ferent States, such State rates, as well as the interstate rates with which they are combined, must be published at stations and filed with the Commission. Re Export Rates from Points East and West of Miss. River, 8 I. C. C. Rep. 185 (1899).

§ 1024. Making and filing.

Any one member of a joint combination may file copies of joint tariff for all the members. Re Filing Copies of Joint Tariff, 1 Int. Com. Rep. 76, 1 I. C. C. 225 (1887). And where one carrier files and properly publishes a joint tariff, he is not affected by the failure of other carriers properly to publish it. Virginia C. & I. Co. v. Louisville & N. R. R. (Va.), 37 S. E. 310 (1900). The tariff's need not be filed at a non-competing point. Chicago & N. W. Ry. v. Osborne, 52 Fed. 912 (1892).

A railway, stage route, and hotel association are not connecting carriers who can make and file a joint tariff. Wylie v. Northern Pac. R. R., 11 I. C. C. Rep. 145 (1905).

§ 1025. Whether routes must be published.

The Commission held that the published tariff should definitely name all the participating roads and indicate the various routes by which they undertake to afford transportation at designated rates. Theoretically, at least, it said, such a disclosure is necessary to a complete statutory joint tariff. And it was ordered that all carriers concerned should file an acceptance of the tariff. In re Form and Contents of Rate Schedules, 6 I. C. C. Rep. 267 (1894). But the Supreme Court of the United States finally held that the carrier publishing a through tariff might reserve the right to route the goods as it pleased beyond its own terminal. Southern Pacific Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 200 U. S. 536, 26 Sup. Ct. 330 (1906).

1026. Export rates.

Rates on export traffic must be published and filed in accordance with the provisions of this section. So-called through export rates, made by adding the ocean rate to the inland rail rates, are not analogous to railroad rates made by joint arrangement by railway carriers subject to the statute. in the sense that the total rate must be published and filed, and it is enough if the railroad carrier publishes and maintains its own rate to the seaboard; but if there is in fact such a joint arrangement that the rate is a joint rate under this section, then the entire through rate should be published, and not the inland division, which in that case might vary while the entire rate remained the same. Re Export & Domestic Rates on Grain, 8 Int. Com. Rep. 214 (1899); Kemble v. Boston & A. R. R., 8 Int. Com. Rep. 110 (1899); Re Publication & Filing of Tariffs, 10 Int. Com. Rep. 55 (1904).

TOPIC E-FORM OF SCHEDULES.

[See Chapter XVIII.]

§ 1027. Clearness of statement.

The publication of tariffs in convenient form, adequate in statement and properly authenticated, is essential to the enforcement of reasonable rates and impartial treatment. So far as possible the schedules should be simple in arrangement, ample in their disclosures, and free from ambiguity. Otherwise the opportunity is afforded for evading the law by discriminating practices and unjust exactions. Re Rate Schedules, 6 Int. Com. Rep. 267 (1894). The rate sheets must be readily intelligible to shippers and consignees. Johnston-Larimer D. G. Co. v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. R., 6 Int. Com. Rep. 568 (1896). They must be so simplified that persons of ordinary comprehension can understand them; and a notation in the tariff of one carrier, making reference to the tariff of some competing carrier, does not meet the requirement of the law that the rate charged shall be published and filed. H. B. Pitts & Son v. St. Louis & S. F. Ry., 10 Int. Com. Rep. 684 (1905). The mere designation, in a paper or circular, of the means of arriving at rates by calculation or reference to other papers, does not constitute the rate sheet required; and the reissuing by a carrier of a tariff of another line, and, by a supplement concurrently issued, limiting its use of the rates therein prescribed to such as are over a specified minimum, is reprehensible. Colorado Fuel & I. Co. v. Southern P. Co., 6 Int. Com. Rep. 488 (1895).

§ 1028. Necessary fullness of statement.

The schedules should be sufficiently full to show all that a shipper 'needs to know. Thus published tariffs specifying rates per standard crate on vegetables shipped from Florida to northern or northeastern points should state plainly the dimensions of the crate to which the rates apply. Re Alleged Unlawful Charges for Transportation of Vegetables, 8 Int. Com. Rep. 585 (1900). On the other hand, where the rate sheet states that the rates are subject to an official classification filed with the Commission which specifically states in detail the rates under a form of bill of lading called uniform bill of lading, limiting the common-law liability and stating that rates on property not shipped subject to the conditions of the uniform bill are a specified percentage higher than the reduced rates under the uniform bill, the schedule was held sufficiently to inform shippers that the rates given were for carriage with limited liability. Mannheim Ins. Co. v. Erie & W. T. Co. (Minn.), 75 N. W. 602 (1898).

TOPIC FENFORCEMENT OF THE SECTION.

[See Chapter XX.]

§ 1029. Invalidity of the varied rate.

Under this section a contract for the transportation of an interstate shipment at less than the published rate approved by the interstate commerce commission is invalid; and the carrier may collect the rate as published, regardless of that fixed by the bill of lading. Southern Ry. Co. v. Harrison (Ala.), 24 So. 552 (1898). For the same reason the violation of such a contract furnishes no grounds for redress under the Act. Red Cloud Mining Co. v. Southern P. Co., 9 I. C. C. Rep. 216 (1902). And a shipper who is compelled to pay charges in excess of those set forth on the published rate schedules, because of rules prescribed by the railroad company in circulars as to maximum and minimum carload weights, is entitled to recover the same back from the company. Suffern v. Indiana, D. & W. Ry., 7 Int. Com. Rep. 255 (1897). See the similar decisions as to invalidity of rates under other sections of the act, ante, § 947.

§ 1031. Provisions of the statute.

Creation of Interstate Commerce Commission.-That a Commission is hereby created and established to be known as the Interstate Commerce Commission, which shall be composed of five commissioners, who shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. The commissioners first appointed under this Act shall continue in office for the term of two, three, four, five, and six years, respectively, from the first day of January, anno Domini eighteen hundred and eighty-seven, the term of each to be designated by the President; but their successors shall be appointed for terms of six years, except that any person chosen to fill a vacancy shall be appointed only for the unexpired time of the commissioner

whom he shall succeed. Any commissioner may be removed by the President for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. Not more than three of the commissioners shall be appointed from the same political party. No person in the employ of or holding any official relation to any common carrier subject to the provisions of this Act, or owning stock or bonds. thereof, or who is in any manner pecuniarily interested therein, shall enter upon the duties of or hold such office. Said commissioners shall not engage in any other business, vocation, or employment. No vacancy in the Commission shall impair the right of the remaining commissioners to exercise all the powers of the Commission. [Interstate Commerce Act, section 11.]

Authority of the Commission. That the Commission hereby created shall have authority to inquire into the management of the business of all common carriers subject to the provisions of this Act, and shall keep itself informed as to the manner and method in which the same is conducted, and shall have the right to obtain from such common carriers full and complete information necessary to enable the Commission to perform the duties and carry out the objects for which it was created; and the Commission is hereby authorized and required to execute and enforce the provisions of this Act. [Interstate Commerce Act, section 12.]

Salaries and expenses.-That each commissioner shall receive an annual salary of seven thousand five hundred dollars, payable in the same manner as the judges of the courts of the United States.

The Commission shall appoint a secretary, who shall receive an annual salary of three thousand five hundred dollars, payable in like manner. The Commission shall have authority to employ and fix the compensation of such other employees as it may find necessary to the proper performance of its duties.

Until otherwise provided by law, the Commission may hire suitable, offices for its use, and shall have authority to procure all necessary office supplies.