De Winter & Co., $2,500 against John C. De Winter, and $2,500 against Edward M. Garrison, imposed. Sentence suspended for one year as against Harry D. Wheeler and George Miller. 25. United States v. Oliver Darby (southern district, California). Indictment for making false statements of weight to carrier in connection with interstate shipments of vegetables. May 28, 1913, indictment returned. May 20, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $500 imposed. 26. United States v. Henry A. Dix & Sons Co. (southern district, New York). Indictment for false billing. October 23, 1913, indictment returned. October 28, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $500 imposed. 27. United States v. Edwards & Rierdan Co. (southern dsitrict, New York). Information in two counts for misbilling shipments of artificial flowers as millinery goods, n. o. s. November 25, 1913, information filed; defendant pleaded guilty; fine of $200 imposed. 28. United States v. Eimer & Amend Co., Inc. (southern district, New York). Indictment for misdescription of contents of packages for shipment in interstate commerce. October 30, 1913, indictment returned. November 5, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $600 imposed. 29. United States v. Erie Railroad Co. (western district, New York). Indictment for failure to collect published demurrage charges on anthracite coal at Buffalo, N. Y. January 10, 1913, indictment returned. Demurrer filed to the indictment as a whole and overruled as to the first 50 counts, but sustained as to 1 count. September 12, 1913, plea of nolo contendere; fine of $20,000 imposed. 30. United States v. Flegle Brothers, E. C. Flegle and J. Flegle (district court, western Kentucky). Indictment for false billing of shipments of flour. March 13, 1912, indictment returned. April 21, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $250 imposed. 31. United States v. The Great Western Sugar Co. (district court, Colorado). Indictment for receiving concessions in violation of Elkins Act. November 23, 1912, indictment returned. May 20, 1913, plea of nolo contendere; fine of $1,000 imposed. 32. United States v. The Great Western Sugar Co. (district court, Colorado), Indictment for receiving concessions in violation of Elkins Act. November 23, 1912, indictment returned. May 20, 1913, nolle prosequi entered. 33. United States v. Leo V. Hahn and T. F. Ryan, trading as The Imperial Rice Co. (southern district, Texas). Indictment for securing concessions on shipments of rice by the device of substitution in transit. March 8, 1913, indictment returned. October 24, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $1,000 each imposed, or $2,000. 34. United States v. Frederick E. Harris (southern district, California). Indictment for obtaining and attempting to obtain payment for damages through false and fictitious claims. March 6, 1913, indictment returned. March 7, 1913, pleaded guilty; fine of $500 imposed. 35. United States v. Huntingdon & Broad Top Mountain Railroad & Coal Co. (district court, middle Pennsylvania). Indictment for suffering and permitting false entries to be made in railroad records. June 12, 1912, indictment returned. May 8, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $500 imposed. 36. United States v. Huntingdon & Broad Top Mountain Railroad & Coal Co. (district court, middle Pennsylvania). Indictment for violation of commodities clause. June 12, 1912, indictment returned. May 8, 1913, nolle prosique entered. 37. United States v. Huntingdon & Broad Top Mountain Railroad & Coal Co. (district court, middle Pennsylvania). Indictment for failure to observe de murrage tariff. June 12, 1912, indictment returned. May 8, 1913, nolle prosequi entered. 38. United States v. Jackson Brothers Lumber Co. and Ray West, clerk (eastern district, Virginia). Indictment for false billing (underweighing) shipments of lumber from Wahelville, Va., to Salisbury, Md. January 6, 1913, indictment returned. May 6, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $5,000 imposed against Jackson Bros. Lumber Co. and $250 against Ray West, or $5,250. 39. United States v. R. S. Jones (northern district, Iowa). Indictment for unlawful use of interstate pass. June 17, 1913, information filed; pleaded guilty; fine of $100 imposed and committed to Linn County jail until paid. 40. United States v. Illinois Central Railroad Co. (northern district, Illinois). Indictment for unlawfully issuing annual pass to banana messengers not entitled thereto. July 23, 1908, indictment returned. December 30, 1912, plea of guilty; fine of $1,000 imposed. 41. United States v. Louis Lefkowitz (southern district, New York). Information in two counts for misbilling leather goods n. o. s. as scrap leather. November 25, 1913, information filed; defendant pleaded guilty; fine of $500 imposed. 42. United States v. Louis Lipp Co. and Albert Weil (southern district, Ohio). Indictment for attempting to secure transportation at less than lawful rates by underweighing. April 11, 1913, indictment returned. May 3, 1913, plea of guilty entered and fine of $2,500 imposed on the Louis Lipp Co.; Albert Weil confined to Miami County jail for 60 days and pay costs. 43. United States v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. and T. E. Sands, general freight agent (district court, Minnesota). Indictment for granting and giving concessions in connection with transit shipments of flour. October 4, 1912, indictment returned. Nolle prosequi entered as to defendant T. E. Sands. April 1, 1913, plea of guilty entered by Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.; fine of $5,000 imposed. 44. United States v. The Michigan Central Railroad Co. (district of Indiana). Indictment for granting concessions to Chapin & Co. in connection with transit shipments of grain. May 18, 1912, indictment returned. May 21, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $2,500 imposed. 45. United States v. The Michigan Central Railroad Co. (district of Indiana). Indictment for false billing in connection with shipments of grain. May 18, 1912, indictment returned. May 21, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $2,500 imposed. 46. United States v. Ira Mendleson & Sons et al. (northern district, New York). Indictment for misrepresenting contents of packages delivered for transportation in interstate commerce. December 5, 1912, indictment returned. December 6, 1912, plea of guilty entered as to Ira Mendleson and fine of $5,000 imposed. Nolle prosequi entered as to other defendants. 47. United States v. Harvey C. Miller and Morris F. Miller (southern district, Georgia). Indictment for accepting rebates and concessions on shipments of grain from Philadelphia to Jacksonville. December 2, 1910, indictment returned. March 23, 1911, order sustaining demurrer and quashing indictment. March 24, 1911, appealed to Supreme Court. March 3, 1913, judgment of trial court reversed; verdict of guilty as to Harvey C. Miller; fine of $5,000 imposed. Verdict of not guilty as to Morris F. Miller. 48. United States v. The New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co. (western district, New York). Indictment for failure to collect lawfully published demurrage charges. January 10, 1913, indictment returned. March 3, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $8,000 imposed. 49. United States v. The New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co. (western district, New York). Indictment for failure to collect lawfully pub lished demurrage charges. January 10, 1913, indictment returned. 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $7,000 imposed. March 3, 50. United States v. The New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co. (western district, New York). Indictment for failure to collect lawfully published demurrage charges. January 10, 1913, indictment returned. March 4, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $15,000 imposed. 51. United States v. The New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. and Lehigh Valley Railroad Co. (northern district, Illinois). Indictment for granting rebates and concessions on shipments of fish and oysters from New York to Chicago. August 3, 1907, indictment returned. December 30, 1913, plea of guilty entered by Lehigh Valley Railroad Co. as to count 1 (55 counts); fine of $1,000 imposed. Nolle prosequi entered as to New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. 52. United States v. The New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. (northern district, Illinois). Indictment for granting rebates and concessions. August 3, 1907, indictment returned. December 30, 1912, plea of guilty; fine of $1,000 and costs imposed. 53. United States v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co. (first district, Massachusetts). Indictment for transporting milk at less than legal rate from a point in Connecticut to Boston. May 26, 1911, indictment returned. April 16, 1913, nolle prosequi entered. 54. United States v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co. (district court, Massachusetts). Indictment for granting concessions to Elm Milk Farm Co., and engaging in interstate commerce without tariff authority. January 7, 1913, indictments returned. April 26, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $5,000 imposed. 55. United States v. Russell-Miller Milling Co. (district court, Minnesota), Indictment for obtaining transportation at less than legal rate in connection with shipments of flour. October 4, 1912, indictment returned. April 1, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $5,000 imposed. 56. United States v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Co. (western district, Missouri). Indictment for granting concessions in connection with shipments of grain products. June 13, 1912, indictment returned. February 13, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $1,000 imposed. 57. United States v. William A. Scarborough and Charles F. Adams, trading as Scarborough Adams & Co. (southern district, New York). Indictment for presenting fraudulent claims against railroads and obtaining discrimination in connection with shipment of eggs. July 21, 1913, indictment returned. October 15, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $3,000 each imposed, or $6,000. 58. United States v. R. B. Shimer & Co., Harry C. Shimer, and Adolph Fortgang (southern district, New York). Indictment for presenting fraudulent claims against carriers and obtaining discrimination in connection with shipments of eggs. June 26, 1913, indictment returned. July 26, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $5,000 each imposed against Harry C. Shimer and Adolph Fortgang, or $10,000; nolle prosequi entered as to R. B. Shimer & Co. 59. United States v. R. B. Shimer & Co. and Harry C. Shimer (southern district, New York). Indictment for soliciting, receiving, and obtaining information concerning shipments consigned to other parties without the consent of shipper or consignee. May 16, 1913, indictment returned. July 24, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $1,000 imposed against Harry C. Shimer; nolle prosequi entered as to R. B. Shimer & Co. 60. United States v. George W. Sheldon and Henry Ackhoff (southern district, New York). Indictment for receiving rebates from the Lehigh Valley Railroad Co. November 16, 1911, indictment returned. February 19, 1913, verdict di rected for defendant. Immediately thereafter indictments were returned against the same parties for the same offense on other transactions. 61. United States v. South Georgia Railway Co. (southern district, Georgia). Indictment for transporting pipe from Adel, Ga., to Perry, Fla., at less than the published rates. June 5, 1911, indictment returned. December 13, 1912, plea of guilty; fine of $1,000 imposed. 62. United States v. Sterling Salt Co., James W. Brice, and William S. Doolittle (western district, New York). Indictment for false billing. January 8, 1912, indictment returned. July 16, 1913, verdict directed for defendant. 63. United States v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. (eastern district, Louisiana), Indictment for accepting less than legal rate from American Chicle Co., in connection with shipments of gum by changing bills of lading after shipment moved. March 29, 1912, indictment returned. April 8, 1913, jury disagreed. 64. United States v. H. S. Tavshanjian, Corporation (southern district, New York). Indictment for misbilling oriental rugs as carpets. November 13, 1913, indictment returned. November 14, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $500 imposed. 65. United States v. The United States Portland Cement Co. (district court, Colorado). Indictment for receiving concessions in violation of Elkins Act. November 23, 1912, indictment returned. May 20, 1913, plea of nolo contendere; fine of $1,000 imposed. 66. United States v. The United States Portland Cement Co. (district court, Colorado). Indictment for receiving rebates in violation of Elkins Act. November 23, 1912, indictment returned. October 11, 1913, nolle prosequi entered. 67. United States v. Vance-Eller-Corporation (western district, Virginia). Indictment for misbilling shipments of cabbages. February 19, 1913, indictment returned. June 18, 1913, plea of guilty; fine of $200 imposed. 68. United States v. The Victor-American Fuel Co. (district court, Colorado). Indictment for receiving concessions in violation of Elkins Act. November 23, 1912, indictment returned. October 11, 1913, nolle prosequi entered. 69. United States v. The Victor-American Fuel Co. (district court, Colorado). Indictment for receiving concessions in violation of Elkins Act. November 23, 1912, indictment returned. May 20, 1913, plea of nolo contendere; fine of $1,000 imposed. 70. United States v. The Victor-American Fuel Co. (district court, Colorado). Indictment for receiving rebates in violation of Elkins Act. November 23, 1912, indictment returned. October 11, 1913, nolle prosequi entered. 71. United States v. The Victor-American Fuel Co. (district court, Colorado). Indictment for receiving concessions in violation of Elkins Act. November 23, 1912, indictment returned. October 11, 1913, nolle prosequi entered. 72. United States v. David Yoder (district court, Colorado). Indictment for unlawfully using an interstate free-trip pass. June 3, 1913, information filed, defendant arraigned and pleaded guilty; fine of $100 and cost imposed. Execution. THE FOURTH SECTION. The most important action taken by the Commission in disposing of questions arising under the amended fourth section of the act was that in connection with the adjustment of rates from eastern territory to Pacific coast destinations and points intermediate, known as the Intermountain cases. Respecting these cases it was stated in our last annual report: The various phases of this section of the act, as last amended, and the interpretation and application, as well as the constitutionality thereof, were referred to in our last annual report to the Congress and were discussed at length before the Supreme Court last spring in the argument of the so-called Intermountain cases, which had been appealed from the Commerce Court, the latter having decided adversely to the validity of the orders of the Commission therein. After submission these cases were again assigned for argument and were recently reargued before the full court, the vacancy on the Supreme Bench having been filled since the first argument. It is expected that when they are decided the Commission will be aided by the decision in disposing of many other cases arising under this section. These cases are still under submission in the Supreme Court, the questions involved are fundamental, and until they are decided the larger and more important situations can not be disposed of, and many minor questions are necessarily delayed. Owing to the long-established basing-point method of making rates in the territory east of the Mississippi and south of the Ohio and Potomac Rivers, there is perhaps no more complicated and difficult situation in dealing with the questions arising under this section than is there presented. The petitions of the carriers operating in this territory recite with considerable detail the variety and character of competition and the difficulties attendant upon any scheme of rate adjustment in which distance is the controlling measure of the amount of the rate. Exhaustive hearings have been had with reference to this situation. Briefs have been filed, oral argument has been heard, and the matters involved are now before the Commission for determination. This section is bounded by the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers. It is pierced by numerous navigable streams. Before the advent of the railroads trading and commercial centers had been established at the ports and upon the rivers. The railroads sought the places where commerce was concentrated and necessarily entered into competition with the water carriers. This promptly led to their making rates to and from the water competitive points lower than from and to intermediate points at which there was no such competition. As railroads increased in numbers and mileage the same policy was pursued as between points at which there was active competition. of railroads and points which did not have such competition. Later the same policy was extended to market competition between the producing points in the West and the railroads serving them and the producing points in the East and the carriers therefrom. Thriving business communities and large commercial centers have grown up |