[361] Report of California Commissioners of Transportation, 1877, table 1, pp. 34-38.
[362] Report of the Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments, relative to constitutional amendment No. 8, abrogating provisions of constitution as to railroad commission (in appendix to journals of the Senate and Assembly of the Legislature of the State of California, 30th Session, Vol. 8, 1893.)
[363] San Francisco Examiner, October 27, 1893. Even in the case of through rates more than one classification was used. It appeared in a case brought before the Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887 that while the Western classification governed shipments from San Francisco to Denver, another classification, known as the Pacific Coast eastbound classification, was used in connection with freight moving from San Francisco to the Missouri River. (Martin v. Southern Pacific Company, 2 I. C. R. 1 [1888].)
[364] United States Pacific Railway Commission, pp. 2536-37, testimony Leland Stanford.
[365] Report of California Commissioners of Transportation, 1877.
[366] Statement of J. S. Leeds, submitted to the State Railroad Commission (San Francisco Bulletin, April 4, 1892).
[367] United States Pacific Railway Commission, p. 3344, testimony J. C. Stubbs.
[368] Letter of Stanford to Committee of San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, December 1, 1873.
[369] United States Pacific Railway Commission, pp. 3292-93, testimony J. C. Stubbs.
[370] San Francisco Examiner, December 30, 1892, October 29, 1894; San Francisco Bulletin, January 31, 1893.