The Morristown gazette. [volume] (Morristown, Tenn.) 1867-1920, 1883-01-24
TICKET coNFERs RIGHT TO A SEA

which on its face shows it to be an ex
cursion ticket. not receivable on regular
trains, may be expelled from q regular
train, on rsfusal 10 pay the regular fare
Nolan v. N. Y. &c. r. r. Co., u. & Sp
SAL.
TICKETS ON FREIGHT TRAINs.
The law does not compel railroads to
carry passengers on freight trains nor to
carry freight on passenger trains. Al
mold v. Ill. Cent R.R. Co., 83 Ill. 273.
If road permits passengers to ride on
its freight trains, it is = matter of ac-
commodati0n to the passenger. The
road may enact and enforce a rule re-
quiring all persons DESTROYS TO avail
themselves of this privilege to purchase
tickets before boarding such q train,
and conductors may eject those who
neglect or refuse to comply with this
requirement. Lane v. E. T., Va. IL Ga.
r. r. Co., 5 Lea, (Tennessee) 1874; Lake
Shore &c. r. Co v. Greenwood, 70
Penn. st. 373. B. s. N. r. Co, " Rose,
IL Nebraska, TT; Ill. Cent. RR. Co.,
v. 90 Ill, 10; Law v. Ill. Cent. R.R.
Co., 80 Iowa, 534.
PASSENGER TO PURCHASE TICKET OR PAY
HIGHER FARE ON TRAIN.
1t has been decided in many of the
States that the regulation adopted by
most roads which requires the purchase
81 oh afa -
lect exacts higher charge when the
fare is paid to the conductor, Is lawful;
but the penalty exacted must be reason
able in amount and the company must
furnish convenient facilities fer the pur-
chase of tickets at the stations. In
Tennessee the law requires the ticket
office to be kept open for one hour be-
fore the departure of the train. Lane
E. T., Va. s. Ga. R.R., 5 Lea, (Ten-
nessee) 1874; Ill. Cent r r. Co., v. John
son, 81 Ill, 314; State v. Goold, So Maine,
279; State v. Chorin, Iowa, 204; St.
Leuis &c. r r. Co. v. South, 43, ILL.,,
176; Bordeaux g. Erie R.R. Co. 8 Hun.
IN. Y } $40, But if the passenger hands
the conductor the regular fare, he can
not be expelled from the car before the
money is returned 20 him, and cOmpa-
NY was held liable for damages though
Che conductor rendered the money after
the passenger had been elected. Bland,
v. So. Pac. R.R. Co., 55 CAL, $40.
TICKET FROM POINT TO POINT.
A ticket for passenger from A. to B.
docs not entitle the holder to travel on
it-from B. to A. KeeIy v. Boston &c.
R.R Co., 81 Maine. 16s.
TICKET "eeoD FOR THIS TRAIN ONLY. !"
A ticket stamped good FOR this train
only" and dated limits the right to
travel on the train for which 1t was is
sued and for The day of its date. Boice
v. Hudson Riv. R.R Co., 81 Barb,
611; Gilmore v. Sands, "a n. Y, Biz.
But where the ticket was stamped
good for this day and train only" and
dated, it was held in New York that
the passenger might select any train of
that day and perform continuous
journey on it 2 Huns SO.
TICKET GOOD FOR THIS TRIP only"
1t was decided in New York that u
tieke: marked good for this trip only,
and dated Oct 18th, might be properly
used on the 25th of December. The
word trip in its ordinary Specification
means a journey, jaunt or excursion; il
does not re late 10 the time when or the
train by which the journey, is TO be
taken. Pier '. Fiaclr. "a Barb. sid.
TICKET NOT GOOD III pETAcHBD.s
Il has been decided that a tickle,
where a coupon is marked "notg oSd il
detached" gives no right OF passage to
the holder where the coupon has been
, separated from the stub in viol.tio,. ei
the condi ion Walker v. RR Co
80 How, Pr, 1927; Houston SC. RR
Co. v. Ford, SO Tex. 364; Hamilton v
n. Y Cent R.R. Co, 81 n. Y lO1.
TICKET TO BE SURRENDERED TO coNpuC
TOR ON RECEIPT of CHICK
A passenger must surrender his tickle
when demanded by the conductor il
exchange for q check. Northern r. r
Co., v. Page, % Barb. n. Y. 1870; Chic
&c r r. Co., v. Grifin, 6S Ill, sos
But the conductor has no right To TAX
up ticket until the last Intermediate
stopping place has been passed, unles
| the conductor gives the passenger
check or token evidencing his rights
Palmer v. ChaIotte R.R. Co., 8 s. C.
$50. Where q passenger surrenderet
his ticket nd was there after expelled
by 8 new conductor for want of ticket
the company was held liable for dana
ges. Pittsburgh &c. r r. Co., v. Hen
nigh, SO Indiana. 500.
TICKET LIMITED AS TO TIME.
1t is now well established that rail
roads may limit the period within wbicl
the ticket must be used. Boston &C
R.R. Co, v. Proctor, Allen. MASS.
267; Johnson v. Conc. R.R. Co., 46 N
a. 21s; Shedd & Troy. &C., R.R. Cs.
40 VI. IS.
TICKET FOR CONTINUOUS PASSAGE.
Where q ticket specifies that it i
good for lone frst-class passage" from
one place to another. the contract Is 70
an entirety, and aot to be performed i
parts; IL Is for continuous passage
State '. Ovsrton, N. J. Law, 4S8; Th
A a. q NJ " RI Co. Ar Tow. O.