United States v. Illinois Terminal R. Co.

CourtUnited States District Courts. 7th Circuit. Southern District of Illinois
Citation168 F. 546
Decision Date23 February 1909
PartiesUNITED STATES v. ILLINOIS TERMINAL R. CO.

168 F. 546

UNITED STATES
v.
ILLINOIS TERMINAL R. CO.

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois.

February 23, 1909


Syllabus by the court

Effective railroad regulation must begin with publicity of rates. The penalty for failure on the part of any carrier subject to the act to regulate commerce (Act Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104, 24 Stat. 379 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3154)) to publish and file its rates is as severe as the penalty for failure to strictly observe such rates after filing.

The line of the defendant railway is entirely within the state of Illinois. The defendant is, however, engaged in the transportation of property moving wholly by railroad from one state to another state. It is, therefore, as much subject to the act to regulate commerce (Act Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104, 24 Stat. 379 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3154)) as it would be if it owned and operated a railway connecting the points in different states between which moved the commodities mentioned in the indictment.

By the amendment of June 29, 1906, c. 3591, 34 Stat. 584 (U.S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907, p. 892), transportation by rail of property moving in interstate commerce by a carrier which has not filed its rates for such service is a misdemeanor.

William A. Northcott, U.S. Atty., Henry A. Converse and Joseph H. Story, Asst. U.S. Attys., and John H. Marble, Atty. Interstate Commerce Commission.

Ashcraft & Ashcraft, and Edwin M. Ashcraft, Jr., for defendant.

HUMPHREY, District Judge.

The defendant here was indicted under section 6 of the act to regulate commerce (Act Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104, 24 Stat. 380 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3156)), as amended by the Hepburn act of June 29, 1906, c. 3591, 34 Stat. 584 (U.S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907, p. 895), for transporting by rail certain car loads of glass bottles, which were moving in interstate commerce, without having first filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission its schedules of rates and charges applicable to such transportation.

The defendant owns and operates a line of railway entirely within the state of Illinois, extending from the east bank of the Mississippi river, at Alton, Ill., in an easterly and southeasterly direction for a distance of about 16 miles. This railway line intercepts and makes [168 F. 547] junction with a number of trunk railway lines which extend eastwardly to points in other states than Illinois.

The indictment is in six counts. Each count recites the carriage by the defendant railway of a car load of glass bottles moving from a point in the state of Indiana to destination at Alton, Ill. Each car load so moving was received by the defendant at the junction point of its railway with one of the railways extending to the eastward, as above recited, and was by the defendant transported from such junction in the state of Illinois to Alton, Ill., where it was delivered to the consignee. The indictment recites that such transportation was so furnished without defendant having filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission any rate or charge whatever applicable to such transportation, or any evidence of the concurrence by the defendant in any rate or charge for such transportation theretofore filed by any of its connecting carriers.

The defendant by a plea of guilty has admitted all the material facts alleged in the indictment. The court, therefore, has the duty of imposing the penalty for the offenses set forth.

The original Cullom act for the regulation of interstate commerce, approved February 4, 1887, provided:

'That every common carrier subject to the provisions of this act shall print and keep for public inspection schedules showing the rates, fares and charges for the transportation of passengers and property which any such common carrier has established, and which are in force at the time upon its railroad as defined by the first section of the act.'

The...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • Mississippi Cent R. Co. v. Knight, 24615
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • March 30, 1925
    ...Chicago, 192 F. 330; St. Joseph Stockyards Co. v. United States, 110 C. C. A. 432, 187 F. 104; United States v. Illinois Terminal R. Co., 168 F. 546; Belt R. Co. of Chicago v. United States, 93 C. C. A. 666, 168 F. 542, 22 L. R. A. (N. S.) 582; United States v. Standard Oil Co. of Indiana, ......
  • Southern Railway Company v. Railroad Commission of Indiana, 22,140
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • January 3, 1913
    ...93 C. C. A. 393; Elgin, etc., R. Co. v. United States (1909), 168 F. 1, 93 C. C. A. 393; United States v. Illinois Terminal R. Co. (1909), 168 F. 546; Southern R. Co. v. United States (1911), 164 F. 347, 222 U.S. 20, 32 S.Ct. 2, 56 L.Ed. 72; Second Employers' Liability Cases (1912), 223 U.S......
  • Service v. Sumpter Valley Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • February 26, 1918
    ...car [88 Or. 573] equipment. The case is not an authority on matters involved in the one at bar. In U.S. v. Ill. Terminal Co. (D. C.) 168 F. 546, decided in 1909, there was an indictment for transporting interstate commerce without filing its schedule of rates with the Interstate Commerce Co......
  • ALTON & SRR v. United States, No. 2502-L.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Northern District of California
    • February 9, 1931
    ...States, 212 U. S. 563, 29 S. Ct. 689, 53 L. Ed. 653; United States v. Hanley (D. C.) 71 F. 672; United States v. Ill. Term. R. Co. (D. C.) 168 F. 546; Standard Oil Co. of N. Y. v. United States (C. C. A.) 179 F. 614; Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Dickerson (C. C. A.) 191 F. 705; Cleveland, C. C......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • Mississippi Cent R. Co. v. Knight, 24615
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • March 30, 1925
    ...Chicago, 192 F. 330; St. Joseph Stockyards Co. v. United States, 110 C. C. A. 432, 187 F. 104; United States v. Illinois Terminal R. Co., 168 F. 546; Belt R. Co. of Chicago v. United States, 93 C. C. A. 666, 168 F. 542, 22 L. R. A. (N. S.) 582; United States v. Standard Oil Co. of Indiana, ......
  • Southern Railway Company v. Railroad Commission of Indiana, 22,140
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • January 3, 1913
    ...93 C. C. A. 393; Elgin, etc., R. Co. v. United States (1909), 168 F. 1, 93 C. C. A. 393; United States v. Illinois Terminal R. Co. (1909), 168 F. 546; Southern R. Co. v. United States (1911), 164 F. 347, 222 U.S. 20, 32 S.Ct. 2, 56 L.Ed. 72; Second Employers' Liability Cases (1912), 223 U.S......
  • Service v. Sumpter Valley Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • February 26, 1918
    ...car [88 Or. 573] equipment. The case is not an authority on matters involved in the one at bar. In U.S. v. Ill. Terminal Co. (D. C.) 168 F. 546, decided in 1909, there was an indictment for transporting interstate commerce without filing its schedule of rates with the Interstate Commerce Co......
  • ALTON & SRR v. United States, No. 2502-L.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Northern District of California
    • February 9, 1931
    ...States, 212 U. S. 563, 29 S. Ct. 689, 53 L. Ed. 653; United States v. Hanley (D. C.) 71 F. 672; United States v. Ill. Term. R. Co. (D. C.) 168 F. 546; Standard Oil Co. of N. Y. v. United States (C. C. A.) 179 F. 614; Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Dickerson (C. C. A.) 191 F. 705; Cleveland, C. C......
  • 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