by the commerce court in an action begun, by the United States on the application of the Attorney General, at the request of the Interstate Commerce Commission, against the Union Stock Yard & Transit Company of Chicago, an Illinois corporation (hereinafter called the "Stock Yard Company"), the Chicago Junction Railway Company, an Illinois corporation (hereinafter called the "Junction Company"), and the Chicago Junction Railways & Union Stock Yards Company, a New Jersey Corporation (hereinafter called the "Investment Company"), and David Pfaelzer, Abe Pfaelzer, and Jones L. Pfaelzer, a copartnership doing business under the firm name and style of Louis Pfaelzer & Sons. The bill sought to enjoin violations of §§ 2, 6, and 20 of the interstate commerce act (24 Stat. at L. 379, chap. 104, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1911, p. 1284; 34 Stat. at L. 584, chap. 3591, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1911, p. 1288; 36 Stat. at L. 539, chap. 309), and of § 1 of the Elkins law (32 Stat. at L. 847, chap. 708, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1911, p. 1309). Its prayer was that an injunction should issue to restrain the Stock Yard Company and the Junction Company from further engaging in interstate commerce until they had filed tariffs, as required by § 6 of the act, and to restrain the performance of a certain contract with the Pfaelzers, and that the Stock Yard Company and the Junction Company be required to file the statements and reports provided by § 20 of the 296]act. The commerce court held that neither the Stock Yard Company nor the Investment Company was a common carrier, and that it had no jurisdiction to determine whether the contract would amount to an unlawful discrimination or advantage, or rebate, and dismissed the bill as to the Stock Yard Company and the Investment Company and as to the Pfaelzers. As to the Junction Company, it held that it was a common carrier subject to the interstate commerce act, and obliged to file its tariffs as required by the statute. It further held that, since there was no allegation in the bill that the Interstate Commerce Commission had by general or special order required the Stock Yard Company or the Junction Company to file statements and reports under § 20, it could not issue mandamus to make such statements and reports. 192 Fed. 330. The government appealed from the dismissal of the bill as to the Stock Yard Company, the Investment Company, and the Pfaelzers, which is case No. 261. It, however, makes no contention against the holding of the commerce court as to the construction of § 20. The Junction Company appealed from the decision of the commerce court as to it, which appeal is case No. 622. The correctness of the decision and decree of the commerce court is submitted upon facts which are practically undisputed. The Stock Yard Company was incorporated under a special act of the legislature of Illinois, February 13, 1865, which authorized it to locate, construct, and maintain near the southerly limits of the city of Chicago: 66 All the necessary yards, inclosures, buildings, structures, and railway lines, tracks, switches, and turnouts, aqueducts, for the reception, safe-keeping, feeding, and watering, and for the weighing, delivery, and transfer of cattle and live stock of every description, and also dead and undressed animals that may be at or passing through or near the city of[297 Chicago, and for the accommodation of the business of a general union stock yard for cattle and live stock, including the erection and establishment of one or more hotel buildings, and the right to use the same; to make advances of money upon such cattle and live stock for freight or other purposes as may become expedient The charter further provided: "That said company shall construct railway, with one or more tracks, as may be expedient, from the grounds which may be selected for its said yards, so as to connect, outside of the city of Chicago, the same with the tracks of all the railroads which terminate in Chicago, the lines of which enter the city on the south between the lake shore and the southwest corner of said city, . . and to make connections with such suitable sidetracks, switches, and connections as to enable all of the trains running upon said railroads easily and conveniently to approach the grounds selected for said yards, and may make such arrangements or contracts with such railroad companies, or either of them, for the use of any part or portion of the track or tracks of such company or companies which now is or hereafter may be constructed, for the purposes aforesaid, as may be agreed upon between the parties; and to transport and allow to be transported thereon between said railroads and cattle yards, all cattle and live stock and persons accompanying the same to and from said yards, and may also transport and allow to be transported between the railroads entering said city, . . freight and property of every kind as well as stock and cattle After its creation it acquired real estate, constructed and operated stock yards, with a stock market, built a hotel for the ac ion of the commerce peal is case No. 622. he decision and deurt is submitted upctically undisputed. ny was incorporated E the legislature of 1865, which author. ruct, and maintain its of the city of ecessary yards, inctures, and railway and turnouts, aquesafe-keeping, feedfor the weighing, of cattle and live on, and also dead that may be at or ar the city of[297 commodation of the nion stock yard for cluding the erection One or more hotel to use the same; zes of money upon ock for freight or become expedient rovided: shall construct a oresaid, as may be ty, ind as well as stock acquired real estate, d stock yards, with a hotel for the ac226 U. S. 1912. in none. UNITED STATES v. UNION STOCK YARD & T. C load lots of dead freight out the state are placed tracks of the Junction transfer cards showing t the cars, and the Junction the cars either to the con on its tracks, or to the the forwarding carrier. trunk lines a fixed charg which the latter absort Company, upon the order places cars for loading b stock yards district, an loaded hauls them to the of the trunk lines, and it trunk lines a fixed amoun which is absorbed by the carload lot freight is freight depot known as t Station, and placed in car Company, which transport ceiving tracks of trunk 1 service the trunk lines Company 5 cents per hund times such freight is ha dustries in the stock yar Union Freight Station by pany and distributed in Junction Company recei than carload lot freight in trunk lines, such receipts able for bills of lading a trunk lines, and all cha commodation of its patrons, and constructed in the stock yards district about 300 miles of railroad track, consisting of main 298]lines connecting with the trunk lines entering Chicago, and a large number of switches to the various industries which had been established adjacent to such tracks. Prior to December 15, 1897, the Stock Yard Company carried on the stock yards and railroad business, and, although it had regular charges for the services it performed, it filed no tariffs with the Interstate Commerce Commission and concurred On December 15, 1897, the Stock Yard Company leased all of its railroad tracks and equipment for a term of fifty years to a corporation known as the Chicago & Indiana State Line Company (hereinafter called the "State Line Company"), retaining for itself the loading and unloading platforms and facilities used in connection with its stock yards business. This lease covered all its railroad and railroad tracks, switches, etc.; roundhouse, repair shops, machine shops, coal shutes, etc., then in existence or theretofore used by the Stock Yard Company in connection with its railroad; and all and singular the equipment and the telegraph lines, instruments, and appur tenances owned or possessed by the Stock Yard Company and used by it in conducting its railroad business. By the terms of the lease, the State Line Company was given the right in the future to maintain and operate upon the lands of the Stock Yard Company additional side tracks and switch tracks and other appurtenances necessary to reach industrial plants. Afterwards the State Line Company consolidated with the Chicago, Hammond, & Western Railroad Company, and the consolidated company became known as the Chicago Junction Railway Company (defendant herein), and, in addition to the railroad leased from the Stock Yard Company, operated a belt line around the city of Chicago. In November, 1907, the Junction Company sold the belt line to the East Chicago Belt Railroad Company, retaining the tracks which had been leased by the Stock Yard Company. The equipment 299] operated by the Junction Company, consisting of locomotives and rolling stock, is owned by the Stock Yard Company, but the Junction Company employs its own engineers and crews. The tracks of the Junction Company are frequently used by the trunk lines to connect the eastern and western systems and to deliver shipments originating without the state to the platforms of the Stock Yard Company, for which service they pay the Junction Company a trackage charge of a fixed sum per car. Large numbers of car57 L. ed. Junction Company are re name of the trunk lines them. The Junction Com rangement with the B Ohio Railroad Company forms a like service for su the less than carload lot by it to the Union Fre destined to points beyond ments of horses are tra trunk lines to the loading Stock Yard Company, and by the Junction Company unloading chutes for hors tion Company receives, b age charge, a certain am this service. A large pa thus performed by the Jun in connection with inte The Junction Company do bills of lading with respec freight. After leasing its railroa Junction Company, the S pany continued to operat facilities for loading and and other live stock bound from points outside the s and water live stock in lines of trunk line carriers. bed, and water live stock signees doing business in the stock yards district. required the Pfaelzers to make changes in their plant; in 1908 it directed them to erect a new plant; and in 1909 they were notified that the government would deny to them further inspection of the prod ucts of their plant. They then proposed to locate in Kansas City, Missouri, [302 but upon negotiation with the Stock Yard Company made the contract under consider The employees of trunk lines bringing live stock to the stock yards turn over the waybills accompanying such shipments, with what are called "live stock stubs" attached, to the employees of the Stock Yard Company, who use the waybills in unloading and counting the stock, and the way. bills and stubs are then sent to the auditoration here. This contract provided that of the Stock Yard Company (being also the auditor of the Junction Company), who retains the stubs and forwards the waybills to the local agents of the trunk lines. The Stock Yard Company advances the charges on such shipments to the trunk lines and collects from the consignees, usually commission men doing business at the stock yards, the moneys it has so advanced for their accommodation. The Junction Company publishes tariffs showing the charges which it exacts for its 301] services, such tariffs being *in general circulation in Chicago, especially about the stock yards district, but they were not filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission. Prior to 1907, the Junction Company, while owning railroad facilities in Indiana, had filed tariffs with the Interstate Commerce Commission, but upon the sale of such properties canceled the tariffs. It was the belief of the government and of the Junction Company that all tariffs and concurrences had been canceled, but it is shown by a stipulation which the parties have filed that since the issues were made up it has been discovered that one particular concurrence, through inadvertence, was not canceled. The Investment Company is a holding company and owns over 90 per cent of the shares of the Stock Yard Company and practically all of the shares of the Junction Company. As to the contract with the Pfaelzers: They were members of a copartnership (since incorporated) engaged in the slaughtering business, their plant being located in the vicinity of the tracks operated by the Junction Company and the cattle pens of the Stock Yard Company. They purchased cattle from time to time outside the city of Chicago and in states other than Illinois, and shipped them to the partnership at the stock yards, where they were handled as hereinbefore stated for delivery to the consignee. The freight charges on such business averaged for the five years prior to the filing of the Pfaelzers' answer about $2,800 annually. The amount of freight consigned to the Pfaelzers tends to increase the business of the Stock Yard Company and the Junction Company, and therefore the revenue of each. upon the erection by the Pfaelzers of a modern slaughtering, packing, and canning plant adjacent to the stock yards in Chicago, costing a certain sum and having a required capacity, the Stock Yard Company would pay them $50,000, and the Pfaelzers agreed that all live stock slaughtered or canned by them within a radius of 200 miles would either be purchased at such stock yards or pass through and use them, the customary yardage, tolls, and charges to be paid thereon, or that the Pfaelzers would pay full tolls and charges on live stock the same as if it had been sent to the stock yards for sale and had there been bought by them; and that for fifteen years they would conduct all their slaughtering, packing, and canning business at such plant, and not interest themselves directly or indirectly in any other plant or in any other stock yards. The Investment Company guaranteed the performance of the contract by the Stock Yard Company. It is stated in the answer of the Stock Yard Company and stands admitted in the case that there are other competitive stock yards in the United States which have built up their business in competition with it by offering and giving inducements, either in the shape of land or money, to packing houses and other industries to locate at or near their yards. From this statement it is apparent that the Stock Yard Company was organized for the purpose of maintaining a stock yard, with the usual facilities of such yards as to loading and unloading and caring for freight, and it was authorized to and did own and operate a railroad system, transporting cars to and from trunk lines in the course of their transportation from beyond the state and to points outside of the state. This service, 80 far as the railroad *and its operation is concerned, is now [803 performed by the Junction Company. The Stock Yard Company still continues to perform the customary stock yard operations, but by means of the lease to the Junction Company it has devested itself of the operation of the railroad system which it was authorized by its charter to construct and operate, and which for many years before the lease it did in fact operate. The Stock In 1908 the Department of Agriculture Yard Company, under the lease, still geta, to make changes in It directed them to nswer of the Stock is apparent that the utside of the state. however, two thirds of the profits received | holding company which In view of this continuity of operation, That the service is performed wholly in one state can make no difference if it is a part of interstate carriage. "The transportation of live stock," said this court in Covington Stock-Yards Co. v. Keith, 139 U. 8. 128, 35 L. ed. 73, 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 461, in treating of the duties of common carriers, irrespective of the act to regulate commerce, "begins with their delivery to the carrier to be loaded upon its cars, and ends only after the stock is unloaded and delivered, or offered to be delivered, to the consignee." In this connection see Coe v. Errol, 116 U. S. 517, 29 L. ed. 715, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 475; Southern P. Terminal Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 219 U. S. 498, 55 L. ed. 310, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 279. The fact that the performance of the service is distributed among different corporations having common ownership in a 67 L. ed. Together, these compan which is being carried i merce, engage in transpor meaning of the act, and as a railroad when they delivered at the stock ya cars, and transport it for tance upon its journey i merce, under "a through furnished by the trunk li ceive it while it is still in state commerce upon a th includes the terminal ser the two companies, and c ery to the consignee. carriers because they are terms of their charters, ho as such, and constantly act and because they are so great railroad systems wh Union Stock Yards Co. 94 C. C. A. 626, 169 Fed. Van Devanter (while a speaking for the court (406): T "Its [the Stock Yards O tions include the use of railroad tracks and employment of a corps of connection, and the carria its tracks of all live stoc from the sheds or pens, wh the depot of the railroad the delivery and receipt live stock at South Omaha. these shipments from the the sheds or pens, and vice a part of their transit bety of origin and destination t riage over any other porti True, there is a temporary loaded cars at the transfer is merely incidental, and the continuity of the transi does the usual transfer of one carrier to another at a And it is of little significan rendered, in the transportation of passen. gers or property, subject to the provisions of this act, than it charges, demands, col. lects, or receives from any other person or person for doing for him or them a like and contemporaneous service in the transportation of a like kind of traffic under substantially similar circumstances and conditions, such common carrier shall be deemed guilty of unjust discrimination, which is hereby prohibited and declared to be unlawful." yards company does not hold itself out as | sation for any service rendered, or to be ready or willing generally to carry live stock for the public, for all the railroad companies at South Omaha do so hold them selves out, and it stands ready and willing to conduct, and actually does conduct, for hire, a part of the transportation of every live stock shipment which they accept for carriage to or from that point, including such shipments as are interstate." 306] *We think that these companies, because of the character of the service rendered by them, their joint operation and division of profits, and their common ownership by a holding company, are to be deemed a railroad within the terms of the act of Congress to regulate commerce, and the services which they perform are included in the definition of transportation as defined in that act. It is the manifest purpose of the act to include interstate railroad carriers, and by its terms the act excludes transportation wholly within a state. In view of this purpose, and so construing the act as to give it force and effect, we think the Stock Yard Company did not exempt itself from the operation of the law by leasing its railroad and equipment to the Junction Company, for it still receives two thirds of the profits of that company, and both companies are under a common stock ownership, with its consequent control. We therefore think the commerce court was right in holding that the Junction Company should file its rates with the Interstate Commerce Commission, and that it should also have held the Stock Yard Company subject to the provisions of the interstate commerce acts. As to the contract, both parties concede the authority of the commerce court to pass upon this subject, and no objection was made as to the manner and form in which the jurisdiction of that court was invoked. There being no objection taken to the method of proceeding, we think, if this contract is within the prohibitions of the act, that the commerce court had the right to entertain the bill and to enjoin the performance of the contract. (Sections 2 and 3 of the Elkins Act.) It is contended that this contract is violative of certain features of the act to regulate commerce and of the Elkins act. Section 2 of the former and 2 of the latter provide: "Sec. 2. That if any common carrier subject to the provisions of this act shall, directly or indirectly, by any special rate, rebate, drawback, or other device, charge, 307] *demand, collect, or receive from any person or persons a greater or less compen Sec. 2. It shall be unlawful for any person, persons, or corporation to offer, grant, or give, or to solicit, accept, or receive any rebate, concession, or discrimination in respect to the transportation of any property in interstate or foreign commerce by any common carrier subject to said act to regulate commerce and the acts amendatory thereof, whereby any such property shall, by any devise whatever, be transported at a less rate than that named in the tariffs published and filed by such carrier, as is required by said act to regulate commerce and the acts amendatory thereof, or whereby any other advantage is given or discrimination is practised. This court has had frequent occasion to comment upon the purpose of Congress in the passage of these laws to require equal treatment of all shippers and to prohibit unjust discrimination in favor of any of them. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 200 U. S. 361, 50 L. ed. 515, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 272; Armour Packing Co. v. United States, 209 U, S. 56, 52 L. ed. 681, 28 Sup. Ct. Rep. 428; Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Mottley, 219 U. S. 467, 55 L. ed. 297, 34 L.R.A. (N.S.) 671, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 265; Chicago & A. R. Co. v. Kirby, 225 U. S. 155, 56 L. ed. 1033, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 648. By 2 of the act to regulate commerce the carrier is guilty of unjust discrimination, which is prohibited and declared unlawful, if by any rebate or other device it charges one person less for any service rendered in the transportation of prop-[308 erty than it does another for a like service. The Elkins act makes it an offense for any person or corporation to give or receive any rebate, concession, or discrimination in respect to the transportation of property in interstate commerce whereby any such property shall be transported at a rate less than that named in the published tariff, or whereby any other advantage is given or discrimination is practised. By the very terms of the contract it is evident that the |