same as O. R. O. R. C.–owner’s risk of chafing. O. R. L.–owner’s risk of leakage. O. R. W.-owner’s risk of becoming wet. p. Epage. pp.FDageS. - R. 25–Rule 25—a term used in the Official Classification to denote a rate 15 per cent less than second class, but not less than third class. R. 26=Rule 26—a term used in the Official Classification to denote a rate 20 per cent less than third class, but not less than fourth class. - R. 28–Rule 28—a term used in the Official Classification to ABBREVIATIONS 279 denote a rate made by adding a certain specified amount to the fourth-class rate. S. U.-set up—a term used in classification to indicate that the article is put together. S. U. C. L.-set up in carloads. S. U. L. C. L.-set up in less than carloads. 16 U. S. 79–Volume 16 of the United States Supreme Court Reports, page 79. Other volumes and pages abbreviated in the same manner. v.-versus (against). W. B.-westbound or waybill. APPENDIX D APIPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS Map 1 of the Atlas of Railway Traffic Maps presents the classification territories of the Canadian, the Mexican, and the three interstate classifications in the United States. This appendix gives in semi-tabular form the application of state classifications and the interterritorial application of interstate classifications. Appendix D is reprinted with slight corrections and changes from “Appendix to Cfficial Map . . . issued under direc- tion of (the) Central Freight Association.” (Transportation Building, Chicago, Ill.) Because of the official source of the authority the tables are in general a reliable reference work. However, it should be borne in mind that the only legal authority for the application of classifications is that carried on the title page or within the current tariff which governs a shipment. I. CLASSIFICATIONS APPLYING ON INTRASTATE TRAFFIC STATE CLASSIFICATION Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . e - e o e s e s e o e o e o e s • * * * * is e o e e s • * 1 Southern Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . © e º e e º 'º e o 'º e s e o e 1 Western Arizona. . . . . . . e e e e º e º e º e s e º 'º e s e s e o e s is e e e s e e º e s e s e e 2 Western California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e e s tº a e 2 Western Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Western Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Official Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Official District of Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Official Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * > t e º s e 2 Florida. Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 8 Georgia Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Western Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Illinois Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Official IoWa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 IOWa. Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Western Kentucky . . f & © 4 & © tº º & © e º 'º e º ºs e tº e º 'º º . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Southern * ast of Mississippi River. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SOuthern Louisiana. : West of Mississippi River. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Western 280 APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS 28). CLASSIFICATIONS APPLYING ON INTRASTATE TRAFFIC– CoNCLUDED STATE CLASSIFICATION Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * º e o e o e º 'º e s e º e e s e Official Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e a 0 e º e º e º 'º' a * * * * e e º e o e Official Massachusetts 3rth e e o 'º e e ni e G i e e s e º & © tº e º e º e e e - e º 'º e 9. * * * Northern Peninsula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . eStel'ſ] Michigan. . ..} Southern Peninsula. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Official Minnesota . . . . . . e e o s a e s e º 'º e º e = < * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2 Western © Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * e e s e o 'º e º e º e s e e º 'º º o . 2 Mississippi Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e e e º e º e e e º e s e 2 Western Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Western Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Nebraska Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº e º e º 'º . 2 Western New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Official New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e e o 'º e º e e e s e º a Official New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e 6 & © e o e > . . . . . . 2 Western New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e tº e º 'º e e e º e o e . . . . . . Official North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 North Carolina North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Western Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Official Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e e s e º e o e e e = * * * * * * * * * 2 Western Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e e s e º e s e º e º 'º e º 'º e Western Pennsylvania. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e e º e º a º e s e s is a s Official Rhode Island . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Official South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e º 'º e º e º e e • * * * * * * * * * * * * 2 South Carolina South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * * * * Western Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SOuthern Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº e º a 6 e o o e & e º e s e s e s e s tº e e º 'º . . . . . . 2 Texas Utah . . . . . . . . . . . e e < e e e s e e a e s a e e º e º e o e e o e º e o e º e º e > * Western Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . © e º e º e º e o e º e o e 6 Official Virginia. . . . . . © e is e e & © e º e º e º e e e e o e s e e e o e o e e a e s e o 'º e º 'º 2 Virginia. Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Western West Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Official Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Western Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e e o e s e e º & 9 º' Western 1 Adopted in accordance with the order of the Circuit Court of the United States (Eastern district of Arkansas). 2 Authorized by State COmmission. 3 Between common points in the state of Georgia, Southern Classifica- tion applies. 4 Between points on Chesapeake & Ohio Railway in Kentucky, Official Classification applies. Except otherwise stated herein the classification governing intrastate is as established by the railroads. Various exceptions have been established by the state commissions and the railroads, which also govern in connection with application of classifications as mentioned above. II. INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS Sections 1, 4, 5, and 7 mention the interterritorial application of each of the Interstate Classifications, i. e., these sections name the origin anºd destination points or territories from and to which the respective interstate classifications apply in addition to established territorial appli- cation as indicated by Map 1. Sections 2, 3, and 6 show the current extraterritorial application of intrastate classifications mentioned. De- scriptions of freight association territories mentioned below are given in Appendix A, and the territories are shown on maps 1, 2, 5, 6, and 8. 282 APPENDIX 1. INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF CANADIAN CLASSIFICATION WESTBOUND FROM TO Oregon, Canadian Freight Association | North Pacific Coast Terminals in United Territory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . States, Washington 2. INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF ILLINOIS CLASSI- FICATION BETWEEN 1 AND Groups, viz.: | Illinois—All stations, except as shown Burlington . . . . . . . . . . IOWa. in Section 3. Clinton . . . . . . . . . . . . . Iowa | Indiana—Stations, viz.: Davenport . . . . . . . . . . IOWa. C. & E. I. R. R. Dubuque . . . . . . . . . . . IOWa. Finney, Freeland, Judyville, and Ft. Madison . . . . . . . . IOWa. } Pence, Hannibal . . . . . . . . Missouri C. I. & S. R. R. Keokuk . . . . . . . . . . . . IOWa. Allison to Lake Village, inc. Louisiana . . . . . . . Missouri Schneider to Whiting, inc. Muscatine . . . . . . . . . . IOWa. E. J. & E. R. R. Princeton . . . . . . . . . . . Iowa J Edgemore to Gary, inc. BETWEEN AND ſ Illinois—All stations in A. T. & S. F. Ry. Ft. Madison, Iowa C. & A. R. R. : Louisiana and St. Louis, Missouri C. & E. I. R. R. : Freeland, Indiana C. B. & Q. R. R. : Groups, viz.: Burlington and West Burlington, Iowa Dodgeville . . Wisconsin Kemper to Keokuk, and Mooar, Iowa, Janesville . . . Wisconsin inC. Jefferson . . . ..Wisconsin: Alexandria, Iowa, to St. Louis, Mis- Madison . . . . . Wisconsin Souri, inc. Milwaukee . . Wisconsin C. I. & S. R. R. : Platteville . . Wisconsin Highland to Allison, Indiana, inc. Watertown . . Wisconsin C. R. I. & P. Ry. : Waukesha . . Wisconsin Fruitland to Burlington, Iowa, inc. I. C. R. R. : - Hedrick to West Lebanon, Indiana, inc. M. & St. L. R. R. (Iowa Cent.) : West Keithsburg, Iowa, Muscatine (North and South Ry.), Fruitland, Grand View and Wapello, Iowa | T. P. & W. R. R. : Burlington, Keokuk and Warsau, Iowa Wabash R. R. : Keokuk, Iowa, and St. Louis, Missouri 1 The word “between” signifies that the classification applies in both directions, APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS 283 INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF ILLINOIS CLASSIFICATION —ConCLUDED BETWEEN AND C. B. & Q. R. R. : Rutledge to Prescott, Wisconsin, inc. I. C. R. R. : Milwaukee . . . . . . Wisconsin Clarno to Summit (Dane), Wisconsin, IIlC. Martintown to Dodgeville, Wisconsin, inc. BETWEEN AND Louisville and Nashville R. R. Evansville and Mt. Vernon. Indiana stations in Illinois. . . . . . . tº c 3. INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF Iowa CLASSIFICATION BETWEEN AND WIA Groups, viz.: Clinton . . . . . . . Iowa East Clinton, Fulton, Davenport . . . . . IOWa. Savanna, and Thomp- } C. B. & Q. R. R. Dubuque . . . . . . IOWa. son, Illinois. . . . . . . . . . Princeton . . . . . IOWa. Groups, viz.: East Moline, Moline, Burlington . . . . Iowa and Rock Island, }. C. R. I. & P. Ry. MuSCatine . . . . . IoWa, Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . Groups, viz.: Clinton . . . . . . . Iowa [ Carbon Cliff, East Mo- Dubuque . . . . . . Iowa line, Moline, and Rock C. B. & Q. R. R. Princeton . . . . . Iowa U Island, Illinois. . . . . . . | Albany, Carbon Cliff, Groups, viz.: Cordova, East Mo- Clinton . . . . . . . IOWa. line, Fay, Fulton, Dubuque . . . . . . IOWa. Hampton, Port By- Muscatine . . . . . Iowa r0m, Rapids City, C. M. & St. P. Ry. Princeton . . . . . IOWa. Rock Island, Savanna, Thompson, and Water- town, Illinois. . . . . . . . J 4. INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION of OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION EASTBOUND FROM TO Groups, viz.: Baltimore, Maryland, Boston, Massa- - - © . . . .º chusetts, New York, New York, Brookneal . . . . . . . . Virginia Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Prov- idence, Rhode Island, Washington, District of Columbia FROM TO Canadian Pacific Ry. sta- tions west of Montreal, Montreal, Province of Quebec, for export. Province of Quebec. . . . . t FROM TO Chattanooga. . . . . Tennessee ) Norfolk & Western Ry. stations in Vir- Knoxville . . . . . . . Tennessee ſ ginia and West Virginia 284 APPENDIX INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION —Continued EASTBOUND–Continued. FROM Groups, viz.: Duluth . . . . . . . . . . Minnesota Green Bay . . . . . . Wisconsin Hancock . . . . . . . . . Michigan Houghton . . . . . . . . Michigan Marquette . . . . . . . . Michigan Michigamme . . . . . Michigan Sault Ste. Marie. . Michigan St. Paul . . . . . . . . JMinnesota Winona . . . . . . . . MinneSOta C. &. N.-W. Ry. stations in Wisconsin north Of Mil- waukee to Manitowoc, also }- Rewaunee. Missouri River Crossings, viz.: Atchison . . . . . . . . . . . Kansas Council Bluffs . . . . . . . . IOWa. Kansas City . . . . . . Missouri Leaven WOrth. . . . . . . . Kansas Omaha . . . . . . . . . . Nebraska South Omaha . . . . Nebraska St. Joseph . . . . . . ... Missouri on traffic Originating in the states of Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington. . . ] FROM Green Bay, Wisconsin, Group FROM - Illinois, except C. & N.-W. Ry. stations, viz.: Galena and Millbrig, C. M. & St. P. Ry. stations north Of Rockford and Free- port, and Ill. Cent. R. R. Stations north Of Free- port . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Iowa, on and east of a line drawn from Dubuque, Iowa, via C. M. & St. P. Ry., to Muscatine, inc., thence via Muscatine North & South Ry. to Wapello; thence via C. R. I. & P. Ry. to Burlington; thence via C. B. & Q. R. R. to and in- cluding Keokuk and Mooar. TO Central Freight Association Territory (east of Illinois-Indiana State Line): Henderson, Louisville, Owensboro, Ken- tucky TO ſ Canadian Freight Association Territory, Central Freight Association Territory (east of Indiana-Illinois State Line), New England Freight Association Ter- ritory. |Trunk Line Association Territory TO Canadian Freight Association Territory, Central Freight Association Territory (east of Indiana-Illinois State Line), New England Freight Association Terri- tory. Trunk Line Association Territory APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS 285 INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION —ContLNUED EASTBOUND–Continued. FROM Milwaukee Group—also via routes across Lake Michi- gan—stations in Wisconin on C. & N.-W. Ry, north of Milwaukee to Manitowoc, inc., also Kewaunee, Mar- inette, Wisconsin, Menom- inee and Manistique, Michi- £8.11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Missouri, viz.: St. Louis, and Stations on and east of a line drawn via Chicago, Burlington and Quincy R. R., from Louisiana to Alex- andria, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NoRTHBound TO Canadian Freight Association Territory, Central Freight Association Territory (east of Indiana-Illinois State Line), New England Freight Association Terri- tory, Trunk Line Association Territory TO FROM Groups, viz.: Baton Rouge . . . Louisiana Friars Point . . . Mississippi •) Ashland, Kentucky, Group, Greenville . . . . . Mississippi | Canadian Freight Association Territory, Helena. . . . . . . . . . Arkansas | Central Freight Association Territory Natchez . . . . . . . . Mississippi (east of Illinois-Indiana State Line), New Orleans . . . . Louisiana | New England Freight ASSOCiation Terri- Port Chalmette . . Louisiana tory, ROSedale . . . . . . . Mississippi | Trunk Line Association Territory Vicksburg . . . . . . Mississippi FROM TO - * Canadian Freight Association Territory, Bowling Green . . . Kentucky Central Freight Association Territory Georgetown . . . . . . Kentucky ‘e, * © located in New York, Pennsylvania, Lexington . . . . . . . Kentucky © tº e Memphis . . . . . . . . Tennessee N º #. Association Terri- Nashville . . . . . . .Tennessee | * º: g g Winchester . . . . . . Kentucky Trunk Line Association Territory FROM TO ſ Canadian Freight Association Territory, Central Freight Association Territory, also Illinois, points in Iowa and Mis- souri adjacent to Mississippi River, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Group, via Bristol . . Virginia.-Tennessee & routes across Lake Michigan, Kewau- | nee, Manitowoc, Marinette, Wisconsin, Manistique and Menominee, Michigan, New England Freight Association Terri- i tory, |Trunk Line Association Territory 286 APPENDIX INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION —ContLNUED NoRTHBOUND–Continued. TO FROM Central Freight Association Territory, also Illinois, points in Iowa and MissOuri adjacent to Mississippi Riv- er, Milwaukee Group, Via routes across Lake Michi- gan—points in Wisconsin On C. & N.-W. Ry. north of Milwaukee to Manitowoc, inc., Green Bay Group, Ke- waunee, Marinette, WiscOn- Sin, Menominee and Manis- tique, Michigan, New England Freight ASSO- ciation Territory, Trunk Line Association Terri- tory J FROM Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Sta- tions in Kentucky . . . . . . . . FROM Covington . . . . . . . Kentucky HenderSOn . . . . . . Kentucky Louisville . . . . . . . Kentucky Maysville . . . . . . . Kentucky Newport . . . . . . . . Kentucky Owensboro . . . . . . . .Kentucky FROM Canadian Freight Association Territory TO jºin Freight Association Territory TO Central Freight Association Territory (east of Indiana- Illinois State Line) tº e & © e Louisville . . . . . . . Kentucky Henderson . . . . . . . Kentucky Owensboro . . . . . . Kentucky ſ t MaySVille . . . . . . . FCentucky Newport . . . . . . . . Kentucky Covington . . . . . . . Kentucky ( ſ Canadian Freight Association Territory, Central Freight Association Territory, also Illinois, points in Iowa and Mis- souri adjacent to Mississippi River, Milwaukee Group, points in Wisconsin on the C. & N.-W. Ry. north of Mil- waukee to Manitowoc, inc., Green Bay Group, Kewaunee, Marinette, Wis- consin, Manistique and Menominee, Michigan, New England Freight Association Terri- tory, |Trunk Line Association Territory Groups, viz.: O Duluth, Minnesota, Green Bay, Wis- consin, Hancock, Michigan, Hough- ton, Michigan, Kewaunee, Wisconsin, Manistique, Michigan, Manitowoc, Wisconsin, Marquette, Michigan, Me- nominee, Michigan, Michigamme, Michigan, Milwaukee Group, New London, Minnesota, St. Paul, Minne- Sota, Winona, Minnesota. APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS 287 INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION —ContLNUED NoRTHBOUND–Continued. FROM Clarksville . . . . . . TenneSSee Memphis . . . . . . . . Tennessee Mobile . . . . . . . . . . . Alabama. Nashville . . . . . . . TenneSSee New Orleans . . . . Louisiana Norton . . . . . . . . . . . Virginia Paducah . . . . . . . . Kentucky Pensacola . . . . . . . . . Florida Port Chalmette . . LOuisiana St. Paul . . . . . . . . . Virginia FROM Cumberland Gap, Tennessee TO Canadian Freight Association Territory, New England Freight Association Terri- }- tory, Trunk Line Association Territory J TO | Groups, viz.: - Baltimore, Maryland, Boston, Massa- Chusetts, Darlington, Rhode Island, New York, New York, Pawtucket, | Rhode Island, Philadelphia, Pennsyl- Middlesboro . . . . . Kentucky . Phillipsdale, Rhode Island, Providence, Rhode Island, Rich- mond, Virginia, Silver Springs, * Rhode Island FROM TO Gulf of Mexico Ports, viz.: Algiers . . . . . . . . . Louisiana Galveston . . . . . . . . . . . Texas Gretna . . . . . . . . . . Louisiana. Gulfport . . . . . . . Mississippi | Groups, viz.: Key West . . . . . . . . . Florida Cairo, Illinois, Chicago, Illinois, Cin- Mobile . . . . . . . . . . . Alabama Cinnati, Ohio, Davenport, Iowa, Du- New Orleans . . . . Louisiana buque, Iowa, Evansville, Indiana, PensaCola . . . . . . . . . Florida Indianapolis, Indiana, Louisville, POrt Arthur . . . . . . . . Texas Kentucky, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, POrt Bolivar . . . . . . . . Texas Peoria, Illinois, Springfield, Illinois, Port Chalmette . . Louisiana St. Louis, Missouri, St. Paul, Min- Texas City . . . . . . . . . . Texas neSOta Westwego . . . . . . . Louisiana On traffic imported TO FROM Humboldt Milan tº e º e º 'º e Tennessee * * * * * * * * e º e Tennessee Groups, viz, : * ſ Alexandria, Virginia, Baltimore, Mary- land, Boston, Massachusetts, Dar- lington, Rhode Island, Hagerstown, Maryland, New York, New York, Pawtucket, Rhode Island, Philadel- phia, Pennsylvania, Phillipsdale, Rhode Island, Potomac Yards, Vir- ginia, Providence, Rhode Island, Richmond, Virginia, Silver Springs, Rhode Island, Washington, District Of Columbia 288 APPENDIX INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION —ContLNUED NoRTHBOUND–Continued. FROM TO Central Freight Association Territory (east of Illinois-Indiana State Line), Paducah. . . . . . . . . Kentucky & New England Freight Association Terri- tory, Trunk Line Association Territory SouTHBOUND. FROM TO Canadian Freight Association Territory, Central Freight Association Territory; also Illinois, points in Iowa and Mis- souri adjacent to Missis- sippi River, Milwaukee Group, points in Wisconsin | Covington, Henderson, Louisviſſe, Mays- on C. & N.-W. Ry. north of Ville, Newport, and Owensboro, Ken- Milwaukee to Manitowoc, tucky inc., and Green Bay Group, Kewaunee, Marinette, Wis- consin, Menominee, Manis- tique, Michigan, New England Freight ASS0- ciation Territory, Trunk Line Association Terri- tory tº tº e º e º O C C C & © tº º e º e º e º e FROM TO ſ Central Freight Association Territory, also Illinois, points in Iowa and Mis- SOuri adjacent to Mississippi River, Mil- waukee Group points in Wisconsin on C. & N.-W. Ry., north of Milwaukee to Manitowoc, inc., Green Bay Group, Canadian Freight ASSociation { Territory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kewaunee, Marinette, Wisconsin, Me- nominee, Manistique, Michigan, New England Freight Association Ter- ritory, | Trunk Line Association Territory FROM TO Canadian Freight Association Territory, Central Freight Association Territory, also Illinois, points in Iowa and Missouri adjacent to Mississippi Riv- er, Milwaukee Group, points in Wisconsin on C. & N.-W. Ry. north of Milwaukee to Bristol, Virginia-Tennessee Manitowoc, inc., and Green Bay Group, Kewaunee, Mar- inette, Wisconsin, Menom- inee, Manistique, Michigan, New England Freight Asso- ciation Territory, Trunk Line Association Terri- tory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . j APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS 289 INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION —ContLNUED SouTHBound—Continued. TO }- | nessee, Mobile, Alabama, Nashville, Tennessee, New Orleans, Louisiana, Norton, Virginia, Paducah, Kentucky, Pensacola, Florida, Port Chalmette, Louisiana, St. Paul, Virginia TO St. Paul, Virginia South Atlantic Ports, viz.: Brunswick, Georgia, Charleston, Geor- gia, Jacksonville, Florida, Savan- º nah, Georgia, Virginia Ry, stations TO | (For export.) Gulf of Mexico Ports, viz.: Algiers, Louisiana, Galveston, Texas, Gretna, Louisiana, Gulfport, Mississip- pi, Key West, Florida, Mobile, Ala- bama, New Orleans, Louisiana, Pensa- Cola, Florida, Port Arthur, Texas, Port Bolivar, Texas, Port Chalmette, Loui- siana, Texas City, Texas, Westwego, Louisiana. TO (For export to Cuba.) Gulf of Mexico Ports, viz.: | Algiers, Louisiana, Galveston, Texas, Gretna, Louisiana, Gulfport, Mississip- pi, Key West, Florida, Mobile, Ala- barna, New Orleans, Louisiana, Pensa- Cola, Florida, Port Arthur, Texas, Port Bolivar, Texas, Port Chalmette, Loui- siana, Texas City, Texas, Westwego, Louisiana. TO |- FROM Canadian Freight Association | Clarksville, Tennessee, Memphis, Ten- Territory, New England Freight Asso- ciation Territory, Trunk Line Association Ter- ritory . . . . . . . e e g c tº e º 'º e º O & © FROM Central Freight Association Territory, also Illinois, points in Iowa and Missouri adjacent to Mississippi Riv- er, Milwaukee Group, points in Wisconsin on C. & N.-W. Ry. Inorth of Milwaukee to Manitowoc, inc., and Green Bay Group, Kewaunee, Mar- inette, Wisconsin, Menom- inee, Manistique, Michigan. FROM Cairo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois Cincinnati . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Ohio Davenport . . . . . . . . . . . . . IOWa. Dubuque . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Iowa Evansville . . . . . . . . . . Indiana Indianapolis . . . . . . . . Indiana Louisville . . . . . . . . . Kentucky Milwaukee . . . . . . . . Wisconsin Peoria . . . . . . . & e º ſº º gº tº Illinois Springfield . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois St. Louis . . . . . . . . . . Missouri St. Paul . . . . . . . . . . Minnesota FROM Central Freight Association Territory (east of Indiana- Illinois State Line) tº º gº e º e FROM Central Freight Association Territory (east of Indiana- Illinois State Line). . e Q & © to }*. Kentucky 290 APPENDIX INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION of OFFICIAL CLAssIFICATION —ContLNUED SouTHBOUND—Continued. FROM Groups, viz.: Duluth . . . . . . . Green Bay . . . . . . Wisconsin Hancock . . . . . . . . . Michigan Houghton . . . . . . . Michigan Marquette . . . . . . . Michigan Michigamme . . . . . Michigan Sault Ste. Marie. . Michigan || St. Paul . . . . . . . . Minnesota Winona . . . . . . . . Minnesota C. & N.-W. Ry. Stations in Wisconsin north Of Milwau- kee to Manitowoc, also Ke- W8 UIIlêe, - Missouri River Crossings, viz.: Atchison . . . . . . . . . . Kansas Council Bluffs . . . . . . . Iowa Kansas City . . . . . Missouri Leavenworth . . . . . . Kansas Omaha . . . . . . . . . . Nebraska South Omaha . . . . Nebraska St. Joseph . . . . . . . Missouri On traffic Originating in the States Of Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington WESTBOUND FROM - Buffalo . . . . . . . . . New York Pittsburgh . . . Pennsylvania FVROM - Canadian Freight Association Territory, Central Freight Association Territory (east of Indiana- Illinois State Line) New England Freight Asso- ciation Territory, Trunk Line Association Terri- tory. ... Minnesota : TO Central Freight Association Territory (east of Illinois-Indiana State Line), HenderSon, Louisville, Owensboro, Ken- tucky TO Dump Creek Line of Carolina, Clinchfield } & Ohio Ry. TO ſ All stations in Illinois except C. & N.-W. Ry. stations, viz.: Galena and Millbrig, C. M. & St. P. Ry. stations north of Rockford and Freeport, and Ill. Cent. R. R. Stations north of Freeport. Stations in Iowa. On and east of a line drawn from Dubuque, Iowa, via C. M. & St. P. Ry. to Muscatine, inclusive; thence via M. N. & S. Ry. to Wapello; thence via C. R. I. & P. Ry. to Bur- lington; thence via C. B. & Q. Ry. to and including Keokuk and MOOar Stations in Missouri, viz.: St. Louis, also stations on and east of a line drawn via C. B. & Q. R. R. from Louisiana to Alexandria, inc. Milwaukee Group, also via routes across Lake Michigan to stations in Wisconsin on the C. & N.-W. Ry. north of Milwau- kee to Manitowoc, inc. Kewaunee and Marinette, Wisconsin, Menominee, and Manistique, Michigan APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS 291. INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION —ConCLUDED WESTBOUND–Continued. FROM Canadian Freight Association Territory, New England Freight ASSO- ciation Territory, Trunk Line Association Terri- tory, Groups viz: Buffalo, N. Y. Erie, Pa. Pittsburgh, Pa. Wheeling, W. Va. FROM Canadian Freight Association Territory, New England Freight ASSO- - Ciation Territory, Trunk Line Association Terri- tory. TO Lexington, Kentucky Group, Hickman, Kentucky TO ſ Groups, viz: Duluth, Minnesota, Hancock, Michigan, Houghton, Michigan, Marquette, Mich- igan, Michigamme, Michigan, St. Paul, Minnesota, Winona, Minnesota. MissOuri River Crossings, viz.: Atchison, Kansas, Coun- cil Bluffs, Iowa, Kansas City, Missouri, Leaven- worth, Kansas, Omaha, Nebraska, South Oma- On traffic to Idaho, Mon- t a na, Ore- g O n, a n d ha, Nebraska, St. Jo- Washington seph, Missouri. . . . . . . . . FROM TO ſGroups, viz.: Central Freight Association Duluth, Minnesota, Green Bay, Wiscon- Territory (east of Indiana- Illinois State Line) sin, Hancock, Michigan, Houghton, Michigan, Marquette, Michigan, Mich- igamme, Michigan, Milwaukee, Wis- consin, New London, Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, Winona, Minnesota, Points on C. & N.-W. Ry. north of Mil- waukee to Manitowoc, inc., Kewau- nee and Marinette, Wisconsin, Manis- Covington . . . . . . . . . Kentucky HenderSon . . . . . . . . Kentucky Louisville . . . . . . . . . Kentucky Maysville . . . . . . . . . . Kentucky Owensboro . . . . . . . . Kentucky FROM North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . { | tique and Menominee, Michigan TO Memphis, Tennessee, Nashville, Tennes- See 292 APPENDIX 5. INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CLASSIFICATION EASTBound FBOM TO ſ Virginia cities, viz.: l Alberta, Alta Vista, Brookneal, Burke- On traffic destined Groups, viz.: ville, Kilby, Jarratt, to points in the Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois | Lynchburg, Meher- states of Geor- Davenport . . . . . . . . . . . . Iowa 3 rin, Norfolk, Peters-} gia, North Caro- Indianapolis . . . . . . Indiana burg, Pinners Point, lina, South Car- Peoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois | Portsmouth, Rich- olina, Tennessee, Milwaukee . . . . . . Wisconsin mond, Ro a no k e, ] and Virginia Suffolk, a n d St. Paul, Virginia NoRTHBound FVROM TO Boyce . . . . . . . . . . . . Tennessee ) Chattanooga. . . . . . . Tennessee L. & N. R. R. stations in Indiana and McCarty . . . . . . . . . . Tennessee Illinois. ROSSVille . . . . . . . . ... Tennessee FROM TO Central City . . . . . . Kentucky Gracey . . . . . . . . . . . . Kentucky || Group, viz.: HopkinSVille . . . . . . . Kentucky Chicago, Illinois Nortonville . . . . . . . . Kentucky J FROM TO Groups, viz.: Gulfport . . . . . . . Mississippi | Groups, viz: Mobile . . . . . . . . . . . Alabama Cairo and Chicago, Illinois, Cincin- New Orleans . . . . Louisiana nati, Ohio, Dubuque, Iowa, Evans- Pensacola . . . . . . . . . Florida ville and Jeffersonville, Indiana, Port Chalmette . . Louisiana Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and St. Wicksburg . . . . . . Mississippi Louis, MissOuri FROM TO Cairo and Chicago, Illinois, Cincin- nati, Ohio, Evansville and Jefferson- ville, Indiana, Milwaukee, Wiscon- sin, Peoria, Illinois, St. Louis, Mis- souri, and Springfield, Illinois | Groups, viz.: Memphis . . . . . . . . . . Tennessee FROM TO New Orleans . . . . . . Louisiana Ashley and Eldorado, Illinois FROM TO - New Orleans . . . . . . Louisiana ſ M. & O. R. R. stations in Illinois (be- U’ort Chalmette . . . . LOuisiana tWeen Cairo and East St. Louis) APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONs 293 INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF SouTHERN CLASSIFICA- TION.—CoNTINUED NoRTHBOUND–Continued. FROM TO Ohio River Crossings, viz.: Brookport Illinois On Cairo . . . . . . Illinois traffic Cincinnati ... Ohio Origin- Evansville Indiana |ating in Jeffersonville Ala- Groups, viz.: Indiana bama, Chicago, Illinois, Davenport, Iowa, Indi- Metropolis Illinois | Flori- anapolis, Indiana, Milwaukee, Wiscon- Mounds . . . Illinois da, Sin, and Peoria, Ill. New Albany GeOr- Indiana gia, Mis- Thebes Transfer Sissip- Illinois J pi, North Carolina, South Caro- lina, Tennessee, and Virginia FROM TO Groups, viz.: - Chicago, Illinois, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Paducah. . . . . . . . . . . . Kentucky Peoria and Springfield, Illinois, and St. Louis, MO. FROM TO ſº Illinois, Group, Canadian Freight Association Territory, Cincinnati, Ohio, Group, #. º.º. Evansviiie and "Jeffersonville, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, North t e ... 3 Group Carolina, South Carolina, 3. ior cºnai **** Tennessee, and Virginia. sºund Freight Association Terri- Trunk Line Association Territory, | St. Louis, Missouri, Group FYFOM TO Groups, viz.: i ancs & & tº Cairo and Chicago, Illinois, Cincinnati, Stations in Mississippi and Ohio, Evansviñé and Jeffersonville Tennessee known as Inte- Indi Mil k e i 9 rior Mississippi and Western ndiana, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Pana | and Peoria, Illinois, St. Louis, Mis- Tennessee Junction points SOUri SouTHBOUND FROM TO Groups, viz.: Alton . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois Streator . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois N. C. & St. L. Ry. Stations Springfield . . . . . . . . . Illinois Terre Haute . . . . . . Indiana 294 APPENDIX INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CLASSIFICA- TION.—Continued SouTHBOUND–Continued. FROM Groups, viz.: Alton . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois Springfield . . . . . . . . Illinois FROM Groups, viz.: Atchison . . . . . . . . . . . Kansas Council Bluffs . . . . . . . IOWa. Kansas City . . . . . . Missouri Leavenworth . . . . . . Kansas Lincoln . . . . . . . . . . Nebraska Nebraska City . . Nebraska Omaha . . . . . . . . . . Nebraska St. Joseph . . . . . . . Missouri Sioux City . . . . . . . . . . IOWa. South Omaha . . . . Nebraska FROM Groups, viz.: Baltimore . . . . . . . Maryland New York . . . . . . New York Philadelphia . Pennsylvania FROM Buffalo, New York, Group, Chicago, Illinois, Group, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Group, New England Freight ASSO- ciation Territory, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Group, Trunk Line Association Terri- tory. FROM Central Freight Association Territory (east of the Indi- ana-Illinois State Line) Cairo, Illinois, Group, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Group, Chicago, Illinois, Group, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Group, Peoria, Illinois, Group, Springfield, Illinois, Group, St. Louis, Missouri, Group, St. Paul, Minnesota, Group. TO Alabama, Kentucky (stations on the M. & O. R. R.), Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee TO ſ Groups, viz.: Friar's Point and Greenville, Mississippi, Helena, Arkansas, Rosedale, Gulfport and Natchez, Mississippi, Mobile, Ala- bama, also Jackson and Meridian, Mis- | Sissippi N. C. & St. L. Ry., A. & V. Ry., G. & S. I. R. R., M. C. R. R., N. O. R. R., N. O. G. N. R. R., and & C. R. R. stations TO Acca, Fredericksburgh, Hampton, Lynch- burg, Manchester, Norfolk, Old Point Comfort, Petersburgh, Portsmouth, Richmond, Soldiers Home, and South- ern Stock Yards, Virginia TO & N. E. N. O. M. | Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Ten- nessee, and Virginia TO Groups, viz.: Gulfport, Mississippi, Memphis, Ten- > neSSee, Mobile, Alabama, New Or- leans, Louisiana, Pensacola, Florida, Vicksburg, Mississippi J APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS 295 INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CLASSIFICA- TION.—ContLNUED SouTHBOUND–Continued. On traffic Georgia, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mis- sissippi, Louisiana (east of the Mis- sissippi River), Tennessee, and Vir- deS- tined to Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Missis- Sippi, North Car- Olina, South Car- Olina, Tennes- See, and Vir- ginia FROM TO Groups, viz.: Cairo . . . . . . . . . . e ſº tº º: Alabama, Kentucky, Cincinnati . . . . . . . . . . . Ohio Evansville . . . . . . . . Indiana H Jeffersonville . . . . . Indiana St. Louis . . . . . . . . Missouri ginia FROM TO ſ Ohio River Crossings, viz.: Brookport, Illinois, Bond Hill, Ohio, Cairo, Illinois, Cincinnati, Ohio, Groups, viz.: Clare, Ohio, Evans- Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois ville, Indiana, Iron- Davenport . . . . . . . . . . . Iowa dale, Ohio, Jeffer. Indianapolis . . . . . . . Indiana sonville, Indiana, Milwaukee . . . . . . Wisconsin Metropolis, Illinois, Peoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois | M. O. und S, Illinois, New Albany, Indi- ana, Thebes, Illi- nois, Thebes Trans- { fer, Illinois. . . . . . . TO Tenn. Cent. R. R., stations Interior Mississippi and Western Tennes- See Junction points FROM Groups, viz.: Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois | N. C. & St. L. Ry. stations Milwaukee . . . . . . Wisconsin \ St. L. & S. F. R. R. Stations in Mississippi, St. Louis . . . . . . . . . Missouri Central City, Elizabethtown, Fordsville, Hopkinsville, Macey, Morganfield, and Nortonville, Kentucky FROM TO Groups, viz.: Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois A. & W. Ry., G. & S. I. R. R., Miss. Cent Milwaukee . . . . . . Wisconsin R. R., N. O. & N. W. R. R., N. O. & G St. Louis . . . . . . . . . º W. R. R. and N. O. M. & C. R. R. Stations FROM TO Groups, viz.: | Hickman, Kentucky, Jackson, Mississip- Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois pi, Mobile, Alabama, Memphis, Tennes- Milwaukee . . . . . . Wisconsin see, Meridian, Mississippi, Pensacola, St. Louis . . . . . . . . . MissOuri Florida, and Paducah, Kentucky FROM TO Groups, viz.: Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois | Alabama and Kentucky (on the M. & O. Milwaukee . . . . . . Wisconsin R. R.), Louisiana, (east of the Missis- St. Louis . . . . . . . . . Missouri J sippi River) Mississippi, and Tennessee 296 APPENDIX INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF SouTHERN CLASSIFICA- TION.—CoNCLUDED SouTHBOUND–Continued. FROM TO Davenport, Iowa, Group. . . . . Tenn. Cent. R. R. stations FROM TO Groups, viz.: Green Bay . . . . . . Wisconsin Kenosha . . . . . . . . Wisconsin || Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky Marinette . . . . . . . Wisconsin (south of south bank of Ohio River), Menominee . . . . . . Michigan North Carolina, South Carolina, Ten- Minneapolis . . . . . Minnesota neSSee, and Virginia St. Paul . . . . . . . . Minnesota FROM To Illinois Central R. R. Stations in Illinois Tenn. Cent. R. R. Stations Southern Ry. stations in Illi- gº nois and Indiana ed FROM TO ſ N. C. & St. L. Ry. stations Groups, viz.: Interior Mississippi and Western Ten- Indianapolis . . . . . . . Indiana ( , nessee Junction points Peoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois | Alabama, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missis- | sippi, and Tennessee FROM TO (For export.) Gulf Ports, viz.: Algiers, Louisiana, Galveston, Texas, Groups, viz.: tº gº g 3. e s “ fe Gretna, Louisiana, Gulfport, Mississip- ; City º: pi, Mobile, Alabama, New Orleans, Louisiana, Pensacola, Florida, Port Arthur, Texas, Fort Bolivar, Texas, Port Chalmette, Louisiana, Texas City, Texas, and Westwego, Louisiana FROM TO T º Interior Mississippi & Western Tennes- º Viz. : Illinois { ... see Junction points 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N. C. & St. L. Ry. Stations Omaha . . . . . . . . . . Nebraska Georgia, North Carolina, South Caro- lina, Tennessee, and Virginia FROM TO Groups, viz.: Minneapolis . . . . . Minnesota Peoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois ; Jackson and Meridian, Mississippi Springfield . . . . . . . . . Illinois St. Paul . . . . . . . . Minnesota FROM TO Groups, viz.: Peoria . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois ; Hickman and Paducah, Kentucky Springfield . . . . . . . . . Illinois FROM º Youngstown, Ohio, Group. . . APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS 297 6. INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF TEXAS CLASSIFICATION FROM Gulf Ports, viz.: Algiers . . . . . . . . ... Louisiana Gretna . . . . . . . . . . LOuisiana New Orleans . . . . Louisiana Port Chalmette . . Louisiana Westwego Louisiana On import traffic TO Texas 7. INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF WESTERN CLASSIFICATION EASTBound FROM IBritish Columbia, Canada, FROM Groups, viz.: Colorado Springs Colorado Denver . . . . . . . . . . Pueblo . . . . . . . . . . . Colorado Trinidad. . . . . . . . . . Colorado FROM Southwestern Tariff Commit- tee Territory, Trans-Continental Freight Bu- reau Territory, TO ſ Canadian Freight Association Territory, Ceutral Freight Association Territory, New England Freight Association Terri- tory, iSoutheastern Freight Association Terri- tory, Southeastern Mississippi Valley Associa- tion Territory, Colorado - |Trunk Line Association Territory TO ſ Groups, viz.: Baltimore, Maryland, Boston, Massachu- setts, New York, New York, Phila- delphia, Pennsylvania, Providence, | Rhode Island TO ſ Canadian Freight Association Territory, Central Freight Association Territory, New England Freight Association Terri- tory, Southeastern Freight Association Terri- tory Southeastern Mississippi Valley Associa- tion Territory, FROM Western Classification Terri- : except points in Illi- . IlOlš |Trunk Line Association Territory TO ſ Stations in Illinois and Indiana, On West and north of line drawn via C. I. & S. Ry. from Chicago to Danville, Illi- nois, thence via C. & E. I. R. R. to Tuscola, thence via the Ill. Cent. R. R. through Mattoon and Neoga to Effing- |ham, thence via Vandalia. R. R. to and including East St. Louis, Illinois 298 - APPENDIX INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION of WESTERN CLASSIFICATION —ContLNUED NoRTHBound FROM TO Algiers . . . . . . . . . . . Louisiana Gretna . . . . . . . . . . . . Louisiana | Groups, viz.: - Gulfport . . . . . . . . . Mississippi Atchison, Kansas, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Mobile . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alabama Denver, Colorado, Des Moines, Iowa, New Orleans . . . . . Louisiana Fremont, Nebraska, Kansas City, Mis- Pensacola . . . . . . . . . . . Florida Souri, Leavenworth, Kansas, Lincoln, Port Chalmette . . . . Louisiana Nebraska, Omaha, Nebraska, St. Jo- Westwego . . . . . . . . . Louisiana seph, Missouri, Salt Lake City, Utah, (On import traffic from Sioux City, Iowa, Sioux Falls, South Asia, Australia, Europe, Dakota, and South Omaha, Nebraska New Zealand, and Philip- pine Islands) ~ FROM TO California, Nevada, and Utah Manitoba, Canada FROM TO Ohio River Crossings, viz.: ) Groups, viz.: Brookport . . . . . . . . . Illinois Duluth, Minnesota, Minneapolis, Min- Cairo . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois nesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, Wino- Cincinnati . . . . . . . . . . . Ohio na, Minnesota (On traffic Originat- Evansville . . . . . . . . Indiana ). ing in Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Jeffersonville . . . . . . Indiana Mississippi, North Carolina, South Louisville . . . . . . . Kentucky Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia) New Albany . . . . . . . Indiana - Thebes . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois J FROM TO Mexico e e º 'º e º O & © e º e º e º O e Q & Q e Colorado FROM - TO Groups, viz.: l Mobile . . . . . . . . . . Alabama Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska Vicksburg . . . . . . Mississippi FROM TO Groups, viz.: - Groups, viz.: Colorado Springs, Colorado, Denver, Memphis . . . . . . . . Tennessee Colorado, Ogden, Utah, Pueblo, Colo- Mobile . . . . . . . . . . . Alabama rado, Salt Lake City, Utah, Trini- - dad, Colorado 2 APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS 299 INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF WESTERN CLASSIFICATION —Continued NoFTHBOUND–Continued. FROM TO Groups, viz.: Groups, viz.: - Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Duluth, Minne- Sota, Kansas City, Missouri, Lincoln, New Orleans . . . . Louisiana Nebraska, Omaha, Nebraska, St. Jo- Port Chalmette . . Louisiana seph, Missouri, St. Paul, Minnesota, Sioux City, Iowa, Sioux Falls, South Dakota SouTHBOUND FROM TO Groups, viz.: - Chicago . . . . . . . . ... Illinois [ Cairo, East Hannibal, Gale, Thebes, Illi- Milwaukee . . . . . . Wisconsin nois (On traffic destined to Arkansas Peoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois and MissOuri) FROM TO Colorado and Wyoming . . . . . Mexico FROM TO Groups, viz.: Groups, viz.: Colorado Springs, Colorado Denver . . . . . . . . . . Colorado Ogden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Utah || Memphis, Tennessee Pueblo . . . . . . . . . . . Colorado ſ Mobile, Alabama Salt Lake City . . . . . . Utah Trinidad . . . . . . . . . Colorado FROM TO Groups, viz.: Davenport . . . . . . . . . . . Iowa Fox River . . . . . . Wisconsin Kansas City. . . . . . . Missouri Mexico Omaha . . . . . . . . . . . Nebraska St. Louis . . . . . . . . . Missouri J FROM TO Groups, viz.: Mobile, Alabama, Vicksburg, Mississippi FROM TO Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska. . { ſ Brookport, Cairo, Illinois, Cape Girar- Groups, viz.: deau, Missouri, Cincinnati, Ohio, Evans- Ashland . . . . . . . . Wisconsin ville, Jeffersonville, Indiana, Louis- Duluth . . . . . . . . . Minnesota Ville, Kentucky, New Albany, Indiana, Minneapolis . . . . . Minnesota Paducah, Kentucky, Thebes, Illinois Minnesota Transfer 3 (on traffic south of Kentucky and Vir- MinneSOta ginia, and east of Illinois Central R. St. Paul . . . . . . . . Minnesota R., Cairo, Illinois, to Jackson, Tennes- Superior . . . . . . . . Wisconsin See, and east of the Mobile & Ohio Winona. . . . . . . ... Minnesota R. R., Jackson, Tennessee, to Mobile; Alabama) : 300 APPENDIX : : < e : e. te INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION of WESTERN CLASSIFICATION —Continued WESTBOUND FROM TO Groups, Viz.: Brookport . . . . . . . . . Illinois Cairo . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois Evansville . . . . . . . . Indiana Joppa . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois ; Missouri, Kansas, and Nebraska to which Metropolis . . . . . . . . . Illinois through joint rates are published Paducah . . . . . . . . . Kentucky Thebes . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois FROM TO Canadian Freight ASSOciation Territory, Central Freight Association Territory, - New England Freight Asso- | Southwestern Tariff Committee Terri- ciation Territory, ... tory Southeastern Freight Asso- ſ Territory of the Pacific ciation Territory, Freight Tariff Bureau Southeastern Mississippi Val- ley Association Territory Trunk Line ASSOciation Terri- | tory FROM TO Cannelton . . . . . . . . . . Indiana Evansville . . . . . . . . . Indiana. Mt. Vernon . . . . . . . . Indiana | Mississippi River Crossings (East St. #Owensboro . . . . . . . . Kentucky | Louis to East Dubuque, inc.), when Rock Hill . . . . . . . . . . Indiana destined to Trans-Missouri Terri- ROCkport . . . . . . . . . . . Indiana tory Tell City . . . . . . . . . . , Indiana - Troy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Indiana J f Applies to East St. Louis, Ill., only FROM TO Central Freight Association Territory and adjacent points east and south there- } Kansas, to which through joint rates of in New York, Pennsyl- are published vania and West Virginia. . . : APPLICATION OF CLASSIFICATIONS 301 INTERTERRITORIAL APPLICATION of WESTERN CLASSIFICATION —ConCLUDED 30 WESTBOUND–Continued. FROM TO Central Freight ASSOciation Territory, Minnesota, New England Freight ASSO- ciation Territory, North Dakota, Southeastern Freight ASSOcia- • tion Territory, British Columbia, Canada Southeastern Mississippi Val- ley Association Territory, South Dakota, Trunk Line ASSOciation Ter- ritory J FROM TO Stations in Illinois and In- ) diana located on, west and north Of line drawn via C. I. & S. R. R. from Chicago to Danville, Illinois, thence Via C. & E. I. R. R. to TuS- cola, thence via the Ill. Cent. Western Ciassification Territory, except R. R. through Mattoon and points in Illinois Neoga to Effingham, thence via Vandalia R. R. to and including East St. Louis, Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . O & © tº e J FROM TO Mobile . . . . . . . . . ... Alabama Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Ne- New Orleans . . . . . . Louisiana braska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, POrt Chalmette . . . . LOuisiana and Wyoming FROM TO Baltimore . . . . . . . . . Maryland ) New York . . . . . . . New York Philadelphia . . . Pennsylvania |Lion. Nebraska. Tompkinsville . . . . New * On import traffic TEST QUESTIONS These questions are for the student to use in testing his knowledge of the assignment. The answers should be written out, but are not to be sent to the University, APPENDIX A 1. What publications contain lists of territorial traffic terms? Mention four. - 2. What provinces are included (partly or entirely) in Canadian Freight Association? 3. What states are included (partly or entirely) in Central Freight Association Territory? 4. Mention some of the Colorado Common Points. 5. Name the East Mississippi River Crossings as defined in Exceptions to the Official Classification. 6. What states are included (partly or entirely) in Green Line Territory? - 7. Name Missouri River Points as defined in Trans-Missouri Rules. 8. What states are entirely in New England Freight Associa- tion Territory? 9. What Canadian provinces are included in Northwestern Territory? 10. Name the Ohio River Crossings. 11. Name the subdivisions of Southeastern Territory. 12. What states are included (entirely or partly) in South- western Tariff Committee Territory 13. What states are included (partly or entirely) in Trunk Line Territory? 14. Name (a) the Virginia Gateways and (b) the Virginia Common Points. 15. Define Western Termini Points. 302 TEST QUESTIONS 303 APPENDIX B 16. Define advance charges, relief claim, concurrence, mini- mum carload, dunnage. 17. What is a gateway ? 18. What is the long-and-short-haul clause ? 19. What is a minimum charge 3 20. Give the meaning of the following terms: prepaid, pro- number, power of attorney. 21. Define five kinds of rates. 22. Define six kinds of tariffs. 23. What is a waybill? APPENDIX C 24. Give the meaning of the following abbreviations: C. L., C. O. D., Est, wt., F. O. B., F. A. S. 25. What is the difference in the meaning of I. C. C. Rep. and I. C. Rep.” 26. Give the meaning of the following abbreviations: K. D., L. C. L., N. O. I. B. N., N. O. S., O. R., S. U., W. B. APPENDIX D 27. What classification applies from Canadian Freight Asso- ciation Territory to the state of Washington? 28. What classification applies between Burlington (Iowa) group and Freeland, Indiana 3 29. What classification applies between Burlington (Iowa) group and Moline, Ill., via C. R. I. & P. Ry. ” 30. What classification applies from C. F. A. (Central Freight Association) Territory to Canadian Freight Association Terri- tory? From Canadian Freight Association Territory to Trunk Line Association Territory From C. F. A. Territory to Gulf of Mexico Ports? From New England Freight Association Ter- ritory to Kansas City, Mo., for points beyond” From North Carolina to Memphis, Tenn.” 31. What classification applies from Memphis, Tenn., to the Chicago group ! From Florida to Trunk Line Association Ter- ritory? From New York to Richmond, Va. ? From New 304 FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION England Freight Association Territory to Mississippi! From the Indianapolis group to Louisiana.” 32. What classification applies from New Orleans to Texas points? 33. What classification applies from Trans-Continental Freight Bureau Territory to Southeastern Mississippi Valley Association Territory? From Mobile (Ala.) to the Omaha (Neb.) group 3 From Mexico to Colorado 2 From Missouri to the Mobile (Ala.) group 2 - - 34. What classification applies from the St. Paul group to Cincinnati, Ohio? From Paducah, Ky., to Kansas where through joint rates are published? From Canadian Freight Association Territory to Territory of the Pacific Freight Tariff Bureau? From North Dakota to British Columbia? From New Orleans to Wyoming? WAY 3 i i82} UNIV. O. AUG 1 1924 BOUND | <！<！！！！！！！！！!！！ ！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！ ••••••••••••••••***