Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1894-10-22
CONDUCTOR HAS A RIGHT
To Take Mileage Coupons From Any Part o
the Book He May Wish.

WArrRvILLE, Oct. 2l.-(SpeciaD -
Judge Philbrook, on Saturday, issued il
writing his decision on the case, Eaton VS.
McIntire, which was heard before him il
the municipal court, last Monday, and il
which there is considerable interest taken
not only in WaterviIle but all over thC
State among the travelling public. The
following is the full text of the decision:
The doctrine laid down in English cases
as to what may be the nature of rail Say
ticket iss led i'll the ordinary form, is con
trary to that now universally held in thl,
rluntry, With us this doctrine seems tC
,btain, that the passage ticket in the ordi'
,sry form is merely voucher, token oi
receipt, adopted for convenience, to sho"
hat the passenger hss paid his fare fro m
me place to another, and does not cors'i-
ute the contract of carriage, although il
nav and often does have upon it some con.
htion or limitation which enters into and
so,ms a part of the contract.
3sth Am. Rer., Gl7. llth Gushing. 81.
1884 Mass, 267. ssh Am. Rep, 135
sSth Am. Dec, 1919. l3th Am. Rep, 81.
I'D Am. Dee, Ago. S4th Am. Dec, 333
sth Am. Rep, 543. 18Th Am. Rep, 6l1.
10Th Am. Rep, III. 18th Am. Rep, 22o
esd Me, 302.
In the last named case our own courts
nave said: 1.-The ticket is not written con-
tract signed by the parties. 1t ls at most
.yidepce of some existing contract for the
massage between two places named, and
that the holder has paid the fare ce'
manded."
The plaintiff, if we understand his posi-
ion correctly, sets up the proposition that
the mileage fook has been purchased and
mid for by him and has become his own
personal property to the extent that he may
40 with Il what he pleases, or at least eXer
c;sa control over those who attempt to Go
with it rs they please, which is substan-
tis,lv the same thing. 1t may be true,
i ,ionhtless is true, that the
nla;n.iff may have such posses
sorv right over his mileage book, that he
NAV. If he sees fit, destroy 1t entirely, by
burning or otherwise, and not be subject to
IN action for destroying property not his
own He might, doubtless, If he saw nj,
having purchased a mileage book, lay Ii
away in his desk and make no further use
wbateyer of it, and his right to keep IN
ax,ctiv ,he same form as when he oough'
it.would hardly be denied. But when he pre-
sonts il TO an officer of the railway company
of whom he bought it, for the purpose OF
showing to that officer that he had entered
into contract with the railway company
which contract entitled him to rlie upon
the road, his relation, and the relation OF
the railway company, to the book become
a closer one. Just what those relations
NAV be is often times, and in many instan-
ces determined, or at least in part defined
nv some stipulation upon the ticket itself
which throws light upon the nsture OF the
.nntraet entered into between the put
chaser and the railway company. Ihe
safendant saws that the stipulations which
appear upon the leaves of the cover OF tue
mileage book in suit determine the right.
OF the railway company and OF tue piamtiil
an ni,iciently to authorize verdict in behalf
of the defendant. The defendsnt calls
attention TO parts of the second and all Of
the sixth paragraph npon the back leaf OF
tho cover. which resds as foil rvs Par
That one coupon shall be detsehed hy
Tho conductor for each mile Travelled.
aP.r 6 That this ticket will be surren
dered to the conductor when the last cou'
nons are detached The third paragraph