May "J, 1907. 



The Weekly Florists' Review^ 



J887 



>*^^^^ 



EXPRESS RATES 



ORDERED CUT 



^Ur#S^Mf»'^#-^ 





Interstate Commission Upholds Florists. 



The Interstate Commerce Commission, 

 :it Washington, May 4, rendered a de- 

 ■ision in the matter of t^e protest of 

 ilie Society of American Florists against 

 tlie rates charged by the United States 

 Express Co., for carrying cut flowers 

 I'lom New Jersey and* Pennsylvania 

 points to New York City. The commis- 

 sion holds that the rate now in force 

 is unreasonable and orders that it be 

 materially reduced after June 15. 



The case is of special interest to 

 growers for the New York market, as 

 materially affecting their daily expendi- 

 tures, but it is of importance to the 

 whole trade in that it indicates the at- 

 titude the Interstate Commerce Commis- 

 sion will take on the claim that special 

 remuneration is justified by the special 

 service and extra expense involved in 

 handling cut flower shipments — it will 

 head off increases in rates in other sec- 

 tions of the country and teach the ex- 

 press companies that might no longer 

 makes right, or if it does, the might 

 now is in the hands of the people. In- 

 cidentally, the decision will attract the 

 attention of the whole country to the 

 flower business, for this is the first ease 

 under the new law in which a decision 

 has been rendered as to the reasonable- 

 ness of an express rate. 



The ease was brought in the name of 

 the Society of American Florists, which 

 claimed that the rate charged by the 

 United States Express Co. on cut flowers 

 from New Jersey and Pennsylvania 

 points to New York City was unreasona- 

 ble, excessive and unjust. This rate till 

 May, 1906, was 50 cents per hundred 

 pounds, and at that time was raised to 

 $1 per hundred pounds. 



G>mpany^s G>ntention. 



The express company defended its in- 

 crease of 100 per cent in its rate by 

 claiming that the delivery service given 

 cut flowers in New York is much more 

 expensive than that given other articles, 

 and that it could not increase its rate 

 a sutficient amount to meet the expense 

 of this special service without largely 

 increasing the total rate, because of its 

 contracts with the railroads under which 

 it is required to pay a percentage of its 

 gross receipts to the railroad companies 

 for their service. It was set forth that 

 the United States Express Co. has con- 

 tracts with the Delaware. Lackawanna 

 & Western Eailroad by which the rail- 

 road receives forty-five per cent of the 

 total gross receipts of the express com- 

 pany; but the commission found that 

 the service rendered by the railroad is 

 no greater or different under the new 

 rate of $1 than it was under the old rate 

 of 50 cents; that the railroad now re- 

 ceives forty-five per cent of the .$1 rate, 

 namely, 45 cents per hundred pounds; 

 that prior to May 1, 1906, the railroad 

 received but one-half of said amount for 

 the same service; that the percentage of 

 gross revenue paid by the express com- 

 pany to the Central' Railroad of New 



Jersey is forty-three per cent, and to the 

 Lehigh Valley Eailroad forty per cent; 

 that the United States Express Co. em- 

 ploys agents at the points of origin 

 concerned, who are, generally speaking, 

 paid for their services in gathering, bill- 

 ing, loading, unloading and delivering 

 express matter with a percentage of the 

 gross receipts at such offices, which per- 

 centages range downward from twenty 

 per cent. 



The Decision. 



Commissioner Lane, who prepared the 

 decision, said: 



' ' Elaborate tables have been presented 

 by the defendant tending to prove that 

 the former rate of 50 cents was unre- 

 munerative, owing to the percentage 

 which it paid to the railroad, added to 

 the percentage which it paid to its agents 

 and the cost of delivery in New York. 

 From these same figures it can also be 

 adduced that the present rate of $1 is 

 unremunerative ; and it may well be said 

 that from an analysis of the charges 

 made upon any single commodity or 

 class of commodities transported by this 

 company a similar result could be 

 arrived at. 



* ' In order to increase its business the 

 express company gives an especially 

 prompt service to flower raisers. There 

 is no evidence that this is not done by 

 all express companies, or that it does 

 anything with respect to this traffic which 

 transportation companies do no,t gener- 

 ally do as to certain classes of perish- 

 able freight. But, admitting that an ex- 

 tra return should be made over and 

 above that received for the carrying of 

 articles generally transported by express, 

 no reason has been shown why the rail- 

 road charges and agents' pay should .be 

 doubled, excepting that the express 

 company has to pay double the amount 

 under its contract to its agents and to 

 the railroad company — a necessity or 

 condition which we cannot recognize as 

 controlling as to rates. ' ' 



The New Rates. 



The order of the commission requires 

 the United States Express Co. to cease 

 and desist from charging the $1 rate 

 after June 15 and directs the express 

 company on or before that date to put 

 in a 60-cent rate from Chatham and Som- 

 erville, N. J., to New York City, a 72- 

 cent rate from Allentown, Pa., to New 

 York City, and from Philadelphia, Hill- 

 side and Dorranceton, Pa., a 90-cent 

 rate. 



The order also directs the reduction on 

 rates on empties from New York City 

 to the points named to the merchandise 

 rate of 50 cents per hundred pounds. 



History of the Case. 



It was October 9, 1906, that the sec- 

 retary of the Society of American Flo- 

 rists filed with the Interstate Commerce 

 Commission the petition setting forth 

 "That in the course of their business 

 members of the S. A, F. located at vari- 

 ous points in New Jersey and Pennsyl- 



vania make shipments of flowers from 

 such points to the city of New York. ' 

 That quick handling of these shipments 

 is so essential, that the use of defend- 

 ant's express line, even at higher rates 

 than those of railroad companies, has 

 been and is absolutely necessary. That 

 on or about the first day of May, 1906, 

 defendant arbitrarily knd unjustly in- 

 creased its express charges on flowers 

 from the points named to New York 

 City. That the following table shows 

 the places, the express charges prior to 

 May 1, 1906, and the advanced express 

 charges of defendant, in cents per 100 

 pounds : 



Charges prior to Charges since 

 From. May 1, 1006. May 1, 1900. 



Somervllle, N. J 50c $1.00 



Chatham, N. J 50c l.Oil 



Allentown, Pa 60c l.OO 



Philadelphia, Pa 75c 1.00 



Hillside, Pa 75c l.ftO 



Dorranceton, Pa 75c 1.00 



' ' That said advance in charges by de- 

 fendant was altogether unwarrantable 

 and unjustified by the circumstances of 

 the case, and the present charges are 

 unjust and unreasonable of themselves 

 and generally. That complainant's 

 members at said points are willing to 

 pay express charges largely in excess of 

 what carriers by railroad would be likely 

 to charge on such commodity between 

 the same points, but it alleges that the 

 above-named advanced rates are so un- 

 just and so much in excess of what they 

 should be that their exaction is nearly 

 ruinous. 



' ' That prior to May 1, 1906, the empty • 

 boxes or cases which contained the flow- 

 ers were either returned free or at a 

 nominal charge by defendant, from New 

 York City to said points, but that since 

 said dat^ defendant unreasonably exacts 

 the same charge per 100 pounds for the ^', 

 return of the empties as it exacts for 

 the flowers themselves. That this addi- 

 tional burden placed by defendant on 

 such shippers is unjustified and should 

 be changed. 



"That these flower shipments aic, in 

 a majority of cases, delivered by com- 

 plainant at the railroad stations, and 

 the defendant is not required to call for 

 them at the greenhouses. That the mar- 

 kets in New York City are bunched in a 

 circumscribed area, so that in cases of 

 delivery to places of business defendant 

 is not required to cart shipments long 

 distances. That the express-carriage of 

 flowers does not call for any special 

 service other than promptness of deliv- 

 ery, and much of the cost which defend- 

 ant has to assume in collecting and de- 

 livering ordinary merchandise is elim- 

 inated." 



The Society of American Florists ap- 

 j>eared before the interstate commerce 

 commission at W^ashington Friday and 

 Saturday, March 15 and 16, at the time 

 of the meeting of the Eose Society. 

 Some twenty or twenty-five oflScers and 

 members of the society were present and 

 evidence was offered by Frank L. ^loore, 

 Chatham, N. J.; L. ^f, Noe and Eobert 

 Sciniltz, ^Madison, N. J.; Adolph Faren- 

 wald, Eoslyn, Pa.; F. H. Traendly, New- 

 York City, and ^\. J. Stewart, Boston. 

 Two hours and a half were consumed in 

 presenting the evidence. On the follow- 

 ing day representatives of the express 

 company presented their side of the case. 

 The judgment of the commission now is 

 rendered. There is no appeal. 



It will be noted, however, that the de^ 

 cision was largely on a technical ground, 

 concerning the railroads' contract, not 

 touched on in the S. A. F. petition. 



