The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1898-10-23

~ OF OcIenUallJ : refusal TO Forward q
, the burden. legally placed up on the &C
paid the required revenue, was affirm
consequence Wells, Fargo & Co. will
now have an opportunity to show its
{ patriotism and pay the tax as requir-
ed by law 1t is evident, judging from
the mercenary stand taken by the
, company, that this news Will hardly
be hailed by ii with Joy. nevertheless
, the war tax must be paid and the
. patrons OF the express monopoly can
no longer be called upon to bear a
burden legally imposed upon the COM
pany.
Costley sued for damages, basing
his action on a refusal of the COM
pany to forward a parcel TO Sacra-
mento unless war stamp was placed
upon the receipt therefor at his
expense. He held that it was the
DUTY Of the company TO place
the stamp upon the receipt and,
as ii taCitly refused to do so and re-
fused 10 forward the parcel until such
time as ne complied with the COM
panE's decision, he commenced an ac-
ton for damages in the Justices
Court Justice Barry heard the case
and decided in plaintiffs favor An
appeal was taken 10 the Superior
Court on IN agreed statement of facts,
the upper court being called upon TO
simply decide the points of law. The
case was submitted TO Judge Trout,
after elaborate argument. and the de-
cision handed down yesterday affirms
the decision Of the lower court.
ne essential laclS lQNOlNeQ are
briefly these reads the decision. De
tendanI is a common carrier engaged
IN the business of carrying goods TO ar
On September s 1898 in this city and CO
certain package with the request tn
and at the same time rendered to defe
PENDANT charged as freightage upon sa
The defendant as d condition prec
required plaintiff to furnish to il a L
value OF 1 cent, or to il l cent for such a
might be attached to the bill OF lading
be Cancelled.
Plaintiff refused 10 furnish said s.
ana III consequence OF such refusal DEF
age. The serious question TO be determ
whether the plaintiff or the defendant,
carrier, IS required by law TO pay for q
The act of Congress entitled An
meet " ar Expenditures and for other
NldeS that it is the duty of an express
to it for transportation, TO issue TO the
ladlng or other evidence of receipt; ano
70 such bill OF lading or other evidence
the value Of l cent; and that any failur
evidence Of receipt shall subject the a.
BY section 13 OF said act of Congress
snail issue any paper OF any kind or deS
schedule a aforesaid, without the SAM
eVad6 the provisions Of said act, shall
ana upon conviction thereof shall be
dollars or by Imprisonment not exceedil
ton Of the court.
our statute provides that a common
and carry whatever Is offered at q reaSOI
undertakes or is accustomed to carry;
must subscribe and deliver 10 the cons
Of lading Of the same tenor, expressing
riage; and if he refuses to do so, the con
ana recover from him besides all uamE
1T Will be observed that no penalty
Congress upon the Consignor in the eve
said revenue stamp to the bill of lading
such penalty is imposed upon the carrie
a decision of Judge Tuley of a Giro
Western Wheel Company VS. The unite
effect that under the aforesaid act OF
quired To issue receipts TO shippers and
stamp required by law.
The court stated that 1t would be
company is required 70 issue to the shiI
receipt. the issue Of which is made a peni
was not the intent of the statute to
obligation to do an illegal act The bill
and this can only be a stamped instrul,,
entertained by Circuit Court OF Mct
Express Company sought 10 place the
shipper
that the respondents decided to raise
menJ OF various packages one cent, for
conditions made by the act Of Congress
this right TO affiX reasonable charges