A-43431, A-46365, A-57043, MARCH 22, 1935, 14 COMP. GEN. 711

A-43431,A-46365,A-57043: Mar 22, 1935

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

TRANSPORTATION - RATES - "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" WHERE A SHIPMENT IS COMPOSED OF ARTICLES WHICH. WHERE A GIVEN SHIPMENT IF SO INCREASED IN WEIGHT WOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO THE "EMIGRANT OVABLES" RATING THE CHARGE UNDER THAT RATING IS NOT APPLICABLE AS THE MEASURE OF THE MAXIMUM CHARGE FOR THE SHIPMENT IN THE ABSENCE OF TARIFF PROVISION TO THAT EFFECT. - THERE HAVE COME TO MY ATTENTION YOUR THREE DECISIONS OF JULY 18. YOUR FURTHER CONSIDERATION THEREOF IS REQUESTED UNDER THE PROVISION OF THE ACT OF JULY 31. THE AMOUNT PAYABLE TO THE CARRIER UNDER THE METHOD OF COMPUTATION PRESCRIBED IN THE DECISION WOULD HAVE BEEN $237.00 BASED ON THE EMIGRANT MOVABLES RATING OF 20. IT APPEARS THERE WAS ACTUALLY ALLOWED ON THE SHIPMENT IN QUESTION $159.28 MORE THAN IT WOULD HAVE COST TO TRANSPORT TWICE THE QUANTITY OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND SIX TIMES THE NUMBER OF HORSES WITH ONE ATTENDANT.

A-43431, A-46365, A-57043, MARCH 22, 1935, 14 COMP. GEN. 711

TRANSPORTATION - RATES - "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" WHERE A SHIPMENT IS COMPOSED OF ARTICLES WHICH, IF INCREASED IN WEIGHT IN THE SAME PROPORTION TO A TOTAL WEIGHT EQUIVALENT TO THE MINIMUM CARLOAD WEIGHT PRESCRIBED FOR "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" RATING, WOULD BE ENTITLED TO THAT RATING, THE PROVISIONS OF CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION RULE 15 (SECTION 1) REQUIRE THAT THE CARLOAD CHARGE FOR "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" SHALL BE THE MAXIMUM CHARGE FOR THE SHIPMENT. WHERE A GIVEN SHIPMENT IF SO INCREASED IN WEIGHT WOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO THE "EMIGRANT OVABLES" RATING THE CHARGE UNDER THAT RATING IS NOT APPLICABLE AS THE MEASURE OF THE MAXIMUM CHARGE FOR THE SHIPMENT IN THE ABSENCE OF TARIFF PROVISION TO THAT EFFECT, THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE APPLICABLE TARIFFS BEING CONTROLLING UNLESS AND UNTIL DECLARED INEFFECTIVE BY THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION OR THE COURTS IN A PROPER PROCEEDING.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO THE SECRETARY OF WAR, MARCH 22, 1935:

THERE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 11, 1934 (G 4/24499- 83), READING---

THERE HAVE COME TO MY ATTENTION YOUR THREE DECISIONS OF JULY 18, 1932, A- 43431, DECEMBER 22, 1932, A-46365, AND AUGUST 7, 1934 (14 COMP. GEN. 100) WHEREIN YOU CONSIDERED THE APPLICATION OF CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 6, SUPPLEMENT 47, PAGE 40, ITEM 3, NOTE 2, EFFECTIVE AS OF APRIL 7, 1932. THESE DECISIONS RELATE TO PAYMENTS MADE BY A DISBURSING OFFICER OF THE ARMY; AND, ACCORDINGLY, YOUR FURTHER CONSIDERATION THEREOF IS REQUESTED UNDER THE PROVISION OF THE ACT OF JULY 31, 1894 (28 STAT. 207).

IN THE NEXT TO THE LAST SENTENCE OF THE DECISION OF AUGUST 7, 1934, YOU HOLD AS FOLLOWS:

"ACCORDINGLY, THERE APPEARS NO BASIS WHY THE CHARGE FOR THE SHIPMENT COVERED BY BILL OF LADING WQ-446371 SHOULD BE IN EXCESS OF THE CHARGE FOR A SHIPMENT OF IDENTICAL CHARACTER WEIGHING CONSIDERABLY MORE THAN TWICE AS MUCH.'

NOTWITHSTANDING THE PRINCIPLE THEREIN STATED, YOUR DECISION OF DECEMBER 22, 1932, A-46365, ALLOWED THE CARRIER THE AMOUNT OF $396.28 ON A SHIPMENT OF 7,094 POUNDS OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS; ONE HORSE WEIGHING 900 POUNDS; AND AN ATTENDANT, WHEREAS, IF THE SHIPMENT HAD CONSISTED OF 14,600 POUNDS OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS; SIX HORSES WEIGHING 900 POUNDS EACH; AND AN ATTENDANT, THE AMOUNT PAYABLE TO THE CARRIER UNDER THE METHOD OF COMPUTATION PRESCRIBED IN THE DECISION WOULD HAVE BEEN $237.00 BASED ON THE EMIGRANT MOVABLES RATING OF 20,000 POUNDS AT $1,185 PER CWT. IN OTHER WORDS, IT APPEARS THERE WAS ACTUALLY ALLOWED ON THE SHIPMENT IN QUESTION $159.28 MORE THAN IT WOULD HAVE COST TO TRANSPORT TWICE THE QUANTITY OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND SIX TIMES THE NUMBER OF HORSES WITH ONE ATTENDANT, BETWEEN THE SAME POINTS, OVER THE SAME ROUTE ON THE SAME DATE. THIS METHOD APPEARS VIOLATIVE OF THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE STATED BY YOU IN DECISION DATED AUGUST 7, 1934.

SECTION 2 OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT, AS AMENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1928 (41 STAT. 479) PROHIBITS THE ASSESSMENT OF A HIGHER CHARGE FOR A SMALLER THAN FOR A GREATER QUANTITY OF LIKE PROPERTY BETWEEN THE SAME POINTS, OVER THE SAME ROUTE, SHIPPED CONTEMPORANEOUSLY. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT, PRIOR TO THE RENDITION OF YOUR DECISION OF JULY 18, 1932, CITED ABOVE, THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE HAD MADE SETTLEMENT OF THIS CLASS OF ACCOUNTS ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT IN QUESTION; BUT THAT, SINCE THAT DECISION WAS RENDERED, SETTLEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE ON THE PRINCIPLES THEREIN ENUNCIATED.

IN VIEW OF THE IMPORTANCE OF THE MATTER, INSOFAR AS THE ECONOMICAL TRANSPORTATION OF THE CHANGE OF STATION BAGGAGE ALLOWANCE FOR OFFICERS OF THE ARMY IS CONCERNED, IT IS REQUESTED THAT FURTHER CONSIDERATION BE GIVEN YOUR DECISIONS OF JULY 18, 1932, A-43431; DECEMBER 22, 1932, A-46365; AND AUGUST 7, 1934 (14 COMP. GEN. 100).

THE DECISIONS OF JULY 18, 1932 (A-43431), DEC. 22, 1932 (A-46365), AND AUGUST 7, 1934 (A-57043), 14 COMP. GEN. 100, RELATED TO SHIPMENTS OF AN ARMY OFFICER CONSISTING IN EACH INSTANCE OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND ONE OR MORE HORSES ACCOMPANIED BY AN ATTENDANT.

FOR CONVENIENCE IN REFERENCE PERTINENT DATA RELATING TO EACH SHIPMENT ARE AS FOLLOWS:

CHART

BILL OF DATE OF WEIGHTS WEIGHT

LADING SHIPMENT CONSIST (ACTUAL)

RATIOS

POUNDS PERCENT A-16365 WQ-202763

APR. 24, 1931 HOUSEHOLD GOODS 7,094 88.74

1 HORSE ------- 900 11.26

7,994

--------- A 43431 WQ-241500 JUNE 22, 1931 HOUSEHOLD GOODS 9,691 90.86

1 HORSE ------- 975 9.14

10,666

WQ-341308 JULY 14, 1931 HOUSEHOLD GOODS 4,944 82.35

1 HORSE ------- 1,060 17.65

6,004

--------- A-57043 WQ-446371 AUG. 12, 1932 HOUSEHOLD GOODS 6,674 74.997

2 HORSES ------ 2,225 25.003

8,899

PRIOR TO DECEMBER 15, 1930, CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 6 (P. 192, ITEM 18), PUBLISHED RATINGS (CARLOAD ONLY) FOR "EMIGRANT MOVABLES," MINIMUM WEIGHT 20,000 POUNDS, LIMITED, HOWEVER (P. 193, ITEM 1) AS FOLLOWS:

NOTE 2.--- RATINGS FOR "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" WILL APPLY ONLY ON:

SECOND-HAND (USED) HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS * * * AND (TOGETHER WITH) ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:

SECOND-HAND (USED) AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS, OTHER THAN HAND:

ONE KNOCKED DOWN PORTABLE HOUSE;

SHRUBBERY OR TREES FOR PLANTING;

FEED FOR LIVESTOCK OR POULTRY, WHILE IN TRANSIT;

LIVE POULTRY, NOT EXCEEDING FIVE HUNDRED (500) LBS. IN WEIGHT;

ORDINARY LIVE STOCK * * * NOT EXCEEDING TEN (10) HEAD; * * *

WHEN SHIPMENT OF EMIGRANT MOVABLES INCLUDES ORDINARY LIVE STOCK * * * ONE MAN IN CHARGE WILL BE CARRIED FREE IN THE CAR WITH THE SHIPMENT * * *.

THUS THE CLASSIFICATION NAMED RATINGS ON MIXED CARLOAD SHIPMENTS WHICH WEIGHED NOT LESS THAN 20,000 POUNDS AND INCLUDED, FOR EXAMPLE, HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND 1 OR MORE BUT NOT MORE THAN 10 ORSES; OR HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND SHRUBBERY; OR HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND BOTH HORSES (NOT IN EXCESS OF 10) AND SHRUBBERY. OTHER THAN THAT SHIPMENTS TO BE ENTITLED TO THE RATINGS FOR "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" MUST INCLUDE HOUSEHOLD GOODS TOGETHER WITH 1 OR MORE OF CERTAIN OTHER ITEMS--- THERE WAS NO REQUIREMENT (EXCEPT AS TO THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ORDINARY LIVESTOCK AND THE MAXIMUM WEIGHT OF POULTRY) AS TO THE CHARACTER OF THE MIXTURE. IN OTHER WORDS, EXCEPT AS TO POULTRY, THERE WAS NO LIMITATION AS TO THE MINIMUM OR MAXIMUM QUANTITY BY WEIGHT OF EITHER HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR OTHER ITEMS WHICH MUST BE INCLUDED OR WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE MIXED SHIPMENT.

CONTEMPORANEOUSLY, RULE 15 OF THE CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 6 PROVIDED:

* * * THE CHARGE FOR A LESS THAN CARLOAD SHIPMENT MUST NOT EXCEED THE CHARGE FOR A MINIMUM CARLOAD OF THE SAME FREIGHT AT THE CARLOAD RATE; * *

THE CHARACTER OF THE SHIPMENTS HERE CONSIDERED WAS SUCH AS TO MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CLASSIFICATION PROVISIONS RELATING TO "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" PRIOR TO DECEMBER 15, 1930, IF DELIVERED TO THE INITIAL CARRIERS IN LOTS OF 20,000 POUNDS OR MORE, AND IT WOULD SEEM TO FOLLOW THAT UNDER THE CLASSIFICATION PROVISIONS IN EFFECT UNTIL DECEMBER 15, 1930,"THE CHARGE FOR A MINIMUM CARLOAD OF THE SAME FREIGHT AT THE CARLOAD RATE" WOULD BE THAT APPLICABLE ON "EMIGRANT MOVABLES," AND THEREFORE THE MEASURE OF THE MAXIMUM CHARGES ON THESE SHIPMENTS.

HOWEVER, ON NOVEMBER 4, 1930, SUPPLEMENT 9 TO CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 6 WAS ISSUED, PROVIDING FOR THE CANCELLATION EFFECTIVE AS OF DECEMBER 15, 1930, OF NOTE 2, SUPRA, AND (P. 19, ITEM 15) FOR THE APPLICATION BEGINNING WITH THIS LATTER DATE OF AN AMENDED NOTE 2, READING AS FOLLOWS:

NOTE 2.--- RATINGS FOR "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" WILL APPLY ONLY ON MIXED CARLOADS OF

SECOND-HAND (USED) HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS * * * TOGETHER WITH ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES, WHICH ARTICLES MUST CONSTITUTE AT LEAST 25 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL WEIGHT UPON WHICH FREIGHT CHARGES ARE ASSESSED:

THE AMENDED NOTE 2 WAS PREFIXED BY A REFERENCE MARK EXPLAINED AS DENOTING "INCREASE BY REASON OF CHANGE IN DESCRIPTION.' THERE WAS NO CHANGE IN THE KIND OF ARTICLES, ONE OR MORE OF WHICH WAS REQUIRED TO BE SHIPPED WITH THE HOUSEHOLD GOODS IN ORDER TO SECURE THE RATINGS PROVIDED FOR ,EMIGRANT MOVABLES.'

IT IS APPARENT THAT THE AMENDED NOTE 2 RESULTED IN A MATERIAL CHANGE IN THE SITUATION BY REASON OF THE NEW REQUIREMENT THAT THE ARTICLES OTHER THAN HOUSEHOLD GOODS "MUST CONSTITUTE AT LEAST 25 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL WEIGHT UPON WHICH FREIGHT CHARGES ARE ASSESSED.' THE CONVERSE OF THIS REQUIREMENT WOULD SEEM TO BE THAT THE WEIGHT OF THE HOUSEHOLD GOODS MUST NOT EXCEED 75 PERCENT "OF THE TOTAL WEIGHT UPON WHICH FREIGHT CHARGES ARE ASSESSED.'

IT APPEARS THAT THIS ADDED REQUIREMENT WAS THE SUBJECT OF CONSIDERATION BY THE COORDINATOR FOR TRAFFIC PRIOR TO THE PROPOSED EFFECTIVE DATE, FOR THE REASON THAT UNDER DATE OF NOVEMBER 11, 1930, SHORTLY AFTER SUPPLEMENT 9 WAS ISSUED, THE COORDINATOR ISSUED A CIRCULAR LETTER (551.2 EMIGRANT MOVABLES) "TO: ALL MEMBERS, FEDERAL TRAFFIC BOARD, AND GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE," REFERRING TO THE SUPPLEMENT AS HAVING "MADE A CHANGE IN DESCRIPTIONS WHICH EFFECTS THE RATINGS HERETOFORE APPLIED ON EMIGRANT MOVABLES, CARLOADS," AND THAT--

THE CHANGE REQUIRES THAT WITH MIXED CARLOAD SHIPMENTS OF SECOND HAND(USED) HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS, ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES, WHICH ARTICLES MUST CONSTITUTE AT LEAST 25 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL WEIGHT UPON WHICH FREIGHT CHARGES ARE ASSESSED, MUST BE INCLUDED.

THE KIND OF ARTICLES SHOWN IN THIS LETTER WERE THE ARTICLES APPEARING IN SUPPLEMENT 9.

FURTHERMORE, IT APPEARS THAT THE OFFICE OF THE QUARTERMASTER GENERAL LIKEWISE CONSIDERED THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE NEW REQUIREMENT, AND UNDER DATE OF DECEMBER 13, 1930, ADDRESSED THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION IN THAT CONNECTION; THE REPLY BY THE SECRETARY, INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION, UNDER DATE OF DECEMBER 17, 1930 (356808), BEING AS FOLLOWS:

* * * THE CHANGE IN THE DESCRIPTION FOR EMIGRANT MOVABLES AS SHOWN IN THE CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION, AND WHICH BECAME EFFECTIVE ON THE 15TH OF THIS MONTH, WAS PROTESTED BY THE BEKINS VAN AND STORAGE COMPANY, OF LOS ANGELES, CALIF., BUT THE COMMISSION DID NOT SUSPEND.

THE NEW ITEM PROVIDES THAT THE ARTICLES SPECIFIED IN NOTE 2 MUST CONSTITUTE AT LEAST 25 PERCENT OF THE "TOTAL WEIGHT UPON WHICH FREIGHT CHARGES ARE ASSESSED.' IN CASE OF A SHIPMENT WEIGHING LESS THAN THE MINIMUM CHARGES WOULD BE ASSESSED ON THE MINIMUM OF 20,000 POUNDS, AND THEREFORE THE NOTE 2 ARTICLES WOULD HAVE TO CONSTITUTE AT LEAST 5,000 POUNDS BY WEIGHT. IF THE SHIPMENT WEIGHED MORE THAN 20,000 POUNDS CHARGES WOULD OF COURSE BE ASSESSED ON THE ACTUAL WEIGHT, AND IN THAT EVENT THE WEIGHT OF THE NOTE 2 ARTICLES WOULD HAVE TO BE INCREASED PROPORTIONATELY.

THE REFUSAL OF THE COMMISSION TO SUSPEND THE CHARGE WAS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO CONSIDERATION OF THE LAWFULNESS OF THE AMENDED DESCRIPTION ON ITS MERITS SHOULD A COMPLAINT BE FILED AGAINST THE DESCRIPTION.

IN ADDITION, THE TRAFFIC MANAGER, WAR DEPARTMENT, BY LETTER LIKEWISE DATED DECEMBER 13, 1930 (FILE QM 551.2 T-R (EMIGRANT MOVABLES) (, ADDRESSED THE COORDINATOR FOR TRAFFIC TO THE END THAT THERE MIGHT BE SECURED FROM THE CHAIRMEN OF THE SEVERAL CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEES EXPRESSIONS OF THEIR OPINIONS AS TO THE EFFECT OF THE 25-PERCENT REQUIREMENT PUBLISHED IN SUPPLEMENT 9. THE COORDINATOR'S REPLY, DATED DECEMBER 30, 1930 (CLASS-N 106), INDICATES THAT THE SEVERAL COMMITTEES ADVISED HIM AS FOLLOWS:

DECEMBER 20, 1930, WESTERN CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE---

* * * A CAR BILLED AT THE MINIMUM OF 20,000 MUST CONTAIN 5,000 POUNDS OF ONE OR MORE OF THE ARTICLES LISTED, COMMENCING WITH "SECONDHAND (USED) AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS, OTHER THAN HAND: "

DECEMBER 22, 1930, OFFICIAL CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE---

* * * IF CHARGES ARE ASSESSED ON THE BASIS OF 20,000 LBS. THE WEIGHT OF THE ARTICLES IN QUESTION MUST EQUAL OR EXCEED 5,000 LBS.

DECEMBER 24, 1930, SOUTHERN CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE---

THE ADVICES * * * BY THE WESTERN CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE DECEMBER 20TH HOLD GOOD FOR US.

THEREAFTER THE OFFICE OF THE QUARTERMASTER GENERAL ISSUED CIRCULAR LETTER NO. 6, DATED JANUARY 19, 1931,"SUBJECT: DESCRIPTION OF SHIPMENT OF PERSONAL PROPERTY ON GOVERNMENT BILLS OF LADING AND IN REQUESTS FOR RATES OR ROUTING," REFERRING TO THE AMENDED REQUIREMENT OF THE CLASSIFICATION TO SECURE THE "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" RATING AS FOLLOWS:

* * * INFORMAL OPINIONS OBTAINED FROM THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION AND THE CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEES SUSTAIN THE CONTENTION OF CARRIERS THAT THE TOTAL WEIGHT REFERRED TO IS THE MINIMUM WEIGHT FOR LENGTH OF CAR ORDERED, OR ACTUAL WEIGHT IF GREATER. THUS, FOR INSTANCE, IF A 36-FOOT CAR BE ORDERED FOR WHICH THE MINIMUM CARLOAD WEIGHT PRESCRIBED FOR EMIGRANT MOVABLES IS 20,000 S., ONE OR MORE OF THE KINDS OF ARTICLES OTHER THAN HOUSEHOLD GOODS * * * MUST CONSTITUTE 25 PERCENT OF SUCH WEIGHT OR 5,000 LBS. SUCH PROPORTIONATE WEIGHT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO INCREASE IF A LARGER CAR BE ORDERED. AND IN "2ND IND.' DATED JANUARY 31, 1931, FILE (524.03-TB MCLANE, MAJ. JOHN T. 103398) (, TO THE QUARTERMASTER GENERAL, THE FINANCE OFFICER STATED IN PART:

IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE FEDERAL TRAFFIC BOARD, AFTER DUE CONSIDERATION, DECIDED THAT NO PROTEST SHOULD BE FILED ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT WITH THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION REGARDING THE INCREASE IN RATING EFFECTED BY SUPP. NO. 9.

THE SUMMARY OF THE SITUATION IS THAT ON NOVEMBER 4, 1930, THE SEVERAL CARRIERS PARTIES TO CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 6, SERVED NOTICE THAT BEGINNING WITH DECEMBER 15, 1930, THE REQUIREMENTS TO SECURE THE APPLICATION OF RATINGS FOR "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" WOULD BE ALTERED SO MATERIALLY AS TO MAKE IT OBVIOUS THAT SHIPMENTS WHICH THERETOFORE WOULD HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO THE APPLICATION OF SUCH RATINGS WOULD NOT MEET THE NEW REQUIREMENT AND WOULD BE SUBJECT TO HIGHER CHARGES FOR TRANSPORTATION BETWEEN THE SAME POINTS. NOTWITHSTANDING A PROTEST AGAINST THE PROPOSED CHANGE THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION REFUSED TO SUSPEND THE CHANGE, ALLOWED THE NEW RESTRICTION TO BECOME EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 15, 1930, AND IN AN INFORMAL OPINION ADVISED THE WAR DEPARTMENT THAT THE EFFECT OF THIS RESTRICTION WAS TO REQUIRE THE INCLUSION WITH HOUSEHOLD GOODS OF AT LEAST 5,000 POUNDS BY WEIGHT OF CERTAIN OTHER ARTICLES. THE COORDINATOR FOR TRAFFIC RECEIVED OPINIONS OF LIKE TENOR FROM THE THREE CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEES AND NO PROTESTS WERE MADE TO THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION BY EITHER THE COORDINATOR FOR TRAFFIC OR THE WAR DEPARTMENT IN CONNECTION WITH SHIPMENTS BY THE UNITED STATES. AND THE QUARTERMASTER GENERAL ISSUED INSTRUCTIONS TO SHIPPING QUARTERMASTERS IN HARMONY WITH THE OPINIONS SO RECEIVED. IT SHOULD BE BORNE IN MIND, HOWEVER, THAT THE PROVISIONS OF CLASSIFICATION RULE 15 WERE CONTINUED IN EFFECT WITHOUT CHANGE AND THE RECORD DOES NOT SHOW SPECIFICALLY THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF THAT RULE WERE CONSIDERED IN ARRIVING AT THE CONCLUSIONS HEREINBEFORE QUOTED.

IT WAS IN THE LIGHT OF THE SITUATION THAT THE QUESTIONS IN A-43431, A- 46365 AND A-57043 WERE CONSIDERED.

IT WILL BE NOTED THAT NONE OF THE SHIPMENTS CONCERNED WEIGHED 20,000 POUNDS; THAT NONE OF SUCH SHIPMENTS INCLUDED 5,000 POUNDS BY WEIGHT OF ARTICLES OTHER THAN HOUSEHOLD GOODS; AND THAT IN ONLY ONE INSTANCE DID THE WEIGHT OF THE ARTICLES--- OTHER THAN HOUSEHOLD--- CONSTITUTE 25 PERCENT OF EVEN THE ACTUAL WEIGHT OF THE SHIPMENT. ACCORDINGLY, THE SHIPMENTS UNDER BILLS OF LADING WQ-202763, WQ-241500 AND WQ-341308 WERE CLEARLY NOT WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" RATINGS IN EFFECT ON THE DATES OF SUCH SHIPMENTS. IN THIS CONNECTION THE DECISION (A-43431) OF JULY 18, 1932, RELATING TO THE SHIPMENTS UNDER BILLS OF LADING WQ-241500 AND WQ- 341308 STATED:

* * * THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER THE RATING FOR EMIGRANT MOVABLES IS APPLICABLE * * * ARISES BY REASON OF THE PROVISION THAT THE ARTICLES ENUMERATED AS REQUIRED IN ADDITION TO THE HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS,"MUST CONSTITUTE AT LEAST 25 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL WEIGHT UPON WHICH FREIGHT CHARGES ARE ASSESSED.'

THE RATING FOR EMIGRANT MOVABLES IS A CARLOAD RATING. WHERE THE ACTUAL WEIGHT OF A SHIPMENT IS AS MUCH AS OR MORE THAN THE MINIMUM CARLOAD WEIGHT OF 20,000 POUNDS PRESCRIBED FOR EMIGRANT MOVABLES, THE EFFECT OF THE QUOTED PROVISION IS CLEAR IN THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE ARTICLES OTHER THAN HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS MUST CONSTITUTE ONE-FOURTH OF THE TOTAL WEIGHT. THE EFFECT OF THE ABOVE PROVISION WITH RESPECT TO SHIPMENTS WEIGHING LESS THAN THE MINIMUM OF 20,000 POUNDS ARISES BY REASON OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 15, SECTION 1, THAT THE CHARGE FOR A LESS-THAN-CARLOAD SHIPMENT MUST NOT EXCEED THE CHARGE FOR A MINIMUM CARLOAD OF THE SAME FREIGHT AT THE CARLOAD RATE. IF WITH RESPECT TO SHIPMENTS WEIGHING LESS THAN 20,000 POUNDS AND HAVING, IN ADDITION TO HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS ARTICLES OF THE KIND REQUIRED IN EMIGRANT MOVABLES BUT SUCH ARTICLES NOT WEIGHING 5,000 POUNDS, THE CHARGES AS FOR A CARLOAD OF EMIGRANT MOVABLES AT CARLOAD RATE ARE NOT AUTHORIZED AS URGED BY THE CARRIER, EVEN THOUGH THE EMIGRANT MOVABLES CARLOAD CHARGE IS LESS THAN THE CHARGES OTHERWISE APPLICABLE TO THE SHIPMENT ON THE BASIS OF OTHER RATINGS, IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 15, SECTION 1, WOULD BE INEFFECTIVE IN MANY INSTANCES. THUS, IN A SHIPMENT CONSISTING OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS WEIGHING 7,500 POUNDS AND OTHER ARTICLES REQUIRED FOR EMIGRANT MOVABLES, WEIGHING 2,500 POUNDS, THE CHARGE AS FOR 20,000 POUNDS OF EMIGRANT MOVABLES AT THE CARLOAD RATE WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED, WHEREAS IF THE SHIPMENT HAD CONSISTED OF 20,000 POUNDS COMPOSED OF 15,000 POUNDS OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS AND 5,000 POUNDS OF THE OTHER ARTICLES, CHARGES FOR THE SHIPMENT WOULD BE AUTHORIZED ON THE BASIS OF THE EMIGRANT MOVABLES RATING. IN THIS SITUATION, ACCORDING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE EMIGRANT-MOVABLES PROVISION AS URGED BY THE CARRIER, THE CHARGES FOR A CARLOAD OF EMIGRANT MOVABLES (20,000 POUNDS AT THE CARLOAD RATE) COULD NOT BE USED AS A MAXIMUM FOR THE SMALLER SHIPMENT, AND IF CHARGES FOR SAID SMALLER SHIPMENT ON THE BASIS OF RATINGS OTHERWISE APPLICABLE EXCEEDED THE CHARGE FOR A CARLOAD SHIPMENT OF EMIGRANT MOVABLES, THE ANOMALOUS RESULT WOULD ENSUE THAT FOR A SHIPMENT WEIGHING TWICE AS MUCH AS ANOTHER SHIPMENT OF IDENTICAL CHARACTER, A SMALLER CHARGE WOULD BE APPLICABLE. SUCH A CONSTRUCTION WOULD APPEAR TO BE CLEARLY UNREASONABLE AND TO DENY PROPER EFFECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 15.

ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT---

WHERE A SHIPMENT IS COMPOSED OF ARTICLES WHICH, IF INCREASED IN WEIGHT IN THE SAME PROPORTION TO A TOTAL WEIGHT WHICH IS THE MINIMUM CARLOAD WEIGHT PRESCRIBED FOR EMIGRANT MOVABLES, AND THE TOTAL INCREASED WEIGHT THUS RESULTING INCLUDES A WEIGHT FOR THE REQUIRED ARTICLES OTHER THAN HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS EQUIVALENT TO 25 PERCENT OR MORE OF THE MINIMUM CARLOAD WEIGHT FOR EMIGRANT MOVABLES, THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 15, SECTION 1, REQUIRE THAT THE CARLOAD CHARGES FOR EMIGRANT MOVABLES SHALL BE THE MAXIMUM CHARGE FOR THE SHIPMENT.

APPLYING THE RULE STATED IN PARAGRAPH IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING, IT APPEARED WITH RESPECT TO THE SHIPMENTS UNDER BILLS OF LADING WQ-241500 AND WQ- 341308 THAT MINIMUM WEIGHTS OF 20,000 POUNDS CONSISTING OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND HORSES IN THE SAME PROPORTION AS IN THE WEIGHTS SHIPPED WOULD INCLUDE LESS THAN 5,000 POUNDS BY WEIGHT OF HORSES. IN OTHER WORDS, SHIPMENTS WEIGHING 20,000 POUNDS AND SIMILAR IN EVERY RESPECT TO THESE TWO SHIPMENTS, EXCEPT FOR THE INCREASED WEIGHTS, WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO THE EMIGRANT-MOVABLES RATING. IT WAS IN VIEW OF THIS SITUATION THAT THE DECISION OF JULY 18, 1932, STATED---

IT THUS APPEARS THE SAME FREIGHT REFERRED TO UNDER RULE 15, IF SHIPPED IN A LOT OF 20,000 POUNDS, WOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO THE EMIGRANT MOVABLES RATING. ACCORDINGLY, THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 15, SECTION 1, DO NOT AUTHORIZE THE APPLICATION OF CARLOAD CHARGES FOR EMIGRANT MOVABLES AS THE MAXIMUM CHARGE FOR THE SHIPMENTS HERE CONCERNED AND THE CHARGES FOR SAID SHIPMENTS WILL BE FOR ADJUSTMENT ON THE BASIS OF RATINGS OTHERWISE APPLICABLE.

THE PRINCIPLE APPLIED IN A-43431 WAS APPLIED IN A-46365 RELATING TO THE SHIPMENT UNDER BILL OF LADING WQ-202763; THE SITUATION IN THE LATTER CASE LIKEWISE BEING A MINIMUM WEIGHT OF 20,000 POUNDS CONSISTING OF ARTICLES IN THE SAME PROPORTION AS IN THE WEIGHTS SHIPPED WOULD INCLUDE LESS THAN 5,000 POUNDS BY WEIGHT OF ARTICLES OTHER THAN HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS. THUS IT AGAIN APPEARED THAT THE "SAME FREIGHT" REFERRED TO UNDER RULE 15, IF SHIPPED IN A LOT OF 20,000 POUNDS, WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO THE EMIGRANT MOVABLES RATING AND THEREFORE THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 15, SECTION 1, DID NOT AUTHORIZE THE APPLICATION OF THE CARLOAD CHARGE FOR EMIGRANT MOVABLES AS THE MAXIMUM CHARGE FOR THIS SHIPMENT.

THE SAME PRINCIPLE WAS APPLIED IN A-57043 RELATING TO THE SHIPMENT UNDER BILL OF LADING WQ-446371, BUT IN THIS LATTER CASE THE RESULT WAS THE APPLICATION OF THE CHARGE UNDER THE EMIGRANT MOVABLES RATING AS THE MAXIMUM CHARGE FOR THE SHIPMENT, IT APPEARING THAT A MINIMUM WEIGHT OF 20,000 POUNDS CONSISTING OF THE ARTICLES COMPOSING SHIPMENT IN THE SAME PROPORTION AS IN THE WEIGHTS SHIPPED WOULD INCLUDE MORE THAN 5,000 POUNDS BY WEIGHT OF ARTICLES OTHER THAN HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS. THIS CONNECTION THE DECISION OF AUGUST 7, 1934, STATED THAT---

IN OTHER WORDS, A SHIPMENT WEIGHING 20,000 POUNDS AND SIMILAR TO THE SHIPMENT HERE CONCERNED IN EVERY RESPECT EXCEPT FOR THE INCREASED WEIGHT, WOULD BE ENTITLED TO THE EMIGRANT MOVABLES RATING. IT THUS APPEARS THE "SAME FREIGHT" REFERRED TO UNDER RULE 15, IF SHIPPED IN A LOT OF 20,000 POUNDS, WOULD BE ENTITLED TO THE EMIGRANT MOVABLES RATING. ACCORDINGLY, THERE APPEARS NO BASIS WHY THE CHARGE FOR THE SHIPMENT COVERED BY BILL OF LADING WQ-446371 SHOULD BE IN EXCESS OF THE CHARGE FOR A SHIPMENT OF IDENTICAL CHARACTER WEIGHING CONSIDERABLY MORE THAN TWICE AS MUCH.

IT IS APPARENT THAT IF THE SHIPMENTS UNDER BILLS OF LADING WQ-241500, WQ- 341308, AND WQ-202763 HAD EACH WEIGHED 20,000 POUNDS, WITH THE ARTICLES IN THE SAME WEIGHT RATIOS AS IN THE SHIPMENTS AS MADE, THE EMIGRANT MOVABLES RATING WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN APPLICABLE. IT WOULD SEEM THEN THAT RULE 15, SECTION 1, WOULD NOT APPLY IN CONNECTION WITH THESE SHIPMENTS AND THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN ANY OTHER TARIFF AUTHORITY TO APPLY THE CORRESPONDING EMIGRANT MOVABLES CHARGE AS THE MAXIMUM CHARGE ON ANY ONE OF THESE THREE SHIPMENTS. AS TO THE SHIPMENT UNDER BILL OF LADING WQ-446371 THE SITUATION WAS DIFFERENT. THERE THE SHIPMENT--- HAD IT WEIGHED 20,000 POUNDS WITH THE ARTICLES IN THE SAME WEIGHT RATIOS IN THE SHIPMENT AS MADE --- WOULD HAVE INCLUDED MORE THAN 5,000 POUNDS BY WEIGHT OF ARTICLES OTHER THAN HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS AND UNDER THE TERMS OF RULE 15, SECTION 1, THE MAXIMUM CHARGE FOR A SMALLER SHIPMENT OF THE "SAME FREIGHT" WAS TO BE MEASURED BY THE CARLOAD CHARGE FOR 20,000 POUNDS THEREOF.

IT WILL BE NOTED, THEREFORE, THAT IN COMPUTING THE AMOUNTS ALLOWED FOR THE FOUR SERVICES ENUMERATED HEREIN, ADVANTAGE WAS TAKEN OF SUCH TARIFF AUTHORITY AS APPEARED AVAILABLE AND THE FACT AS INDICATED IN YOUR LETTER THAT IN A-46365,"THERE WAS ACTUALLY ALLOWED ON THE SHIPMENT IN QUESTION $159.28 MORE THAN IT WOULD HAVE COST TO TRANSPORT TWICE THE QUANTITY OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND SIX TIMES THE NUMBER OF HORSES WITH ONE ATTENDANT, BETWEEN THE SAME POINTS, OVER THE SAME ROUTE ON THE SAME DATE," DOES NOT MAKE IT APPARENT THAT THE ALLOWANCE WAS IN ERROR OR "VIOLATIVE OF THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE STATED * * * IN DECISION DATED AUGUST 7, 1934.' THE SENTENCE QUOTED BY YOU AS STATING THIS SO CALLED "GENERAL PRINCIPLE" DOES NOT STAND BY ITSELF IN THE DECISION DATED AUGUST 7, 1934, BUT IS TO BE READ IN CONNECTION WITH THE FACTS IN THAT CASE, AS NOTED IN THE SENTENCE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YOUR QUOTATION, IT WAS STATED THAT "IT THUS APPEARS THE "SAME FREIGHT" REFERRED TO UNDER RULE 15, IF SHIPPED IN A LOT OF 20,000 POUNDS, WOULD BE ENTITLED TO THE EMIGRANT MOVABLES RATING," WHEREAS, AS HAS BEEN SHOWN, THE SHIPMENT CONSIDERED IN A-46365 WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SO ENTITLED EVEN IF SHIPPED IN A LOT OF 20,000 POUNDS.

FURTHERMORE, CONCERNING THE STATEMENT--- "* * * IT APPEARS THERE WAS ACTUALLY ALLOWED ON THE SHIPMENT IN QUESTION $159.28 MORE THAN IT WOULD HAVE COST TO TRANSPORT TWICE THE QUANTITY OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND SIX TIMES THE NUMBER OF HORSES WITH ONE ATTENDANT, BETWEEN THE SAME POINTS, OVER THE SAME ROUTE ON THE SAME DATE," IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT THE LARGER SHIPMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO THE LOWER CHARGE BECAUSE THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TARIFF REQUIREMENTS AS TO PERCENTAGE RATIOS UPON WHICH SUCH LOWER CHARGE WAS CONDITIONED. IT HAS NOT BEEN INDICATED, HOWEVER, UNDER WHAT TARIFF AUTHORITY THE CHARGE FOR SUCH A SHIPMENT MUST BE OBSERVED AS THE MAXIMUM CHARGE FOR A SHIPMENT OF LESS WEIGHT WHICH DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE PERCENTAGE REQUIREMENTS AND WHICH IF THE ARTICLES THEREOF WERE INCREASED IN WEIGHT, IN THE SAME RATIO, TO AN AGGREGATE WEIGHT OF 20,000 POUNDS WOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO THE LOWER CHARGE APPLICABLE ON THE SHIPMENT TREATED AS ILLUSTRATIVE. SIMILAR QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE OPERATION OF TARIFF PROVISIONS STIPULATING THAT ONE PART OF A MIXED SHIPMENT SHALL BEAR TO THE WHOLE A RELATIONSHIP OF NOT MORE THAN A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE WHOLE BY WEIGHT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION,AND NOTWITHSTANDING THAT SMALLER SHIPMENTS WHICH DID NOT OBSERVE THE PRESCRIBED WEIGHT RATIOS HAD BEEN CHARGED CONSIDERABLY MORE THAN CONSIDERABLY LARGER SHIPMENTS WHICH DID OBSERVE THE PRESCRIBED WEIGHT RATIOS, THE HIGHER CHARGES FOR THE SMALLER SHIPMENTS HAVE BEEN HELD TO BE APPLICABLE. SEE IN THIS CONNECTION WEST END SCRAP IRON AND METAL COMPANY V. DULUTH, SOUTH SHORE AND ATLANTIC RAILWAY COMPANY ET AL., 179 I.C.C. 304, WHERE APPARENTLY THE CHARGE FOR MORE THAN 60,000 POUNDS WOULD HAVE BEEN LESS THAN FOR 45,000 POUNDS; MONOLITH PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY V. CHICAGO AND NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY ET AL., 190 I.C.C. 427, WHERE APPARENTLY THE TRANSPORTATION OF 43,320 POUNDS WOULD HAVE COST $243.68 LESS THAN FOR 26,020 POUNDS; WESTERN HIDE AND FUR COMPANY V. CHICAGO AND NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY ET AL., 203 I.C.C. 213, WHERE THE CHARGE FOR 50,000 POUNDS WOULD HAVE BEEN LESS THAN FOR 36,000 POUNDS; HONEY FROM ROCKY MOUNTAIN STATES TO WESTERN TRUNK LINE POINTS, 204 I.C.C. 87, WHERE A PROPOSED RULE PRESCRIBING WEIGHT RATIOS NOT THERETOFORE REQUIRED WAS APPROVED IN PRINCIPLE ALTHOUGH THE RESULT WOULD BE CHARGES CONSIDERABLY GREATER THAN THOSE THERETOFORE APPLICABLE. CONCERNING THE REFERENCE TO SECTION 2 OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT (U.S.C.A. TITLE 49, 41 STAT. 479) IT WILL BE NOTED THAT THE SAID SECTION PROVIDES IN SUBSTANCE THAT IF A CARRIER CHARGES ONE PERSON MORE OR LESS THAN IT CHARGES ANOTHER PERSON--- "FOR DOING * * * A LIKE AND CONTEMPORANEOUS SERVICE IN THE TRANSPORTATION * * * OF A LIKE KIND OF TRAFFIC * * * UNDER SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONDITIONS, SUCH * * * CARRIER SHALL BE DEEMED GUILTY OF UNJUST DISCRIMINATION, WHICH IS PROHIBITED AND DECLARED TO BE UNLAWFUL.'

IT DOES NOT APPEAR, IN VIEW OF THE CLASSIFICATION REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY TO BE OBSERVED TO SECURE THE "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" RATING AND CONSIDERING THE CASES CITED, SUPRA, THAT A SHIPMENT CONSISTING OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS WEIGHING 17,748 POUNDS AND HORSES WEIGHING 2,252 POUNDS--- THAT IS TO SAY, THE EQUIVALENT OF A SHIPMENT UNDER BILL OF LADING WQ-202763 WITH THE WEIGHTS ACTUALLY SHIPPED INCREASED IN THE SAME PROPORTION TO AN AGGREGATE WEIGHT OF 20,000 POUNDS--- WOULD BE ENTITLED TO SUCH RATING AND TRANSPORTATION AT THE CHARGE THEREFOR PROVIDED. CONTEMPORANEOUSLY, HOWEVER, A SHIPMENT SUCH AS IS ILLUSTRATED, NAMELY, HOUSEHOLD GOODS WEIGHING 14,600 POUNDS AND HORSES WEIGHING 5,400 POUNDS, THE AGGREGATE WEIGHT HERE LIKEWISE BEING 20,000 POUNDS, WOULD BE SO ENTITLED. IN OTHER WORDS, WHILE TWO SHIPMENTS ON THE SAME DAY WEIGHING THE SAME AND COMPOSED OF LIKE ELEMENTS--- THAT IS, HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND HORSES--- WOULD BE SUBJECT TO DIFFERENT CHARGES BETWEEN THE SAME POINTS VIA THE SAME ROUTE, THE DIFFERENCE IN CHARGES RESULTING BECAUSE ONE SHIPMENT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY TO SECURE THE APPLICATION OF THE "EMIGRANT MOVABLES" RATING, WHILE THE OTHER SHIPMENT FAILS TO DO SO. IT WOULD SEEM TO BE A SETTLED RULE OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION THAT CARRIERS MAY PRESCRIBE THAT TO SECURE A GIVEN RATE ON A MIXED CARLOAD SHIPMENT, THE ELEMENTS OF THE MIXTURE BE IN CERTAIN PROPORTIONS, OTHERWISE HIGHER CHARGES WILL BE APPLICABLE. IT WOULD SEEM, FURTHER, THAT THIS RULE MUST HAVE BEEN ADOPTED IN CONTEMPLATION OF SECTION 2 OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT AND, THEREFORE, THAT SUCH PRESCRIPTIONS ARE NOT CONSIDERED AS BEING WITHIN THE INHIBITION OF THE SAID SECTION. THIS BEING SO, IT WOULD SEEM TO FOLLOW THAT THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE TWO SHIPMENTS, ONLY ONE OF WHICH MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE LOWER CHARGE, IS NOT TREATED AS "TRANSPORTATION * * * OF A LIKE KIND OF TRAFFIC" WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THERE WOULD APPEAR TO BE NO AUTHORITY UNDER THE APPLICABLE TARIFFS TO APPLY THE CHARGE ON THE SHIPMENT CONSISTING OF 14,600 POUNDS OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND 5,400 POUNDS OF HORSES AS THE MAXIMUM CHARGE ON A SHIPMENT CONSISTING OF 7,094 POUNDS OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND 900 POUNDS OF HORSES. TO THE CONTRARY IT WOULD SEEM THAT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 15 OF THE CLASSIFICATION THE MEASURE OF THE MAXIMUM CHARGE ON THE LATTER SHIPMENT MUST BE THE CHARGE FOR A CARLOAD SHIPMENT CONTAINING THE SAME CONSTITUENTS IN THE SAME WEIGHT RATIO AND IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT CHARGES IN EXCESS OF SUCH MAXIMUM WERE ALLOWED IN CONNECTION WITH THE SHIPMENT UNDER CONSIDERATION IN A-46365.

ACCORDINGLY, THERE DOES NOT APPEAR ANY INCONSISTENCY IN THE THREE DECISIONS TO WHICH YOU REFER, NOR DOES THERE APPEAR TO BE ANY AUTHORITATIVE BASIS FOR OTHERWISE COMPUTING THE CHARGES FOR THE SHIPMENTS CONCERNED, WHICH WERE MADE BY THE WAR DEPARTMENT, AND OBVIOUSLY WITH CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE APPLICABLE THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION OR THE COURTS IN A PROPER PROCEEDING.