W-587 (Sub-No. 28), Foss LAUNCH & TUG Co., EXTENSION-INDIAN ISLAND.
Decided August 28, 1956.
W-594 (Sub-No. 7), UNION SULPHUR AND OIL CORPORATION EXTENSION-
LUMBER. Decided December 7, 1953.
W-624 (Sub-No. 1), KEANSBURG STEAMBOAT COMPANY EXTENSION-NEW
YORK HARBOR. Decided September 18, 1952.
W-654 (Sub-No. 6), ISTHMIAN STEAMSHIP COMPANY EXTENSION-Beaumont.
Decided March 16, 1953.
W-690 (Sub-No. 3), INLAND NAVIGATION COMPANY EXTENSION-SNAKE
RIVER. Decided October 2, 1953.
W-700 (Sub-No. 7), COYLE LINES INCORPORATED EXTENSION-BATON ROUGE.
Decided August 13, 1956.
W-809 (Sub-No. 4), TIDEWATER-SHAVER BARGE LINES EXTENSION-SNAKE
RIVER. Decided February 11, 1954.
W-825 (Sub-No. 1), GRIZZAFFI MOTOR COMPANY EXTENSION-PEARL RIVER.
Decided October 11, 1954.
W-895 (Sub-No. 8), SHEPARD STEAMSHIP Co., CONTRACT CARRIER APPLICA-
TION. Decided December 7, 1953.
W-895 (Sub-No. 10), SHEPARD STEAMSHIP Co., EXTENSION-NEW YORK.
Decided December 15, 1955.
W-922 (Sub-No. 3), JAY OTTINGER EXTENSION-VESSELS (2). Decidea
October 22, 1956.
W-939 (Sub-No. 7), NEW LONDON FREIGHT LINES, INC., EXTENSION-SOUTH-
HOLD. Decided May 11, 1955.
W-967 (Sub-No. 6), STEAMER AVALON, INC., EXTENSION-ST. CROIX RIVER.
Decided January 17, 1957.
W-974 (Sub-No. 1), L. L. HOFFMAN COMMON CARRIER APPLICATION (2).
Decided December 7, 1951.
W-1014 (Sub-No. 1), BLAINE STUBBLEFIELD EXTENSION SOUTHBOUND.
Decided June 15, 1953.
W-1019 (Sub-No. 8), WEST COAST TRANS-OCEANIC STEAMSHIP LINE COMMON
CARRIER APPLICATION (2). Decided November 17, 1955.
W-1028 (Sub-No. 1), EDWARD B. SCOTT COMMON CARRIER APPLICATION.
Decided March 4, 1952.
W-1029, TOLCHESTER LINES, INC., COMMON CARRIER APPLICATION. Decided
January 25, 1952.
W-1036 (Sub-No. 6), TERMINAL STEAMSHIP COMPANY, INC., EXTENSION—
BRIDGEPORT. Decided January 12, 1956.
W-1048, M. F. MARTIN, JR., CONTRACT CARRIER APPLICATION. Decided
March 11, 1953.
W-1058, LEWISTON NAVIGATION Co., COMMON CARRIER APPLICATION. De-
cided October 2, 1953.
W-1060, (Sub-No. 1), GRAND PORTAGE AND ISLE ROYAL TRANSPORTATION
Co., COMMON CARRIER APPLICATION. Decided June 10, 1954.
W-1070, WATERWAYS, INC., COMMON CARRIER APPLICATION.
gust 24, 1954.
W-1073, ALVIN M. LEIMANN COMMON CARRIER APPLICATION. Decided
August 10, 1954.
W-1073 (Sub-No. 2), ALVIN M. LEIMANN EXTENSION-PASSENGER LIMITA-
TION. Decided February 25, 1957.
W-1074, CLYDE MARTIN COMMON CARRIER APPLICATION. Decided October
29, 1954.
rtial Grant: Ohio Barge Line, Inc., 506; Ottinger, Jay, 688; Sause Bros.
n Towing Co., Inc. 523
ONTRACTS: Commission's authority under § 313 (b) to require filing of con-
carriers' contracts with shippers is discretionary and should be exercised
when it is in public interest to do so. 456;
And there was no need as yet for exercise of that authority when it appeared
during a 7-year period there had been but a single instance of a water con-
t carrier's failing to publish rates actually maintained and charged, as re-
ed by § 306 (e). That one case created no presumption that contract carriers
erally were violating that requirement, nor did it appear that water contract
iers were causing substantial distress to other carriers. 456
EFINITION AND TESTS OF STATUS: Transportation, under contract between
licant and owner-shipper, of motor craft exceeding 40 feet in length or 8 feet
idth, under own power from dock of manufacturer or seller to a dock specified
shipper, with transportation requirements varying according to dimensions,
sepower, fuel and crew needs, seaworthiness, etc., of each vessel, was a highly
cialized service designed to meet needs of motor-craft owners desiring de-
ry of vessels in condition for immediate operation, and constituted contract
-iage. 691
EXTENSION OF OPERATIONS: When applicant had been transporting lumber
products from Tillamook Fay, Oreg., to southern California ports in a manner
irely satisfactory to contracting shippers; there was need by shippers at other
egon and Washington origins for contract-carrier service of similar type, in-
ding loading and discharging of shipments, and for a standard of service, from
ndpoint of dependability and definite assurance that cargo would be lifted,
ich was not afforded by common carriers; and existing contract service between
ose areas was limited to relatively few origins, grant of extension authority was
rranted. 532
FURNISHERS OF VESSELS: That applicant for permit as charterer of deck barges
shippers for use on intracoastal waterway between points in South Carolina,
orgia, and Florida had, under temporary authority, leased barges only to a
gle lumber company, which had used them only for movements from Hilton
ad Island, S. C., and Sapelo Island, Ga., to Jacksonville, Fla., did not warrant
itation of permanent authority to chartering to that shipper for use between
ose points. 125
Prior finding that a "grandfather" permit issued under § 309 (f) for chartering
vice should not be limited as to territorial scope did not support contention that
›ermit issued under § 309 (g) for a new chartering service must also be unlimited
ritorially. In latter case, territorial scope should generally be no broader than
at sought in application. 126
Since under § 309 (g) no terms, conditions, or limitations restricting right of a
ntract carrier to substitute or add contracts within scope of its permit may be
posed, permit granted applicant for furnishing of vessels to shippers for trans-
rtation of their own lumber could not be restricted to chartering to the single
mber company that it had served under temporary authority. 209
Exemption granted under § 302 (e) for chartering by applicant engaged in
nstruction business of its barge of unusual size and sturdy construction to other
ntractors for transportation of their heavy machinery and equipment. Protest-
it, a common carrier by general towage, would not be adversely affected, since
was doubtful whether it would be offered such traffic so long as it must obtain
e special barge from others, entailing lengthy delays and excessive costs;
d its apprehensions concerning expansion of applicant's service were needless,
nce exemption was limited to chartering of a single barge. 244
INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT SECTIONS 5(1), 5(2) AND 312
F. D. No. 16704, COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION COMPANY ET AL. POOLING.
(F. D. No. 19506.) Decided March 6, 1957.
F. D. No. 16802, T. J. McCARTHY STEAMSHIP COMPANY ET AL. POOLING.
(F. D. No. 17778.) Decided July 28, 1952.
F. D. No. 17778, T. J. MCCARTHY STEAMSHIP COMPANY ET AL. POOLING.
(F. D. No. 16802.) Decided July 28, 1952.
COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION COMPANY ET AL. POOLING.
Decided March 6, 1957.
GRANTED IN WHOLE OR IN PART
F. D. No. 16079, MCALLISTER LIGHTERAGE LINE INC., ET AL. PURCHASE,
ETC. (W-457.) Decided February 6, 1952.
F. D. No. 17355, PUGET SOUND NAVIGATION CO. CERTIFICATE TRANSFER.
(W-361.) Decided September 28, 1951.
F. D. No. 17358, NICHOLSON-UNIVERSAL STEAMSHIP COMPANY CONTROL.
Decided June 25, 1951.
F. D. No. 17440, DauntleSS TOWING LINE, INC., CERTIFICATE TRANSFER.
(W-237.) Decided September 18, 1951.
F. D. No. 17486, CUMBERLAND RIVER SAND COMPANY, INC., CERTIFICATE
TRANSFER. (W-534.) Decided April 7, 1952.
F. D. No. 17511, EAST COAST SHIPPING Co., INC., CERTIFICATE TRANSFER.
(W-993 (Sub-No. 3).) Decided November 15, 1951.
F. D. No. 17603, C. G. WILLIS CERTIFICATE TRANSFER. (W-557, W-645.)
Decided February 12, 1952.
F. D. No. 17683, E. W. HOLSTROM TRANSPORTATION CERTIFICATE TRANSFER.
(W-182.) Decided June 30, 1952.
F. D. No. 17693, MISSISSIPPI VALLEY BARGE LINE COMPANY ET AL. MERGER,
ETC. (W-78, W-326, and Ex Parte No. 99.) Decided May 26, 1952.
F. D. No. 17989, BARRETT LINE, INC., PERMIT TRANSFER. (W-353.) De-
cided May 8, 1953.
F. D. No. 18007, SHAVER TRANSPORTATION COMPANY PURCHASE, ETC. (W-
409, W-694.) Decided August 12, 1953.
F. D. No. 18137, WASHINGTON ISLAND FERRY LINE CERTIFICATE TRANSFER.
(W-544 (Sub-No. 1).) Decided June 15, 1953.
F. D. No. 18306, LUCKENBACH GULF STEAMSHIP COMPANY, INC., CERTIFICATE
TRANSFER. (W-512.) Decided December 22, 1953.
F. D. No. 18365, SCHAFER BROTHERS STEAMSHIP LINES PERMIT TRANSFER.
(W-474.) Decided June 10, 1954.
F. D. No. 18377, RUSSELL V. WARNER AND GEORGE H. TAMBLE PERMIT
TRANSFER. (W-64.) Decided April 12, 1954.
F. D. No. 18501, ATHERTON LEACH CERTIFICATE TRANSFER. (W-602.)
Decided June 2, 1954.
F. D. No. 18525, C. T. SMITH & SON CERTIFICATE TRANSFER, ETC. (F. D.
No. 18526 and W-425.) Decided June 21, 1954.
F. D. No. 18526, C. T. SMITH & SON CERTIFICATE TRANSFER, ETC. (F. D.
No. 18525 and W-425.) Decided June 21, 1954.
I therefor, of temporary authority for a portion of the proposed extension
See also AGENTS; CONTRACT CARRIERS; RATES, FARES, AND
HARGES (Establishment).
PERATING: Contract whereby applicant solicited, received, manifested, and
d freight, and supervised loading and forwarding of cars, for an unregulated
ociation" operated by an affiliate of its president was not lawful merely be-
e it had similar contracts with other forwarders. In latter case, applicant
merely doing for authorized forwarders what they could legally do for them-
es, whereas a contract with an unregulated association might well encompass
undertaking to perform services which the other party could not legally
280
RANSPORTATION: When bulk-commodity carrier contracted with shippers to
y coal in its vessels, which at the same time were used to carry automobiles
ts affiliate, a certificated carrier, transportation of the entire cargo was subject
he act, and agreements to carry both commodities should be made in the
e of the certificated carrier. 59
greements, written or oral, between applicant and shippers, covering former's
very service of parcels to latter's customers, merely formalized obligations and
onsibilities of carriers serving the public, and did not affect applicant's status
forwarder subject to part IV, since there were no restrictions against pro-
on of service for other shippers and shipper was not bound to use applicant's
ice exclusively. 700, 701
NTROL. See also COMMON CONTROL, MANAGEMENT, OR ARRANGEMENT;
ORPORATIONS; FORWARDERS (Merchants and Manufacturers; Prohibited In-
rest in); VESSELS.
✓ GENERAL: Although vendee partnership failed to prove it had legal control
ower to exercise control over an unregulated water carrier whose stock was
lly owned by several nephews and a niece of the partners, and from which it
Id charter barges for use in acquired operations, such family relationship,
›led with employment of the affiliate's stockholders in important operational
tions with vendee, gave latter a measure of actual control which should not
lisregarded in determining whether it had sufficient vessels available to begin
ations. 459, 460
CQUISITION THROUGH STOCK OWNERSHIP: Authorization: Russell, Lew S., Sr.,
lah H., Lew S., Jr., and Margery, and Robert W. and Betty Lou Thomayer,
Albany Barge Lines, Inc., 731; Shaver Transp. Co., Tidewater-Shaver Barge
es, and Russell Towboat & Moorage Co., of Consolidated Nav. Co., 169
NVENIENCE AND NECESSITY. See also CAR FERRIES; INLAND
√ATERWAYS; OPERATION (Abandonment); TRANSPORTATION.
XTENSION OF OPERATIONS: Grant of extension authority to Seatrain Lines
the port of Savannah was warranted when no break-bulk water carrier was
ently operating thereto, and restoration of prewar coastwise service was of
l importance to economic welfare of that port and those served to or from it;
lication was strongly supported by individual shippers, shipper organizations,
lic bodies and officials, and connecting railroads; abundance of potential
fic was indicated by volume which had moved through Savannah prior to
rld War II; and the growth of the Southeast, and that Seatrain even under
porary authority had afforded access to markets unavailable while water
sportation was lacking, promised greater volume in future. 511, 515, 517
irant of extension authority for transportation of lumber by barge and tow-
t on Pacific coast was warranted when applicant, in its steamship operations,
handled the largest volume of that traffic in Pacific coastwise trade, but its
t had been reduced by age and obsolescence and cost of replacement with
|