pany declined to publish the rate desired by the complainants. The Commission advised complainants of the position of the railroad company and informed them that the desired rate could not be ordered put in, unless after a formal hearing the circumstances warranted the Commission in so doing, and requested the complainants to advise it if they desired a hearing. No further response. PENFIELD HOSIERY MILLS, VS. GEORGIA RAILROAD COMPANY. FILE NO. 8510. Routing interstate shipments. Complainants complained that the Georgia Railroad failed to carry out routing instructions given it by them, covering movements from their mill at Penfield, Ga., to certain points in Louisiana; and that, in consequence, delays in the delivery of such shipments oftentimes occurred. The matter was taken up with the defendant railroad company and prompt delivery of the shipment, then undelivered, was accomplished. The following letter of the Commission, dated February 9, 1909, will explain the rights of shippers in regard to routing interstate shipments: "Referring again to the matter of the Georgia Railroad failing to observe routing specified by you on shipments to points in Louisiana, I beg to say that as we advised you in reply to your first communication upon this subject, this Commission is entirely without jurisdiction in cases of this kind, and such shipments are subject alone to control by the Interstate Commerce Commission. The Interstate Commerce Commission has ruled that shippers have the right to designate the delivering carrier, that is the line over which the shipment shall be delivered at destination. However, there is no regulation of the Interstate Commerce Commission, so far as we are advised, which authorizes shippers to designate the intermediate carriers, or any carriers, except the originating and delivering lines. As we have heretofore advised you, shippers, however, are entitled to the rate published by the most practicable route, or the lowest rate in effect. In other words, your rights in the premises are as follows: The Georgia Railroad and its connections, if a different routing from that desired by you is used, must apply the lowest rate between the points of shipment and cause delivery of shipment at destination over whatever line you specify. As to intermediate carriers, however, I do not find that you are authorized under the Interstate Commerce regulations to specify same." Complaint complained that the defendant companies failed to operate a sufficient number of passenger trains over their lines, entering Cartersville, Ga., and that such trains as were operated failed to make convenient connections at said point. The complaint was taken up by the Commission with the de fendant railway companies and the Seaboard Air Line Railway made a change in its schedule, but not such as complainant contended was necessary to meet the reasonable demands of the traveling public. The Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company contended that the territory traversed by its line, entering Cartersville, Ga., was so thinly populated that it could not afford additional train service. No disposition yet made of the complaint. CLARKSVILLE RAILWAY COMPANY. FILE NO. 8512. Petition for authority to issue certifi- After due notice and formal hearing, the Commission, on December 17, 1908, authorized the petitioning company to issue its capital stock in the amount of $10,000.00. These matters taken up by the Commission with the Southern Express Company and Western Union Telegraph Company, and arrangements were made for the establishment of both express and telegraphic service, at Meadows, Ga. The Commission on December 17th, received a protest from the citizens of Eatonton, Ga., protesting against proposed change in passenger train schedules serving that city, to take effect on December 20th. The Commission promptly telegraphed the general manager of the defendant railway company requesting that no change be made in its schedules until full investigation could be made by the Commission. The railway company replied, by wire, that the change had been duly advertised and that to change the plans at that time would result in great confusion, as it would be impossible to work up and print a new time table. The Commission, thereupon, began an immediate investigation and found that the change proposed had first been taken up with the people of Eatonton, Ga., and the Commission was advised by 46 citizens of Eatonton prior to the effective date of said change that same had had approval. The new schedule was put in, in the expectation that it would serve a larger number of people than the old schedule. The Commission did not interfere with the change because of the indorsement of the same by the people most immediately concerned, and because it was to be tried as an experiment, the railway company stating that if the change did not prove to be more satisfactory than the old schedule, it would be perfectly willing to make any necessary change to accomplish that end. On the first trip of the train operated on the new schedule, the Macon newspapers announced that 80 passengers were on board. No further complaint has been received as to the change. FILE NO. 8515. DIXIE COTTON COMPANY, vs. CENTRAL OF GEORGIA RAILWAY CO. Alleged increase in rates on cotton from Davisboro to Savannah, Ga. Filed in office December 18, 1908. Complainants alleged that the Central of Georgia Railway Company had, without notice, increased the rate on cotton from Davisboro, Ga., to Savannah, Ga. Investigation disclosed the fact that the defendant railway company published rates on cotton from Davisboro and other stations in the same territory, to Savannah, which rates included the cost of compression, with a note to the effect that if compression was not required, the rates applicable would be the published rates, less the compression fee; and when the order of the Commission went into effect increasing rates for compressing cotton, the rates on cotton from the points named to Savannah, where compression was desired, were naturally increased to the extent of the increase in compression fee ordered by the Commission. Claimants so notified and no further complaint received. This matter was taken up by the Commission with the defendant company and on December 11th, said company forwarded the complainant the amount that he was required to pay as hack-fare in endeavoring to secure the delivery of his baggage and explanation as to cause of delay in delivery of complainant's baggage. This claim was filed account of error of the defendant railway company in forwarding shipment intended for claimant at Uptonville, Ga., but through error forwarded to Thomaston, Ga. Matter taken up by the Commission with the Central of Georgia Railway Company and delivery of shipment accomplished and correct rate applied. This claim was made account alleged overcharge on shipment of pears from Atlantic Coast Line local stations to New York and Philadelphia. Upon investigation, the Commission found that the correct published rates were applied and no overcharge collected, and claimant so advised. C. H. REDDING, vs. FILE NO. 8523. Complaint as to rates and service. WAYCROSS ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER Filed in office December 21, 1908. COMPANY. Complainant complained that the defendant company refused to install in his place of business, a meter, and that he was required to pay, in advance, an excessive arbitrary charge for current, and that the defendant company failed to furnish good service. The Commission, after considerable correspondence, finding it impracticable to bring about a satisfactory disposition of this complaint, after that fashion, appointed Commissioners Stevens and Hillyer as a committee to visit Waycross, Ga., and make a personal investigation of the matters complained of. Commis sioner Hillyer, after visiting Waycross, recommended that the Commission employ an electrical expert and send him to Waycross for the purpose of securing an expert report as to the rates, rules and service of the defendant com. pany. The expert was secured and upon consideration of his report, the Commission, on April 1st, ordered the defendant company to install a meter in complainant's place of business within ten days from that date, and allowed said defendant company to require weekly payments of all bills due by complainant, and also required a bond in the sum of $50.00 for the prompt payment of bills. It was further ordered that the defendant company show cause, if any it could, before the Commission on April 15, 1909, why its scale of rates, then in effect at Waycross, Ga., should not be reduced and why reforms and improvements recommended by the electrical expert should not be made. A fuller report of this case appears elsewhere in this report, reference to which will be found in the Subject Index, under Waycross Electric Light and Power Company. This was a complaint that the Drake Telephone Company refused to connect the complainant with the offices of the Postal Telegraph and the Western Union Telegraph Company. The matter was handled with the company complained against and full response made by said company, copy of said response. being sent to the complainant with the advice that if the explanation was not satisfactory, and complainant desired it, the Commission would order a formal hearing in the matter, at which all parties at interest could be present and submit such facts as they desired the Commission to consider. No further response. FILE NO. 8525. ROME RAILWAY & LIGHT Co. Petition for authority to issue bonds. After due notice and formal hearing, the Commission, on January 21, 1909, granted the Rome Railway & Light Company authority to issue refunding and consolidated bonds in the sum of $750,000.00. FILE NO. 8526. B. W. STONE, vs. ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD. Inability to secure rate quotations. Mr. Stone advised the Commission that he had been endeavoring to get from the defendant company information as to the rates on fruit trees from Thomasville, Ga., to Louisiana and Mississippi points, but without avail. Matter taken |