Verhoeff & Company at, Eleventh and Maple streets, in the city of Louisville, and that said car was offered as above named, at a point where there was and is a physical connection between the tracks of said companies, namely, at Fourteenth and Rowan streets, in the city of Louisville; that along with said car there was tendered what is known as a trackage ticket, being numbered 5688, being issued by the Louisville Bridge Company, for which trackage ticket said Kentucky and Indiana Bridge Company had paid $1.00, and which was the usual and ordinary rate for switching on said line of the Louisville Bridge Company in the city of Louisville; that said trackage ticket was dated the 2d day of December, 1894, directing the switchmen to pass car No. 4680, F. C. & P., from the Kentucky and Indiana Bridge Company line to H. Verhoff & Company.

Affiant further states that the employes, servants and agents of the said Louisville Bridge Company, or those operating it, refused to receive said car, stating that they would not receive any freight which was brought by the Kentucky and Indiana Bridge Company from New Albany, and consigned to any point on the line of the Louisville Bridge Company. Upon said refusal as aforesaid, affiant went to F. A. Bonebrake, who was the Superintendent of the Louisville Bridge Company and the Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis Railway Company, and requested that said car be received and delivered; that said Bonebrake, or his representative, declined to receive said car, giving as a reason that said Bridge Company, or those operating it, had orders that no such receipt or delivery be made.

Affiant states that all the demands made upon said Louisville Bridge Company, or the representative of said Bridge Company, was to receive, transfer and deliver said car, and to move and transport the same, but they refused to receive, transfer, deliver, move, or transport said car, stating that if it was taken back to New Albany, and delivered to the Louisville Bridge Company, or the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis Railway Company, that they would deliver it, and not otherwise.

Affiant further states that said car laid on said tracks for some time, waiting for its receipt and transportation by said Louisville Bridge Company, but said Bridge Company refused to receive, transport or deliver the same as requested, or as required by this affiant, or by the trackage ticket attached to the way-bill.

Affiant further states that cars are moved, transported and delivered for other railroads and other lines on similar trackage tickets, and at said point, ard that $1 per car is the rate for such delivery and switching, and although a trackage ticket was so tendered, which is the usual form of paying for switching said cars on said line, said car was refused and said party declined, acting for said Louisville Bridge Company, and for said Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis Railway Company to receive, or deliver the same as requested by this affiant for and on behalf of the Kentucky and Indiana Bridge Company.

1894.

W. B. MEEK.

Subscribed and sworn to before me by W. B. Meek this 24th day of December,
M. DUNCANSON, N. P. J. C., Ky.
My commission expires June 28, 1896.

STATE OF KENTUCKY,

JEFFERSON COUNTY.}

J. P. Pulliam, being duly sworn, says that he is the local freight agent of the Kentucky and Indiana Bridge Company; that he has read the affidavit of W. B. Meek

General Freight Agent of the Kentucky and Indiana Bridge Company, in reference to the offer and refusal of the Louisville Bridge Company, or those operating it, to receive and deliver, transport and move, car F. C. & P. No. 4680, brought by the Kentucky and Indiana Bridge Company from New Albany, and consigned to H. Verhoeff & Co., in the city of Louisville, at Eleventh and Maple streets, and that he knows the statements made by said Meek are true; that he heard the interview between said Meek and Bonebrake, and knows the same to be correctly stated by said Meek. J. P. PULLIAM. Subscribed and sworn to before me by J. P. Pulliam this 24th day of December, M. DUNCANSON, N. P. J. C. Ky. My commission expires June 28, 1896.

1894.

Since receiving these complaints, Hon. Wm. J. Hendrick, Attorney-General of Kentucky, has instituted proceedings in the Jefferson Circuit Court to recover the penalty imposed by the Constitution for a violation of its provisions.

The Commission is advised that the Louisville Bridge Company has since been receiving and switching all cars offered by the Kentucky and Indiana Bridge Company.

COAL RATES AT MIDDLESBOROUGH.

Middlesborough Belt Railroad Company, Complainant,

vs.

Knoxville, Cumberland Gap & Louisville Railroad Co., Defendants.

Discrimination.

J. H. Bartlett, receiver of the Middlesborough Belt Railroad Company, on December, filed a complaint against the Knoxville, Cumberland Gap and Louisville Railroad Company, which is explained in the following extract from his letter:

For the information of yourself and Commissioners, I beg to give you the following outline of the trouble and the cause of it, and to show you the arbitrary way in which a larger corporation is attempting to treat a small one.

The dispute is between the Middlesborough Belt Railroad Company, a corporation organized under the laws of the States of Kentucky and Tennessee, having track in both States, and the Knoxville, Cumberland Gap and Louisville Railroad, which is also organized under the laws of both States, and also has track in both States. Both > these properties are in the hands of Receivers, both under the same court. The Knoxville, Cumberland Gap and Louisville Railroad connects at Knoxville with the Marietta and North Georgia Railroad, which is also in the hands of a Receiver, and one of the principal shippers of coal over the three lines is the Mingo Mountain Coal and Coke Company, also in the hands of a receiver, in the same court. The receivers of the various properties are as follows: Middlesborough Belt Railroad, J. H. Bartlett,

Middlesborough; Knoxville, Cumberland Gap and Louisville Railroad, Clarence Cary, New York; Marietta and North Georgia Railroad, J. B. Glover, Marietta; Mingo Mountain Coal and Coke Company, C. M. Woodbury, Middlesborough.

I was appointed receiver in the middle of October, 1893, and, upon investigating the affairs of the company, I found that they were not receiving sufficient revenue for the services performed. The road, previous to my appointment, had been operated by the K., C. G. & L. R. R. Company's officials, and they had arranged that the mileage on the Belt, which is used for the conveyance of coal from the mines to Middlesborough Station, and is only about eight and a half miles, should be treated as a longer mileage, and taken as a part of the through system and get a proportion or pro rate of the total freight received. This is a most unusual thing for a belt railroad which does not pretend to be any thing more than a switching road, and where the charges are almost invariably made at a certain sum per car handled. As, however, the only business on the road of any moment is that of coal, and as coal is invariably sold by the ton, and as the capacity of cars vary from twelve tons to twenty-six tons or thirty tons, a charge per car on all shipments, particularly on through shipments, I did not consider advisable, and in response to the representations of the coal companies, a rate was fixed per ton, and I made this ten cents per ton in place of what it was previously of eight cents, or sometimes less. For shipments for local business to all points on K., C. G. & L., and to all points on the Cumberland Valley Division of the L. & N. R. R., a local rate of $4 a car was retained. This rate had been settled by the K., C. G. & L. officials, and I made no change in it.

The above rates were in force for twelve months, and although, of course, the coal shippers would prefer to have had the old rates left as they were, still there was no serious trouble, and for the past twelve months the business has been conducted on this basis.

On the 9th of October, Mr. W. B. Bradley, General Freight Agent of the K., C. G. & L. R. R. and the M. & N. G. R. R., made me a written proposition to reduce the rates and discriminate in favor of one coal mine and shipper as against the other mines in the same district. I declined to be a party to any such transaction, and informed him that our ordinary rates would have to be paid by everybody. After some correspondence, I was officially notified on the 2d of November, that the K., C. G. & L. R. R. would insist upon having the rates which had been in force from the mines (which means inclusive of the Belt charges), that they would insist upon having these same rates from Middlesborough, and this on coal for use in Knoxville meant an advance of 50 per cent. on the lowest grade, 36 per cent. on the medium grade, a 25 per cent. advance on the highest grade, which of course is for lump coal for domestic use. They also notified me that they would require that all coal and coke be delivered to them free of all charges of every description. That means that they would not allow the rates to go on as an advance charge, which is customary on all business between railroads.

I at once telegraphed the receiver of the K., C. G. & L., Mr. Clarence Cary, who resides in New York, and who is a co-receiver with me in the American Association, Limited, advising him that I had been notified by his General Freight Agent of this advance, and asking if it was done with his sanction and approval, as the matter was very serious to the American Association's interests Mr. Cary replied that he had not considered or been sufficiently advised as to the proposed change in the

freight rates, and that he was referring the communication to the Knoxville office for report. On the third of November I'enclosed Mr. Cary copies of the correspondence, as I was notified that the change in rates would take place on the 15th of November. I heard nothing further from Mr. Cary till the 18th of November, when he telegraphed me that he had instructed the railroad officials to withhold the proposed changed rates until the Belt Railroad and the Coal Companies could have a hearing; also saying that he was suddenly called to London, England, and that he was to sail on the Wednesday following, and that in the meantime his partner, Mr. Whitridge, would act for him in railroad matters. The date of the proposed change had been altered from the 15th of November till the 25th of November, and relying upon Mr. Cary's telegraphic assurance that no change would be made until the matter had been fully discussed, at considerable expense and loss of time I went to New York, and had a meeting with the representatives of the K., C. G. & L. Railroad and the coal companies, with the result that the K., C. G. & L. rates were arranged to be reduced to what they were previously, provided the Belt Railroad would decrease its rates twenty per cent., the K., C. G. & L. retaining this difference. In spite of Mr. Cary's telegraphic assurance that the rates would not be advanced on the 25th of November, acting under Mr. Whitridge's instructions, the rates were so advanced, with the consequence that until the 18th of December there were 40 cr 50 car loads of coal lying in the Middlesborough yard and in our gravity yard awaiting shipment. No notice was given to the coal companies that this extraordinary advance in freight rates was to be made, with the exception that a notice was posted in the depot.

The result of such an arbitrary proceeding has been to disorganize the coal business, and to create a great deal of trouble and hardship.

I still declined to make any reduction in the Belt rates, and the K., C. G. & L. refused to receive the business unless their terms were complied with. As a matter of expediency, and as a temporary measure till such a time when I can get relief, either from your Commission or from the courts, I arranged with the coal companies to prepay us in cash the difference between the old rates and the new, allowing the charges fixed by the Belt to go forward as before, and I am just in receipt of a rate sheet issued by the K., C. G. & L. and the M. & N. G. roads jointly, in which they have fixed the Belt rate at the figures which they have arbitrarily adopted.

I should be glad if you would investigate the position of affairs, and see if the members of the Commission can not take this matter up and let me have justice.

Yours truly,

J. H. BARTLETT, Receiver.

This being a question for adjustment by the Inter State Commerce Commission, this Board immediately prepared a petition to that body embracing the complaint of Mr. Bartlett, and will prosecute it before the Inter-State Commission to a conclusion.

Milling in Transit.

The complaint of Miles & Son, millers at Frankfort, against the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company, praying that the defendant be required to afford the complainants the same

advantages as are offered Louisville millers in the practice of "milling in transit," or to abandon the practice, which was taken up by this Board before the Inter-State Commerce Commission, has never been passed upon by that body. The decision of this matter involves a great deal to millers in all parts of this country, and it is a very delicate question. Millers at certain points have been enabled to build up a very large business through this practice of "milling in transit," while others, who are denied its privileges on account of their less favored location, must struggle for an existence. If it be decided that the practice is unlawful, the business of the former class will be seriously crippled, but it is but common justice that all should share the facilities of transportation alike. The Inter-State Commission has under consideration other cases of like kind from other sections of the country, and we are informed that all are being considered together, and an early decision may be expected.

SEPARATE COACH LAW.

The statute requiring railroads to furnish separate coaches for white and colored people which became operative in October, 1893, has been respected as far as possible upon the railroad lines in Kentucky, with reference to travel between points within the limits of the State. Several suits have been instituted in the State and Federal courts by colored persons to test the constitutionality of the law. But one of these has come to trial. Judge Barr, in the United States Court at Owensboro, held that the law was unconstitutional with reference to interstate passengers. Judge Barr's charge to the jury in this case of Rev. W. H. Anderson, colored, of Evansville, Indiana, vs. the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company, was as follows:

"Gentlemen of the jury, it is proper that the court should carefully state to you the previous rulings in this case so that you may apprehend the issues that you are to try.

"This suit, as you have understood it, is one by the plaintiff, Anderson, who purchased a ticket at Evansville for himself and wife on the L. & N. Railroad to be transported as first-class passengers to the town of Madisonville. On another occasion he purchased for himself and wife a first-class ticket from Henderson, Kentucky, to Madisonville, Kentucky. He claims that when he and his wife got into the car at Evansville no objection was made to his getting into the ladies'