US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

1. Upon a thorough investigation of the grain rate structure in the western district, the Interstate Commerce Commission prescribed rate-break combinations as the exclusive basis of transit privileges at primary markets. However, transit privileges at interior points on routes passing through a primary market were allowed on the basis of lower rates in effect over competing routes between the same points.

Held, that, considering the whole history of grain rate regulation, the differentiation between primary markets and interior points thus made by the Commission was not an undue or unreasonable discrimination forbidden by the Interstate Commerce Act. P. 314 U. S. 544.

2. The contention that the orders of the Commission are invalid because they deprive the primary markets of natural competitive advantages is rejected. P. 314 U. S. 548.

3. Whether a discrimination is unreasonable under the Act is a question of fact that has been confided by Congress to the judgment and discretion of the Commission, and upon which its decisions, made the basis of administrative orders operating in futuro, are not to be chanrobles.com-red

Page 314 U. S. 535

disturbed by the courts except upon a showing that they are unsupported by evidence, were made without a hearing, exceed constitutional limits, or for some other reason amount to a, abuse of power. P. 314 U. S. 546.

36 F.Supp. 865 affirmed.

Appeal from a decree of the District Court of three judges dismissing the complaint in a suit to set aside orders of the Interstate Commerce Commission.