rails, and crossings, and defects that might cause accidents. Nothing is insignificant in our opinion that may occasion disaster. Our efficient inspectors have scrutinized and reported all physical defects they could find, and also such violations of rules on the part of officers and men as came to their attention. The details of this work are set out in following pages of this report.

The department of tariffs has been recently strengthened. Schedules for all intrastate movement are filed, and supervised, and inquiries promptly responded to, and information given out. The report of that department is included in this volume.

The last General Assembly devolved new and important duties on the commission as to medical emergency cases on trains, as to ash pans and automatic bells on locomotives, as to switch engine equipment, as to full crews on trains, as to locomotive headlights. We have issued circulars and held conferences, and enforced the acts as they prescribed. The full crew act has been carried on writ of error to the supreme court of the United States, where we are represented by special counsel, the companies, meanwhile, complying with the act. The other laws above referred to have been put into effect, generally with the co-operation of the carriers except the headlight act. As to this the Commission made an investigation, commencing in May and extending to January, and after obtaining all the information, expert, scientific and practical that was available, embraced in a record of more than 500 pages, made a final order requiring the use of headlights of 1,500 candle-power in this state.

As to block system, the Commission has been considering this subject ever since the enactment of 1907. It has had the best expert advice, and came to the conclusion that generally where railroads had sufficient train movement to come within the terms of the act requiring a block system, something better than the manual telegraph block system should be installed. The Commission made its views known in a general circular or order, which also called a conference on this subject. At the conference the companies suggested that the Commission was without authority by the terms of the law to approve or disapprove block systems, and on reference to the attorney-general, their objection was sustained by him. Our activities in this important matter are, therefore, greatly lessened. We sincerely trust that the carriers will install approved block systems in keeping with the great necessity and the progressive development of safe railroad operation.

Our second annual railroad convention met duly on the 10th day of November, a full and able delegation being present. The credit of this plan of regulation, or rather co-operation for preventing accidents, is justly credited to the State of Indiana. It is yet constructive, but it now appears that with some further legislation a great deal of good can be accomplished. The general bulletin issued showed a reduction in the number of persons killed in railroad accidents in this state during the year ending June 30, 1909, to be 45 less than the year before; it showed a reduction of 25, nearly one-fourth, in the number of employes killed, and it showed only 1 passenger killed during the year in 150,000,000 passenger journeys, by the fault of railroads or any railroad man. The convention provided for an advisory committee of railroad men to act with the Commission in scrutinizing accidents, which committee has been appointed. The proceedings of this convention in this volume are interesting.

Our formal and informal cases are reported hereafter. We have had up coal rates again, and made reductions to South Bend, Mishawaka and elsewhere. Interchange of business and switching rates at junction points have been before us again, decided in the Richmond and Bloomington cases, attacked in court, and our order in the Bloomington case affirmed. The Vandalia class rate case was decided adversely to the findings and orders of this Commission by the federal court, and we have requested the attorneygeneral to appeal the case to the supreme court of the United States. As to express rates, the litigation being in the federal court, and the state court having decided adversely to part of our general order, while the Commission believes that these rates are too high, and will take such action hereafter as the law and facts require whenever complaint is made or proceedings instituted, we deemed it best, on the advice of our counsel not to proceed further in this particular case in the federal court.

While we have settled and tried many cases, the Commission regrets that it is still involved in a great deal of litigation. This is mostly the action of the carriers, seeking to set aside our orders in the courts. In the state courts we are generally, nearly always, successful; in the federal courts we have been correspondingly unsuccessful. Attention to these cases involves a great deal of labor. We trust that as the principles governing such matters are settled by the courts, there will not be so many suits; hence, we will be afforded more time to attend to our other important duties. One

of these cases commenced by the Commission, deserves special mention. The Commission ordered the Wabash Railroad to separate the grade of the level crossing of its railroad with the public highway at Topeka. The railroad company did not obey the order or recommendation, and the Commission has employed special counsel to enforce it. Suit has been commenced, and this case will settle the power or want of power in the Commission to order the separation of grade crossings.

A matter of great importance to shippers and carriers is the order of the Commission putting into effect in this state the uniform code of demurrage rules, adopted by the National Association of Railway Commissioners. Indiana is the first state to adopt these rules, which we believe are the best for uniform practice that can be devised.

PENDING LITIGATION.

The Commission is now engaged, as plaintiff or defendant, in the following litigation:

FEDERAL COURTS.

No. 1. Express Companies vs. Commission.

Since our last report, on the advice of our counsel it was determined not to proceed further with this particular case in the federal court.

No. 2. Railroad Commission vs. L. E. & W. R. R., C., C., C. & St. L. Ry.

Since our last report, these suits have been dismissed and costs paid.

No. 3. Vandalia Railroad Company vs. Commission.

Since our last report, the special master reported adversely to the Commission, his report was confirmed by the court and a permanent injunction issued, forbidding the enforcement of the rates fixed by the Commission. The cause has been ordered appealed to the circuit court of appeals, and is in charge of the attorneygeneral.

No. 22.

Railroad Commission vs. Southern Indiana Railway. (Interstate Commerce Commission.)

Since our last report, it has appeared that the cause of complaint in this matter has been removed, by the defendant's receiver making equitable distribution of coal cars. The case has therefore been dismissed without prejudice.

No. 23. Chicago, Indianapolis & Louisville Railway Company vs. Railroad Commission.

Suit to enjoin enforcement of coal rates fixed by the Commission in Cause No. 286 (Slider vs. C., I. & L. R. R.). Hon. C. V. McAdams has been employed as special counsel, with the executive approval.

No. 26. Grand Trunk Railway vs. Commission.

Pending on appeal to supreme court of the United States.

STATE COURTS.

Rush Circuit Court.

No. 4. Commission vs. C., H. & D. and C., C., C. & St. L. Ry. Cos. Since our last report this cause has been dismissed, and the Commission is awaiting final determination by the interested roads, as to whether the interchange switch will be constructed without further litigation.

LAKE SUPERIOR COURT.

No. 5. Chicago, Indiana & Southern Railroad Company vs. Commission.

Still pending.

LAWRENCE CIRCUIT COURT.

No. 6. Commission vs. Southern Indiana Railway and B. & O. S. W. R. R.

Since our last report, this cause has been satisfactorily adjusted, and dismissed, the defendants paying to the state $141.21 each, to defray the expense incurred by the latter in the litigation.

TIPPECANOE SUPERIOR AND CIRCUIT COURT.

No. 7. Chicago, Indianapolis & Louisville Railway Company vs. Commission.

Since our last report this cause has been affirmed by the supreme court of Indiana. (Superior court.)

No. 8. Wabash Railway Company vs. Commission.

This case is still pending.

(Superior court.)

No. 13. State vs. Wabash Railroad.

This prosecution under the full crew law has been dismissed at the suggestion of special counsel, Hon. Martin M. Hugg.

(Circuit

court.)

BARTHOLOMEW CIRCUIT COURT.

No. 9. Southern Indiana Railway Company vs. Commission; C., C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. vs. Commission.

These cases have been dismissed, the matter in controversy having been satisfactorily adjusted.

No. 25.

Southern Indiana Railway vs. Commission and C., C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co.

This case has been dismissed, the cause of complaint having been satisfactorily disposed of.

ALLEN CIRCUIT COURT.

No. 10. Commission vs. Express Companies.

These cases, involving express rates in Fort Wayne, have been dismissed.

No. 29. P., Ft. W. & C. Ry. Co. vs. Commission.

This suit, brought to set aside the order of the Commission in Cause No. 251, requiring interchange of freight at Warsaw, is still pending.

VERMILLION CIRCUIT COURT.

No. 11. Southern Indiana Railway Company vs. Commission. Since our last report this cause has been dismissed, the subject of complaint having been satisfactorily disposed of by the Southern Indiana Railway Company.

MONTGOMERY CIRCUIT COURT.

No. 12. State vs. C., I. & L. Ry.

This prosecution under the full crew law has been dismissed at the suggestion of special counsel Martin M. Hugg.

MARION COUNTY.

No. 14. Commission vs. C., I. & L. Ry.

Action in the Superior Court, Room 2, concerning the issuance of free transportation under the act of 1905; pending.

No. 17. Lake Erie & Western Railroad Company vs. Commission. Pending in the Marion Superior Court, Room 3. Forkner & Forkner, special counsel.

No. 18. C., C., C. & St. L. Ry. vs. Commission.

This case is pending and is at issue. It is in the hands of the Attorney-General.