that through rates must not exceed the sum of the locals.Coffeyville Vitrified Brick & Tile Co. v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co., 12 I. C. C. 498. Not unlawful to refuse to carry at carload rates mixed cars of mineral water and beer.-Milwaukee, etc., Brewing Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 28. Ordinarily joint through rate should be lower than sum of the locals.-Laning-Harris Coal & Grain Co. v. Mo. Pac. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 154; Flaccus Glass Co. v. Cleveland, etc., R. Co., 14 I. C. C. 333; Burnham, etc., Dry Goods Co. v. Chicago R. T. Co., 14 I. C. C. 299; Gump v. G. & O. R. Co., 14 I. C. C. 98; Payne-Gardner Co. v. L. & N. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 638; Randolph Lumber Co. v. Seaboard A. L. Ry. Co., 14 I. C. C. 338; Sylvester v. Penn. R. Co., 14 I. C. C. 573. A railroad constructed for a special purpose is entitled to have that fact considered in making rates.-Am. Asphalt Asso. v. Uintah Ry. Co., 13 I. C. C. 196. Capitalization and value of property employed of little value in fixing express rates. Kindel v. Exp. Co., 13 I. C. C. 475, 485. Rule as to released rates.-Re Released Rates, 13 I. C. C. 550. Improper to fix rates according to the use of a commodity.-Ft. Smith Traffic Bureau v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 651. Considerations involved in determining the reasonableness of rates.-Thompson Lumber Co. v. Ill. Cent. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 657, 664. Voluntary reduction of rates by a carrier does not alone prove former rate unreasonable.-Ottumwa Bridge Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co., 14 I. C. C. 121. Storage charges for a reasonable time in which to remove freight part of the transportation and must be reasonable.-New York Hay Ex. Asso. v. Penn. R. Co., 14 I. C. C. 178. In exceptional cases the through rate may exceed the sum of the locals.Randolph Lumber Co. v. Seaboard A. L. Ry. Co., 14 I. C. C. 338, citing Minneapolis, etc., R. Co. v. Minnesota, 186 U. S. 257, 262, 46 L. Ed. 1151, 22 Sup. Ct. 900. But see Lindsay Bros. v. Grand Rapids & I. Ry. Co., 15 I. C. C. 182; Michigan Buggy Co. v. Grand Rapids & I. Ry. Co., 15 I. C. C. 297. State rates though not binding on the Interstate Commission are valuable in determining the reasonableness of interstate rates.-Corn Belt Meat Producers Asso. v. Chicago, B. & Q. Ry. Co., 14 I. C. C. 376. The question of the reasonableness of a rate one of fact and each case must stand upon its own record. Kansas City Hay Dealers Asso. v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co.,

14 I. C. C. 597; City of Spokane v. N. Pac. Ry. Co., 15 I. C. C. 376. Effect of increased cost of labor and materials.-Shippers and Receivers Bureau of Newark v. New York, O. & W. Ry. Co., 15 I. C. C. 264. Statute declaratory of common law.— Int. Com. Com. v. B. & O. R. Co., 43 Fed. 37, 42, 3 I. C. R. 192; affirmed, 145 U. S. 263, 36 L. Ed. 699, 4 I. C. R. 92, 12 Sup. Ct. 844; Tift v. So. Ry. Co., 123 Fed. 789, 792, 138 Fed. 753; So. Ry. Co. v. Tift, 148 Fed. 1021, 206 U. S. 428, 51 L. Ed. 1124, 27 Sup. Ct. 709. Cannot recover for unreasonable charges except under statutes, as the United States has no common law. Swift v. Philadelphia & R. R. Co., 58 Fed. 858, 64 Fed. 59. Disapproved.-Kinnavey v. Terminal R. Asso. of St. Louis, 81 Fed. 802, 804; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Call Publishing Co., 181 U. S. 92, 45 L. Ed. 765, 21 Sup. Ct. 561. In determining the question whether or not a rate is reasonable, rigorous, theoretical rules cannot be adopted; circumstances that must be considered stated.—Int. Com. Com. v. L. & N. R. Co., 73 Fed. 409, 419 to 426. Cost of Service of a particular movement cannot be found by taking the average cost of all movements of same commodity. -Int. Com. Com. v. Lehigh R. Co., 74 Fed. 784. The word "charges" used in section defined.-Detroit, G. H. & M. Ry. v. Int. Com. Com., 74 Fed. 803, 21 C. C. A. 103, 43 U. S. App. 308, reversing 57 Fed. 1005, 4 I. C. R. 722; affirmed, 167 U. S. 633, 42 L. Ed. 306, 17 Sup. Ct. 986. Reasons for the Act.Van Patten v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 81 Fed. 545. Question whether or not rates are reasonable a relative one and may be determined by comparison.-Int. Com. Com. v. East Tenn., V. & G. Ry. Co., 85 Fed. 107, enforcing order in 5 I. C. C. 546, 2 I. C. R. 798, 3 id. 106, 4 id. 213; affirmed, East T. V. & G. Ry. Co. v. Int. Com. Com., 99 Fed. 52; reversed, 181 U. S. 1, 45 L. Ed. 719, 21 Sup. Ct. 516. Mere fact of a greater charge for a shorter than a longer haul does not prove rate unreasonable.-Int. Com. Com. v. Western & A. R. Co., 88 Fed. 186; Allen v. Oregon R. & Nav. Co., 98 Fed. 16; Int. Com. Com. v. Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. Co., 120 Fed. 934, refusing to enforce order in 8 I. C. C. 503. Section defined, its purpose stated and a statement of what must be considered in determining the reasonableness of a rate. Int. Com. Com. v. Chicago G. W. Ry. Co., 141 Fed. 1003; affirmed, 209 U. S. 108, 52 L. Ed. 705, 28 Sup. Ct.

493, where is stated the probative effect of a rate long in existence. Demurrage charges must be reasonable and such charges governed by section. Michie v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co., 151 Fed. 694. The question of the reasonableness of a rate is a judicial one.-Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. Minnesota, 134 U. S. 418, 33 L. Ed. 970, 981, 10 Sup. Ct. 462, 702. Under Act prior to June 29, 1906, Commission could determine the reasonableness of a particular rate, but could not prescribe rates.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Int. Com. Com., 162 U. S. 184, 40 L. Ed. 935, 16 Sup. Ct. 700; Int. Com. Com. v. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co., 167 U. S. 479, 511, 42 L. Ed. 243, 17 Sup. Ct. 896, affirming 76 Fed. 183; Int. Com. Com. v. Ala. M. Ry. Co., 168 U. S. 144, 162, 42 L. Ed. 414, 18 Sup. Ct. 45. This power now specifically given by Act June 29, 1906. Expenditures for permanent improvements should not be charged to current expenses.-Ill. Cent. R. Co. v. Int. Com. Com., 206 U. S. 441, 51 L. Ed. 1128, 27 Sup. Ct. 700.

Notes of Decisions Rendered Since 1909.

A published rate not just and reasonable is not lawful when attacked-"Legal" and "lawful" distinguished.—Arkansas Fuel Co. v. C. M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 16 I. C. C. 95, 97. Applies to mileage book rates.--Commutation Rate Case, 21 I. C. C. 428, 442, 443. "Lawfulness" under Sec. 1 not to be confused with "legality" under Section 6.-Crescent Coal & Mining Co. v. C. & E. I. R. R. Co., 24 I. C. C. 149, 156. Covers all cases of unreasonableness relatively and otherwise. Board of Trade of Chicago v. C. & A. R. R. Co., 27 I. C. C. 530, 535. Elevation is a service in connection with transportation.-Elevation Allowances at St. Louis, 30 I. C. C. 696, 697. Value of the commodity a material fact.-Western Advance Rate case 1915, 35 I. C. C. 497-606.

Notes of Decisions Rendered Since 1915.

The section means "that rates to be just and reasonable must be relatively fair as between localities similarly situated as well as reasonable per se."-Corp. Com. of Va. v. C. & O. Ry. Co., 40 I. C. C. 24, 28. "The commerce of the country shall flow freely in established channels, without unnecessary

hindrance, embarrassment or delay."-Omaha Grain Exch. v. G. N. Ry. Co., 47 I. C. C. 532, 537.

Notes of Decisions Rendered Since 1920.

As to reasonableness of whole schedule of rates under Act as amended by Transportation Act, 1920, see Dayton-Goose Creek Ry. Co. v. U. S., 263 U. S. 456, 68 L. Ed. 388, 44 Sup. Ct. 169. Rates substantially higher than line between validity and unconstitutionality may properly be deemed just and reasonable and not excessive.-Banton v. Belt Line R. R. Corp., 268 U. S. 413, 69 L. Ed. 1020, 45 Sup. Ct. 534. See also Vandalia R. R. Co. v. Schnull, 255 U. S. 113, 65 L. Ed. 539, 41 Sup. Ct. 324. Erroneous to use composite figures as to cost of all freight in prescribing reasonable rates on a particular commodity.-Northern Pac. R. R. Co. v. Dept. of Public Works, 268 U. S. 39, 69 L. Ed. 837, 45 Sup. Ct. 412. Not only common elements, but any special circumstances, to be considered in fixing reasonable rates on particular commodity.-Miss. R. R. Com. v. A. & V. Ry. Co., 88 I. C. C. 47. Freight rate from farm to primary market only one of elements affecting grain prices.-Rates and Charges on Grain & Grain Products, 92 I. C. C. 373. Percentage formula cannot be accepted as measure of reasonable rates.-West Va. Rail Co. v. P. R. R. Co., 93 I. C. C. 216; Toledo Cooker Co. v. N. & A. Ry. Co., 93 I. C. C. 271. Commercial and economic conditions may be considered, but not controlling in fixing reasonable rates.-Wool Rates Investigation, 1923, 91 I. C. C. 235. Reasonableness of rate not determinable by comparing with average rates.-Chicago Heights Mfrs. Asso. v. P. R. R. Co., 92 I. C. C. 194. Reasonable salt rates prescribed.Salt Cases of 1923, 92 I. C. C. 388. All circumstances must be considered.-Continental Oil Co. v. Director-General, 102 I. C. C. 338. Unfavorable financial condition of carrier not a justification for charging unreasonable rates on particular commodity.-Richmond Radiator Co. v. N. Y., N. H. & H. R. R. Co., 109 I. C. C. 497. Cost study covering only more expensive part of through transportation not fair test of reasonableness of through rates.-Limestone from Illinois Points, 89 I. C. C. 11. One test of reasonableness of rate is its relation to whole rate structure of which it is a part.— News Corp. v. M. P. Ry. Co., 93 I. C. C. 381. Ordinarily manu

raw material.See also Barnett

factured product takes higher rate than Young v. C., I. & L. Ry. Co., 89 I. C. C. 428. Oil Co. v. Director-General, 93 I. C. C. 85. A test of reasonableness is relationship of rate to rates on analogous articles. -Barrett Co. v. St. J. & L. C. R. R. Co., 91 I. C. C. 9. Act contemplates that rates to be just and reasonable must be relatively fair.-Delta Beet Sugar Corp. v. Director-General, 93 I. C. C. 547; Wyoming Coal Co. v. Virginian Ry. Co., 96 I. C. C. 359. Principles underlying construction of class-rate scales discussed.-Southern Class Rate Investigation, 100 I. C. C. 513. Fact that liberal use of fertilizer tends to increase tonnage of other commodities considered in prescribing reasonable rates.-Fertilizers Between Southern Points, 113 I. C. C. 389. Joint rate which exceeds aggregate of intermediates prima facie unreasonable.-American Sumatra Tob. Co. v. A. C. L. R. R. Co., 118 I. C. C. 503; Kroehler Mfg. Co. v. C. N. Ry. Co., 123 I. C. C. 555. Sand, gravel, slag and stone among lowest-grade articles offered for transportation.Rates on Chert, Clay, Sand & Gravel, 122 I. C. C. 133. A minimum reasonable rate is not necessarily or often a maximum reasonable rate.-Ex-Lake Iron Ore from Chicago to Granite City, 123 I. C. C. 503. Varying rates in same territory on account of differences in traffic density on different railroads not in harmony with Act; rate-making principles discussed.-Consolidated Southwestern Cases, 123 I. C. C. 201. In considering reasonableness of group rates, comparisons of rates and distances from selected points not controlling.Dallas Paper Co. v. A. & L. M. Ry. Co., 126 I. C. C. 739. Theory that milk and cream are an auxiliary transportation chargeable only with out-of-pocket costs not tenable.-Milk and Cream Between New England Points, 126 I. C. C. 38. While volume of movement important in fixing reasonable rates, an excessive rate not justified merely because of light movement.--Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Co. v. P. R. R. Co., 129 I. C. C. 174. Principles of Hoch-Smith Resolution applied to deciduous fruits.-Calif. Growers' and Shippers' Protective League v. S. P. Co., 129 I. C. C. 25, 132 I. C. C. 582. Rates on livestock prescribed.-Eastern Livestock Cases of 1926, 144 I. C. C. 731. Rates on agricultural products under Hoch-Smith Resolution prescribed.-Hay, Straw and Excelsior, 146 I. C. C. 664. Interterritorial rates differing in