Sandusky-Portland Cement Co. v. Baltimore & O. R.

Citations

• 187 F. 583
• 111 C.C.A. 439
• 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4203

Syllabus

<p>1. Carriers (§ ISO*) — Reasonable Rates — Public Policy.</p> <p>Common carriers being required to furnish service at reasonable rates, it is as much a matter of public policy that established rates he not unreasonably' low as that, they' be not unreasonably high.</p> <p>I Ed. Note.— For other eases, see Carriers, Cent. Dig. §§ 162, 851-865; Dec. Dig. § 189.* 1</p> <p>2. Commerce (§ 89*) — Interstate Commerce Commission — Courts—Jurisdiction.</p> <p>Where a railroad company entered into a contract with complainant that, in consideration of complainant’s establishment of a cement factory on its line with a capacity of not less than 600 barrels a day, the carrier's regular established tariff rates on cement during a specified period should not exceed those set out in a schedule, complainant, in a suit to restrain the railroad company from establishing and filing higher rates than those contained in the schedule, could not obtain such relief in the courts in advance of a finding by the Interstate Commerce Commission on the issue whether the subsequent rates were reasonable or unreasonable, to be determined in the light of the railroad’s operation as an entirety.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.- — For other cases, see Commerce, Dec. Dig. § 89.*]</p>