Bellows Falls times. [volume] (Bellows Falls, Vt.) 1856-1965, 1898-03-26
Windham County Court.


Joseph Ranchau VS. Rutland railroad
company.
This was an action to recover the value
of piece OF baggage checked for plaintiff
by defendant company at Burlington for
Fitchburg, MASS, and which the company
has never been able to deliver. The suit
was brought into court by the defendant on
an appeal from the decision of Justice C.
H. Williams of Bellows Falls awarding
plaintiff damages in the sum of $1463O.
The evidence on the part of plaintiff
tended to show that himself and party who
were French people, purchased five tickets
tor Ftchburg at the Burlington ticket { flee
of the company on the night of March II,
1897. They then presented the checks to
the baggage master and he checked tor
them l. pieces OF baggage, giving them
checks tor the same.
On their arrival at Fitchburg the son of
plaintiff presented the checks to the bag
gage agent who could tno but 10 of the
pieces called for by the II checks The
10 pieces we're taken and demand made tor
the missing piece which was large dry
e DDS box with rope handles, filled with
winter clothing and bedding. Frequent
demand was made for the missing box
without avail. The plaintiff valued contents
of box at $3.50 SO. The check in question
was put into the case. The ties imony OF
plaintiff was given through an interpreter
and occupied nearly halt day.
The evidence on the part of the defend
ant company tended to show that IL checks
were issued to defendant and his party at
Burlington as claimed That the baggage
checked consisted of four large dry goods
boxes with rope handle, and weighing ire m
l75 to 100 pounds each, four trunks and
three bags or satchels. That the baggage
was checked in two lots and renamed
partly on the track and partly on the plat
form some little time before the departure
otShe train. That it was all loaded as sup
posed onto the tram tor Rutland but that
the train baggage master soon after leaving
Burlington made the usual record OF the
baggage in his car, taking the check, num-
Der and destination OF each piece, finding
only ~ pieces OF baggage bearing Fitch
burg checks. That on arrival OF baggage
at Fitchburg the local baggage master made
the usual record of baggage received. That
this record showed but 10pleces received
from Burlington, the same being four large
boxes, four trunks and two bags That
the number OF the checks on these pieces
corresponded with the record OF the num-
Der made by the train baggage master out
of Burlington. That after the check was
presented for the missing piece which was
claimed to be box, the usual course was
taken by both the Rutland and Fitchburg
roads to trace and locate the same but win
out success. That at first the plaintiff made
claim tor goods valued by him at 800 70
which was increased at the hearing before
| the justice to $155. The defendant put
into the case the several records of the
baggage made at Burlington, on the train
ana at Fitchburg, also sample ticket is
sued by the Rutland RAILROAD company,
containing statement that the road as
sumed no liability in the sale thereof to a
greater extent than 800 and then only for
wearing apparel,
The theory OF the defense as outlined in
cross examination and by argument of
counsel was that the claim of plaintiff, so
far as it related to the box beng the miss
ing piece, was fraudulent; that it wa, high
ly improbable that package of the size of
the box claimed could entirely sink out of
sight under the circumstances of the case :;