The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-05-21
MARINE O0URT-PART q.
Important to Steamboat Companies and
Their Passengers.

Important to steamboat Companies and
Their Passengers.
Before Judge Joachimsen.
Rosenbach vs. The New Jersey Steamboat Com
pany.-The plaintiff on tine nth OF July last was .
passenger on board the steamboat Drew, belong
ing TO the defendants. running between this city
ana Albany. He had purchased ticket for -, Sc
curing saloon berth. Immediately on going
aboard he repaired to his room, No. 80, where he
deposited his valise; then went below IN search OF
some friends who were to be fellow travellers with
him, locking the door OF his room and taking the
key with him. Soon after he met q friend and
returned TO his stateroom for the purpose OF pro-
curing some cigars from mis- valise. THIS was MISS
ing. He at once reported his loss at the Captains
once when search was instituted for The miss
refused to make good the loss, amounting
as claimed to 500, Tor the recovery OF
Maa the eayps sasos s vns
made to dismiss the complaint on the ground that
the plaintiff had, by not conforming to the rules
and regulations OF the company, in giving his va
lise In charge OF the baggage master OF the boat,
made himself the custodian OF his own property
JoacnImsen denied tne motion for non-suit The
defence then put IN copy Of the rules and regu-
lations or the company, copy OF which Is con-
spicuously displayed in every stateroOm. to the
effect, bearing upon the point In Issue, that the
company are only responsible for baggage checked
with tue baggage master OF the boat. and that Tor
any baggage lost from the staterooms they are
not responsible. The Court ruled on some or the
points raised by the defendants counsel that such
vaise as that described by the plaintin and Its
contents were necessary to his comfort as trav-
eler leaving 1t, however, to the jury to decide on
the whole issue. Various authorities and cases
in point were cited and submitted. 1t appeared in
evidence that the plaintiff carried his vaise in his
hand, openly, up the gangway OF the boat, across
the deck. 10 the foot OF the stairs leading
to the staterOOms and to his room without cha-
lenge on the part OF any Official OF the company,
or caution rnat he should deposit 1t with the bag
gage master, or that his own custody or 1t would
be at his own risk. Judge Joachtmsen in charg-
ing the Jury said :-sTniS case on the points OF
law raised Is one oil great Importance to the COM
muntty at large and to companies chartered for
the transportation Of travellers for hire, that they
as such carriers contract Tor the transporra-
ton and delivery OF personal enects and baggage.
But O common carrier has the right under the law
OF this State at the time OF contracting to carry,
TO prescribe reasonable terms and regulations for
for their passengers, and these regulations, rea-
sOnabe ana proper, must be compiled with, or the
passenger, in case OF accident or loss, cannot re.
cover. The question the jury had to determine was
with the company Tor transportation for hlmsen
and personal baggage to Albany by the purchase
OF q ticket Tor the journey, the defendants also
contracted that the plaintn should deliver his
60 their baggage master, to be delivered to the
plaintiff at the termination OF the journey. They
must Judge from all the surrounding circumstances
whether such a contract was made. 1t does not
and afterwards limit it to a mere notice OF rules
and regulations exhibited In staterOom. The
carrier must make clear to the passenger the con-
dftions OF his contract and the restrictions under
senger and the consequences or a Noncompliance
Herewith. 1t was Tor the jury to determine what
the contract was in this case from the evidence.
The jury found verdict Tor the plaintiff IN $780,