[559] 162 U. S., 197. Late data as to the extent of the practice are in App. V, Digest, Hearings (Senate) Committee on Interstate Commerce, 1905, pp. 1-29. Cf. also p. [406], supra.
[560] Delaware and Hudson Canal case; 1 I.C.C. Rep., 152.
[561] Hearings before Committee on Interstate Commerce, U. S. Senate, Feb. 15, 1900 and May 18, 1905, vol. IV, pp. 2866 and 2880.
[562] Chapter IX, supra.
[563] 162 U. S., 184: 4 I.C.C. Rep., 744.
[564] 32 Federal Reporter, 1002.
[565] Chapter VII, supra.
[566] 4 Int. Com. Rep., 592: 167 U. S., 479. Both the original opinion and final decision with a map are in our Railway Problems. Cf. also, p. [248], supra. The case revived in 1910 is in 18 I.C.C. Rep., 440. Vide p. [588], infra.
[567] The Congressional history of Section 4, is in Haney, op. cit., p. 304; especially good in Brief for Appellees, by Ed. Baxter in the Alabama Midland Case, U. S. Sup. Court, Oct. term, 1896, No. 563, p. 98. All the leading English cases are reprinted (Gov. Printing Office) in "Extracts from the Parliamentary Papers relating to the Long and Short Haul Clause," 1895, pp. 1-83; with an "Analysis of American Cases" (National Publishing Co., Washington), 1895, pp. 1-39; both issued in connection with the C., N. O. and T. P. case, U. S. Sup. Court, Nos. 729 and 832. The complicated legal history is best detailed step by step in Annual Reports of the Commission; references are in Judson on Interstate Commerce. App. F, part II (Elkins), Senate Committee Hearings, 1905, pp. 65-130, gives a garbled outline, convenient for citations. 21 I. C. C. Rep., p. 405, summarizes well. Several of the leading cases are reprinted in our Railway Problems, as indicated by footnotes hereafter.
[568] For a few pages, I follow closely the line of my report on the subject for the U. S. Industrial Commission in 1900.