Page:Department of Public Utilities v. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co.pdf/13

 from one state to another and in the latter delivered to a large number of local distributing  corporations. In all of these cases it was, of course, obviously impossible to earmark the gas when placed in the pipe line for delivery to any particular one of the local companies to which it. was to be delivered in the state of destination; nevertheless, in all of them the court held that the transaction constituted interstate commerce and was not subject to local regulation. In Eureka Pipe Line Company v. Hallanan, 257 U.S. 265, 42 S. Ct. 101, 66 L. ed. 227, all of the oil was produced in West Virginia and in that state placed in a pipe line extending into Ohio. The producers, however, reserved the right to divert quantities of oil from the pipe line while still in West Virginia and before it crossed the line into Ohio. Manifestly, it was impossible to earmark or segregate any quantity of oil when put in the pipe line in West Virginia and say it was to be delivered in Ohio. Yet the Suprethe Court held that all of the oil delivered in Ohio wa the subject of interstate commerce.

"In Public Utilities Commission v. Attleboro Steam and Electric Co., 273 U.S. 83, 47 S. Ct. 294, 71 L. ed. 549, the greater part of the electricity produced in Rhode Island was diverted for use in that state before it passed into Massachusetts. It was impossible to earmark that part of the electricity which was to be transported in Massachusetts. But the court held that the transportation of that part which did reach Massachusetts was interstate coMmerce, not subject to local regulation. In Dahnke–Walker Milling Co. v. Bondurant, 257 U.S. 282, 42 S. Ct. 106, 66 L. ed. 239, none of the grain purchased in Kentucky for shipment into Tennessee could be earmarked as destined for any particular customer in the latter state. But again the court held that its purchase and transportation was interstate commerce, free from state interference.

"As heretofore remarked in discussing the original package doctrine, such considerations cannot apply to the interstate transportation and delivery of gas. From the very nature of the substance transported, the only