Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1912-12-20

| sumption of which the plaintiff wa.
| soon after taken violentlM ILL., Upor
| the assumption that the asparagus was
| poisonous and was the proxinaate eauss
of the injuries of which the plaintiff
suffered, is the defendant then, under
the evidence in the case, liable? The
undisputed evidence shows that thS
train crew on the dining-car was ex-
perienced and Intelligent. The con-
ductor had had a long experience and
the chef had served fifteen years as
q cook. The can of asparagus from
which the plaintiff was served was
purchased by the eommissary agent of
the company, who was at the time
handling the dining-car service upon
the Boston & Maine and Maine Central
Railroads. He purchased this partic-
ular can with others either on Febru-
airy 18th or 18th of the month in which
it was served, of 6. s. Pierce Company,
Boston. It was a, we'll known brand,
called The Red Label Brand and the
only Kind used upon the dining ear 1t
was guaranteed by. the S. s. Pierce
Co, as pure under the Pure Food AND
Drug Act Of 1906.
The plaintiff, however. contends, ad
hitting all these things to be true.
that the strict rule of law which pre-
walls in this class of cases will hold the
defendant responsible. In other words,
the plaintiffs contention is that the
defendant in this class of cases is an
insurer OF the qualify of the food pro-
duet which he serves. We are unable
to believe that this is a sound rule.
when confined Ito the sale or use of
canned goods.
1t has been the boast of the common
law that it was able to adjust itself to
the inevitable vicissitudes and changes
that occur in the development of in
dustrial life. business methods, social
progress and scientific invention. With
in the last century has appeared from
time to time the discovery of devises
that have revolHtionized the methods
and accomplishments of human effort.
The subjugation OF steam and, control
of electricity, and the consequent in-
ventions for their practical use, have
become instrumental in introducing
an epoch in the history Of science. In-
dustrial, commercial and financial pro-
jects have also assumed new forms
and employed rev methods Yet. III
the adjustment of all thetnew and va
ried relations, arising from the adep-
ton, application and use Of these new
agencies and new methods. the prfpci-
pies of the common law have adapted
themselves SO APPLY as to fi'ender almost
imperceptible the radical transitions
that have taken place. 1faA's'9 BLY,
.eOf Ulittle less Importance, than the
appearance of the great achievements
referred to is the establishment and
development of the canning industry,
in this country and in othef
parts of the world. 1t may be
said that the art of canning. il
not invented within the last century.
has at least, assumed the vast proper
tons which it has now attained, With
in a comparatively few years. 1t in
wolves a unique and peculiar method
Of distributing, for domestic and for
eign use, almost every product known
to the art of husbaudry. The whole-
salor, the retailers and the user of
these goods, whether in the capacity
Of caterer, seller or host. sustain an
entirely different duty respecting a
knowledge Of their contents and quail
lily than prevails with regard to know
ing the quality, of those food products
which are open TO the inspection of the
seller or, Nictqaler With reference to-
these it may we'll be considered, as has
been held that having an opportunity to
investigate, and thereby To know the
quality Of their merchandise, they aro
charged With a Responsibility amount
ing to practical guarantee.
ha cot lxytf lea of Ian fArOnll-
lated upon the theory that the pro-
vision dealer and the yictualer, hav-
ing an opportunity to observe and in
spect the appearance and quality OF the
food products they offered to- the pub
lie. were, accordingly, charged with
knowledge of their imperfectiens. Win
slow VS.. Lambald, IS Pick, 81; Bishop
VS.. Weber. 159 Mass, All. But upon
the state of facts in the case at bar,
situation arises that cannot, in the
practical conduct of the canning bust
ness, fall within these rules. No
knowledge of the original or present
contents of a perfect appearing can is
possible, in the practical use OF canned
products. They cannot be chemically
analysed every time they are used
| Accordingly, the reason for the rule
| having ceased. a new rule should be
applied to the sale and use of canned
| goods that will more nearly harmon-
| ize with what is rational and just.
| 1t clearly appears in the case al
| bar that it was utterly impossible fol
! the defendant to know anything slnor'
| about the contentc of the can of as,
/ paragus used, than did the plaintiff
/ With regard to this knowledge, o
4 means of obtaining it, they We're upoi
/ a perfectly equal footing. The plain
! tiff and the defendant necessarily sun
derstood the situation precisely alike
| There could be no mistake. The plain
tiff knew, or should be charged wit
knowledge, that the defendant coul'
have no possible information concern
ing the contents of that can which sh
did not have. We know of no rule o
law which will imply a warrantya .
that of which 1t is impossible for
defendant to know by the exercise o
airy skill, knowledge or investigation
however great In other words, Meth
err law nor reason require impossible
ties. What duties the law may impos
upon manufacturers of food products
which turn out defective, we do nc