Copyright
Thomas Johnson Michie.

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

. (page 9 of 214)
Online LibraryThomas Johnson MichieA treatise on the law of carriers (Volume 4) → online text (page 9 of 214)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


37, 145 S. W. 889, 39 L. R. A., N. S., 634.

Dakota. — Waldron v. Chicago, etc., R.
Co., 1 Dak. 351, 46 N. W. 456.

Illinois. — Lake Shore, etc., R. Co. v.
Hochstim, 67 111. App. 514; Michigan



3149



PASSSNGERS^ EFFECTS.



§ 3475



samples,'*^ merchandise,^^ more money than is usually carried under similar



Cent. R. Co. :•. Carrow, 73 111. 343, 24 Am.
Rep. 248.

Indiana. — Doj-le v. Kiser. 6 Ind. 242.

Kansas. — Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Con-
klin, 16 Am. & Eng. R. Cas. 116, 32 Kan.
55. 3 Pac. 762.

Michigan. — Amory V. Wabash R. Co.,
130 Mich. 404. 90 N. W. 22, 4 R. R. R. 408,
27 Am. & Eng. R. Cas., N. S., 408.

Minnesota. — Haines v. Chicago, etc., R.
Co.. 29 Minn. 160, 12 N. W. 447, 43 Am.
Rep. 199.

Mississippi. — New Orleans, etc., R. Co.
V. Shackleford, 87 IMiss. 610, 40 So. 427,
24 R. R. R. 15, 47 Am. & Eng. R. Cas., N.
S., 15, 4 L. R. A., N. S., 1035, 112 Am. St.
Rep. 461.

Missouri. — Hubbard v. Mobile, etc., R.
Co., 112 Mo. App. 459, 87 S. W. 52; Min-
ter r. Pacific Railroad. 41 :\Io. 503, 97 Am.
Dec. 288; Ross v. ^Missouri, etc., R. Co.,
4 ^lo. App. 583; Sherlock v. Chicago, etc.,
R. Co.. 85 Mo. App. 46; Rossier v. Wa-
bash R. Co., 91 S. W. 1018, 115 Mo. App.
51.->; Rider v. Wabash, etc., R. Co., 14 Mo.
App. 529.

Xezc York. — Millard v. Missouri, etc.,
R. Co., 6 Am. & Eng. R. Cas. 311, 86 N.
Y. 441, affirming 20 Hun 191; Butler v.
Hudson River R. Co., 3 E. D. Smith 571;
Glovinsky v. Cunard Steamship Co., 6
Misc. Rep. 388, 26 N. Y. S. 751; Perley v.
New York, etc., R. Co., 65 N. Y. 374; Slo-
man v. Great Western R. Co., 67 N. Y.
208, 5 Am. R. Rep. 113, reversing 6 Hun
546; Stoneman z: Erie R. Co., 52 N. Y.
429; Trimble v. New^ York, etc., R. Co.,
57 N. Y. S. 437, 39 App. Div. 403, affirmed
in 56 N. E. 532, 162 N. Y. 84, 48 L. R. A.
115; Saleeby z: Central R. Co., 90 N. Y.
S. 1042, 99 App. Div. 163, 15 N. Y. Ann.
Cas. 353, affirmed in 184 X. Y. 597, 77 N.
E. 1196.

Xorth Carolina. — Charlotte Trouser
Co. V. Seaboard, etc., R. Co., 139 N. C.
382. 51 S. E. 973, 21 R. R. R. 459, 44 Am.
& Eng. R. Cas., N. S., 4.59.

Ohio. — Bowler, etc., Co. v. Toledo, etc.,
R. Co., 3 X. P. 322, 1 O. Dec. 55; Toledo,
etc., R. Co. V. Dages, 57 O. St. 38, 47 N.
E. 1039, 8 Am. & Eng. R. Cas.. .N. S., 533,
63 Am. St. Rep. 702; Greenwich Ins. Co.
V. Memphis, etc., Packet Co., 1 X. P. 126,
4 O. Dec. 405; Toledo, etc.. R. Co. v.
Bowler, etc., Co., 63 O. St. 274, 58
\. E. 813. 19 Am. & Eng. R. Cas.. X. S..
574. affirming 10 O. C. C. 272, 6 O. C. D.
401.

OrcRon. — Oakes v. Xorlhcrn Pac. R.
Co.. 20 Ore. 392. 26 Pac. 230, 23 Am. St.
Rep. 126, 12 L. K. A. 318; Wells v. Great
Northern R. Co.. 59 Ore. 165. 114 Pac.
92. 116 Pac. 1070, 34 L. R. A., N. S., 818.

South Carolina. — Elcischman. etc., Co.
V. Southern Kailwav. r,r, S. E. 974. 70 S. C.
237. 9 L. R. A.. N.'S., 519.

Texas. — St. Louis, etc.. R. Co. v. Green,
44 Tex. Civ. App. 13, 97 S. W. .".31; Ft.
Worth, etc.. R. Co. v. Rosenthal Millin-



ery Co. (Tex. Civ. App.), 29 S. W. 196;
Texas, etc., R. Co. v. Capps, 2 Texas
App. Civ. Cas., § 33, 10 Am. & Eng. R.
Cas. 118.

Wisconsin. — Hoeger v. Chicago, etc.,
R. Co., 63 Wis. 100, 23 X. W. 435, 21 Am.
& Eng. R. Cas. 308, 53 Am. Rep. 271.

England. — Belfast, etc., R. Co. v. Keys,
9 H. L. Cas. 556, 9 W. R. 793, 4 L. T.
841, 8 Jur., N. S., 267; Cahill v. London,
etc., R. Co., 10 C. B., N. S.. 154, 7 Jur.,
N. S., 1164, 30 L. J. C. P. 289, 9 W. R.
653, 4 L. T. N. S. 246; Macrow v. Great
Western R. Co., L. R., 6 Q. B. 612, 40 L.
I. Q. B. 300, 24 L. T. 618, 19 W. R. 8, 3
Ry. & C. T. Cas. xix; Great Northern
R. Co. V. Shepherd, 8 Exch. 30, 30 Railw.
Cas. 310, 21 L. J. Exch. 286.

Articles exposed to view. — If a passen-
ger takes with him articles, which do not
come strictly within the denomination of
baggage, and exposes them to view, so
that no concealment is practiced, and the
carrier chooses to treat them as personal
baggage, and carries them accordingly,
and a loss occurs, he will be responsible
therefor. Great Northern R. Co. v. Shep-
herd (Eng.). 8 Exch. 30, 30 Railw. Cas.
310, 21 L. J. Exch. 286.

49. Drummer's samples. — United States.
— Tacobs V. Tutt, 33 Fed. 412; Strouss v.
Wabash, etc., R. Co., 17 Fed. 209.

Mississippi. — New Orleans, etc., R. Co.
V. Shackelford, 87 Miss. 610, 40 So. 427,
24 R. R. R. 15, 47 Am. & Eng. R. Cas., N.
S., 15, 4 L. R. A., N. S., 1035, 112 Am. St.
Rep. 461.

Missouri. — Rider v. Wabash, etc., R.
Co., 14 Mo. App. 529.

Nczjii York. — Trimble v. New York, etc.,
R. Co., 162 N. Y. 84, 56 N. E. 532. 17 Am.
& Eng. R. Cas., N. S., 176, 48 L. R. A.
115.

South Carolina. — Fleischman, etc., Co.
z\ Southern Railway, 56 S. E. 974, 76 S.
C. 237, 9 L. R. A., N. S., 519.

Texas.— ¥t. Worth, etc., R. Co. v. Ro-
senthal Millinery Co. (Tex. Civ. App.),
29 S. W. 196; Texas, etc., R. Co. z>. Capps,
2 Texas App. Civ. Cas., § 33, 16 Am. &
Eng. R. Cas. lis.

Wisconsin. — Hoeger v. Chicago, etc.,
R. Co., 63 Wis. 100, 23 N. W. 435, 21 Am.
& Eng. R. Cas. 308, 53 Am. Rep. 271.

Canada. — Dixon v. Ricliolicu Nav. Co.,
15 Ont. .'\pp. Rep. 647.

Sample case checked as baggage for
two years. — In Nrw (hU-ans, etc., !\. Co.
',: Shackelford, 87 .Miss. 610, 40 So. 427,
21 R. R. R. 15, 47 Am. & Eng. R. Cas., N.
S.. 15, 4 L. R. A., N. S., 1035, 112 Am. St.
Rc)). 461. it is held that if the carrier's
station agent knew that a parcel checked
as baggage was a sample case and the
carrier had accejitcd it as baggage for
two years, the carrier is liable for its loss
or (lestruction in transit.

60. Merchandise. — Toledo, etc.. R. Co.
V. Dagcs. 57 O. St. 38. 47 N. E. 1039, 8 Am.



S8 3475-3476



CARRIERS.



3150



circumstances,^^ stage costumes and properties,"'- and tents. •'•^ It has been held,
however, that evidence that a passenger dehvered to the baggage master of a
railroad a package of merchandise, and received a check for it, on showing his
passenger ticket ; that the baggage master knew that it was merchandise, and that
other passengers had similar packages, will not warrant the jury in finding that
the railroad company agreed to transport the merchandise, or became liable for
it as a common carrier, in absence of evidence of an agreement that it should be
carried as freight, or that the baggage master had authority to receive freight to
be carried on a passenger train, or to bind the company to carry merchandise as
personal baggage.^'*

Extra Compensation. — If a railroad receives for carriage from a passenger
trunks containing articles other than personal baggage, either with or without
payment of an extra charge, and with knowledge of the contents of the trunks,
the carrier is liable for loss or damage as an insurer or common carrier of
freight.''^ Where a carrier has a fixed tarifif of charges for transporting gold,
and the carrier knows that a certain package which a passenger has introduced
into his vehicle contains gold, and charges the passenger, not the usual rates
for its transportation, but merely such as are chargeable for ordinary extra bag-
gage, the carrier is liable in case of loss.^^

§ 3476. Effect of Acceptance without Knowledge of Nature of Prop-
erty. — In the absence of a special agreement, the carrier's common-law liability
for baggage, of the nature of which it is ignorant, embraces only such articles as
properly constitute baggage.-^'' So it may be stated as a general rule that a carrier



& Eng. R. Cas., N. S., 533, 1G3 Am. St.
Rep. 702; Toledo, etc., R. Co. v. Bowler,
etc., Co., 63 O. St. 274, 58 N. E. 813, 19
Am. & Eng-. R. Cas., N. S., 574, affirming
10 O. C. C. 272, 6 O. C. D. 401; Green-
wich Ins. Co. V. Memphis, etc., Packet
Co., 1 X. P. 12G, 4 O. Dec. 405.

51. Money. — St. Louis, etc., R. Co. z'.
Berry, GO Ark. 433, 30 S. W. 7G4, 28 L. R.
A. 50], 46 Am. St. Rep. 212.

Passenger ignorant of rule. — A railroad
company is liable to a passenger who,
without knowledge of the rule forbidding
its agents to receive money to be so
shipped, delivers a trunk containing a'
large amount of money to its agent, in-
forms him of the fact, and he receives
the same for shipment. St. Louis, etc.,
R. Co. V. Berry, 60 Ark. 433, 30 S. W. 764,
28 L. R. A. 50], 4G Am. St. Rep. 212.

52. Stage properties. — Oakes v. North-
ern Pac. R. Co., 20 Ore. 392, 26 Pac. 230,
23 Am. St. Rep. 126, 12 L. R. A. 318.

53. Tents.— Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Con-
klin, 32 Kan. 55, 3 Pac. 762, 16 Am. &
Eng. R. Cas. 116.

54. Authority of baggage master. —
Blumantle z\ Fitchburg R. Co., 127 ]\[ass.
322, 34 .\m. Rep. 376."

55. Extra compensation. — Charlotte
Trouser Co. v. Seaboard, etc., R. Co., 51
S. E. 973, 139 N. C. 382. 2] R. R. R. 459,
44 Am. & Eng. R. Cas., N. S., 459; Sa-
leeby v. Central R. Co., 77 N. E. 1196,
184 N. Y. 597; Greenwich Ins. Co. v.
Memphis, etc.. Packet Co., 1 N. P. 126,
4 O. Dec. 405.

It would not seem practicable in this
respect to distinguish between the car-
riage of freight and the carriage of bag-



gage, nor between knowledge of the value
of the articles carried and knowledge of
their character. In one case, as clearly
as in the other, considerations of public
policy justify the conclusion that if the
carrier, for the purpose of obtaining pat-
ronage, and with actual knowledge of all
the material facts, waives it right to re-
fuse merchandise which it is requested to
carry as baggage, or to make an addi-
tional charge conmiensurate with the in-
creased risk, it can not, after a loss has
occurred, assert an immunity from lia-
bility because of such rights. Toledo,
etc., R. Co. V. Dages, 57 O. St. 38, 47 N.
E. 1039, 8 Am. & Eng. R. Cas., N. S.,
533, 63 Am. St. Rep. 702.

Where carrier exacts extra compensa-
tion. — Sloman r. Great Western R. Co.,
67 N. Y. 208, 5 Am. R. Rep. 113; Perley
V. New York, etc., R. Co., 65 N. Y. 374;
Stoneman v. Erie R. Co., 52 N. Y. 429;
Trimble v. New York, etc., R. Co., 162
N. Y. 84, 56 N. E. 532, 17 Am. & Eng.
R. Cas., N. S., 176, 48 L. R. A. 115.

56. Gold. — Hellman v. Holladay, Fed.
Cas. No. 6,340, 1 Woolw. 365.

57. General rule as to liability for ar-
ticles other than baggage. — Hubbard v.
INIobile, etc., R. Co., 87 S. W. 52, 112 Mo.
App. 459; Robinson z'. New York, etc.,
R. Co., 129 N. Y. S. 1030, 145 App. Div.
391, affirmed in 203 N. Y. 627, 97 N. E.
1115; Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Matthews,
114 Ky. 973, 72 S. W. 302, 24 Ky. L. Rep.
1766, 60 L. R. A. 846, 102 Am. St. Rep.
316, 6 R. R. R. 769, 29 Am. & Eng. R.
Cas., N. S., 769.

By tlie sale of a ticket to a passenger
the carrier does not become h"able lor the



3151



PASSENGERS EFFECTS.



3476



of passengers is not liable as a common carrier for loss or injury to packages of
merchandise, or other articles not baggage, accepted as baggage, unless its agent
having control of the receipt of the baggage was informed or knew, or was
chargeable with notice as to what was contained therein, and no misrepresenta-
tion was made by the owner to the agent having charge of the business of check-
ing the baggage. ^^ It is held that where goods not the personal baggage of a
passenger are checked as his baggage without the fact being brought to the knowl-
edge of the carrier, the carrier is liable only as a gratuitous bailee, and to recover
for a loss gross negligence or willful injury must be clearly shown. ^^ But though
a carrier did not know that the trunks of a passenger contained samples, it had
no right, after arrival of the trunks at their destination, to practically abandon
them and leave them for three days on a station platform, exposed to the
weather.^*' And a passenger is not precluded from recovering for loss of bag-
gage for vvhich the carrier is liable, because he had also in his trunk articles for
which the carrier is liable.''^



safe transportation of merchandise de-
livered as baggage, without clear proof
of an agreement to that effect. Blunien-
thal V. Maine Cent. R. Co., 79 Me. 550, 11
Atl. 605.

Under Ky. St., § 738, providing that
every company shall check every par-
cel of "baggage" taken for transportation,
s company is only liable as a car-
rier for what the passenger takes with
him for his own personal use and con-
venience, unless the company by contract,
express or implied, has accepted other
articles as baggage. Illinois Cent. R. Co.
V. }ilatthcws, 72 S. W. 302, 24 Ky. L. Rep.
1766, 60 L. R. A. 846, 114 Ky. 973, 102 Am.
St. Rep. 316, 6 R. R. R. 769, 29 Am. &
Eng. R. Cas., N. S., 769.

58. Effect of acceptance without notice
of character or value of goods. — United
States. — Strouss v. Wabash, etc., R. Co.,
17 Fed. 209; Humphreys v. Perry, 148 U.
S. 027, 13 S. Ct. 711, 37 L. Ed. 587.

Arkansas. — St. Louis, etc., R. Co. v.
Mjiler, 103 Ark. 37, 145 S. W. 889, 39 L.
R. A., N. S., 634.

Illinois. — Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Thomp-
son, 19 111. 578; Davis v. Michigan, etc.,
R. Co., 22 111. 278. 74 Am. Dec. 151.

Indiana. — Doyle v. Kiser, 6 Ind. 242.

Kansas. — Soutiicrn Kansas R. Co. v.
Clark, 52 Kan. 398, 34 Pac. 1054.

Kentucky. — Illinois Cent. R. Co. v.
Matthews, 114 Ky. 973, 72 S. W. 302, 24
Ky. L. Rep. 1766. 60 L. R. A. 846, 102 Am.
St. Rep. 316, 6 R. R. R. 769, 29 Am. &
Eng. R. Cas., N. S.. 769.

Massachusetts. — Stimson v. Connecti-
cut River R. Co.. 98 Mass. 83, 93 Am. Dec.
140; .Ailing V. Boston, etc., R. Co., 126
Mass. 121, 30 Am. Rep. 667.

Minnesota. — Haines v. Chicago, etc., R.
Co.. 20 Minn. 160, 12 .\. W. 447, 43 .Am.
Rep. 199.

Mississippi. — New Orleans, etc., \<. C'>.
V. Moore, 40 Miss. 39.

Nciv York. — Giirney v. Granfl Trunk
R. Co., 14 N. Y. S. 321. 59 I Inn 625, 37 X.
Y. Super. Cl. 155.



Ohio. — -Pennsylvania Co. v. Miller, 35
O. St. 541, 1 Ky. L. Rep. 184, 35 Am. Rep.
620; Toledo, etc., R. Co. v. Bowler, etc.,
Co., 58 N. E. 813, 63 O. St. 274, 19 Am.
& Eng. R. Cas., N. S., 574.

Pennsylvania. — Merritt v. Lehigh Val-
ley R. Co., 40 Pa. Super. Ct. 219.

Tennessee. — Yazoo, etc., R. Co. v. Bald-
win, 81 S. W. 599, 113 Tenn. 205, 12 R. R.
R. 856, 35 Am. & Eng. R. Cas., N. S.,
856.

If a passenger undertake to carry prop-
erty not baggage in the character of bag-
gage, the carrier is not liable for a loss
not accasioned by its wrongful act.
Smith V. Boston, etc., Railroad, 44 N. H.
325.

A railroad company is not liable, to ei-
ther owner or agent, on its ordinary con-
tract of transportation of a passenger for
losing a trunk delivered into its charge
as his personal luggage, but which con-
tained only samples of merchandise, and,
with its contents, was owned by a trader
whose traveling agent he was to sell
such goods by sample; nor in tort, for
the loss, without proof of gross negli-
gence. Stimson v. Connecticut River R.
Co.. 98 Mass. 83, 93 Am. Dec. 140; Ailing
V. Boston, etc., R. Co., 126 Mass. 121, 30
Am. Rep. 667.

59. Brick v. Atlantic, etc., R. Co., 58 S.
E. 1073, 145 N. C. 203, 26 R. R. R. 629, 49
Am. & Eng. R. Cas., N. S., 629, 13 Am. &
Eng. Ann. Cas. 328. See Toledo, etc., R.
Co. V. Dagcs, 57 O. St. 38, 47 N. E. 1039.
8 Am. & Eng. R. Cas., N. S., 533, 63 Am.
St. Rep. 702: Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Mat-
thews, 114 Ky. 973, 24 Ky. L. Rep. 1766,
72 S. W. 302, 60 L. R. A. 846, 102 Am. St.
Rep. 316. 6 R. R. R. 769, 29 Am. & Eng.
R. Cas.. N. S.. 769.

60. Must not abandon goods. — Char-
lotte Trriuser Co. 7'. Seal)uar(l, etc., R.
Co.. 51 S. IC. 973, 139 N. C. 382. 21 R. R.
R. 459, 44 Am. ^ Eng. R. Cas.. N. S., 459.

61. Where articles arc mixed. — Dibble
V. Brown. 12 Ga. 217. 56 Am. Dec. 460.



§§ 3476-3477 carriers. 3152

Absence of Fraud and Concealment. — It has been held that where a rail-
road company receives for transportation, in cars which accompany its passen-
ger trains, property of a passenger other than his baggage, in relation to which
no fraud or concealment is practiced or attempted upon its employees, it as-
sumes with reference to the property the liability of a common carrier of mer-
chandise.*^-

Extra Compensation. — Where merchandise or other property not properly
classed as baggage is packed with a passenger's baggage without the carrier's
knowledge, the payment of extra charges on account of overweight will not con-
vert such property into freight or baggage and render the carrier responsible for
it as an insurer.*^^

§ 3477. Duty to Disclose Nature and Value and Effect of Conceal-
ment. — Duty to Disclose Nature and Value. — A passenger, in the absence
of a request, is not bound to volunteer information to the carrier's servants as
to the nature and value of his baggage, provided it is only such and so much as
he is warranted in carrying for the journey contemplated.*'^ And it is held that
in the absence of legislation, or of special regulations by the carrier, or of con-
duct by the passenger misleading the carrier as to the value of his baggage, his
failure to disclose it, when no inquiry is made of him is not, in itself, a fraud
upon the carrier.*'^ It is held, however, that a passenger is required to act in good
faith, and if he obtains carriage on his ticket as personal baggage of merchandise
or articles not properly such baggage, without disclosing the fact, the carrier will
not be liable as an insurer, for their loss or damage.*^*' And it has been held that
a traveler who presents to a carrier of passengers, as his baggage, an ordinary
trunk or valise, without describing its contents, impliedly represents that it
contains only wearing apparel, and articles such as are necessary for his comfort
and convenience on the journey, and if it, in fact, contains costly jewelry, and it
is destroyed without gross negligence chargeable to the carrier, he is not liable
for such extra value.*"-' The carrier has been held not liable for the loss of a
box containing only merchandise where the passenger gave no information as
to the contents of the box and the servants of the carrier did not inquire, although
the word "glass" was written on the box in large letters.*^^ The carrier may, by

62. Absence of fraud and concealment. "shipper," as used in Rev. St., § 4281. ex-
■ — Hannibal, etc., R. Co. v. Swift (U. S.). emptint^ a master or owner, etc., from lia-
12 Wall. 262, 20 L. Ed. 423. bility for loss of articles of whose value

63. Extra compensation. — ■ Humphreys he is not notified, does not apply to car-
V. Perry, 148 U. S. 627, 13 S. Ct. 711, 37 riers by land of the baggage of passen-
L. Ed. 587; Hamburg-American Packet gers.

Co. V. Gattman, 127 111. 598, 20 N. E. 662; 66. Saunders v. Southern R. Co., 62 C.

Talcott V. Wabash R. Co., 50 N. Y. St. C. A. 523, 128 Fed. 15, 11 R. R. R. 596, 34

Rep. 423, 66 Hun 456, 21 N. Y. S. 318; Am. & Eng. R. Cas., N. S., 596; Michi-

Cincinnati, etc., R. Co. V. Marcus, 38 111. gan, etc., R. Co. v. Oehm, 56 HI. 293, 4

219; Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Matthews, 114 Am. R. Rep. 451; Blumenthal v. Maine

Ky. 973, 72 S. W. 302, 24 Ky. L. Rep. Cent. R. Co., 79 Me. 550, 11 Atl. 605;

1766, 60 L. R. A. 846, 102 Am. St. Rep. Denver, etc., R. Co. v. Johnson, 50 Colo.

316, 6 R. R. R. 769, 29 Am. & Eng. R. 187, 114 Pac. 650, Ann. Cas. 1912C, 627.

Cas., N. S., 769. "It is the duty of the passenger to give

64. Passenger's duty to disclose nature the carrier notice that his trunk contains
and value of goods. — Camden, etc., R. Co. merchandise, or things which can not be
V. Baldauf, 16 Pa. 67, 55 Am. Dec. 681; included as baggage, unless the carrier
Godfrey 2k Pullman Co., 87 S. C. 361, 69 has knowledge that the contents of the
S. E. 666. trunk are not baggage, but merchandise."

"However valuable an article of bag- Amory v. Wabash R. Co., 130 Mich. 404,

gage may be, it seems now to be well 90 N. W. 22, 4 R. R. R. 408, 27 Am. &

settled by the authorities that the owner Eng. R. Cas., N. S., 408.

is not bound to disclose such peculiar 67. Michigan Cent. R. Co. v. Carrow, 73

value to the carrier, unless inquiry be 111. 348, 24 Am. Rep. 248.

made." Tones v. Voorhees, 10 O. 145. 68. Box of merchandise marked "glass."

65. Railroad Co. v. Fralofif, 100 U. S. 24, — Cahill v. London, etc., Ry. Co., 10 C. B.,
25 L. Ed. 531 holding that the word N. S., 154, 7 Jur., N. S., 1164, 30 L. J. C. P.



31:



PASSENGERS EFFECTS.



S8 3477-3478



notice brought home to the passenger, require the latter to make known to him
the nature and vakte of the property which the carrier is to convey.*^'-* But it has
been held that where the advertisement of a carrier stated that passengers were
"prohibited from taking anything as baggage but their wearing apparel, which
will be at the risk of the owner," and the trunk of a passenger contained specie,
and the extra weight of his baggage was paid for, and the agents of the carriers
took charge of it, it was not incumbent on the passenger to inform the carrier
of its contents, unless he was inquired of ; and that the carrier was liable for its
loss through the negligence or fraud of its agents/"

Effect of Concealment of Nature and Value. — A carrier may be discharged
from liability for the full value of baggage if the passenger, by any device or
artifice, evades inquiry as to such value, whereby a responsibility is imposed
upon the carrier beyond what they are bound to assume in consideration of the
ordinary fare charged for the transportation of the person.' ^ Where the pas-
senger informs the carrier that his trunk contains nothing but clothing, whereas
it contains a large amount of coin and gold ornaments, the carrier is not liable
for any of the contents where it is lost.'^ And it has been held that a person
who places in the hands of the agent of a railroad company merchandise, jewelry,
and other valuables for transportation, under the semblance of baggage, is guilty
of fraud, which releases the company from liability as common carriers, and it is
simply liable as common bailees for hire.'^^

§ 3478. Right and Duty of Carrier to Investigate. — As a condition prec-
edent to a contract for the transportation of baggage, the carrier may require
information from the passenger as to its value." ^ But the law^ does not require
a common carrier of passengers, under ordinary circumstances, to inquire or in-
vestigate in order to find out the nature of property offered for transportation
as the ordinary baggage of a passenger, as it is entitled to assume that it is such,
and nothing else.'^ Thus, the carrier is not bound to inspect a trunk, presented



Cas. No. 7,059, 5
R. Co. V. Marcus.



289, 9 VV. R. 603, 4 L. T., N. S., 246, af-
firmed in Exchequer Chamber, 13 C. B.,
N. S.. sm.

69. Notice requiring disclosure. — Fish
V. Chapman, 2 Ga. 349, 46 Am. Dec. 393.

70. Camden, etc., R. Co. v. Baldauf, 16
Ta. 07. .j.-, Am. Dec. r,si.

71. Effect of concealment of nature and
value.— Railroad Co. v. Fraloff, 100 U. S.
24, 2.J L. Ed. 531. See Jones v. Voorhees,
10 O. 145.

72. The Ionic, Fed.
Blatchf. 538.

73. Cincinnatti, etc.,
38 111. 210.

74. Right of carrier to investigate.—
Railro.-ul Co. -'. Fraloff, 100 U. S. 24, 25
L. E<\. 531; Bonner v. Blum (Tex. Civ.
Appj, 25 S. W. GO.

75. Duty of carrier to investigate.—
Humphreys 7: Perry, 148 U. S. 627, 13 S.
Ct. 711, :;l L. l-'d. 587; Michigan Cent. R.
Co. V. Carrow, 73 111. 348, 24 Am. Rep.
248; Ailing r. Boston, etc., R. Co., 126
.Mass. 121, 30 Am. Rep. 667; Haines 7;.
Chicago, etc., R. Co., 29 ,\Iinn. 100, 12 N.
W. 447, 43 /\m. Rep. 199; Toledo, etc.,
R. Co. V. Bowler, etc., Co., 63 O. St. 274,
58 N. K. 813. 19 Am. & Kng. K. Cas.. N.
S.. 574; Toledo, etc.. R. Co. 7'. Dages,
.17 O. St. 38, 47 \. K. 1039, 8 .Am. & l-'.ng.
R. Cas.. N. S., 533. 63 Am. St. Rep. 702;
Pennsylvania Co. v. Miller. 35 O. St. 541.
1 Ky. P. Rep. 181. 35 Am. Rep. 620.



"Delivering to the carrier a trunk or
closed package, ostensibly ordinary bag-
gage, without a statement as to its con-
tents, is equivalent to a representation by
the passenger that it belongs to him, and
contains only such articles as are prop-
erly classed as personal baggage." Illi-
nois Cent. R. Co. v. Matthews, 114 Ky.
973, 24 Ky. L. Rep. 1766, 72 S. W. 302, 60
L. R. A. 846, 102 Am. St. Rep. 316, 6 R.
R. R. 7G9, 29 Am. & Eng. R. Cas., N. S..
7 GO.

Box of merchandise marked "glass." —
Where a passenger took with iiiiii a box
containing only merchandise, but not ex-
ceeding in weight the limit prescribed
for personal baggage, but gave no infor-
mation to the railroad's servants as to
the contents of the box, nor did they in-



Online LibraryThomas Johnson MichieA treatise on the law of carriers (Volume 4) → online text (page 9 of 214)