The weekly Panola star. [volume] (Panola, Miss.) 1857-1881, 1866-08-04

HtfiiiaH NJ ~ Hlm team n
AFfleFs HH9 ibbtHl4

f nhaalf IA Hama A.
afHi IF M4lH /.
HfHlEe aaf mlalHHgld Ia htHff
f4iNf fhN fHt AaHllllafa ~ tfel
lH's " HiHH = a tfIef aatfs slfh
ef hFmi w H.s tlHlaHa hlts #htI
e affly Hh0m naifs IN he ftHaI
= ] n emplalhi n his mw
geffl Hf VtHss #ttlmr Hgsti Il
he m ~ mi sHl N flsNi ae ~.
tie mHhi iad ftaaiafs "a ~ NJ
Aef mimi ami1 ha trimfI
the .uf hatm fkaiie ihui NJ
' f"nlfht'f dtmH ~ ~ ibis mtpf
nHiailuF N ien s%ecial mhsoi md
efHr3i he q afly faf pigss N NJ
nri Aes no present I III IL mhs
lH which the demurrer could hay
HfH leHtlly shaiainnt
Y M i nothing IN mr. tnie IN
ltering " alrlishina The mlatama
egui-l'es NJ pleading ~ ~ sanction
y The fempiest degree auel Ffoaa In
niracy and eafelcaane.. Whit
technical FIRMS are abolished H.
natiers n mlstanw which they wcri
Designed ~ present ~ rurts aud IN
ries are wisely preserved. aud eunifal
~ bc present i Sin ordinary md ron
riae language without repetition"
The ouris-the country -euunai
aud clients arc alike Interested In tlp
ptpper entire menl NJ these suhsinn
tlal requisites Of pleading. The az.
pcnsc, delay. confusion, and ann q
siry consump Ion Of time cvcrywher
occasioncd by the neglect Of these
rules, leaving oft Of view the inlurie.
often resulting thcrefrum To The mr..
ties In the loss Of substantial rights,
demand q strict Observance Of the
few simple aud necessary rul 8 exist.
ing on this subject.
We shall not further M Ice the
original pleadings, but now proceed
10 examine the cause of action stated
IN the amend d declaration on the de-
mnrrcr thereto.
The first cause Of demurrer = Lid
on was, TINT the plaintiff in hi.
amended complaint savers al things
complained Of in his original com.
plant filed which is necessary
to be averred, and in addition and
amendment thereto" filed his amend
ed declaration without stating them,
and defendant cannot take issue upon
them.
In reference to this anomalou,
averment in the amended declaration,
il is sufficient to say that il was IT.
relevant and redundant m tier, which
should have been stricken out on mo.
ton, but it does not invalidate the
mltters properly stated, and is n BE-
treated as surplusage. The assent Of
defendant to plaintiffs application Ia
90 on his cars to Bibb's station, en-
titled plaintiff to go. and he thereby
became right'ully a passenger upon
such assent, whether he had paid his
fair or not, nd was in no default
until it is shown that upon demand
mide he refused TO pay.
The third ground of demurrer re-
lied on WIS that the declaration did
not show that plaintiff became a pas
senger by virtue of any special con-
tract with the conductor, and il did
not set out any general und rtaking,
and for augbt that appears the con-
tract was m de with a stranger, &c.
This cause of demurrer is disposed
Of by the views presented on the
previous ground, showing hal with
out prepayment the agreement re-
lied on is this declaration to land
plaintiff at Bibb's station was a bind
ing contract On defendant under the
circumstances stated. Independent,
however, OF any special contract,
plaintiff had a right to get on the
train and travel on it, and was in no
default until payment was demanded
of him and refused, aud the defend
ants liabilities, AS common carriers,
under such circumstances, until de-
mand was made, would be- precisely
the same, Us though prepayment had
been made.
The second cause Of demurrer is,
that the plaintiff does not show that
ne was rightfully on the cars, or that
b paid his passage to. any agent Of
Il .ieniant.
The decl ration AYERS on this sub
iect tht defen liant WIS a com non
@ rrier OF pass n .ers, ior pay, rom
J nkson to Brandon, &c.; that plain
off paid the price demanded for his
nssage, aud requested the conductor
defendants agent to stop the train
1t Bibb's station tn let him get of,
which the conductor then and there
igreed to do. This averment suii-
cicntly states the plaintiffs right and
the defendants obligation in this re-
spect. For even II il were true that
this averment does not show that the
money was then and there pail to
defendants agent at the time Of his
promise to stop the train at Bibb's
station aud let the plaintiff get off,
.till the declaration shows that plain
tif WIS on the train by defendants
',nsent and under an express agree
ncnt to land him nj Bibb's station.
r. he had not paid he was liable to
,ny. and the agreement Of defendant
to stop at his station aud let him get
'ut there was obligatory until a re-
'isal to pay on demand is shown.
Common carriers have a right to de-
mand prepayment Of fir. II they
d not demand sfne { in a'vn nee
they must be presumed to rely on
their lien on passengers bigglge, or