upr000329 28

Page 3 July 21, 1937. Mr. H. E. Wedekind: proposed. In other words, when a b i l l o f lading, freight b i l l , or other shipping document becomes, in the normal course of business, in the possession of a water c a rrie r, the weight upon which charges are assessed for the r a i l haul is shown. Although the information does not generally appear in as great d e ta il as is shown In the weight agreements, the same can re ad ily be checked by one method or another i f the water lin e should choose to go to the trouble o f doing so. is my opinion, as stated, that the proposed arrangement would not be in violation of Paragraph (11) of Section 15 of the Interstate Commerce Act. I f any doubt should prevail with respect to the lawfulness o f the practice, the same could be overcome by tbe insertion of a b rie f statement in the weight agreements to the e ffect that the shipper and carrier represen­tatives entering into such agreement understand and agree that the weights agreed upon fo r shipping purposes may, in the normal course o f business, be supplied to the carriers comprising the Intercoastal Steamship Freight Association, or their duly authorized representative, in order that the provisions of such weight agreement may be extended to t r a ffic interchanged with such water carriers* Taking everything into consideration, therefore, it Very truly yours, L. N. BRADSHAW UiB:M cc- Mr. G. 2. Duffy, Commerce Atty. A.T. k S*F.Ry«Qo. San Francisco, C a lif. ec- Mr. S. E* Bennett, Gen* sol. Union P acific R.R.Co* P a cific Elec t r ie ,B ld g ., Los Angeles