Copyright
Thomas Johnson Michie.

A treatise on the law of carriers (Volume 4) online

. (page 65 of 214)
Online LibraryThomas Johnson MichieA treatise on the law of carriers (Volume 4) → online text (page 65 of 214)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


ing carrier in violation of the due process clause of the fifth amendment, or as
violating the liberty of contract guaranteed by that amendment.-"'^

The Interstate Commerce Act Feb. 4, 1887, as amended by Act June 29,
1906, provides that any common carrier, etc., on receiving property for interstate
transportation, shall issue a receipt or bill of lading therefor, and be liable to the
holder for any loss, damage, or injury to the property caused by the common car-
rier, etc., and no contract, receipt, etc., shall exempt the carrier from the liability
hereby imposed. Congress has constitutional power to regulate the right of pub-
lic or common carriers of interstate commerce to contract, and § 20 is constitu-
tional. ^-



30. Galveston, etc., R. Co. r. Wallace,
223 U. S. 481, 56 L. Ed. 516, 32 S. Ct. 205;
Atlantic, etc., R. Co. v. Riverside Mills,
219 U. S. 186, 55 L. Ed. 167. 31 S. Ct. 164.
31 L. R. A., N. S., 7, affirming 168 Fed.
990; Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Scott, 219
U. S. 209, 55 L. Ed. 183, 31 S. Ct. 171, af-
firming 133 Ky. 724, 118 S. _W. 990.

The imposition upon an interstate car-
rier voluntarily receiving property for
transportation from a point in one state
to a point in another state, o<" liability
to the holder of the bill of lading for a
loss anywhere en route, with a right of
recovery over against the carrier actually
causing the loss which is made bv Act
Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104, § 20, 24 Stat. 3S6 (U.
S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3169), as amended
bv Act June 29, 1906, c. 3591, § 7, 34 Stat.
593 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1909, p. 1163),
in spite of any agreement or stipulation
limiting liability to its own line, is a
valid regulation of interstate commerce.
Atlantic, etc., R. Co. v. Riverside Mills,
219 U. S. 186, 55 L. Ed. 167. 31 S. Ct. 164,

31 L. R. A., N. S., 7, affirming judgment
168 Fed. 990; Louisville, etc., R. Co. v.
Scott, 219 U. S. 209, 55 L. Ed. 183, 31 S.
Ct. 171, affirming judgment 118 S. W.
990, 133 Ky. 724; Galveston, etc., R. Co.
V. Wallace, 223 U. S. 481, 56 L. Ed. 516,

32 S. Ct. 205.

31. The property of the initial carrier
is not taken in violation of Const. U. S.
Amend. 5, to pay the debt of an inde-
pendent connecting carrier whose negli-
gence ma}' have been the sole cause of a
loss, by the Carmack amendment (Act
June 29, 1906, c. 3591, § 7, 34 Stat. 593
[U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1909, p. 1163]), to
Act Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104. § 20, 24 Stat. 386
(U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3169), under
which an interstate carrier voluntarily
receiving property for transportation
from a point in one state to a point in
another state is made liable to the holder
of the bill of lading for a loss anj-where
en route, in spite of any agreement or
stipulation to the contrary, with a right
of recovery over against the carrier ac-
tually causing the loss, since the liability
of the receiving carrier which results in
such a case is that of a principal for the
negligence of his own agents. Atlantic,



etc., R. Co. v. Riverside Mills, 219 U. S,
186, 55 L. Ed. 167, 31 S. Ct. 164, 31 L.
R. A., N. S., 7, affirming judgment 168
Fed. 990; Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Scott,
219 U. S. 209, 55 L. Ed. 183, 31 S. Ct. 171,
affirming judgment 118 S. W. 990, 133
Ky. 724.

The liberty of contract secured by
Const. U. S. Amend. 5, was not unconsti-
tutionally denied by the enactment by
congress, in the exercise of its power
under the commerce clause, of the Car-
mack Amendment (Act June 29, 1906, c.
3591, § 7. 34 Stat. 593 [U. S. Comp. St.
Supp. 1909, p. 11631) to Act Feb. 4,1887,
c. 104, § 20, 24 Stat. 379 (U. S. Comp.
St. 1901. p. 3169), by which an interstate
carrier voluntarily receiving property for
transportation from a point in one state
to a point in another state is made liable
to the holder of the bill of lading for a
loss anywhere en route, in spite of any
agreement or stipulation to the contrary,
with a right of recovery over against
the carrier actually causing the loss. At-
lantic, etc., R. Co. V. Riverside Mills. 219
U. S. 186, 55 L. Ed. 167, 31 S. Ct. 164, 31
L. R. A., N. S., 7, affirming judgment 168
Fed. 990; Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Scott,
219 U. S. 209, 55 L. Ed. 183. 31 S. Ct.
171, affirming judgment 118 S. W^ 990,
133 Ki'. 724.'

32. Under Interstate Commerce Act

Greenwald ?•. Weir. Ill N. Y. S. 235. 59
Misc. Rep. 431.

Act Cong. June 29, 1906. c. 3591, § 7,
34 Stat. 595 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907,
p. 909), known as the "Carmack Amend-
ment to the Interstate Commerce Act,"^
providing that any common carrier re-
ceiving property for interstate transpor-
tation shall be liable to the holder of
the bill of lading for any damage caused
by it or any common carrier to which
such property may be delivered, and that
no contract shall exempt such carrier
from the liability imposed, is a '•;alid reg-
ulation of interstate commerce, and does
not operate to take private property for
public purposes. Louisville, etc., R. Co.
V. Scott. 133 Ky. 724, 118 S. W. 990, 19
Am. & Eng. Ann. Cas. 392.

The Act of June 29. 1906. providing that
a carrier receiving property from a point



3445



REGUIvATION AND CONTROL.



§ 3834



§§ 3834-3859. Subjects of Regulation— § 3834. In General.— The

commercial power of congress is without hmitation. It extends to every species
of commercial intercourse hetw^een the United States and foreign nations and to
all commerce among the several states.-'-* The power extends to and embraces
within its control all the subjects of that commerce-*-* and all persons engaged
in it. •'•-"'

Power to Create Corporation. — Congress may create corporations as ap-
propriate means of executing its powers over, and for tlie purpose of promoting
interstate commerce, as for instance, a railroad corporation. ^c To the same end
congress may employ such a corporation created by one of tlie states. •='

Means and Instruments of Commerce. — The power of congress to regulate
interstate and foreign commerce extends to and embraces v/ithin its control and
authorizes appropriate legislation with respect to all the instrumentalities and
means by which that commerce may be carried on or conducted,-* ^ and congress
has authority to regulate an instrumentality or agency employed in commerce be-
tween the states, not only when that agency or instrumentality extends through
two or more states, but also when it is confined in an action entirely within the
limits of a single state.-*'-'

Means and Instruments Invented Since Constitution Adopted.— The
power granted to congress to regulate commerce is not confined to the instru-
mentalities of commerce known or in use when the constitution was adopted, but
it keeps pace with the progress of the country, and adapts itself to the new



in one state to a point in another can not
limit its liability to its own line, is not
unconstitutional as infringing state sov-
reignty. Galveston, etc., R. Co. v. Wal-
lace (Tex. Civ. App.), 117 S. W. 169.

A carrier receiving property for trans-
portation from a point in one state to a
point in another is within Carmack
Amendment, June 29, 1906, § 7, to Inter-
state Commerce Act Feb. 4, 1887, § 20,
making it liable for the loss en route,
notwithstanding stipulation to the con-
trary, where it accepts such shipment
over route selected by shipper, as to
which the carrier has no established
through rate. Norfolk, etc., R. Co. v.
Dixie Tobacco Co., 228 U. S. 593, 33 S.
Ct. 609, affirming judgment 111 Va. 813,
69 S. E. 1106.

33. Subjects of regulation. — State Ton-
nage Tax Cases (U. S.), 13 Wall. 204, 20
L. Ed. 370; Interstate Commerce Comm.
V. Brimson, 154 U. S. 447, 38 L. Ed. 1047,
14 S. Ct. 1125; Schollenberger v. Penn-
sylvania, 171 U. S. 1, 43 L. Ed. 49, 18 S.
Ct. 767.

34. Steamship Co. v. Joliffe (U. S.), 2
Wall. 450, 17 L. Ed. 805; United States
V. Marigold (U. S.), 9 How. 560, 13 L.
Ed. 257; Smith v. Alabama, 124 U. S. 465,
31 L. Ed. 508, 8 S. Ct. 564; Sherlock v.
Ailing, 93 U. S. 99, 23 L. Ed. 819.

35. Persons engaged in commerce. —
Steamship Co. z'. Joliffe (U. S.), 2 Wall.
450, 17 L. Ed. 805; Smith v. Alabama, 124
U. S. 465, 31 L. Ed. 508, 8 S. Ct. 564; Sher-
lock V. Ailing, 93 U. S. 99, 23 L. Ed. 819.

36. Power to create corporation. — Lux-
ton 7'. North River Bridge Co., 153 U.
S. 525, 38 L. Ed. 808, 14 S. Ct. 891; Wil-
son V. Shaw, 204 U. S. 24, 51 L. Ed. 351,



27 S. Ct. 233; Cherokee Nation v. South-
ern Kansas R. Co.. 135 U. S. 641, 34 L.
Ed. 295, 10 S. Ct. 965.

37. Cherokee Nation v. Southern Kan-
sas R. Co.. 135 U. S. 641, 34 L. Ed. 295,
10 S. Ct. 965.

38. Means and instruments of com-
merce. — Gloucester Ferrv Co. t'. Pennsyl-
vania, 114 U. S. 196, 29' L. Ed. 158. 5 S.
Ct. 826; Hopkins v. United States, 171 U.
S. 578, 43 L. Ed. 290, 19 S. Ct. 40; Wel-
ton V. Missouri, 91 U. S. 275, 23 L. Ed.
347; The Daniel Ball (U. S.), 10 Wall.
557, 19 L. Ed. 999; Smith v. Alabama,
124 U. S. 465, 31 L. Ed. 508, 8 S. Ct. 564;
Sherlock v. Ailing, 93 U. S. 99, 23 L. Ed.
819; County of Mobile v. Kimball, 102
U. S. 691, 26 L. Ed. 238; Hooper z'. Cal-
ifornia, 155 U. S. 648, 39 L. Ed. 297, 15
S. Ct. 207; Veazie v. Moor (U. S.), 14
How. 568, 14 L. Ed. 545; Railroad Co. t;.
Fuller (U. S.), 17 Wall. 560, 21 L. Ed.
7j0; Monongahela Nav. Co. v. United
States, 148 U. S. 312, 37 L. Ed. 463, 13 S.
Ct. 622; United States v. Knight Co., 156
U. S. 1, 39 L. Ed. 325, 15 S. Ct. 249;
Northern Securities Co. v. United States,
193 U. S. 197, 48 L, Ed. 679, 24 S. Ct. 436.

39. "If its authority does not extend to
an agency in such commerce, when that
agency is confined within the limits of a
state, its entire authority over interstate
commerce may be defeated. Several
agencies combining, each taking up the
commodity transported at the boundary
line at one end of a state, and leaving it
at the boundary line at the other end, the
federal jurisdiction would be entirely
ousted, and the constitutional provision
would become a dead letter." The Dan-
iel Ball (U. S.), 10 Wall. 557, 19 L. Ed.
999.



§ 3834



CARRIERS.



3446



developments of time and circumstances. The power of congress extends from
the horse with its rider to the stage coach, from the saiHng vessel to the steam-
boat, from the coach and the steamboat to the railroad, and from the railroad to
the telegraph, as these new agencies are successively brought into use to meet
the demands of increasing population and wealth. It was intended for the gov-
ernment of the business to which it relates, at all times and under all circum-
stances. As it was intrusted to the general government for the good of the na-
tion, it is not only the right, but the duty, of congress to see to it that inter-
course among the states and the transmission of intelligence are not obstructed
or unnecessarly encumbered by state legislation.^*^ The language of the grant of
power to congress to regulate foreign and interstate commerce makes no ref-
erence to the instrumentalities or agencies by which such commerce may be car-
ried on ; it is general, and includes alike commerce by whomsoever carried on,
whether by individuals,"* ^ partnerships, associations,'^- or corporations.^^



40. Means and instruments invented
since constitution adopted. — Pensacola
Tel. Co. V. Western Union Tel. Co., 96
U. S. 1, 24 L. Ed. 708.

Up to a recent date commerce, both
interstate and international, was mainly
by water, and it is not strange that both
the legislation of congress and the cases
in the courts have been principally con-
cerned therewith. The fact that in re-
cent years interstate commerce has come
mainly to be carried on by railroads and
over artificial highways has in no man-
ner narrowed the scope of the constitu-
tional provision, or abridged the power
of congress over such commerce. On
the contrary, the same fullness of con-
trol exists in the one case as in the other,
and the same power to remove obstruc-
tions from the one as from the other.
Constitutional provisions do not change,
but their operation extends to new mat-
ters as the modes of business and the
habits of life of the people vary with each
succeeding generation. The law of the
common carrier is the same today as
when transportation on land was by
coach and wagon, and on water by canal
boat and sailing vessel, yet in its actual
operation it touches and regulates trans-
portation by modes then vmknown, the
railroad train and the steamship. Just so
is it with the grant to the national gov-
ernment of power over interstate com-
merce. The constitution has not changed.
The power is the same. But it operates to-
day upon modes of interstate commerce
unknown to the fathers, and it will oper-
ate with equal force upon any new modes
of such commerce which the future may
develop. In re Debs, 158 U. S. 564, 39
L. Ed. ]09:2, T.T S. Ct. 900.

41, Commerce carried on by individ-
uals.— Paul V. Virginia (U. S.), 8 Wall.
168, 19 L. Ed. 357; Gloucester Ferry Co.
V. Pennsylvania, 114 U. S. 196, 29 L. Ed.
158, 5 S. Ct. 826; Welton v. Missouri, 91
U. S. 275, 23 L. Ed. 347; County of Mo-
bile V. Kimball, 102 U. S. 691, 26 L. Ed.
238; Philadelphia, etc., Steamship Co. v.
Pennsylvania, 122 U. S. 326, 30 L. Ed.



1200, 7 S. Ct. 1118; Luxton v. North
River Bridge Co., 153 U. S. 525, 38 L.
Ed. 808, 14 S. Ct. 891; Wilson v. Shaw,
204 U. S. 24, 51 L. Ed. 351, 27 S. Ct. 233.

42. Partnerships and associations. —
Paul V. Virginia (U. S.), 8 Wall. 168, 19
L. Ed. 357.

43. Paul V. Virginia (U. S.), 8 Wall.
168, 19 L. Ed. 357; Gloucester Ferrv Co.
V. Pennsylvania, 114 U. S. 196, 29 L. Ed.
158, 5 S. Ct. 826; Welton v. Missouri,
91 U. S. 275, 23 L. Ed. 347; County of
Mobile V. Kimball, 102 U. S. 691, 26 L.
Ed. 238; Philadelphia, etc.. Steamship
Co. V. Pennsylvania, V22 U. S. 326, 30 L.
Ed. 1200, 7 S. Ct. 1118.

"At the time of the formation of the
constitution a large part of the com-
merce of the world was carried on by
corporations. The East India Company,
the Hudson's Bay Company, the Ham-
burgh Company, the Levant Company,
and the Virginia Company, may be named
among the many corporations then in
existence which acquired, from the ex-
tent of their operations, celebrity
throughout the commercial world. This
state of facts forbids the supposition that
it was intended in the grant of power to
congress to exclude from its control the
commerce of corporations. The language
of the grant makes no reference to the
instrumentalities by which commerce
may be carried on; it is general, and in-
cludes alike commerce by individuals,
partnerships, associations, and corpora-
tions." Paul V. Virginia (U. S.), 8 Wall.
168, 19 L. Ed. 357. See, also, Glouces-
ter Ferry Co. v. Pennsylvania, 114 U. S.
196, 29 L. Ed. 158, 5 S. Ct. 826; Philadel-
phia, etc., Steamship Co. v. Pennsylvania,
122 U. S. 326, 30 L. Ed. 1200, 7 S. Ct.
1118.

"At the present day, nearly all enter-
prises of a commercial character, requir-
ing for their successful management large
expenditures of money, are conducted by
corporations. The usual means of trans-
portation on the pubUc waters, where ex-
pedition is desired, are vessels propelled
by steam; and the ownership of a line



3447



REGULATION AND CONTROL.



§§ 3835-3836



§ 3835. Corporations in General. — The power conferred upon congress
to regulate commerce includes as well commerce carried on by corporations as
commerce carried on by individuals.-*^ Franchises of a corporation chartered by a
state, so far as they involve questions of interstate commerce, must always be
exercised in subordination to the power of congress to regulate such commerce.'*'*

§§ 3836-3851. Railroads— § 3836. In General.— Railroad companies
engaged in the transportation of passengers and freight among the states and be-
tween the United States and foreign countries, are instruments of interstate and
foreign commerce, and their business is such commerce itself. Therefore such
companies and the railroads they operate are subject to regulation by congress.'*'^
By the act of June 15, 1866, ch. 124, congress, for the declared purpose of facili-
tating commerce among the several states, and the postal and military communi-
cations of the United States, authorized every railroad company in the United
States, whose road is operated by steam, to carry upon and over its road boats,
bridges and ferries, all passengers, troops, government supplies, mails, freight,
and property, on their way from one state to another, and to receive compensa-
tion therefor, and to connect with roads of other states so as to form continuous



of such vessels generally requires an ex-
penditure exceeding the resources of sin-
gle individuals. Except in rare instances,
it is, only by associated capital furnished
by persons united in corporations, that
the requisite means are provided for such
expenditures." Gloucester Ferry Co. v.
Pennsylvania, 114 U. S. 196, 29 L. Ed.
158, 5 S. Ct. 820.

44. Corporations. — The language of the
grant makes no reference to the in-
strumentalities by which commerce may
be carried on; it is general, and includes
alike commerce by individuals, partner-
ships, associations, and corporations.
Paul V. Virginia (U. S.), 8 Wall. 168, 19
L. Ed. 357; Pensacola Tel. Co. v. West-
ern Union Tel. Co., 96 U. S. 1, 24 L. Ed.
708; Philadelphia Fire Ass'n v. New
York, 1]9 U. S. 110. 30 L. Ed. 342, 7 S.
Ct. 108.

45. "In respect to this the general gov-
ernment may also assert a sovereign au-
thority to ascertain whether such fran-
chises have been exercised in a lawful
manner, with due regard to its own
laws. Being subject to this dual sover-
eignty, the general government posses-
ses the same right to see that its own
laws are respected as the state would
have with respect to the special franchises
vested in it by the laws of the state. The
powers of the general government in
this particular in the vindication of its
own laws, are the same as if the corpo-
ration had been created by an act of
congress. It is not intended to intimate,
however, that it has a general visitorial
power over state corporations." Hale v.
Henkel, 201 U. S. 43, 50 L. Ed. 652, 26
S. Ct. 370.

46. Railroads. — Northern Securities Co.
V. United vStates, 193 U. S. 197, 48 L. Ed.
679, 24 S. Ct. 436; United States v. Trans-
Missouri Freight Ass'n, 166 U. S. 290,
41 L. Ed. 1007, 17 S. Ct. 540; Fargo v.



Michigan, 121 U. S. 230, 30 L. Ed. 888,
7 S. Ct. 857; Wabash, etc., R. Co. v. Illi-
nois, 118 U. S. 557, 30 L. Ed. 244, 7 S.
Ct. 4; United States v. Joint Traffic
Ass'n, ]71 U. S. 505, 43 L. Ed. 259, 19 S.
Ct. 25; Case of the State Freight Tax
(U. S.), 15 Wall. 232, 21 L. Ed. 146; Tel-
egraph Co. ZK Texas, 105 U. S. 460, 26 L.
Ed. 1067. See, also, Cherokee Nation v.
Southern Kansas R. Co., 135 U. S. 641,
34 L. Ed. 295, 10 S. Ct. 965; Chicago, etc.,
R. Co. V. Pullman Southern Car Co., 139
U. S. 79, 35 L. Ed. 97, 11 S. Ct. 490; In-
terstate Commerce Comm. v. Brimson,
154 U. S. 447, 38 L. Ed. 1047, 14 S. Ct.
1125; Smyth v. Ames, 169 U. S. 466, 42
L. Ed. 819, 18 S. Ct. 418; Lake Shore,
etc., R. Co. V. Ohio, 173 U. S. 285, 43 L-
Ed. 702, 19 S. Ct. 465.

When such railroad carriers, in the ex-
ercise of public franchises, engage in the
transportation of passengers and freight
among the states, they become — even if
they be state corporations — subject to
such rules as congress may lawfully es-
tablish for the conduct of interstate com-
merce. Northern Securities Co. v. United
States, 193 U. S. 197, 48 L. Ed. 679, 24
S. Ct. 436.

Among the instruments and agents to
which the power extends are the rail-
roads over which the transportation
from one state to another is conducted,
the engines and cars by which such
transportation is effected, and all who
are in anywise engaged in such trans-
portation, whether as common carriers or
as their employees. Mondou z'. New
York, etc., R. Co., 223 U. S. 1, 56 L. Ed.
327, 32 S. Ct. 169, 38 L. R. A., N. S., 44.
See, also. Interstate Commerce Comm.
v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 215 U. S. 452, 54
L. Ed. 280, 30 S. Ct. 155; Interstate Com-
merce Comm. V. Chicago, etc., R. Co.,
215 U. S. 479, 54 L. Ed. 291, 30 S. Ct. 163;
Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Arkansas, 219 U.
S. 453, 55 L. Ed. 290, 31 S. Ct. 275.



3836



CARRIERS.



3448



lines for the transportation of the same to the place of destination. ■^''' This act
was passed under the power vested in congress to regulate commerce among the
several states, and was designed to remove trammels upon transportation between
different states, which previously existed, and to prevent the creation of such
trammels in the future.'*** Congress has, by the act of February 4, 1887, com-
monly known as the interstate commerce act, and amendments thereto, assumed
the regulation and control of the interstate railway traffic of the United States.
The principles of the common law are operative upon all interstate commercial
transactions except so far as they are modified by congressional enactment. ^'-^
Therefore, prior to legislation by congress on the subject, the interstate railway
traffic of the country was regulated by the principles of common law applicable
to common carriers. ^^



47. Act of Tune 15, 1866, ch. 124, 14
Stat. 66; Rev." Stat., § 52.58. In re Debs,
158 U. S. 564, 39 L. Ed. 1092, 15 S. Ct.
900: Railroad Co. v. Richmond (U. S.),
19 Wall. 584, 22 L. Ed. 173; Missouri,
etc., R. Co. V. Haber, 169 U. S. 613, 42
L. Ed. 878. 18 S. Ct. 488; Illinois Cent.
R. Co. V. Illinois, 163 U. S. 142, 41 L.
Ed. 107, 16 S. Ct. 1096; Railroad Co. v.
Fuller (U. S.), 17 Wall. 560, 21 L. Ed.
710; Gulf, etc., R. Co. v. Hefley, 158 U.
S. 98, 39 L. Ed. 910, 15 S. Ct. 802; Bow-
man V. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 125 U. S.
465, 31 L. Ed. 700, 8 S. Ct. 689, 1062.

In Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Illinois, 163
U. S. 142, 41 L. Ed. 107, 16 S. Ct. 1096,
the court stated that the act of 1866 au-
thorized every railroad company em-
braced within the act "to connect, in any
state authorizing it to do so, with roads
of other states, so as to form continuous
lines of transportation."

By the statute of Illinois of February
2, 1855, all railroad corporations of the
state were empowered to make contracts
with each other, and with railroad cor-
porations of other states, for leasing, or
running, or connecting their railroads;
and by the statute of Illinois of February
25, 1867, railroads terminating at a point
at which there was a railroad bridge on
a line of continuous railroad thorough-
fare- were required to be connected by
rail, as to make "an uninterrupted com-
munication over such railroads and bridge
as public thoroughfares." By the acts of
congress of December 17, 1872, c. 4, and
February 14, 1883, c. 44, bridges were au-
thorized to be built across the Ohio River
by any person or corporation, having
lawful authority therefor, and with the
approval of the secretary of war; and
were declared to be lawful structures
and post routes for the transmission of
the mails and the troops and munitions
of war of the United States. 17 Stat.
398; 22 Stat. 414. The bridge across the
Ohio river from the Kentucky shore to
the Illinois shore, opposite the city of
Cairo in Illinois, having been constructed
by a lawful authority, and as permitted
by congress, the Illinois Central Railroad
Company had the right, under the acts
of congress and the statute of Illinois, to



connect its roads with that bridge, and to
run its southward bound trains over that
bridge as part of a system of interstate
communication. Illinois Cent. R. Co. v.
Illinois, 163 U. S. 142, 41 L. Ed. 107, 16
S. Ct. 1096.

48. Bowman v. Chicago, etc., R. Co.,
125 U. S. 465, 31 L. Ed. 700, 8 S. Ct. 689,
1062; Railroad Co. v. Richmond (U. S.),
19 Wall. 584, 22 L. Ed. 173; In re Debs,
158 U. S. 564, 39 L. Ed. 1092, 15 S. Ct. 900.

49. Common-law principles applicable.
—Western Union Tel. Co. v. Call Pub.
Co., 181 U. S. 92, 45 L. Ed. 765, 21 S.
Ct. 561.

50. Application to interstate railway
traffic— Western Union Tel. Co. v. Call
Pub. Co., 181 U. S. 92, 45 L. Ed. 765, 21
S. Ct. 561; Interstate Commerce Comm.
V. Baltimore, etc., R. Co., 145 U. S. 263,
36 L. Ed. 699, 12 S. Ct. 844.

"In Bank v. Adams Exp. Co., 93 U. S.
174, 23 L. Ed. 872, the express companies
received at New Orlean's certain pack-
ages for delivery at Louisville. These
were interstate shipments. In the course
of transit the packages were destroyed
by fire, and actions were brought to re-
cover the value thereof. The companies
defended on the ground of exemption
from liability created by the contract un-



Online LibraryThomas Johnson MichieA treatise on the law of carriers (Volume 4) → online text (page 65 of 214)