482 FEDERAL REFOBTEB. �a railroad assume to itself the exclusive right or privilege of carrying on the express business over its own Unes or any portion of them. I do not undertake to say that a railroad may not undertake to act as an expressman, but, if it should Bndertake to do so, it must do it as an expressman and not as a railroad. It is no part of its duty or privilege as a rail- road. If, tben, in the conduct of its business as expressman, its duties, relations, and operations be different and distinct from those appertaining to it as a railroad, it must treat its express department as though it had a separate individuality from that of the railroad — as though it were a stranger to the railroad in so far as it relates to its transactions vrith other express companies. It must give to it no opportunities, advantages, or privileges it does not allow to other express companies carrying on a like business. The very fact that the interests and rivalries of a railroad doing such a business tempt its officers and employes to secretly discriminate in its favor, and that it has so many opportunities and advantages in the conduct of its operations to covertly discriminate in its favor as against the express company which may be the rival of the railroad on its lines, demands that courts must hold railroads which incorporate expressage as a braneh of their business transactions to a strict and rigid impartiality, so far as it may be possibly done. �In dealing with this case the Louisville & Nashville Ex- press Company must be considered and treated by the railroad as though it were a company or person in nowise connected with or belonging to the railroad, in so far as privileges and advantages are given it. It must have no better treatment than a stranger company doing a similar business over its lines under like conditions. Both are to be regarded as cus- tomers of the railroad, and neither as being a part of it. If it be said that this is impossible, the reason for rigid enforce- ment, or as near an approach to an impartial administration of their affairs as may be, becomes the more imperative. �Are the principles herein stated observed in this case? Here are two companies doing an expressage over these lines. ����
