April 28, 1950

HonorableW.~J. Murray, Jr., Chairman Railroad Commleslon of Texas Austin, Texaa Attention: Honorable Bryan Bell OpinionNO. v-1048

Dear Sir: Re: Whether Articles 883, 883(a), and 883(b), V.C.S., apply to,,motor bus companies transporting baggage. The subject or your request ror an OplnlOn relatlng~-to

appllcabllltg

### or Articles 883, 883(a), and 883(b), V.C.S., to motor bus companies 80 a8 to permit limitation or llabllltyror baggage transported,and whether these statutesrequlre'abond to be filed with the Commlsslon; has received careful study.

You present two precise questions: "1. Do Articles 883, 883(a) and 883(b) of the Revised civil statutes or Texas apply ?. to motor bus companies?

"2. Do these Articles of the ~Revlsed Civil Statutes of Texas require that this bond be riled with the Railroad Commlsslon?" Section lc or Article 911a, V.C.S., derinee "Motor Bus Company" to mean:

(I

. .. every corporationor person .. . engaged ln the business or transporting persona ror compensationor hire loverthe pubilc hlghwaye within the State of Texae.

. . . Section 2 ol Article glla providea that:..

Hon. W. J. Murray, Jr., page 2 (v-1048)

"All motor-bus companies,as defined herein, are hereby declared to be 'common carriera

....' Article 883 reads as follows: nRailroadcompaniesand other common carriers

### or goods, wares and merchandise, for hire, within this State, on land, or in boats or vessels on the waters entirely wlthln this State, ,shall not limit or restrict their llabllltyas it exists at common law, by any general or special notice, or by insertingexceptions in the bill of lading or memorandumgiven upon the receipt of the goods for transportation, or in any other manner whatever. Iso ~speclal agreementmade in contraventionof this Article shall be valid; provided,however, that 'arequlrementof' notice or olalm, consistentwith the provisions or Ax-ticle~ 5546 of the Re~vlsed

Civil Statutes or Texas, 1925, a8 a conditionpreoedent tokhe enforaeme& or any claim for 108s; damage and delay, or either or any of them, whether inserted in a bill of lading or other contract 0P arrangementror carriage,or otherwiseprovided, shall be valid and Is not hereby prohibited." Thla statutewas originally enacted by the 8th Legislaturein 1860 a8 Se&Ion 1 of Chapter 44..It L, provided: *

. .. That common carriers or goods, for hire, within this State, on land or In *boats, .or-vessels, on the waters entirely within the body of this State, shall not limit or restrict their liability,a8 it exists at common law, by any general or actual notice, nor by lnaertlng exception8 In the bill of lading, or memorandumgiven upon the receipt of the goods ror tranaportatlon,nor In any other manner, except by special agreementbetween the carrier and shipper,reduced to writing and signed. .

Hon. W. J. Murray, Jr., page 3 (v-1048)

L by the parties or their agents." (Emphasis added) Acts 8th Le g-s t%Q; Ch. 44, P. 38.
In 1863 the 10th Legislatureamended Section 1 of the WAct concerning common carriersand defining their llablllt1eeIn certain oases," to read:

(I

.. . That railroad companiesand other aommon cX%lTierS 0r goods, wares, and merchandise for **hire;** within this State, on land, or In boats, or vc88e18, on the waters entirelywlthln'thebody at this State#ahall not limit, or restrict their liability,as It exists at common law, by any general or spealal notice, nor by lnsertlng exceptlons in the bill of Lading, nor memorandum given upon the reoelpt of the goods 

### r0r transportation, .norIn any **other** manner, whatever. and no special agreement,made in contraventfon of tfi foregoingprovIsions 

### or this seation sLl1 be valid " (Em ha 1 dd d) %cg., l&3; ,.'I$ ;.'7.' Act8 10th
Thus, under the 1860 Act, common carriers oi goods 

### ror hire aould limit or restrlot llablllty as It eX18ted~

at common law by *speolalagreementbetween the carrier and sfiipper."Btit the Act or 1863.removed this rightand In effeat rested llabllltyupon oa.rrlers Or &oodS. wares. and merchandise ror.hlrea8 it exi8tS at common law. L : This provision 

### or the Act as written iti 1863 was included in **the** revlelons or 1879, 1895, 1911, and 1925, In precisely the rorm of the 1863 amendment. In 1941, the Legislatureagain amended this statute (Artlele 883, V.C.S.) by adding thereto, the iollorrlng

language: II

... provided;however, that a requirement

### or **notloe** or claim, oonslstent with the provisions or Artlole 5546 of the Revised civil Statute8 of Texas, 1925, ~a8 a condition precedent to the enforcementof any alalm for loss, damage and delay, or either or any of them, whether Inserted in. .

Hon. W. J. Murray, Jr., page 4 (v-1048)

a bill or lading or contract or ermnge-. ment l’or carriage,or otherwiseprovided, shall be valid and IS not hereby prohlblted." Act.8

47th Leg., R.S., 1941, Ch. 500, p. 805.
In 1947, the statutewas again amended by two new sectionswhich are oodlfled as Arts. ii3";~ and 883(b) and read:
"Art. 883(a). Declarationdr value; rates based on value; evidence
"No specialized

motor aarrler~

or other carrier for hire, Including the carriers referred to In said Article 883, shall be required to accept for transportationhoueehdld goods, personal erreote or USed orrice furniture and equipment,unless the Shipper or owner thereof or his agent shall rlrst declare in writing the reasonablevalue thereor. The oarrler shall not be liable ln.damagesior an amount In excess of such declaredvalue for **the** lose, destruction or damage or such property. The Railroad CO~88lOn Sha'll

establishadequate rates consistentwith such declaredvalues to be assessed and aollectedby such carriers. If the Railroad Commlaslon falls to establish such rates, then in that event suah carriers are authorizedto collect reasonable transportation charges consistentwith the declaredvalue of such property." Acts 50th Leg., 1947, Ch. 327, p. 563. "Art. 883b. Declarationof value. as evldenoe "The declarationor value by the shlpper shall not be admissible as evidence In any aourt a&ion unless the carrier at the time of acoeptanceof such Shipmenthad or provlded and maintained in ioboe insurance in a solvent company authorizedto do buslnesa in TeJCaS,

or bonds, in an amount equal to suah dealaredvalue to protect the owner of such shipment against loss or damage thereto; provided,however, this requirementHon. W. J. Murray, Jr., page 5 (V-1048)

as to ln8urance or bonds shall not apply to steam or electricalrailways." .I&. Article 883 prohibitingcommon carriers from llmltlng or restricting their llabllltyas It exists at common law ~applles to baggage transportedby common carriers, as well asp-to cammodltlesshipped as freight. The liability of oarrlers of baggage entrusted to their care Is that bf insurer and Is the same as the common law llabllltyof carriers of goods. Burnet v. Rltter,; 276,s.~. 347 (Tex. Clv. App. 1925); gTex. Jur. glb 924, Carriers, Sew. 665, 674; Q-H. & S.A. Ry. v. i&9es'~' 77 S.W. 234 (Tex. Clv. App. 1903 i4%7&;.* .

' Hutahfn8on on Crarrlere~

(3rd Ed. 1906),

- As said in White v. St. Louis Southwestern a. 86 S.W. 962, 965 (Tex. Clv. App. 19051:

”

. . . **there** is no law .ln this State flxlng apeclflaallythe measme of llablllty 0r carrleri3.~ror

the iOSS.Or or damage to baggage. Their dutlea' and llabllltlesare' the same as at common law, and at common law a common carrier for hire Is an Insurer of the Safety or baggage aommltted to its care ror transportatlon....~"
It is an undoubted rule that statutes In ierogatlon of the common law should be 8trlctPy conlltrued and we are not persuaded that Articles 

## 883(a)and 

## aadb) In any way permit common carriers 0r persons to limit or restrict their llablllty-for damage to or loss of' w passengers'baggage as It exists at common law. We think the only purpose of House Bill 297 (Arts. 883(a) and 883(b)) Is to permit oarrlere transportingas freight "householdgoods, personal erfects or used orrice fkrnlture and equipment as a alass of aommodltle8to limit or restrict their llablllty.~

Under the Act "no specializedmotor carrier or other oarrler for hlre, lnaludlng the oarrlers referred to In Article 883, shall be required to accept ior tramportatlonhousehold goods,~personal'eff'ects or used furniture and equipment,unless the shipper or owner thereof or his agent shall first declare In wrltlng the reasonablevalue thereof...."Hon. W. J. Murray, Jr., page **6** (V-1048)

The Legislaturehas designatedhousehold goods, personal effects or used office furnitureand equipment a class of commoditiesfor ease in dealing with numerous items slmllar In characterand we think such a classlflcatlonhas a definite,valid objectiveand purpose.

The 1947 Act provides that carriers shall not be required to accept the class of'commodltleaenumerated therein unless the shipper declares the reasonable value thereof, and Article 6496, V.C.S., defines "shipper" as: "

.. . any person, firm or corporation tenderingrrelght for shipment,and any -consignorOF aonslgneeor any bill or gladlng, or other person, firm or corporation having the right of consignoror consignee." 'Phe 1947 Act further provides that "the Railroad Commlsslon shall establishadequate rates conslstent **~with** such deolaredvalues to be assessed and aollected bye such carriers" and Ii the Commissionrails to make such rates **the** oarrlers are authorizedto collect transporta- ~tlonoharges consistentwith the declaPedvalue. These portions of the statute are persuasiveand Indicate an objective to Includewithin the statute the class of eommodltles enumeratedwhen transportedas "freight"as dlstingulahedfrom "baggage."

In 2 SutherlandStatutoryConstruotlon (3rd Rd. 1943), 395, it 18 Said:

c ”

. . . where general words fOllOW speclflc Word8 In an enumerationdescribing the legal subject, the general words are con- 'struedto embrace only objects similar In nature to those objects enumeratedby the preceding specificwords." Household goods as used in wills and tariffs embraces things domeatlc In nature purchased or aoqulred for we In and about the house, excludingarticles of consumptionand of trade. In Re Mltchell~sWill, 38 I.Y. Sup.26 **673** (Sum. Ct. 1942).

Baggage is "the trunks, valises, etc., which one carries on a journey...." Webster'sNew International..’ -

L Hon. W. J. Murray, Jr., page 7 (V-1048)

Dictionary (2nd Ed. Unabridged,1938). While baggage transportedby motor bus companies as a privilege granted incident to carriage of passengers,conslderatlonfor which Is furnishedby the purchase of a tloket, m&y be includedwlthln the UnreStriCteddefinitionof "personal -errects"

it 18 **not** Included In the restrictedmeaning or 'thatterm asaertalnedfrom the preaedlngwords "houeehold gOod8."

Webster'sNew International Dlatlonaq (2nd Ed. Unabridged, 1938) defines "personaleffect8 as "ef

### reds of a personal character:esp., as used In ~1118, tarirr laws, eta., suoh property especiallyappertalnlng to ones person. The term may be restrictedby words of narrower import to things 8jUSden generls, or where not restricted,as in a residuary legacy, 'pax include all artlales not employed In one'~s bUSine88.
As used in tills, "personaleffects" is held to mean artlales similar in kind to apeclrl~ articles enumerated. ,Itla a broad expansive term and.uhen not restrictedby cont~ext embrace8 everythingwithin the L deserlptionof personal property, but when used~ln the

expreaalon "household-furniture and erreats" its meaning Is re8trloted to householdgoods. The words are not words or art, have no fixed meaning and:.are to be lnterpreted In aucordancewith use and may be restricted by appllcatlohof the rule ejusden generls to a partlcular class or type or commoditiesor propert speclflcally mentioned. t

In Re Llppenoott'sEstatei 370fslj1;8, 59 Pa. Supp. 1896); Child V. &ton, 183 At N.J. Ct. Chan. 1936) 48 C J 1046 Per&al 'Sec. 6; + In Re MIchaelson'sE&ate, i8'N.Y. &up.26 59,‘60 (Sum.

. .

The problem here Is to determine the meaning the words "personalefredts'had in the leglslatlve vocabulary,and we think **the** meaning must be.ascertalned from the preaedlngwords "household**goods.*** Rad the' Legislature intended **the** words "personaleirects" to be used In their unreatr1cted8enseh It would not ha;e employed the more particular term household goods. The words npersonalefrects"must be construed in their ordinary meaning Interpretedfrom the context of the statute In the light of the purpose sought to be accomplishedby Its enactment.-. .

Hon. W. J. Murray, Jr., page 8 (V-1048)

In Popham v. Patterson,121 Tex. 615, 51 S.W. 2d 680 (1932), the court said:

..

"In construing statutes It is the duty of the court to ascertain the leglslative~ Intent, and, when such Intent is once arrived at, It should be given errect; in fact, such intent Is the law. In determiningthe legislative intent, the court should not look alone to any one phrase, clause, or sentence of the Act, but to the entire Act; and this Includes the caption, the body of the Act, and the emergency clause...." Application of this rule makes It clear that the LegislatureIntended to permit "specialized motor carriers" and other carriers transportingas freight "householdgoods, persdnal effects or used office furnlture and equipment'as a class or commodltlesto restrict llablllty. We find no intentionexpressed in the~1947 ijet

or reasonably to be lmplled from Its terms to allow carriers of'persons for hire to llmlt or restrict their llablllty as it exists at common law for loss of or damage to baggage of passengerstransported Incident to the carriage of persons.

In answer to your first question,we hold that Articles 

## 883,883(a)and 

## 883(b) do not apply to motor bus companies. We believe that our answer to your first question appropriatelydisposes of your second question.

. SUNMARY

Articles 

## 883,883(a)and 883(b),

### v.c.s., do not apply to motor bus companies so as to permit llmltatlonor.restrlctlon of llablllty for damage to or loss of baggage of passengers transportedas an Incident to carriage of persons.

APPROVED: Charles D. Mathews ExecutiveAssistant
Joe R. Greenfill First Assistant Yours very truly,
PRICE DANIEL

Everett Hutchinson ASSistallt EH:db