FOOTNOTES:
[162] 14 I. C. C. Rep., 250. Upheld by the Supreme Court in 1911; 219 U. S., 498. Also 23 Idem, 535.
[163] Circular Letters of the Chicago Bureau of Car Performances; undated.
[164] The latter half of chap. XII.
[165] The chapter on reorganizations in vol. II will afford other instances with full references. Com. & Fin. Chron., LIX, p. 232.
[166] 55th Cong., 1st Sess., Sen. doc., 39, p. 29.
[167] Ann. Rep., I. C. C., 1896, p. 82: and 1897, p. 53. Fine cases in 1 I. C. C. Rep., 633-656.
[168] Investigation of grain rates at Missouri river points; 54th Cong., 2nd Sess., Sen. doc. 115, pp. 17-22, etc.
[169] 167 U. S. Rep., 633.
[171] On private car lines, Columbia University Studies, etc., LXXXI, 1908, p. 185. J. W. Midgley's Circular Letters as chief of the Bureau of Car Performances in 1901, costing him his position, by the way, are most significant. Car service reform resulted nevertheless. Cf. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1904, p. 299. See pp. 96 and 140, supra.
[172] U. S. Bureau of Corp., Rep. on Trans, of Petroleum, pp. 36, 60, 81, 88.
[173] 10 I. C. C. Rep., 1, 148, 385 and 661: 18th Ann. Rep., I.C.C., 19 and 42: Senate (Elkins) Committee, 1905, pp. 2424-2495. Later cases discussed at p. 212, infra.
[176] 11th Ann. Rep., I.C.C.; 16th Idem, p. 13; and 21st Idem, p. 14.
[177] Bureau of Corp., Rep. on Trans, of Petroleum, 1905, p. 105 et seq.
[178] 11 I.C.C. Rep., 438; Cf. 13 Idem, 70; and 19 Idem, 356.
[179] Report on Discriminations and Monopolies in Coal and Oil; Jan. 25, 1907, pp. 1-81.
[180] Ripley, Railway Problems, chap. II, fully described.
[181] 11 I.C.C. Rep., 558; U. S. Bureau Corp'ns Rep., p. 148.
[183] 20 I. C. C. Rep., 200, with dissenting opinion. Reviewed by the U. S. Commerce Court 1912; Railway Age Gazette, chap. LII, p. 1550. P. 586, infra.
[184] U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals, decided March 12, 1902. The history is in Ann. Rep., I.C.C., 1907, p. 114; 1908 pp. 26 and 36; and 1909, p. 26.
[185] Never published. Outlined in Wisconsin Assembly Journal, 1905, chap. II, pp. 1463-1497.
[187] Cf. 59th Congress, 1st Session, Senate Doc. 526.
[188] 13 I.C.C. Rep., 123.
[189] Ann. Rep., I.C.C., 1910, p. 10.
[190] Idem, 1909, p. 32. Circuit Court of Appeals decision, April 29, 1911, Ann. Rep., I.C.C., 1908, p. 32.
[192] Boston Transcript, Feb. 20, 1912.
[193] 22 I.C.C. Rep., 51.
[194] 222 U. S., 42. The system is described in the Railway Age Gazette, June 4, 1909.
[195] 21 I.C.C. Rep., 304. Compare also before the U. S. Commerce Court; the Stock Yards case, 192 Fed. Rep., 330; the California Switching case, 188 Fed. Rep., 229; and the Crane Iron Works case, No. 55, April session, 1912. The tap-line decision, 23 I.C.C., 277, most fully discussed the general policy to be observed toward industrial roads in the lumber business. Cf. also the use of boat lines. 23 Idem, 358.
[196] Railway Age Gazette, LII, pp. 269 and 340.
[197] Evidence before the Stanley House Committee on Steel Corporation, Feb. 28, 1912, p. 3667; and Bureau of Corporations on U. S. Steel Corporation, II, p. 72.
[198] American Economic Review, 1911, p. 789.
[199] S. O. Dunn, American Transportation Question, pp. 62, 81.