Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1911-06-27
OREGON SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
Full Text Published by Courtesy Of F. A. Turner, Reporter OF the
Supreme Court.

mitted to stipulate against liability
for the loss or injury of property in
trusted to 1t for carriage and trans
portation occasioned by its own neg
ligence = . =. Nor can the carrier
be permitted to stipulate or contract
for partial or limited exemption from
liability occasioned by its negligence
with any more reason than it may
for a total exemption" And on the
other hand he recognizes that the
shipper may agree with the company
upon the value of the goods shipped,
and be bound thereby, and IF the
plaintiff freely, and without restraint,
that Is, was laboring under no such
inequality of conditions as that he
was compelled to enter into the con-
tract whether he would or not, in or
der to have his stock carried-exe-
cuted the contract in question, he is
bound by the stipulations as to the
value" Here there is no stipulation
as to value but there is an attempt
to limit the liability regardless of
value.
In the second brief it is contended
that as the first paragraph of Sec. 6
of the |. c. c. act ga Stat. at l.. $500
railroads are required to print for
public inspection Schedules showing
the rates and fares and charges for
transportation of passengers and
property = = and shall also
state separately the terminal charges
and any rules and regulations which
in anywise change or affect or de-
termine any part of the aggregate of
such aforesaid rates, fares and
charges" And by the fifth para
graph of Sec. 6 it must "fle with the
commission, hereinafter provided for,
copies of its schedule of fares, rates
and charges which have been estab-
lished;" that, therefore, such sched-
ules when filed with the commission
are conclusive on the shipper and the
carrier, and that as the schedule so
filed by the defendant provides that
liability of this company and of 9TH
er lines over which baggage is
checked is limited to $780," therefore
both the company and the plaintiff
were bound by that limitation. But
we do not concur in these views.
Rules and regulations affecting the
rates are to be printed in the sched-
ule kept by the company for public
inspection, but it is the schedule of
the rates, fares and charges that are
to be filed with the commission and
cannot be deviated from. There is
nothing in the act that authorizes the
company to limit its liability against
its own negligence or that makes a
statement of limitation of liability in
the schedule enforcible by the COM
mission or binding upon the shipper.
In this case neither was it the sub
ject of agreement between the COM
pany and the carrier, but was i'm
posed by the company as a condition
of the sale of the ticket, and in sign
ing the ticket the plaintiff was labor
ing under such an inequality of con-
ditions as he was compelled to enter
into the contract, whether he would
or not, in order to have his baggage
checked. AS said in Normile V. Ore
gon Nav. Co, "If the purpose of the
contract a merely to place a limit
on the amount for which the defen-
dant shall be liable-that is to say,
exempt it in any measure from full
liability, as respects the value of the
property concerned-then clearly, as
to any losses resulting from negli-
gence, it cannot be helped (upheld)
and this upon the ground that it
would not be just and reasonable"
The petition is denied.