to the New York City ana Northern railroad and thence to market. Previous to the building of the railroad, the ore had been transported by wagon. The expense incident to this method had been so great as to prevent the Mines from being profitable. It was stated by Mr. Case and Mr. Gannon, that this piece of railroad was a necessity to keep the Mines in operation. The road was opened for business in January, 1885, but was not ballasted or put in good order until July, 1885. The trains are operated by the New York City and Northern, the road-bed and superstructure being maintained by the company itself. No passenger trains are run, and no station agent is maintained to receive freight either at the Mines, which is the terminus of the road, or at the Falls, which is the middle point.

A freight car is left at the Falls and also at the Mines, into which, it was stated, miscellaneous freight could be left, but there is no one to receipt for it, no one apparently responsible for it, and in a word, no one with whom to transact the necessary business incident to shipping or receiving goods.

Bulky freights by the car-load, such as coal, brewers' grains, etc., are left at the stations where the farmers can unload themselves. Á milk car is attached to a freight train, and this part of the business seems to be conducted satisfactorily. A freight agent goes over the road every day, and it was supposed by the railroad company that he could attend to all the business offering; but the farmers and citizens complain that, as the freight trains run quite irregularly, he cannot be found when he is wanted, and that consequently this arrangement fails to properly subserve the convenience of the public.

Furthermore, there is no station or building where freight offered can be either receipted for or protected from the weather or theft.

1ST. WITH REGARD TO FREIGHT ACCOMMODATIONS.

The railroad companies express great doubt as to the likelihood of sufficient miscellaneous freight being offered to warrant the building of a station at either Mahopac Falls or Mahopac Mines, in view of the fact that the former is but two miles from Baldwin Place on the New York City and Northern, and but two miles from Mahopac, a station on a branch of the Harlem road.

At the hearing, however, in response to the general demand for better freight facilities, Mr. Case, on the part of the Mahopac Falls Railroad Company, agreed to construct a station at Mahopac Falls; there is already one at the Mines. Mr. Gannon, on the part of the New York City and Northern, agreed to maintain at both places freight agents, who would be authorized to transact all necessary business incident to the shipping and receiving of freight.

It is not necessary, therefore, to discuss the legal obligation resting upon the railroads to establish and maintain such agencies at the above points, further than to remark that it is the maximum of service that could be reasonably asked or enforced-Mahopac Mines being but two miles from Mahopac Falls, and the latter but two miles from Baldwin Place.

2D. WITH REGARD TO PASSENGER SERVICE.

The Mahopac Falls railroad was built under the General Railroad Act and acts amendatory thereof, and exercised the powers of eminent domain and other privileges delegated in those statutes. A corresponding obligation rests upon it, therefore, to give reasonable and good service to the community through which it runs.

Section 36 of the General Railroad Act (Chap. 140, Laws of 1850, as amended by Chap. 49, Laws of 1867) provides as follows:

"§ 36. Every such corporation shall start and run their cars for the transportation of passengers and property at regular times to be fixed by public notice, and shall furnish sufficient accommodations for the transportation of all such passengers and property as shall, within a reasonable time previous thereto, be offered for transportation at the place of starting, and at the junctions of other railroads, and at the usual stopping places established for receiving and discharging way passengers and freights for that train, and shall take, transport and discharge such passengers and property at, and from, and to such places on the due payment of the fare or freight legally authorized therefor."

The objection raised by the road is that, for at least nine months in the year, passenger trains on this branch would be run at a considerable pecuniary loss.

The representatives of the road further insist that there is no necessity for such trains, inasmuch as Baldwin Place station is but two miles from the Falls, and that Mahopac station on the Harlem road is about the same distance from the Falls, and but little more from the Mines.

Mr. Gannon voluntarily agreed to run trains to connect with the New York City and Northern for three months during the summersay from the middle of June to the middle of September. With this, however, the complainants were not satisfied, but insist upon a winter service as well.

They claim further, that at the time the property was condemned for railroad purposes, pledges and promises were made by the railroad authorities that such service would be rendered; that such promises and pledges add an equitable to their legal rights in the premises.

In a communication to the Board since the hearing, Mr. T. D. Hill incloses the following testimony of Wm. H. Case, engineer of the road and representative thereof (being on page 38 of testimony, with regard to lands of T. D. Hill, on file in the office of the county clerk at Carmel).

Question by Mr. Holbrook (the railroad company's lawyer). "About how many trains will be run on this road daily ?”

(Objected to but allowed.)

Answer: "According to my judgment, there will be perhaps as many as two trains each way daily."

The railroad claims that it is a severe hardship to force it to continue its passenger service through the winter at a constant loss, particularly in view of the fact that a considerable number of railroads within the State do suspend such operation.

The answer to this is, that such roads are run exclusively for summer passenger travel, and their suspension in winter is with the con

currence of the communities through which they run, no complaints having reached the Board of such suspension. The Board does not know of any legal authority to so discontinue running in winter, although, under certain circumstances, it is just to permit it.

The question being fairly raised, however, by the residents of this neighborhood, the Board can reach no conclusion but that the railroad is under legal obligations to give passenger service the year through.

An engine is kept fired up on this branch for running the freight trains, switching, etc. It could run a passenger car down in the morning and up in the afternoon, to connect with the train to and from New York. This would involve an additional mileage of sixteen miles per day, as estimated by Mr. Gannon, which at the rate of forty cents per train mile, would involve an expenditure of $6.40 per day.

The road being but four miles long, the maximum fare would be twelve cents; if the average were nine cents, it would require seventyone passengers to pay expenses. There is little likelihood of there being one-third of this number.

In view of the traffic arrangement between the Mahopac Falls railroad and the New York City and Northern, it has been assumed that this loss would fall exclusively on the New York City and Northern, and that as this latter road is in the hands of a receiver, and is earning but little over its operating expenses, this additional burden would be seriously felt.

The answer to this is, that the building of the Mahopac Falls railroad to connect with the New York City and Northern, has given it a valuable freight business, far in excess of any loss incident to such passenger service. The figures, as given by the road to the Board, substantiate this claim on the part of the petitioners.

In view of the above facts, the Board has reached the following conclusions, and

RECOMMENDATIONS.

1st. The Board recommends that the Mahopac Falls Railroad Company erect a suitable station at Mahopac Falls.

20. That the Mahopac Falls Railroad Company maintain at Mahopac Mines and at Mahopac Falls, a freight agent to tra sact such business as may be offered—or that the New York City and Northern Railroad Company maintain such agents.

3d. That the Mahopac Falls Railroad Company run at least one passenger train each way on its road daily, to connect with the morning train south, and the afternoon train north of the New York City and Northern railroad, or that the New York City and Northern railroad run such trains.

By the Board.

WILLIAM C. HUDSON,

Secretary.

The company has complied with the recommendations as above, as

the Board is informed by the complainant.

XIII.

A. OTTMAN v. THE NEW YORK CENTRAL AND HUDSON RIVER RAILROAD COMPANY.

March 26, 1886.

Mr. Ottman, of Albany, set forth that he was engaged in the milk business in Albany and obtained his milk from Palatine Bridge; his competitors in the business obtained their milk from Fort Plain. They all received their milk from both points at twenty-five cents per can delivered from the baggage-car. Some few weeks previous to making the complaint, he had been informed by the agent of the Central at Palatine Bridge that he could not ship that way any longer, but must hereafter ship by express, the difference in the price being twentyfive cents a can, making such a discrimination against him, which, if continued, would virtually drive him out of the trade.

This complaint having been transmitted to the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, they replied by saying the cause for the complaint of Mr. Ottman had occurred through mistake and had been rectified.

XIV.

J. C. HENDERSON & Co. v. THE NEW YORK CENTRAL AND HUDSON RIVER RAILROAD COMPANY.

March 29, 1886.

The firm of J. C. Henderson of Troy complained that it had shipped a hot air furnace, weighing about 1,000 pounds, to Chatham, by the New York Central and Hudson River railroad in November of 1885, and a few days after was informed that it had reached its destination less one piece. Inquiry of the company developed the fact that the missing piece was at the freight house, in Troy, broken, and that the other pieces had been sent forward with knowledge of the broken piece and that freight had been charged for the full shipment, and when the casting was sent forward to replace the broken piece that also was charged. When a bill was presented for the broken piece and the company was asked to pay for it, the company's agent demanded that the firm should sign a release from liability of further shipments. The company refused to sign the shipping receipts of the firm and notified it that unless the firm signed the release double first-class rates would be charged on their shipments. This the firm claimed to be unlawful discrimination against it and alleged that it was losing trade daily by reason of it.

The company made the following reply:

"First, that Messrs. Henderson & Co.'s teamster was at once notified when the damage was discovered.

"Second, that the New York Central charged only actual weight on the piece and the balance. If this was not correct the New York Central would have settled a claim for overcharge at any time.

"Third, that the request for the release was only in accordance with, and on account of, custom and the published tariff; that the New York Central did not refuse to sign receipts and that the charge of double first-class is that of the tariff on freight of this character not taken at owner's risk.

Fourth, that if they have shipped for years at released rates without a release being asked or signed, it is only because a yearly release left at their office on January 1st of each year, and returned signed by C. O. Greene, has been supposed to be a release from that firm.

Furnace and stove castings are generally shipped without protection and are more liable to fracture and damage than almost any other class of freight.

Under the ordinary classification price they are rated at first-class at owner's risk and double first-class at company's risk, but to aid the manufacturers at Troy they have been rated specially at fourth-class if released. It seems impossible that any manufacturer at Troy has failed to understand this and our freedom from claims would indicate the contrary. I do not think the propriety of different classification upon freight of this character, according as the risk of damage falls upon the company or shipper, has ever been denied, and the practice has grown from the demands of shippers."

The company, however, admitted that the difference was too great and that the Troy agent had been directed to charge double fourthclass rates.

To this answer Messrs. Henderson & Co. made reply by sending the sworn statements of their drayman that no notice of the breakage had been given and that the agent had refused to sign their shipping receipts, and by stating that while G. O. Greene occupied a part of the same store his business had no relation to their's, and that the company had receipted for freight shipped under their respective names and that there was no foundation for the supposition that a release signed by Greene affected the firm of Henderson & Co. The firm further set forth that the charging of double fourth-class rates instead of double first-class rates did not help them as that rate even was double the charge made to their competitors. Messrs. Henderson & Co. then submitted the following questions to the Board:

"First, Are we obliged to sign a yearly release with the said company to secure the fourth-class rates which is the universal charge of other roads without this yearly release?

Second, If we are not entitled to a rebate for the excessive charges they have made on our freight?

Third, Are we not entitled to gentlemanly treatment from their employees when we send our men there to do business for us?

"Fourth, Are they not obliged to give us a receipt for our shipments when we deliver them at their depot in good order?"

To this communication the Board made the following answer:

STATE OF NEW YORK.
BOARD OF RAILROAD COMMISSIONERS,
ALBANY, March 17, 1886.

Messrs. J. C. HENDERSON & Co., Troy, N. Y.:

GENTLEMEN - In answer to your communication without date, but received March 10, the Board has to say that a reasonable rule made by railroads to charge additional freight for castings and fragile goods when taken at railroad risk of breaking, is proper, and seems to be founded on equitable grounds, reasonable and applied to all alike.

If you can show, however, that the railroad charges you double fourth-class rates, when stoves are taken at its risk of breaking, and charges your competitor