10 ` FEDERAL Rnronrnn.
Generally, I consider that the case of Scty'ieZd v. Railway O0., supra,
is the best exposition and furnishes the true rule on this subject; but for
the Texas & Pacino Railway the matter is settled by its charter, § 15,
supra,—"but that the same charges per mile as to passengers, and per ton
per mile as to freight, r* * _* shall be made, by said company as
they make for freight and passengers over their own road." And in this
connection it may be proper to say that a proper construction of said
section 15 does not permit that connecting roads should be charged less
, or more per ton per mile as to freight, or less or more per mile as to pas-
sengers, than the rates charged on or over the Texas & Pacino lines, but
the same. In other words, section 15 is in the interest of and for the
protection of shippers local to the Texas & Pacific Railway, as well as in
the interest of and for the protection of connecting lines. If respondents
are, as they seem to say, charging the petitioners' lines less per ton per
it · mile than the charges made on respondents lines to other shippers under
the same conditions as to distance and shipping points, then respond-
ents are discriminating, (and probably against shippers that are forced
to use their lines;) which ought not to be permitted under any circum-
stances, and particularly on a railroad to the construction of which the
general government and the state of Texas contributed so large a portion
of the public lands. ` I
For the relief of petitioners, an order will be entered directing the
receivers to give them the same rates and the same privileges for doing
business in all respects as are given to other connecting or intersecting
lines, substantially as prayed for in their petition. . u
In one of the exhibits attached to the petition I notice the statement
made by the general freight agent of the respondents "that the question
of through rates into Texas is not absolutely controlled by the Missouri
Pacific Railway, or the Texas & Pacino Railway, but by the Texas Tranio
Association, of which the Texas & St. Louis, the H. & T. C., the
Southern Pacino, and G. C. & S.   Railways are also members;" and,
again, " the basis fixed by the Texas Tranic Associationfor the division
of rates from Louisville and Cincinnati to common points in Texas, like
Dallas and Fort Worth, via Newt, Orleans and all lines, is as fol1ows."
- Whether these statements imply any power in the Texas Trafnc Associ-
ation to make discriminating rates for or against the Texas & Pacino
Railway, or against any railway connecting. or intersecting with the Texas S
& Pacino Railway, as to shipments via the Texas & Pacino, does not ap-
pear. If any such power is vested in the Texas Tranic Association,. then
theconnection of the receivers0f the Texas & Pacino Railway Company
with that association is as obnoxious as the hereinbefore referred to con-
tract with the Missouri Pacino Railway system. As these matters have
been brought ·to the attention ofthe court, and considering that the re-
ceivers are operating the lines0f the Texas &. Pacino Railway under the
orders and protection of the cou1·t, to the end that the duties and obli-
gations devolving upon the Texas & Pacino Railway Companyas a pub-
lic carrier under its charter may be performed, and that the public may
_ not suffer detriment by the non—user of its franchises, as-well as to pre-