NUMBER 45 (See page 72)
FINDINGS OF FACT
[Transcript of record, Supreme Court of the United States, October term, 1886. Number 1,290. The Lake Shore and Michigan Southern Railway Company, plaintiff in error, vs. Scofield, Shurmer and Teagle, in error to the Supreme Court of the state of Ohio, pages 14-21.]
This cause came on to be heard upon the pleadings, exhibits, and testimony, and was argued by counsel; in consideration whereof the plaintiffs, having moved for a reservation to the Supreme Court, the judges are unanimously of opinion that important and difficult questions exist in the case, making it proper that the same should be reserved to the Supreme Court for decision, which questions embrace the following propositions:
1st. Is this a case upon the face of the petition and under the laws of the state in which the court ought to interfere by injunction?
2nd. Whether such remedy by injunction will apply as well to the case of shipments over the defendants' road alone, as to cases of through shipments over such road and connecting roads?
3rd. What are the duties and obligations of common carriers at common law as distinguished from the statutory provisions of this and other states and countries?
4th. Are the defendants at common law obliged to carry freight at the same price for all parties or members of the public, without regard to quantity or circumstances connected with the transportation?
5th. May the defendant, as a common carrier and a corporation organised for that purpose, contract with a party controlling 90⁄100 or more of all the freight of a particular class, at a given city or point, to carry the same for less than general tariff rates, in consideration that it shall receive all the freight thus controlled by such party?
6th. May the defendant, as a common carrier, in consideration of receiving all the freight of such party, that the quantity shall not be diminished, and that terminal facilities as to loading, unloading, and delivering the freight shall be furnished different from regular or usual freight and with less expense and risk to the carrier, contract to carry such freight, with such convenience and benefits, for less than general tariff rates to the public?
7th. May the defendant, as common carrier, transport over its road large quantities
[ 336 ]
