Case Name: Gaither v. Barnet and Walker
Court: Constitutional Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1811-05
Citations: 2 Brev. 488
Docket Number: 
Parties: Gaither v. Barnet and Walker.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Carolina Law Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 488–489

Head Matter:
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT, COLUMBIA,
MAY, 1811.
Gaither v. Barnet and Walker.
If common carriers specially undertake to deliver, safely, any article car- . ried, they will be bound, by their undertaking, to answer for the loss, although it may happen from an unavoidable accident.
Motion for a new trial, on summary process, before Grimke, J.y in the District Court of Fairfield. A decree was given for the defendants on tho following case. The defendants, being river car- Hers in canal boats, from Rocky Mount to Charleston, published an advertisement to this effect: That they had provided themselves with two boats suitable for the carriage of country produce, from their establishment at Rocky Mount to Charleston, and proposed to carry for a freight not exceeding one dollar and twenty cents per hundred weight, for all lading taken in at Rocky Mount; and for . all lading taken in below Love’s Shoals, to be at the same freight as from Camden ; and that they would ensure the safe delivery of every thing committed to their care for freight. Nov. 16th, 1800. The plaintiff entrusted to the charge of the defendants a bail of cotton, to be carried from Rocky Mount, or near it, to Charleston. The boat having this bale of cotton on board, and other articles, was snagged on her voyage to Charleston, and the cotton lost. It seemed to have been admitted on the trial, that the defendants were not liable for neglect.
Note. See the ease of Eveleigh v Sylvester, ant. 178. 2 Bos. and P. 416 If A send goods by B, who says “ I will warrant they shall go safe,” B is liable for any damage the goods shall sustain, though A sends a servant of his own in B’a cart to look after them. A special undertaking, a warranty. Robinson v. Dun-more.
The case was submitted without argument.

Opinion:
Waties, J.,
declared the opinion of the court; that a new trial ought to be granted, as it appeared from the evidence given on the trial, that the plaintiff relied on the assurance of the defendants in their advertisement, to answer for the safe delivery of the article in question, in Charleston, without any condition, or proviso. The defend, ants were insurers, and undertook to deliver the cotton at the place of delivery ; at all events, without the exception of any accident. They are bound, by their undertaking, to ensure, or warrant, the safe delivery, though the loss happened without any fault on their part.
New trial granted.