Page images
PDF
EPUB

within the United States. While we agree with the result of the joint board's conclusion in respect of this operation between Detroit and Windsor it cannot be determined that such operation is exempt under the provisions of section 203 (b) (8) of the act until it is established, in an appropriate proceeding for that purpose, that Windsor is or is not commercially a part of the city of Detroit for the purposes of motor-carrier regulation. For this reason we make no finding concerning this phase of applicants' operation. Applicants' status, in this connection, is similar to that of hundreds of carriers rendering a local cartage service in a territory immediately adjacent to a municipality, the commercial zone of which has not been determined. The establishment of the zone automatically will operate to determine the status of such carriers, as will the establishment of the Detroit commercial zone establish applicants' status as to the operation in question.

Since 1930, applicants' transportation of household goods has been conducted from Detroit to points in eastern Ontario. They seek authority to continue these operations to all points in the Province of Ontario. As hereinbefore stated, our jurisdiction in respect of applicants' operations extends only to those conducted within the United States, and accordingly our findings herein will be so limited.

The evidence offered by applicants relative to these operations reveals movements between Detroit and points in the Province of Ontario each year since June 1, 1933. While not controlling on the question of public convenience and necessity, the fact that applicants have been successfully operating over a period of several years tends to show that there is a public demand for the continuance of their service. Protestants emphasize the few movements of household goods made by applicants between Detroit and Windsor during the period of their past operations. However, we have heretofore recognized that transportation of household goods is, by its nature, necessarily an irregular service, and accordingly we conclude that applicants' past operations sufficiently indicate a public demand for their service to warrant the issuance of the authority sought.

Applicants own and operate eight units of equipment, three of which they are authorized to operate in Michigan. They are financially able to carry on the described operation.

We find that present and future public convenience and necessity require operation by applicants as a common carrier by motor vehicle in interstate or foreign commerce, over irregular routes, of household goods as defined in Practices of Motor Common Carriers of Household Goods, 17 M. C. C. 467, between points in Detroit as part of a continuous carriage to or from points in Canada beyond the international boundary at Windsor, Ontario; that applicants are fit, will

ing, and able properly to perform such operation and to conform to the provisions of the act and the requirements, rules, and régulations of the Commission thereunder; and that an appropriate certificate should be granted authorizing such operations to the extent that they are conducted within the United States.

Upon compliance by applicants with the requirements of sections 215 and 217 of the act and our rules and regulations thereunder, an appropriate certificate will be issued.

COMMISSIONER LEE concurs in the result.

28 M. C. C.

No. MC-1124

HERRIN TRANSPORTATION COMPANY COMMON
CARRIER APPLICATION

Decided February 24, 1941

On reconsideration, findings in the prior report herein, 24 M. C. C. 473, modified so as to authorize applicant to operate as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, of general commodities, with certain exceptions, over a described regular route between Elton and Opelousas, La., serving all intermediate points, in lieu of route 6 described in the appendix of the prior report.

Appearances shown in the prior report.

REPORT AND ORDER OF THE COMMISSION ON RECONSIDERATION

DIVISION 5, COMMISSIONERS LEE, ROGERS, AND ALLDREDGE

BY DIVISION 5:

In the prior report and order herein, 24 M. C. C. 473, we authorized the issuance to applicant of a certificate to operate as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, of general commodities, with certain exceptions, over a regular route, among others, between Elton and Opelousas, La., designated as route 6 in the appendix of said report and described as "Between Elton and Opelousas, La., over Louisiana Highway 25, serving all intermediate points." It was our intention to authorize applicant to operate over a connecting route between U. S. Highways 90 and 190, through Evangeline, La. However, through error the route extending through Evangeline was designated as Louisiana Highway 25, whereas an examination of available maps shows that it should have been designated as Louisiana Highways 370 and 371, which closely parallel Louisiana Highway 25. Accordingly the proceeding is hereby reopened on our own motion for the purpose of correcting this matter. On reconsideration, we find that the prior report and order herein should be, and they are hereby, amended so as to authorize applicant to operate as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, of general commodities, except those of unusual value, commodities in bulk, those injurious or contaminating to other lading, and household goods as defined in Practices of Motor Common Carriers of Household Goods, 17 M. C. C. 467, between the junction of U. S. Highway 190 and Louisiana Highway 370 south of Basile and

407283m-41-vol. 288

Opelousas, La., over Louisiana Highway 370 to its junction with Louisiana Highway 371, thence over Louisiana Highway 371 to Jennings, La., and thence over Louisiana Highway 25 to Opelousas, serving all intermediate points, in lieu of route 6 as described in the appendix of the prior report; and it is so ordered.

No. MC-100061

LEROY QUIGLEY COMMON CARRIER APPLICATION

Submitted September 11, 1939. Decided February 24, 1941

Public convenience and necessity found to require continuance of operation by Skylines, Incorporated, as a common carrier by motor vehicle, of passengers and their baggage, in charter operations, from points in the town of Burrillville, Providence County, R. I., to points in Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Maine, and return, over irregular routes. Issuance of a certificate approved upon compliance by applicant with certain conditions, and application in all other respects denied.

William Gordon for applicant.

W. A. Melander, Raphael Vicario, Frank J. McGee, and Michael J. Bowen for protestants.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

DIVISION 5, COMMISSIONERS LEE, ROGERS, AND PATTERSON BY DIVISION 5:

Exceptions were filed by applicant to the order recommended by the examiner. Our conclusions differ from those recommended.

By application filed January 27, 1939, as amended, Leroy Quigley, of Mapleville, R. I., doing business as Cooney's Garage, seeks a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing operation in interstate or foreign commerce as a common carrier by motor vehicle of passengers and their baggage, in round-trip charter service, from Mapleville, Burrillville, and Woonsocket, R. I., and Millville, Mass., to points in Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine, over irregular routes. Certain rail and motor carriers operating in the affected territory oppose the application.

Applicant operates a garage at Mapleville, which is a village in the town of Burrillville, and sells new and used automobiles. He also is engaged in furnishing a daily motor-carrier service for mill workers,

between Woonsocket and Mapleville, on the one hand, and Pascoag, R. I., on the other.

In January 1934 he commenced transporting round-trip charter parties from points in the town of Burrillville to points in other States, operating one 7-passenger sedan. In 1936 he augmented his equipment and at the time of hearing owned three 10-passenger sedan busses and one 7-passenger sedan. He discontinued transporting charter parties to points in States other than Rhode Island in October 1938, on being advised that such operations were unlawful.

Applicant testified that he kept no records that would show charter parties transported by him. He submitted, however, a list of charter parties conducted during the period from December 1934 to October 1938, which he stated was prepared from his recollection of trips. performed by him or his drivers. Examination of this compilation discloses that practically all of the charter service listed thereon originated in the town of Burrillville and that the passengers were transported to points in Rhode Island or to points in and around Boston, Mass. However, the list also shows one trip to Connecticut, two to New Hampshire, and one to Maine during this period. Operations successfully conducted for such a long period of time, although not controlling, are evidence that the public convenience and necessity require a continuance thereof.

Applicant testified that he had had numerous requests from baseball clubs, bowling teams, fishing parties, and the various social organizations in the town of Burrillville for charter-party service to points outside of Rhode Island. These organizations prefer to hire busses from a local operator for such trips because of his easy accessibility. Five residents of Burrillville testified in support of the application. They stated that it would be a convenience to them and to the social organizations of which they are members to be able to charter a bus from a local operator when needed for transport to points outside Rhode Island.

Representatives of three companies operating passenger busses over regular routes between points in the affected territory testified that their companies are authorized to conduct round-trip charter parties from the points here involved to points in the States covered by the application. One of these companies owns 10 ten-passenger busses, 6 of which were not registered because of a lack of demand for busses of such limited capacity. The record is clear that the granting of the hereinafter-described authority will not materially adversely affect the revenues of existing carriers.

On October 7, 1940, in No. MC-FC-13027, division 5 approved the substitution of Skylines, Incorporated, as applicant in this proceeding in lieu of Leroy Quigley.

« PreviousContinue »