Summary

Pierce Butler Great Northern Railway Company v…

The shipments moved on combination rates, being the sum of proportionals made respectively by the Canadian Pacific and the Great Northern, [1] applicable from mines to destinations, and on through bills of lading issued by the former, routing over its railroad to junction with the latter at the international boundary and thence over the railroad last mentioned to places of delivery. The combination rates necessarily reflect agreement, express or implied, between the connecting carriers to establish a through route for continuous carriage from origin on one to destination on the other.
Source: Wikisource

Pierce Butler Great Northern Railway Company v…

The ship line is operated in physical connection with the rail line, but the rail line receives none of the ship line's earnings, makes no division of a through rate with the ship, suffers none of its loss, and takes none of its hazards. The furnishing of a through bill of lading in connection with ship-side delivery at the port of Mobile is not a contract by the rail carrier for shipment beyond at a specified rate, or at any rate, nor does it carry with it any of the elements attaching to the through bill issued by a rail carrier with a rail connection.
Source: Wikisource

Pierce Butler Great Northern Railway Company v…

Plaintiff and another complained to the commission alleging the proportionals filed by the Great Northern and other American carriers to be unjust and unreasonable in violation of section 1 (49 USCA § 1) . They did not attack the combination or allege aught against the Canadian Pacific proportional. They prayed merely reasonable maximum American proportionals and reparation to the extent of the excess over such maxima. The commission found the American proportionals to be unjust and unreasonable so far as they exceed specified maxima which it made applicable in lieu of those assailed.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature