Ex parte Koehler

Decision Date04 April 1887
Citation30 F. 867
PartiesEx parte KOEHLER, Receiver, etc.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Oregon

Syllabus by the Court

The transportation of property from one state to another is interstate commerce, whether the carriers engaged in moving it, or the vehicles on which it is borne, cross the line of the state or not.

This act does not include or apply to all carriers engaged in interstate commerce, but only such as use a railway, or a railway and water-craft, 'under common control management, or arrangement for a continuous carriage or shipment' of property from one state to another; nor does it apply to the carriage of property by rail wholly within the state, although shipped from or destined to a place without the state, so that such place is not in a foreign country.

The Oregon Railway & Navigation Company carriers certain kinds of goods on its steamers forth and back between Portland and San Francisco at special and reduced rates. The Oregon &amp California Railway, under the management of the petitioner carries the same kinds of goods forth and back between Portland and Ashland, and way-stations in Oregon, at special and reduced rates. The Oregon Pacific Railway Company carries the same kind of goods forth and back between certain points on the line of the Oregon & California road and San Francisco via its railway from Albany to Yaquina bay, and thence by steamer, at reduced rates, and thereby competes with the Oregon & California Railway and the Oregon Railway &amp Navigation Company for business between said points and San Francisco. The Oregon Railway & Navigation Company and the receiver of the Oregon & California Railway act independently, though concurrently, in making these reduced rates, but no through bill of landing or freight receipt is given, nor is either interested in or liable for the carriage of the goods beyond its own line of transportation. Held, that the Oregon & California road and the steamers of the Oregon Railway & Navigation Company in the carriage of the goods in question are not 'used under any common control, management, or arrangement for a continuous carriage or shipment' thereof to and from San Francisco, within the intent and meaning of the act, and that the carriage and handling of said goods, so far as the receiver is concerned, is performed wholly within the state, and therefore specially exempted by the terms of the act from its operation, provided the same are not directly shipped to or from a foreign country.

John W. Whalley, for petitioner.

DEADY J.

The road of the Oregon & California Railway Company is 400 miles in length, and lies wholly within this state, between Portland and Ashland, near the southern boundary thereof. It is operated at present by a receiver of this court heretofore appointed on the application of the plaintiff, in the pending suit of Harrison v. Oregon & C. Ry. Co., to enforce the lien of a mortgage thereon. On March 30, 1887, the receiver, Mr. Richard Koehler, filed a petition in this court, asking for instruction whether the Oregon & California road is within the purview of the interstate commerce act lately passed by congress, when engaged in carrying freight destined to or coming from a point or place without the state, under the circumstances herein stated.

It appears from the petition that the receiver, acting under the instruction of this court heretofore given, (Ex parte Koehler, 25 F. 73,) has been and now is carrying wheat and other agricultural products of the state, destined to San Francisco, from certain points along the line of the Oregon &amp California road where there is competition with the Oregon Pacific Railway Company, at special and lower rates than if destined for Portland only; that such products are taken from Portland to San Francisco, at a special rate, on the steamers of the Oregon Railway & Navigation Company, that said steamers also carry goods at special rates on their return trips for San Francisco to Portland, destined to the points aforesaid along the line of the Oregon & California road, consisting of the products of California, China, the Hawaiian islands, and the Central and South American states, which goods are carried from Portland, on the Oregon & California road, to the places of their destination at special and lower rates than those charged for goods shipped from Portland for other and non-competing points on said road; that the Oregon Pacific Railway Company is operating a line of railway from Albany to Yaquina by a, Oregon, in conjunction with a line of steamers between the latter place and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • United States v. Colorado & N.W.R. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • November 25, 1907
    ...(U.S. v. Geddes, 65 C.C.A. 320, 131 F. 452; Interstate Commerce Commission v. Bellaire, Z. & C. Ry. Co. (C.C.) 77 F. 942; Ex parte Koehler (C.C.) 30 F. 867; U.S. Chicago, K. & S.R. Co. (C.C.) 81 F. 783) and it is certain that it is thus limited in its effect since the amendatory act of June......
  • State v. J.W. Kelly & Co.
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • November 19, 1910
    ... ... v. Crain, 209 U.S. 229, 28 S.Ct ... 475, 52 L.Ed. 754; The Daniel Ball v. United States, ... 10 Wall. 557, 566, 19 L.Ed. 999; Ex parte Koehler (C. C.) 30 ... F. 867, 869; In re Greene (C. C.) 52 F. 113; ... Houston Direct Navigation Co. v. Insurance Co. of North ... America, 89 ... ...
  • United States v. Mississippi Valley Barge Line Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • December 27, 1960
    ...common arrangement "is not to be inferred from circumstances which are entirely consistent with" this independence. See also Ex parte Koehler, C.C.D.Or., 30 F. 867, and Mutual Transit Co. v. United States, supra, at page 667 of 178 F. We are not unmindful here that there was no joint rail-w......
  • Lusk v. Atkinson
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 15, 1916
    ...when such carriage or handling is performed wholly within the State. Interstate Commerce Comm. v. Belaire Railroad Co., 77 F. 942; Ex parte Koehler, 30 F. 867; Exchange v. Railroad, 2 I. C. C. 142; Gallogy & Firestone v. Railroad, 11 I. C. C. 1; Act of Congress to Regulate Commerce, sec. 1.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT