Lapas attēli

(Cox) was required to pay $1.32, the maximum lawful rate being 34 cents.

On same day the matter was referred to the company, and January 10th it replied that "the overcharge was occasioned by a clerical error," offered to refund the overcharge, and January 14th, after receiving the freight receipt, the company wrote through Mr. N. S. Pennington, Traffic Manager, "I have to day made a voucher in favor of Mr. S. M. Cox, for overcharge on two boxes of oranges from Hawthorne to Madison, refunding him all in excess of 34 cents," which, as Mr. Cox wrote the Commission, February 7th had been done.




R. R.

Overcharge on Household

January 16th, 1891, Mr. Stern complains that on one box of household goods, weighing 215 pounds, shipped from Macon, Georgia, via the Georgia Southern & Florida R. R., and transferred to the F. C. & P. R. R., consigned to Tampa, he was required to pay $11.35 on 360 pounds. No bill of lading was issued, nor any through rate quoted. Mr. Stern referred the matter to the company, and it replied under date of January 12th as follows:

66 * * * The only way in which you can obtain this property is by paying this amount; send the expense bill to me and I will investigate and see if there has been an overcharge, and will adjust it accordingly. The agent at Tampa has no authority to deliver you the box without payment of the freight and charges as billed. The better way to proceed in the matter would be to act as suggested above, and thus avoid additional correspondence and complication."

Mr. Stern adds:

"I have been in business in the State of Florida for several years and had transactions with several railroads, the J., T. & K. W., South Florida, also the Florida Southern, and they always rectify overcharges before freight bills are paid. It appears to me that the F. C. & P. R. R. is an exception ;" and asks if the Commission has authority in such matters.

The Commission answered January 19th that "The Commission has never held that a road had a right to collect more than the schedule rates before delivering goods, and they do not believe they have the right to demand and collect arbi trary charges, irrespective of amount.

At the same time this shipment, being from a point in Georgia to a point in Florida, is interstate, and this Commission can exercise no authority with respect to it. This ended the correspondence.



Demanding Freight on


R. R. Co.

"BUSHNELL, FLA., February 6th, 1891. Honorable Board of Railroad Commissioners, Tallahassee, Fla.:

GENTS-I have some fertilizers here in depot and is two sacks short, so reported by carrier, and agent refuses to give up the goods unless I pay freight on all. Please let me know if that is your ruling.

I also have this complaint to make. I ordered goods from Mobile, Ala., via Tampa, in care of the Florida Central & Peninsular and have bill lading showing that it was shipped that way, the goods were delivered to the Florida Central & Peninsular at Plant City which makes the rate of freight more than should be if it had been delivered at Tampa as per bill lading directs.

You will please advise me and you will greatly oblige, yours respectfully, N. L. CLARKE. His letter was ackowledged by the Commission and the matter of shortage in fertilizers, etc, was referred to the company as follows:


TALLAHASSEE, February 9, 1891.

Mr. N. S. Pennington, Traffic Manager, Jacksonville, Fla. : DEAR SIR-There is on file in the office of the Commission a complaint made by Mr. N. L. Clarke, of Bushnell, Fla., in whieh he states that a shipment of fertilizers to him at Bushnell is reported to be four sacks short, but that the agent refuses to deliver to him the goods until he shall have paid the freight on both what is short, and what is in the depot.

The latter part of Section 21, Chapter 3862, Laws of Florida, reads as follows: "Provided the consignee shall pay the freight charges on goods, merchandise and other freights received, and shall not be compelled to pay for goods, merchandise and other freights not received."

You will see that to require payment on the goods not re

ceived, before delivering what has been received, is a violation of the law. It is also a violation of Freight Rule 23 of the Commission.

Please give this matter your attention and see that Mr. Clark's freight is delivered to him, upon his payment of the freight on what is delivered, not requiring him to pay on what has not been received, and let the Commission hear from you. By order of the Board.



To which the Company replied, February 20, 1891: "Referring to your letter of the 9, relative to shipments of fertilizer made to Mr. N. L. Clarke, Bushnell, Fla., on which shipment there were four sacks short, I have to say that the missing freight has been found and promptly delivered to Mr. Clarke.

"Our agent has been instructed in accordance with your letter above referred to.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. Clarke was furnished with a copy of this reply and answered as follows:

BUSHNELL, FLA., February 26th, 1891. "GENTS-Yours of 24th is at hand, and in answer will say that the R. R. has made it all O. K. I wrote you to know if it was your ruling * * that I should pay freight on the shortage; also, to which you answered previous. Many thanks. "Yours respectfully,


In regard to the shipment from Mobile referred to in Mr. C's letter, he was informed by the Commission that if he would furnish them with the B-L and freight receipt, they would investigate the matter. replied.





To this Mr. Clarke has not

Overcharge on Peanuts

By letter dated February 9, 1891, Messrs. Parramore & Co. complained that the company had collected and received from them on a shipment of peanuts from Reddick, a station on the Florida Southern Ry. to Madison, weighing 1241 lbs, the sum

of $10.42, and claimed that it was an exorbitant charge. Upon referring the matter to the company, it replied as follows:

66 February 23d, 1891.

"John G. Ward, Esq., Secretary Railroad Commission, Tallahassee, Fla.

“DEAR SIR-Referring to your favor of the 11th inst, relative to complaint of Mess. W. L Parramore & Co., I have to say there is an overcharge of $1.99 in our proportion charged on the shipment of peanuts mentioned, which amount we will be very glad to refund, if the papers are sent to us for ajust


"In this connection I wish to say that Messrs. Parramore & Co. did not present any claim to us, or we would have been very glad to have adjusted it at once for them, without taking up your time as well as my own in the additional correspondence. It appears this shipment of peanuts was made from Reddick, Fla., and forwarded by the Florida Southern Railway to Gainesville, thence by the Savannah, Florida & Western Railway to Live Oak, from which point the Florida, Central & Peninsular Railroal hauled it to Madison. If you will kindly forward me all the papers, I wil endeaver to adjust the matter with our connections and satisfy the claimants.

"Yours truly,

"N. S. PENNINGTON, Traffic Manager."

The expense bill or freight receipt was sent to the Company, and the following letter to Messrs. W. L. Parramore & Co:


TALLAHASSEE, FLA., February 25, 1891.

Messrs. W. L. Parramore & Co., Madison, Fla.:


GENTLEMEN-A letter received from the Traffic Manager of the Florida Central & Peninsular Railroad this morning, in answer to a letter of the Commission to him regarding your complaint as to overcharge on a shipment of peanuts, admits that there was an overcharge of $1.99, and says that the amount will be refunded to you if the papers in the case are sent to him.

The expense bill filed by you with your complaint will be forwarded to him by this mail, and the Commission request

that as soon as the matter is adjusted, that you will advise them, so the case can be closed on their docket.

By order of the Board.



To this no reply has been received at the date of closing this report. (March 1st, 1891.)

In the matter of overcharges on freights by the Florida Central & Peninsular Railroad Co., and the Savannah, Florida & Western Railway Co., on freights interchanged between their railroads in Florida.

From complaints which have been made to the Commission, and from an examination of the agents and officers of the Florida Central & Peninsular Railroad Co., and the Savannah Florida & Western Railway Co. at Live Oak, early in 1890, the following facts were disclosed to-wit:

That on freights delivered by either road to the other, consigned to points within this State, a much higher rate was exacted than the schedules of freight rates as revised and adopted by the Commission for the use of said roads, allowed.

That the Florida Central & Peninsular Railroad Co. had November 1st, 1889, issued a schedule of freight rates called Tariff L purporting to apply to "interstate business," between Live Oak and Lake City Fla., to all stations on the western division, except the termini, Jacksonville and River Junction, with instructions to the agents at Live Oak and Lake City, to apply them to all business, whether state or interstate, coming from the Savannah, Florida & Western Railway, which prescribed higher rates than said Commission rates. To illustrate: From Live Oak to Tallahassee, the Tariff L rates and the Commission rates, (a 90 mile haul) were as follows:

123456 A B C D E F H K Tariff L.. 81 74 63 54 50 45 34 28 28 21 49 39 55 16 Commission Rates.... 62|53|49|38|36|31|28|20|20|15|35|31|45|12


L M O $2 10 $2 20 $28 00 $24 00 1 70 1 80 20 00 13 00

That the Savannah, Florida and Western Rallway had, November 5, 1889, issued a similar schedule of freight rates 66 on interstate business " to be used on business delivered to it. from the Florida Central and Peninsular Railroad, at Live Oak, Lake City, Gainesville, Monticello or Chattahoochee, with the same instructions to agents, which, for a like haul of 90 miles, were as follows:

1 2 3 4 5 6 AB C Railroad Rates. 88 78 65 58 52 47 36 29 30 Commission Rates. 62 55 48 40 31 25 25 18 11

22 51 41 57 16 82 16 82 22 $30 00 $19 00
11 31 23 40 10 1 20 1 70 17 00 14 00


« iepriekšējāTurpināt »