retain routes 1 and 3 and the remainder of route 4, with the result that three carriers instead of one were permitted to operate between Cleve land and Pittsburgh. In approving those transactions, however, the operating rights of the carriers involved were modified to insure against the performance of duplicate service. aloq nommoɔ In operating between Baltimore and Winchester, vendor uses his route via Frederick on truckload traffic moving between those points as that route is shortest and passes through no large city. On all other occasions the route used is dependent on the traffic moving to and from intermediate points. The three routes for the most part are over separate highways, but not entirely so. The Winchester WashingtonBaltimore route proposed to be sold by vendor duplicates the Winchester-Frederick-Baltimore routes which he would retain between Winchester and Berryville, approximately 11 miles, and between Ellicott City and Baltimore, approximately 5 miles. The points com mon to the route to be sold and the routes to be retained by vendor and their population (1940 census) are Baltimore 859,100, Washington 663,091, Winchester 12,045, Berryville 1,262, Ellicott City 1,216, and Catonsville, Md., 7,647. In their exceptions, applicants state that they are willing that vendees be restricted from serving Catonsville, which is less than 1 mile from the Baltimore city limits, but that as to the other common points, service by both vendées and vendor is planned. The question of whether the sale of a right to operate over different routes between the same termini to different and competing carriers would be consistent with the public interest is for determination on the evidence adduced in each proceeding, with consideration being given to the effect which an additional competitor would have on existing carriers in view of the amount of available and potential traffic in the territory. Hall-Purchase-Magee Truck Lines, Inc., 38 M. C. C. 529, 536. In some of the cases where we have authorized the transfer of operating rights between two points, with the retention by the seller of operating rights between the same points, the routes sold and retained were over different highways, and, in some cases, approval has been conditioned upon modification of the operating rights of the parties to insure against the performance of a duplicate service by the purchaser and the seller, as was done in the BreuerWilson case. In other cases, the transactions have been unopposed and the record did not contain evidence showing that competing carriers might be harmed by the additional operation. Such is not the situation presented by the instant transaction. Here two "route splits," one of 11 miles and one of 5 miles, are involved, and the application contains no request for the issuance of operating authority to either vendees or vendor over the duplicate segments. Also, in view of the number of points proposed to be served in common by applicants, it is not practicable to modify the operating rights in such a manner as to insure against duplication of service. Moreover, the evidence shows that at least 7 motor common carriers and 10 motor contract carriers now actively compete for traffic between the common points. To authorize the transaction in the manner proposed would result in another carrier operating between important points without a cessation of any service by vendor between those points. In this connection, vendor's traffic manager stated that the reason for selling one of the three Baltimore-Winchester routes was that "since we had alternate routes we would not jeopardize our interests" and "would retain our traffic." The effect of approval herein would be to place vendees in competition with vendor and other carriers and the creation of an additional service without a showing that the present and future public convenience and necessity require the additional service. Based on the evidence adduced, we are of the opinion that the proposal to purchase one of the vendor's three routes between Baltimore and Winchester properly may not be approved. We find that the proposed transaction has not been shown to be consistent with the public interest, and that the application should be denied. An appropriate order will be entered. COMMISSIONER MITCHELL dissents. 50 M. C. C. No. MC-F-3331 JOHN BRIDGE-CONTROL; BRIDGEWAYS, INC.-PURCHASE (PORTION)-CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT COMPANY Submitted July 28, 1947. Decided September 17, 1947 Purchase by Bridgeways, Inc., of certain operating rights of Consolidated Freight Company, and acquisition of control of the operating rights by John Bridge through the purchase, approved and authorized, subject to conditions. H. J. Waples and Kit F. Clardy for vendee. Robert E. DesRoches and Conrad E. Thornquist for protestants. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION DIVISION 4, COMMISSIONERS MAHAFFIE, MILLER, AND MITCHELL BY DIVISION 4: Exceptions were filed by protestant Michigan Express, Inc., to the examiner's proposed report, and vendee replied. Bridgeways, Inc.,1 an Ohio corporation, of Detroit, Mich., and Consolidated Freight Company, a Michigan corporation, of Saginaw, Mich., herein called Bridgeways and Consolidated, respectively, by a joint application filed November 4, 1946, seek authority under section 5 of the Interstate Commerce Act for the purchase by the former of certain operating rights of the latter for $1,000. By the same application, John Bridge, also of Detroit, who controls Bridgeways through ownership of all its outstanding capital stock, seeks authority under the same section to acquire control of the operating rights through the purchase. Hearing has been held, at which 7 motor common carriers 2 opposed the application, of which the first four named in footnote 2 introduced evidence. Briefs were filed by the protestants and by Bridgeways. Bridgeways' operations in interstate or foreign commerce as a motor common carrier of general commodities, with exceptions, are described in Lecrone-Benedict Ways, Inc.-Purchase-LeCrone Motor, 37 M. C. C. 745, and Lecrone-Benedict Ways, Inc.-Purchase-Great Central, 39 M. C. C. 401 and 591, and 40 M. C. C. 13. Generally, its 1 Formerly Lecrone-Benedict Ways, Inc. The corporate name was changed by amendment to its charter on July 16, 1946. Interstate Motor Freight System, Wolverine Express, Incorporated, Holland Motor Express, Associated Truck Lines, Inc., Michigan Express, Inc., Rooks Motor Express, Inc., and Blue Arrow Transport Lines, Inc., herein called Interstate, Wolverine, Holland, Associated, Express, Rooks, and Blue Arrow, respectively. operations extend (a) over numerous regular routes in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, including routes (1) between Chicago, Ill., and St. Louis, Mo., via Peoria, Ill. (2) between St. Louis and Buffalo, N. Y., via Indianapolis, Ind., Toledo and Cleveland, Ohio, and between. St. and Vincenne and JH (3) TR between and Evansville, Ind., via Vincennes, (5) between Cincinnati and Detroit via Toledo, (6) between Detroit and Chicago via Battle Creek and Benton Harbor, Mich., (7) between Battle Creek and Lapeer via Flint, Mich., (8) between Flint and Detroit via Pontiac, Mich., and (9) between Flint and Benton Harbor via Grand Rapids and Holland, Mich., serving numerous intermediate and off-route points; and (b) over irregular routes in part of the same territory. It has authority under No. MC-8602 (Sub-No. 29+TA) to operate until November 29, 1947, in the transportation of such commodities as are transported under its authority to serve Grand Rapids, over a regular route between Grand Rapids and Muskegon, Mich., over U. S. Highway 16, serving no intermediate points. It has pending applications under section 207 seeking auther ity to extend its operations, including one in No. MC-3602 (Sub-No. 23) which seeks regular-route rights, among others, between the same points covered by the above-mentioned temporary authority. It utilizes substantially more than 20 motor vehicles in its operations... On October 17, 1944, in No. MC-30897, a certificate was issued to Consolidated authorizing similar operations, in the transportation of general commodities, with exceptions, over regular routes in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan, but for the most part in the last-mentioned State, principally (1) between Chicago and Detroit via Benton Harbor, Kalamazoo, and Ann Arbor, Mich., over U. S. Highway 12, (2) between Cadillac and Benton Harbor via Grand Rapids and Holland, Mich., over U. S. Highway 131, Michigan Highway 21, and U. S. Highway 31, (3) between Holland and Manistee, Mich., via Muskegon, over U. S. Highway 31, (4) between Grand Rapids and Detroit via Lansing, Mich., over U. S. Highway 16, (5) between Flint and Toledo via Detroit, over U. S. Highways 10, 25, and 24, and: (6) between Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo, over U. S. Highway 131, serving most intermediate points. Under that certificate it may also operate between Grand Rapids and Muskegon over two combinations of routes, (a) via Nunica, Mich., over U. S. Highways 16 and 31, and (b) via Grand Haven, Mich., over U. S. Highway 16, Alternate U. S. 4 Embraces (a) operating rights previously granted in No. MC-30897, and (b) operating Tights acquired pursuant to authority granted in No. MC-F-1972, Consolidated Freighs Co.-Purchase Northern Motor Erp., Inc., 39 M. C. C. 802. fat 958 Highway 16 (Michigan Highway 104), and U. S. Highway 31, serving no intermediate points on either combination of routes. On May 14, 1947, in No. MC-30897 (Sub-No. 1), a certificate was issued to Consolidated authorizing similar operations in serving the site of The Upjohn Company plant located about 412 miles southeast of Kalamazoo as an off-route point in connection with its operations to and from Kalamazoo, bets at Hot so pong tiener, boldoguia. Mouni Under an agreement of August 30, 1946, Bridgeways would purchase for $1,000, payable upon, approval of the transaction by this Commission, that portion of Consolidated's operating rights certificated in No. MC-30897 authorizing the transportation of general commodities, with exceptions, between Grand Rapids and Muskegon, over U. S. Highways 16 and 31, serving no intermediate, points. Funds necessary to consummate the transaction would be provided from Bridgeways' available cash without borrowing. ad I " Bridgeways balance sheet as of December 31, 1946, shows assets aggregating $965,291, consisting of: Current assets $634,529, principally cash $22,359, and accounts receivable, less reserve for uncollectible accounts, $566,503; carrier-operating property, less depreciation, $45,010; intangible property less reserve for amortization, $1,842; other investments and advances $240,395; and deferred debits $43,515. Its liabilities were:Current liabilities $1,005,637, principally notes payable $520,589, and accounts payable $371,023; equipment obligations $76,000; deferred credits $30,579; reserves $9,086; capital stock $78,200; and earned surplus (debit balance) $234,211. Its income statements for 1944, 1945, and 1946, show deficit of $214,504, and net incomes of $5,689 and $120,421, respectively, the last two figures being before provision for income taxes. „Ilɛnoltosjda von di Consolidated's balance sheet as of December 28, 1946, shows assets aggregating $458,746, consisting of: Current assets $184,248, principally cash $33,106, and accounts receivable, less reserve for uncollectible accounts, $129,510; carrier operating property, less depreciation, $204,865; intangible property $18,001; investments and advances $39,329; and prepayments $12,303. Its liabilities were: Current liabilities $266,267, principally notes payable $100,759, accounts payable $58,643, and wages payable $36,196; equipment obligations $73,378; other longterm obligations $2,250; deferred credits $3,265; reserves $1,722; capital stock $11,484; and surplus, unearned $38,905 and earned $61,475. Its income statements for 1944 and the period January 1 to December 28, 1946, show net incomes, before provision for income taxes, of $12,012 and $36,068, and, after provision for income taxes, $8,777 and 1 4 Between the junction of U. S. Highway 16 and Alternate U. S. Highway 16 just south of Nunica, and Grand Haven Alternate U. S. Highway 16 and Michigan Highway 104 are the same. RT |