Page:United States Reports, Volume 209.djvu/134

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

OC, TOBE:? ?ER>? ?907, $:.?tt;men?, of ?he Ca?e. 2? U.S. �INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION v. CHICAGO GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. No. TS. Argued April 16, 17, 1907.--D?ided ?h ?8, 1900. Railroado are the prl. vate proporty of their owners, sad while the h? the power to pr?eribe rules for securing faithful sad efficient service and equality between shippers and communities, the publio is 'in no pe?per sense a ?enersl. m?n%,er. The ?ompanies may', subjeet, to ehan?e of rate? provided for in the Interstate Commerce Act,, cenla-ant, with ?hip- pers for ?n?le and sueoe?ive ta-a.?rtations and in sang t?eir own rate? may take into a?eount ?ompefitinn, provided it, is ?muine and not,, a mere pretense. There is no p?esumption o! wron? arisin? from a ?h? of rate made by u carrier. The pr?umptlon of good faith and int?rit? a?encis the aetinn o! carriers a? it, does the 'action of other ?rporafions sad individuals sad those pr?umptlons have not, been overtlyown by say le?i?int/on A rate on t? nmnufant,ured stride re?lt/n? from i?nuine 0ompet/tiou ? n?m'al oonditlons is not nece?arily an undue and ?nable discrimination a?in?t, a manufa?urin? cemmunity be?an?e it, is lower ? tile rate ml the raw material; and, under the eireum?tances of this e?e, there wa? no undue sad ?nable di?rlmin?tion ? the (?iea?o packix?-hot?es indu?tri? on ?he par? of the railroads in makil?, a? the result of set,ual oompefifiun sad conditions, a luwer rate for manu- fac?-ured paek/n?-house produet? th?n for livestock from Mi?ouri River t?ointe to Chioa?o. . CEar? proceeclin? were had before the Interstate Com~. meree Commission. They were commenced by tbe filin? of petition by ?he Chicago Live Stock Exchan? in April, 1902, char?il? ?he defendant?, who are now ?he ?ppe]lees? wi?h lhe violation of � and 3 of ?he Interstate Commeree Ac? of Febru?.?y 4, lS87. The specific offense s?attd was tha? ?he defendant? were ehargin? higher. rates of frei?h? upon live stock shipped from Mi?ouri River points? and other point?