CITIZENS OF BRADY'S SWITCH, KY., Complainants,

VS.

THE CHESAPEAKE & OHIO RAILWAY CO., Defendant.

Subject: Abolishing switch at Brady's siding.

It appears that a siding was established at Brady's Switch some thirty years ago, and was allowed to remain at that point until recently, when it was taken out and moved some three or four hundred feet farther east on account of it being on a very steep grade, and not affording sufficient room to handle the business at that point. The right of way on which the new siding was located was furnished by interested parties at that point who were unwilling to let the outside public load or unload their freight from this siding. The matter is now under investigation, and is, therefore, continued.

O'BRIEN, PETERS & Co., SPRINGFIELD, KY., Complainants,

VS.

LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD Co., Defendant.

Subject: Delay in furnishing cars and damage to live stock shipments from Springfield, Ky.

This matter is now under investigation and is, therefore, continued.

This matter is still under investigation, and is, therefore, continued.

CITIZENS OF EMINENCE, KY., Complainants,

VS.

LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD Co., Defendant.

Subject: Extortionate and discriminatory rates to and from all points in Kentucky.

The Commission held a meeting at Eminence, Ky., and heard the testimony of quite a number of witnesses, and it being developed that the complaint was of a general nature, it was consolidated with that of J. Ed. Guenther, et. al., versus the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, et. al., and the rates complained of were materially reduced by the order of the Railroad Commission effective August 1, 1906. This order, however, was not permitted to go into effect, the Commission having been enjoined by the defendant company, and the matter is now pending in the Federal Court. Until this is disposed of, no further action can be taken.

CITIZENS OF FRANKLINTON, KY., Complainants,

VS.

LOUISVILLE & Nashville RailROAD Co., Defendant.

Subject: Delay to tobacco; Franklinton to Louisville.

This case was investigated and the delay found to be due both to the Railroad Company and the drayage line. Complainants were advised that when unusual delays of this character occurred, resulting in damages, claim should be filed against the transportation company.

WHEAT & SHORT, Complainants,

VS.

CINCINNATI, NEW ORLEANS & TEXAS PACIFIC RAILWAY Co., Defendant.

Subject: Insufficient supply of cars and excessive rates on crossties from McKinney, Ky., to Cincinnati.

Both these subjects are under investigation, and are, therefore, continued.

CITIZENS OF FLAT ROCK, KY., Complainants,

VS.

CINCINNATI, NEW ORLEANS & TEXAS PACIFIC RAILWAY Co., Defendant.

Subject: Petition to remove depot to new site.

This matter was investigated and permission granted to move the depot to the point desired.

CROSTHWAIT & KITCHEN, Complainants,

VS.

CINCINNATI, NEW ORLEANS & TEXAS PACIFIC RAILWAY Co., Defendant.

Subject: Overcharge in storage at Sadieville, Ky.

This complaint was investigated. The actual overcharge was refunded, and complaint dismissed settled.

CITIZENS OF AUBURN, KY., Complainants,

US.

LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD CO., Defendant.

Subject: Extortionate rates to and from all points in Kentucky.

The rates complained of were materially reduced by the order of the Commission effective August 1, 1906. This order, however, was not permitted to go into effect, the Commission having been enjoined by the defendant company, and the matter is now pending in the Federal Court. Until this is disposed of, no further action can be taken.

CITIZENS OF BELTON, KY., Complainants,

VS.

LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD Co., Defendant.

Subject: Inadequate depot facilities at Belton, Ky.

Petition was filed by the citizens of Belton, Ky., claiming insufficient depot accommodations at that point. The quesion was taken up with the

proper official of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, and it is now being investigated, and is, therefore, continued.

FORBES MANUFACTURING CO., Complainant,

VS.

. LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD Co., Defendant.

Subject: Switching at Hopkinsville, Ky.

This matter is now under investigation and is, therefore, continued.

E. M. JOHNSON, PRINCETON, KY., Complainant.

VS.

LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD Co., Defendant.

Subject: Shortage of coal cars at Princeton, Ky.

Complaint was received from complainant regarding the insufficient supply of coal cars at that point and after correspondence with the officials of the Illinois Central Railroad, the Commission was advised by a letter from Mr. Johnson, under date of July 28, that there was such a vast improvement in the handling of cars at that place, that he would withdraw his complaint, which was done.

R. L. BLAKEMAN, Complainant,

vs.

CINCINNATI, NEW ORLEANS & TEXAS PACIFIC RAILWAY CO., Defendants.

Subject: Failure to have ticket office open to enable passengers to purchase tickets before the arrival of trains.

The complainant requested the endorsement of the Commission in order that he might go before the Grand Jury and indict the defendant company. He was advised, however, that this endorsement on the part of the Commission was not necessary.

CITIZENS OF MAYFIELD, KY., Complainants,

VS.

LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD Co., Defendant.

Subject: Extortionate rates to and from Mayfield.

The rates complained of were materially reduced by the order of the Commission effective August 1, 1906. This order, however, was not permitted to go into effect, the Commission having been enjoined by the defendant company, and the matter is now pending in the Federal Court. Until this is disposed of, no further action can be taken.

S. RENAKER & SON, CYNTHIANA, KY., Complainants,

VS.

CHESAPEAKE & OHIO RAILWAY Co., Defendant.

Subject: Extortionate rates on poultry to Boston, Mass.

Before any action was taken in this matter, complainants advised that the rate had been arranged to their satisfaction and the complaint was withdrawn.

J. C. SAMUELS, Complainant,

vs.

LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD Co., Defendant.

Subject: Overcharge on shipment of lambs from Toronto, Canada, to Deatsville, Ky.

This complaint was investigated and the fact developed that the shipment was overcharged, which amount was refunded by defendant, and the matter dismissed settled.

MORGANFIELD & ATLANTA RAILROAD Co., Complainant,

VS.

ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD Co., Defendant.

Subject: Disagreement as to crossing at Clay, Ky.

The Morganfield & Atlanta Railway Company having filed with this Commission its petition asking to be permitted to cross the tracks