The heart of the railroad problem / The history of railway discrimination in the United States, the chief efforts at control and the remedies proposed, with hints from other countries

by Frank Parsons

[75]. Investigation of expense bill frauds on grain shipments from Missouri River points to Chicago and other destinations. I. C. C. Rep. 1896, p. 75, on Santa Fe case. 7 I. C. C. Decis. 1897, p. 240, expense bill system held illegal.

[76]. I. C. C. Rep. 1896, p. 79.

[77]. Ibid., p. 77.

[78]. Ibid., p. 80. The Commission has not felt able to declare such an allowance unlawful (10 I. C. C. Decis. 1904, p. 309), but it seems clear that substantial preferences may be given in this way.

[79]. Report, U. S. Industrial Commission, 1900, iv, p. 79.

[80]. I. C. C. Rep. 1896, pp. 46–48.

[81]. There is a statement concerning it in the I. C. C. Rep. 1896, p. 81, but it does not bring out the facts at the core of the matter as stated to me by the railway men.

[82]. 8 I. C. C. Decis. 1898, p. 316.

[83]. I. C. C. Rep. 1894, p. 9.

[84]. It was held in the Nichols case (66 P. A. C. Rep. 768) that where a shipper orders cars to be delivered at a certain date, the company’s action in filling subsequent orders before complying with the first is unlawful. (Oregon Short Line.)