Mississippi Valley Barge Line Co. v. United States,
292 U.S. 282 (1934)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Mississippi Valley Barge Line Co. v. United States, 292 U.S. 282 (1934)

Mississippi Valley Barge Line Co. v. United States

No. 807

Argued April 5, 1934

Decided April 30, 1934

292 U.S. 282


1. Findings of the Interstate Commerce Commission may not be assailed in a suit to set its order aside in the absence of the evidence on which they were made. This settled rule cannot be avoided by the submission of additional evidence in the form of affidavits. P. 292 U. S. 286.

2. It is not for a court to substitute its judgment for that of the Interstate Commerce Commission in the adjustment of a rate schedule; the judicial function is exhausted when there is found a rational basis for the Commission's conclusion. P. 292 U. S. 286.

3. Order of the Commission permitting lower rail rates on sugar, to meet water competition on the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers, held supported by the facts set forth in its report. Id.

Page 292 U. S. 283

4. The policy of Congress with respect to rail and water transportation, as evinced by the Transportation and the Inland Waterways Transportation Acts, does not mean that carriers by rail shall be required to maintain a rate that is too high for fear that, through a change, they may cut into the profits of carriers by water. The most that it can mean, unless, conceivably, in circumstances of wanton or malicious injury, is that, where carriers by land an water are brought within the range of the regulatory powers of the Commission, as, e.g., in establishing through routes or joint rates, there shall be impartial recognition and promotion of the interests of all. P. 292 U. S. 288.

5. The permissive minimum rail rate in this case, fixed high enough to more than pay the cost of service, involves no discrimination against the complaining water competitor. P. 292 U. S. 288.

4 F.Supp. 745 affirmed.

Appeal from a decree of the District Court, constituted of three judges, dismissing a bill to set aside an order of the Interstate Commerce Commission.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.