, 1862-06-30
THE LIABILITIES OF 4 COMMON
CARRIER.
York Manufacturing Co. VI. Illinois
Central Railroad Co.

p11lud1u8 III 41Elnpuls III GQ9 1a11 OF 165H, and
Oh the 8th Nov. 1853 purchased 201 bales Of
cotton on account Of the plaintiHs. Harris,
Hunt e. Co. were defendants agents at Mem
phts for the purpose Of making contracts for
the shipment Of goods from that place, which
night pass over the Illinois Central Railroad
or any portion Of 1t.
In giving the case to the Jury, the Court
charged substantially as follows:
think there cAn be no doubt Of this principle,
ard that the defendant, IS q railroad corporation
OF this State, could, under the law Of this 6tate
appoiqt age1ts at Memphis to make contracts for
any part Of It. and for the purpose OF this action
it ts sufficient for Us to regard this as contract
made ,n; Memphis sg harfs Hans e. Tith
tranfit Of the cotton from Memphis to Boston, and
inasmuch IS no controversy hiss been made thst
nS eStSe to- nasns = o s eoph q
to know that defendant had authority 70 appoint
an agent to make contract which would be bind
ment ne tt The eoton Cine % into the Company posses-
non at Catro, that Of Its agents, because there
It vas within the Limitations Of the stare Of HI
noie, and the charter, of course, operated Oh the
This being 80, it vas competent for the defend.
ant through It's agente, to make the same Kind Of
di ions, that they would have made at Memphis.
So that the first question to be determined Is
Mhethe. the defendant, through his agents Ct
cotton from Cairo ovet IT, road, aed Il 80, whai
were the terms and conditions Of that contract.
Tnomas Trout = CO: acted for the plaintiff;
Of November the shipment took place on board
The steamer Sdriatic at Memphis. bill OF lad
ing has been which @ rsfers to the cetton
that e sasne dsg on efsa Soard e.
delivered without delay at the port boston IRE,
and the unavoidable danger q the It7er only e.--
ctpted. to Samuel BatehsloF Treasnser o. 70 hts
when asked In relation to III! agency, and tie
eSaae d aPPsa
On the eth Of November 1859, S0t bales the quality
was strictly middling and marked Z. II. co:-was
with Harris, Hunt Co: to ship the cotton to Bos-
ten- They b Z sfgned e. bill OF laatng as agreed for
Now The drat question to be determined ia
whether this property Was shipped nnder this con-
tract. It Is not material as 10 the authority Of
Thos. Trout and sons from the plaintiff. They
he cotton to he sgents of tie defendant, to
port it trom Memphis to Boston Then whatever
The contract Thoa. Trout and sons made Was
fendant was concerned, the only persons that
esss aattaa spdss ssn' the eon 9s 'hRRsd 4Rs shs s
defendant, the only contract which could be bind.
Ing on the defendant was the contract with Thos.
Trout d Sons, and whether they were authorized
to make it By the piantif or not is perfectly i'm
'Dal, iii Of 1ading Is. ordinarily memorandum Of
the Of 5 geash h1 Thf i s5s snd
goods; bnt in addition 70 its being memosan-
anm Of tie amount Of the goods, # e also con.
contract By which party acknowledges that he
receives goods and agrees to transport goods AID
deliver them Ut the particular plsce for liked
That In what Ia dnne hY thu fern1H ri h3A
CONTRACT.
Now. the first question for you to determine is,
company. ard did they receive 1t and agree to hold
it aid transfer it nnder this contract. they did
why then as matter of course it is the only con
eeneray @ the case. appcabie to Ill sranaae @ Ions q q
This character, that when property is delivered to
carrier, either BY lard OF by water, AID btu Of
carrier agrees to transfer the property
for fixed price, that, that bill Of lsding
ne TIE p35e
ladfng as the agreement binding upon defendant
for transit Of the property It's road than it IL
the only contract which Is binding On them, ana
IN this contract there is an exception to the
s hat a' i NJ fe s as tie aet ass
He is responsible Tor all losses,. it is eaid, e1-
anp e s {or sSs rfisf to limit 1t
! his responsibility, and there can be no doubt,
ottoa n saSn iSn t to 50
| ca1aere to put limitations upon theif liability,
and that shippers wonld not bs respon'
! sib:e for ths loss Of any cotton IN
this bill OF hiding and #, as I have said, 1t was
under this contract. andthat the cotton Vas ship
ped then by the terms covers and controls tie Do
t fendant, and he would not be eublect to loss by
fire. except BY certain contingents to be hereafter
Il TIC same time there was this bill OF 1adlne
axrented By Harr1e, Hunt Co, ,nessng agents O
| the defendant. The steamboat Adriat,c also exc
cn1ed bill Of la6iDg, and a. 1t appears, with Har
pr, properly should i be transported ffom Memphis
to Cairo and delivered to tMr. aAbbott, the agent
tss tSd P g Snd The pSss axea
taken At $z72 PSI bale aud s. way q the niinoi.
| Central railroad.
Ys4 will perceive that T. is not material whsth !
whether they could 20 to Memphis or not mas
much as It y an nndonbted fact, Or principle Q
= e1Hd aoI r Sep
There is no controversy made but that ;h1sproper
| t. did come within the control Of the agents 0
The defendant Il is not disputed that the MeBsrs
Graham 8 CO. we're agents Of the defendant ant
poeseeEion Of The defendant. =.
evening Of the 10th Of Novcmber-the shipment
having been made on the 6th, during the night
Shortly after it's arrival they transferred the CO.
! ktu 4clO1E ~ suE fld@ul4A. WILL OlAE1 GUiAQAy "
the barge lying BY the side Of the steamer. o.
the following day, Nov 11th, ,:the whole OF the cot
ton WAS On board the barge, and the barge wa
@he1e 20 the the saeasf e ss ynE
long after The barge was placed there, the fire va
discovered BY which vesy considerable po!tion q
the cotton was consumed. and so far as this plalr
tiff ts concerned, there was loss OF one hundre
bales; one hundred and one bales had been II
s hs oR e1ons as
Now If ybu 1nd that there W8s no contract lin
ting the liability of the defendant IN relation
eas b. wen the
Into its possession. II you shall dnd that the1
was contract which limited the liability Of til
from euch liability then the remainlng questio
l.. whether the defendant exercises Eeaeonab
care Of this property, That Is q question Of 1s'
That It Is euch care as man would take OF b
own property. It % seens m to be conceded M b by t. t.
Of transporting cotton 1s to lsa!e i .nncoyere
sSsss sntEsh il ns ssssE 5 !esaps sas sPst Il
, be the safest .waJ of transportation; but this
not the general way of transport as It Is impEac'
! 60 that il it catch ire it can be extinguished
the earliest possible moment.
Itfe for you to ray, if you shall find that the
mon carrier, and that be vas not subject to 10
= by fire, in consequence OF specfsl contrac
t whether the defendant Ia fesp0neih1e In conE
h 9uence Of want Of due care In the management
| this cotton.
l. You will consider firstly, the value Of the pre-
!, | cry: Hecrndy, the character of the pzopert
;. thirdly, the circumstances under which t "
IL placed and 1t ts for you to say whether there
"a dne care exercised In reference to the cotton.
g there Was due care, and If there wns due exen
e ticu then the plaintiff cannot recover; II the
= | 1ae not due care used By the defendants, tht
~ notwithstanding there might have beenan exeu
t wculd be responsible If you shall hnd the
y feudant not responsible, you will simply say ;
ia find the defendant not guilty: Il you shau 4
II that the defendant Is responsible, then the da
IS market to which it was to be transported whit
IF I euppoee, wuuld be the value Of the cotton
Boston, deducttug freight. It fs for you to
aS careful in determining what care shall be exerc1t
- and the principles Of law Important.
IL 1t il stated tha: the cotton WIS insured by
ID Insurance company in Boston, and that the act
ia brought by the plaintiff on behalf Of the ms
y anee company. That Is competent fos the plain
70 | to do.
of The jury are still out, but will proba1
- bring in eea1ed verdict Monday morni1
90 The attorneys in the caso are: For platnt
Gallup d Hitchcock; for defendant, Scat
-. McAnister & Jewett.
e. F MARITIME. Of the Chicago Dancing Acade,
he will give so,ree on Thursday evening, July
M ushering in +'the day we celebrate" with mi
and dancing. 95*-9t
BIT ~ At Sherman House, wedding and "cs
to cards, written and engraved Fire quires Fre
l. paper and envelopes. most fashionable pattern,
- gantly stamped, "a. Call In parlors. For sauEp
10 mail two stamps to Yankee Card Writer iea