SECTION 14.

§ 276. Commission must make report of investigations..

Page

319

277. The report of findings of fact made prima facie evidence..... 319 278. The Commission as a general referee 279. Claims for reparation before the Commission.. 280. Reports of decisions

320

321 322

§ 276. Commission must make report of investigation. SEC. 14. (As amended March 2, 1889.) That whenever an investigation shall be made by said Commission, it shall be its duty to make a report in writing in respect thereto, which shall include the findings of fact upon which the conclusions of the Commission are based, together with its recommendation as to what reparation, if any, should be made by the common carrier to any party or parties who may be found to have been injured; and such findings so made shall thereafter, in all judicial proceedings, be deemed prima facie evidence as to each and every fact found.

All reports of investigations made by the Commission shall be entered of record, and a copy thereof shall be furnished to the party who may have complained, and to any common carrier that may have been complained of.

The Commission may provide for the publication of its reports and decisions in such form and manner as may be best adapted for public information and use, and such authorized publications shall be competent evidence of the reports and decisions of the Commission therein contained, in all courts of the United States, and of the several States, without any further proof or authentication thereof. The Commission may also cause to be printed for early distribution its annual reports.

$277. The report of findings of fact made prima facie evidence. It was said by Justice Jackson in the Kentucky and Indiana Bridge case, supra, 37 Fed. Rep. 567, the first important decision under the Act, that in respect to interstate commerce matters covered by the Act, the Commission may be regarded as the general referee of each and every Circuit Court of the United States upon which the jurisdiction is conferred of enforcing the rights, duties and obligations recognized and enforced by the Act. The functions of the Commission are those of referees or special commissioners appointed to make preliminary investigations of and report upon matters for subsequent judicial examination and determina

tion. The Supreme Court has said in several cases that the proper course of procedure is for all the facts to be submitted to the Commission, and it has refused to assume to exert its original judgment on the facts, as under the statute the courts are entitled, before approaching the facts, to the aid that must necessarily be afforded by the previous enlightened judgment of the Commission upon such subjects. See East Tennessee etc. Ry. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 181 U. S. 1, 1 c. 27, 45 L. Ed. 719, 729, and cases cited. In L. & N. R. Co. v. Behlmer, 175 U. S. 648, 44 L. Ed. 309, the Court said that the Act attributes prima facie effect to findings of fact made by the Commission, and that body from the nature of its function and the duties imposed upon it by the statute is peculiarly competent to pass upon questions of fact of the character here arising. The court therefore in several cases, where it adjudged that the Commission had erred in the mistaken view of the law, directed the dismissal of the proceedings in court without prejudice to the right of the Commission to further investigate the facts. See supra, and cases cited.

§ 278. The Commission as a general referee. While the Commission is thus a general referee, its position is somewhat anomalous in the law, in that it not only acts in a quasi judicial capacity as a referee, but it may also institute proceedings in its name in the courts and thus be a prosecutor in the same cases wherein it has acted as judge.

While there is no requirement in the Act that carriers complained of shall produce all of their evidence before the Commission, and in numerous cases parties have reserved such evidence until hearing was had in the courts on proceedings instituted by the Commission to enforce their orders, the Supreme Court has said that this was not the proper procedure (162 U. S. 1. c. 196, 40 L. Ed. 935), but that all the testimony should be submitted to the Commission for their determination of the questions of fact. The Commission has ruled that it is not required to report the details of evidence, but only its findings of fact. See 1 I. C. C. R. 490, 1 Int. Com. Rep. 773, 673, where it said that the report and findings of the Commission upon evidence related only to the ascertainment and presentation of all the material facts necessary to clearly and justly present the merits of the controversy, and the Commis

sion therefore does not report evidence which is only cumulative, or which is immaterial or irrelevant, or show details of evidence all embraced in the substantial facts stated upon which the findings and conclusions of the Commission are made. As to the effect of the Commission's findings upon the questions of reparation in view of the constitutional guaranty of trial by jury, see infra, sections 15 and 16.

$279. Claims for reparation before the Commission.While the Commission cannot determine rates for the future, in order to determine a claim of reparation for the charge of an unreasonable rate, it must decide what rate should have been charged, that is, what is a reasonable rate, in order to determine the amount of damage to which the party is entitled. As to the procedure of the Commission in claims of reparation, it was held that the complainant must make proof of his damage (8 I. C. C. R. 158); that all the carriers on the route need not be before the Commission (6 I. C. C. R. 378), and that speculative damages will not be allowed. 5 I. C. C. R97, 3 Int. Com. Rep. 740. Nor will the Commission consider claims not arising out of the duties imposed by the Act. 4 I. C. C. R. 265, 3 Int. Com. Rep. 278. It is sufficient for the complainant to consult the published schedule of charges, and he is entitled to recover thereon the excess over such schedules charged him. 7 L. C. C. R. 255. See also as to conclusions of Commission as to its jurisdictions in matter of awarding reparation. 5 I. C. C. R. 84, 3 Int. Com.. Rep. 711.

The subject of reparation was discussed by the Commission in the case of the Independent Refiners Association, 6 I. C. C. R. 378, 7 I. C. C. R. 513. In this case claims of reparation were allowed to be filed in the same proceeding by the individual shippers who were members of the complaining association. The Circuit Court however for the western district of Pennsylvania, 82 Fed. Rep. 192, refused to enforce this order, holding that each complainant had a plain, adequate and complete remedy at law. Thereafter in the case of the Cattle Raisers Association of Texas, 10 I. C. C. R. 83, the Commission held that in view of the unsettled state of the law as to the recovery of claims of reparation, the members of the complaining association should file intervening petitions, each for

his own demand. The suits brought in the Circuit Court (W. Dist. of Penn.) for recovery of the amounts allowed the Commission on the claims of members of the Independent Refiners Association are still (1904) pending undetermined.

§ 280. Reports of decisions.-The provision for the publication of the reports of the Commission was added to the section by the amendment of 1889. There were originally two series of reports containing the opinions of the Interstate Commerce Commission. The Interstate Commerce Reports, cited as "Int. Com. Rep." were published by the Lawyer's Co-Operative Publishing Company of Rochester, New York, and included not only the reports of the Commission but also the proceedings of the Commission, and the reports of decisions of the court on Interstate Commerce questions. The Interstate Commerce Commission Reports, cited as "I. C. C. R.," were first published by L. K. Strouse & Co. of New York. The Lawyers' Co-Operative Publishing Company purchased the other series, and now the official and only edition is that published by the Lawyers' Co-Operative Publishing Company, reporting only the decisions of the Interstate Commerce Commission, with an occasional appendix of reports of other interstate commerce cases. Advance numbers of volume 10 are now (1905) in the course of publication. The reports now published are cited as I. C. C. R. The five volumes of the discontinued (Strouse) series contain the same cases included in volumes 1 to 4 of the Co-Operative series.

§ 281.
282.

SECTION 15.

Notice to common carrier to cease from violation of act.
Notice to the carrier jurisdictional.

§ 281. Notice to common carrier to cease from violation of act.-SEC. 15. That if in any case in which an investigation shall be made by said Commission it shall be made to appear to the satisfaction of the Commission, either by the testimony of witnesses or other evidence, that anything has been done or omitted to be done in violation of the provisions of this act, or of any law cognizable by said Commission, by any common carrier, or that any injury or damage has been sustained by the party or parties complaining, or by other parties aggrieved in consequence of any such violation, it shall be the duty of the Commission to forthwith cause a copy of its report in respect thereto to be delivered to such common carrier, together with a notice to said common carrier to cease and desist from such violation, or to make reparation for the injury so found to have been done, or both, within a reasonable time, to be specified by the Commission; and if, within the time. specified, it shall be made to appear to the Commission that such common carrier had ceased from such violation of law, and has made reparation for the injury found to have been done, in compliance with the report and notice of the Commission, or to the satisfaction of the party complaining, a statement to that effect shall be entered of record by the Commission, and the said common carrier shall thereupon be relieved from the further liability or penalty for such particular violation of law.

§ 282. Notice to the carrier jurisdictional. This section is really supplementary to the preceding, in that it provides for notification to the carrier of the finding of the Commission, when such finding is against the carrier. As seen before, it is provided by section 9 that a party complaining has the election of proceeding under sections 8 and 9 directly in court, or of proceeding before the Commission. If the finding of the Commission is against the shipper, the complaint is dismissed, and in such case the party is barred from proceeding in court on the same complaint. The Commission has no power to enforce its findings and the succeeding section provides for the requisite legal procedure for such enforcement. Notification to the carrier is therefore a jurisdictional step in such procedure. See 7 I. C. C. R. 286.