Interstate Commerce Commission v. Illinois Central Railroad
Company, ante, p.
215 U. S. 452,
followed as to power, under the Act to Regulate Commerce,of the
Commission to make reasonable arrangements for the distribution of
coal cars to shippers, including cars for transportation of fuel
purchased by the railroad company for its own use.
Where the case is submitted on bill and answer, a fact, alleged
in the complaint and denied in the answer and for which proof is
demanded, cannot be considered, especially where, as in this case,
there is a contrary finding of a body such as the Interstate
Commerce Commission.
The facts are stated in the opinion.
Page 215 U. S. 480
MR. JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case is controlled by the opinion just announced in the
case of
Interstate Commerce Commission v. Illinois Central
Railroad Company, ante, p.
215 U. S. 452. The
complaints made to the Commission were alike in both cases, and
they were heard before that body at the same time, and one report
was made in both cases. The order in both cases was the same. Like
bills for injunction were filed in the court below, and there also
they were heard together and were disposed of in one opinion. There
is only this difference between the two cases. In this, the bill
for injunction contained the following averment concerning a small
number out of the thousands of coal cars forming part of the
equipment of the road:
"That your orator has purchased and now operates on its line 360
steel hopper-bottom coal cars; that said cars are of an extreme
height, to-wit, ten feet; that, by reason of such height, said cars
can be unloaded only upon specially constructed trestles; that no
consignees to whom coal is shipped from mines on your orator's line
own or have the use of such trestles, and that such cars are not
available for commercial shipment of coal. And your orator avers
that it at all times restricts these cars to the service of hauling
your orator's own fuel supply, and that, by reason of such
restriction, and by reason of the fact that your orator alone has
the means of unloading said hopper-bottom cars, said cars never
constitute a part of your orator's equipment available for
commercial shipments of coal."
The answer of the Commission denied all knowledge of the truth
of the averments thus made, and called for proof on the subject. No
proof was made, and the cause was submitted to the court below on
bill and answer. In view of this fact, and in consideration,
moreover, of the weight which the law gives to the finding of the
Commission as to the existence of unlawful preference, and the
operative effect of the order which the Commission made, until set
aside, we think the mere
Page 215 U. S. 481
averment of the facts referred to in no way causes this case to
differ from the
Illinois Central case. Of course, under
these circumstances, we intimate no opinion as to how far, had the
facts alleged as to the hopper cars been established, they would,
to the extent of such cars, have taken this case out of the rule
announced in the
Illinois Central case. It follows that
the judgment must be reversed and the case remanded for further
proceedings in conformity to this opinion.
MR. JUSTICE BREWER dissents.