TWENTY-FIRST ANNUAL YEAR BOOK— PART VII 603 



We think that the transportation act ought to be amended in regard 

 to that proposition. That involved several hundred million dollars. 



Secondly, as to going value. Mr. Prouty, who was one of our best 

 champions in the country at the beginning, has changed his notion about 

 the railroads being entitled to going value. That will add about 12 per 

 cent if the commission adopts his view. If the railroads are worth 

 $20,000,000,000 that will be another $2,000,000,000 or so on which you pay 

 6 per cent annually, which makes $120,000,000 or $150,000,000 a year. 



The third proposition is mixed shipments of live stock, which is 

 pending. 



Fourth is partition between mixed shipments. The subject of the 

 rules and regulations of mixed shipments is going to be up for re- 

 appraisal before the commission. 



Fifth, spotting charges. They are reviving the proposition of spot- 

 ting charges at certain industrial tracks, and elsewhere. 



Sixth is the live stock commission. We had that proposition up, 

 and you people are familiar with it. There is considerable doubt in the 

 rainds of people whether the federal government has control of that. A 

 number of years ago the supreme court held in the Anderson case at 

 Kansas City that it was a set amount. 



Seventh, minimum weights on live stock. 



Eighth, spotting to unload. They are considering advancing those 

 rates above what they have been. 



Ninth, charging for feed. The railroads propose levying a rate on 

 that; and they have just assured us they will withdraw that proposition. 



Tenth, the two-for-one rule. There is an attempt on the part of one 

 railroad to change that on the ground that it is being abused. I won't 

 go into details with regard to that. 



Eleventh. — Notwithstanding the general advance effective this last 

 August, the railroads, on the 7th of December, just a few days ago now, 

 thinking perhaps that live stock wasn't bearing its fair share of the bur- 

 dens, put on another advance of 7 cents a hundred pounds on single-deck 

 cars from the Missouri river to Chicago on hogs. Gentlemen, that is 

 one case where we failed to catch the culprit before the decision had been 

 rendered. Originally the commission had a case brought by the Indian- 

 apolis Chamber of Commerce in which they claimed that Indianapolis 

 and Chicago were so competitive from Missouri river points in hogs that 

 the Indianapolis rate should not exceed the Chicago rate by 10 cents. 



In a previous case the counsel for the Indianapolis Chamber of Com- 

 raerce admitted in the record that on a line drawn north and south from 

 Chicago to St. Louis, Indianapolis didn't expect to be on an equality with 

 Chicago; that it wasn't necessary; it wasn't her natural territory. 



But here it seems that the Missouri river is her natural territory, 

 and in the trial of that latter case no producers' organization in the Uni- 

 ted States that I can find was represented by counsel or by witnesses. 

 I learned that after the decision had been rendered. I immediately 

 asked for a re-opening. My request has not been granted; has not been 

 acted upon, so far as I know. But in the meantime Indianapolis said we 

 were crying before we were hurt, that the railroads would reduce the rate 

 to Indianapolis instead of raising it to Chicago. Along came the 7-cent 



