36 BULLETIN 1150, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
sion, 6 cents per 100 pounds for hogs and 4 cents per 100 pounds for 
cattle; insurance one-half of 1 per cent of the gross sales value of 
each kind of stock. (See p. 41.) The local car expenses usually con- 
sist chiefly of feed and bedding. Each species should be charged with 
the feed it receives, and the bedding may be divided on the basis of 
the space occupied by each species in the car or on the weight basis. 
Ropes and special crates for vicious animals should be charged to 
the owners of the animals requiring their use. 
Prorating when shipment consists of more than one car—When 
several cars of the same kind of live stock are shipped the same day, 
should the returns, shrinkage, and expenses be averaged, or should 
each car be prorated as a separate unit? If 25 farmers deliver 200 
head of hogs for shipment. the fact that three cars may be required 
to transport the hogs is and should be of no concern to them. Each 
patron is entitled to the same price for the same grade of live stock 
and should be assessed at the same rate of expense as every other 
patron whose stock was included in the shipment. 
In actual practice, however, the solution is not always so simple. 
When only one grade of hogs is loaded into each of several cars 
included in a shipment to one market, the expenses can be averaged 
for the entire shipment, the shrinkage in the case of the-hogs can 
be calculated separately for the good butcher hogs and the packers, 
and also for the “throwouts” when their shrink is abnormal. In 
the case of calves and sheep, the rates of shrinkage should be calcu- 
lated separately for the bulk of the load and the culls or “ throwouts,” 
whenever the rates show a marked difference. 
As each car in the above case is assumed to contain but one grade 
of live stock, each grade can be priced to the shippers in accordance 
with the actual sales. If two or more cars of the same grade sold 
for different prices the proceeds should be averaged. 
Where the shipment consists of several cars of mixed grades it is 
clear that all shippers should receive the same price of the same grade 
of stock, even though the animals were distributed among the sev- 
eral cars and might actually have sold for different prices. 
An entirely different situation is presented when part of the ship- 
ment goes to one market and another part to another market. In 
this case the shrinkage and expenses should be calculated separately 
for the cars going to each market. A question arises, however, as 
to the distribution of the net proceeds. If the manager has mis- 
judged the relative merits of the different markets, he finds himself 
in an embarrassing position when attempting to explain to a shipper 
why his stock brought less than that of a neighbor, whose stock 
happended to be included in a car shipped to another market which 
turned out to be the highest one that day. If the stock is graded 
and each grade shipped to the most advantageous market, it might 
still happen that the lower grade would bring the same or a higher 
price than the higher grade, and the manager would have the same 
difficulty in attempting to explain the inconsistency. 
In spite of these difficulties, the manager is presumed to have used 
his best judgment and to have patronized the market offering the 
best average results for each class and grade of livestock. Each ship- 
ment to a different market should therefore be treated as a separate 
unit. If dissatisfaction results frequently, it means that the manager 
