INTERSTATE COMM. COMM. ?. CHICAGO G. W. RY. Ill 2?9 U.S. St?te?nant of tiao and packing-house products between the same points. There can be, and is, no complaint as to such traffic. The local rates from the Missouri River and St. Paul, and from 150 miles east, to Chicago, are as shown in above Schedule. These rates gradually decrease until the Mississippi River is reached, and the average Iowa rate is 21 eents. The great weight of evi- dence indicates that these rates are at least reasonably low. "Second. That the co?t of carrying live stock is greater than that of carrying dressed meats and packing-house prod- ucts. "Third. That the value of the service of carriage is greater to the packers, because of the higher price of a car of ? meats or packing-house products. Dressed meats and packing- house products are in value worth nearly twic? as much as llve stock. This factor is important, in ordinary cases, how- ever, in part, because of the greater risk of carriage of high- priced commodities. In these cases, as to the particular commodities in question, the evidence shows that the defend- ant railroad companies pay out a much larger amount in damages for losses arising from the carriage of live stock tha? they do for losses arising from the carriage of dressed meats and packing-house products, in proportion to the value of the products carried, and more in damages per car regardless of the value. This makes the risk of carriage greater for live stock. The result is that the value of the service is not such an im- portant factor in this kind of a case as it is considered to be in ordinary cases. "Fourth. That the rates in question given to the packers at Missouri River and St. Paul were the result of competition. The product of the packers at these points was large in quan- tity, was certain and continuous in amount, was in the hands of ?; few people, and for years before the Federal injunction of March, 1902, had been competed for so strenuously by the railroads reaching and passing through these points, as to cause the cutting of rates and the giving of secret rebates in large amounts. Four of the defendant companies, the Chicago,
�
