, 1875-02-06
Responsibility Of Railroad Oompa-
MES for Baggage.
The De Forge Case Again An.
pears.
Conflict Of Jurisdiction Between State
and Federal Courts.
Opinions Filed at hit. Vernon.
SLEEPlNC.CARS,
THEIR STATt,g se+rrr1

sLEEP1Nc.cARs.
THEIR STATUS SETTLED
:. oao o1 too moss interesting cusea 10 tho put,
NC a. large when has been Intelv t]ec;,3.d h. ~
suptema Court ls that of Choste. M. smit5 y.
tae lui''hln pa'ace-car Company, full at.
ttFaes OF which In given below. The samn ona.-
''en has a!so tlst bRer decided ut DutfaIo in H..
easa OF Z. ". Hees Va. The Pullman I'alsce.C,x
COMPANY, IN which case. however. the lima ~
argument IL ontirelp dlsti,,ct.
sr*'e' asatt q tss'isa sr cafna.s1 IL s,ta ~
pslia";. f. for , ,pe .ss. caimea' iaa's"s sa hsgg. sg
+: sss Of S Sst i; T. isa '''':sss sssass =
frsn IN T., T., snn. stssnGon r. o = n.s: T. NJ;
StfrouEt, t",ithwest ot y, Lout1 for H., M. ~
XIX Innylng ls:te. md Mucs 1ie ptirchatoI ! t,:set
N Chicago hcuce 10 St. LOU. arcr .hn Aim
~ L'uit H1i"ay fur which he paid fLs.2, uo ~
sae day. wens to the o:acb Of sppe4at md 1nsht ~
steernj-aF ticket from Cniesgo to Est st. Lous. far
ssab lu 10 s ea5 .n 1as .s,n ta9 sh! sf r. ~
for st. Louis at . oclosf ,. n, Ii, Ia'a9o ,nnGsC
9lls', va: IN a inside .est-l,ocset au.i waon Ia
iow; in tue mor.a: he found tko veSt Is ha tstt t.
but Lie money gout. " -
On bsI'.f Of TIC f.,an Palace Car colnnsc,, I. ~.
eaEed that thy hare plaza 10 ttnrs vsI"siles nd
that tsr sgens arc 1utts,rie1 to re:eiys 10 wresa
r;uhabrs. ct money, receive no nay fo- h1srs1s
occupancy Of the eorhs, anI that they do not Te,e,Ts
2sckhgas s4u.hts. or oury from passengers on thA
s1r to tax, charge g Upon tho hack ol their checks
printed til. following: ,year5uc appsrri ar h,utr ~
Eaed ~ tLn car vii be entirely at Lie owners fsEs
hfstc@a<s pass'ge ticket proper pasa from tue ra
foad con,r.ny p,asenger~ receive their berths tox
IN 1 aaa f Ths Osrh nd
tho lars psid by tat lIssxtr IL tbs Eaijrua Com
lany fos trankfo.tstson. and the Railroad Compsav
Car Company for terth. til. later receive nav for
hi:'tl"g recommendations ncna Whatever for trsna.
IHs Court below save the following instruction II
~ t,e tusy belleye from ,hs o,i3eacs that ths
.rar tre:h Chc.;u 10 Alton, was sobbed Of sum Of
money ~h'ca In tnern had with him. then the verItcl
'bhed, ut<: sL- sat,s was CRATE; tIsn Touia ha ~, m
ui.inal 4nu rc."on4'e su.n for rareIrr 10 carry
%nn nm IT, s;;aHsans e1enses only, upon such
ourn:s a, Inc +! ntlt Has laen upon aid bis rotur1,
aonc n ahIA case An Should only recover sucj or
.!lnkrs and FaIsnaAlie rui whr ths 1ury n,av u
lucy taanx ptnptr sda tn:esea par csat Tor for-
Tha jury returned verdict fer tho p1a,ua1 for
s571. np"n which judgment MAS rendered. to 7eyeTss
peal o'Ne >1&" ~P~
The instruction which the Court Para 4c tn. 4r-,
inaae fns Company reHPcnrit'e insnser for thu
.a!Sy Q! lie money, intod!ug upon II the asyefs liz
hy Of III i1uEetrcr az common crrrer nuti Il Il
1os position which apneeeA counsel tate t.t ths 70
ation st~rea tue attes i'll this cao m4s that Of Inn
ke-rer aud gas tia. tho Liability Of thc comnanv
II th.t Of an nnktertr.
l esd:r ta -ereftatu whether The extraordinary re-
tFnHsllt: claimed Gra extaS, It becomes dmuortant
~ inquire INTO
THE s4rrnE or INNS AND GUESTS,
where LII. Liability was Imposed bJ tho common !sv
and whether sar description properly apnttns hrrs
keilt. In defining All lin. saya:
:" nant 10 LoHat hcrt opsn publicly for thu ode-
ahR anu entertainment Of travellers tn general for
f.L151
and upon i.rrsitns coutract with every persaa who
ZONES. and does no: afford entertainment FOR tho pub
Til. j.. substantially tho ,as dotuitun " il Ryep in
= ! the oo9ka upon tho subject.
1nt iAe kroEer u 4 mere cofree-houac, private
ooafaih2, cr tod7;nE-hotlHe Is Tot 1nnkecpef in
the Ct tho law~ It must be common iun. that
H. aa sun kent for travellers generally and not merely
who VT nrs lodsers. Tie duty Of s.nkeeEnrs nAteads
chiefly To- ths entertaining and hasoosinx x
sec'riug the goois and erets II their cuesG: suIs
therefore, If cut WIN kseps ccmmnn inu rcf,sea
either 10 retsirs traveller Euost Into htA house or
him Reasonable pEes for the .inr, ha s not ony H,-
NE to rsntLsr damages sor the Injury, tn Al action ou
c indisted nul anol At tlIa sait Of liz ling. Ths
;,ttoy" bs gooIs ot biz suest lart aud tSrce OF
iats thu glifat fur gu1.abe reward.
from the authorities alrt.dy cited, It is manifest
hat i', tht. Pullman IsIAes car fats quite .hcrs Of
aare Car Company that OF au Innkecre:.
Il docs not, iha tl,r innkocper, undertake to 10.
on tue boarding public, indsesimnateiy.
Fita lodging aud entertainment. II only under.
rho have already ra,d their iare, aud srs pro-
uea WIN hss-rlass ticket, emitting taaEa to ride
II Particular placr.
!toes uo. uadsrtako 10 furnish victuas apd lodR-
ln;ns.ear atasheI 10 the traia, IL saowu, uut not
'~neA by tic Pullman Company. nor run bY then,.
: belongs to another conpany. the Chicago + Alton
)tntngtAr Association. Appellant, W understand,
FUkH!aHEa NO ACCuaINunATtON WHATEYx4
s7s tho ufe "f tha berth sud bsd, and place and
o,ytnencts inr toilet rurposeo. No would moi haro
s 4s:si"n. b'tt tie nut furn.lng entertainment u
1nu 'nnke"nr y ob'igai to reco!ys and cars for all
hcb fis Is NAY @nd enous 'srI e .. OF u ' h 1axs
- JOURNEY, .ppsaat dos .' MT '' reeeiss I 'I pay
u. nor ondertske 10 caro- for sny property o.
'ods Whatayes mud noorou ly refuses to da Tha
20 Of t!e innkeepcr, aeo.sory to tho principal
~ T. te iM'se. aud NC "nn'osste The gurat for
Ita1ie re%ard hccat1se nu such contract Ia hiAdu.
The sae Mnresetsy exist here in the cAas
coHinlon I'm; ~ tbs tia.t wien thls custom Of
day aty o M xsysns rsysss saae saa e
n, there he Mas ohIt,st 10 ttop for tas night. aud
e'bt Lila gools and i.sgass nto taa custody Of tbs
nkteCer. but here the traytfe was not compelled
accept thu addouaI comfort Of slesldng-cat; 10
ighl have rclua!ued Y .o oFd!asty chr, anl thers
onoy mud baessJs could bo eAfHly transported, %
70 train which boss hu we're baggage and Al ex-
GSa car. ADD &Aefr HlA DO uGftk4Hf " po4ib2 this
ity aud H4Iilfty IN 1rpel1nt.
ii canEat 10 huplosr any surh measurs of duty oa
lbiy nttGhe1 tn appellant IL declared would b.
nE 70 al iun1eeper. Thu recommendation furu,satd
t~lRa WAS III aceurtlanca with III exprtsa coutrxot
tered into ~hesl he bought biz berth ticket a. C,l
GO, Whi'h "Aa far the use Ut sperInea couch from
IrsE" tc 81. Louis, aud appellant did not Renter 3
ry'," made inandatery ts i4s4, tho c&4s Of ~
akerJ#f.
ut i it should lse dtsued That on principle u,erGy,
= company would he required to t1kp much cars
It's EetMs of lodker, 1nnkeepes bf tIloss ok
uest, the sanle lRy he nAtl with reference to thA
,ntF u boIrlng.h'tno or OF = lodslua-huusa.
lhh peculiar ability Of tho innlterer " ons Of
'at E!Iert aul ahoul,l nHt bs extended bsyoni it,
'peF nhltts, Me aEs satisfied that tltrs u
No PnEGEuEfr on PRINCIPLE
the INIT 'atian of such liability upon appellant
kPPGltAAt a nut hai's q carrier. II 11als
ct to carry. ArprlEc1 bring carried BY tbs
lroxl Company, xl.l it apr-laut wsE carrier II
ul rnt bo Liable for tbs loss In thia case, bs:4usa
money WIN not delivered Into tLs posssasinn ot
totty 1f arleaut, whlch Ia eas<niss to lta !ixaly
rarfirr.
t wnu|d las uareasenaslo tu mako tAs Colapauy 70
'pa.lu tnr thu oa: hf 1a1tluy which vas AeYer Ia.
sc1 to its c4nsu ~ kt a!t IT wh!na it had no IN.
nation, aaI wtneH tbs nstlcr ll4d csaceaIsd upon
o~n trsf'a. TnI t1pc1uts to liiu hazard Ut HAhi1.
for loAutd by cs,llaa1nn for pretan1el cla1ns of
0hero tberA would fse no HA&ns OF uispzoof zauk1
Re tha sexporAIiiiy claimed fearful one 4ppcIIeS
II %ha1 1uuf+ ad~ ~ htz