Bennet v. Missouri Pac. R. Co.

• Decision Date: 30 June 1891
• Citation: 16 S.W. 947,105 Mo. 642
• Parties: Bennett v. The Missouri Pacific Railway Company, Appellant
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

16 S.W. 947

105 Mo. 642

Bennett v. The Missouri Pacific Railway Company, Appellant

Supreme Court of Missouri, Second Division

June 30, 1891

Certified from St. Louis Court of Appeals.

Remanded to St. Louis Court of Appeals.

H. S Priest and H. G. Herbel for appellant.

S. F Andrews for respondent.

OPINION

Macfarlane, J.

This case was appealed from the circuit court of the city of St. Louis to the St. Louis court of appeals, from which it was transferred to this court as involving the construction of the constitution of the United States. A statement pointing out the question involved is made by Judge Thompson of said court of appeals in his opinion, upon which the transfer was ordered, as follows:

"This is an action against a common carrier for damages for loss of certain cotton while in the hands of the carrier for transit. The cotton was shipped from a point in Texas, and was burned at Galveston, in the same state. The defendant, in his answer, pleads the following stipulation in the bill of lading and claims exemption from liability thereunder 'The cotton aforesaid may pass through the custody of several carriers before reaching its destination, and it is understood as a part of the consideration for which the said cotton is received, that the exceptions from liability made by such carriers, respectively, shall operate in the carriage by them, respectively, of the said cotton, as though inserted herein at length, and especially that neither of said carriers or his company shall be liable for loss or damage of any kind occasioned by delays from any cause or change of weather, or for loss or damage by fire, or for loss or damage on seas, lakes, canals or rivers.' The plaintiff, in his reply, pleads the following statute of Texas: 'Railroad companies and other common carriers of goods, wares and merchandise, for hire, within this state, on land, or in boat or vessels on the waters entirely within the body of this state, shall not limit or restrict their liability as it exists at common law by any general or special notice, or by inserting exceptions in the bill of lading, or memorandum given upon the receipt of the goods for transportation, or in any manner whatever; and no special agreement made in contravention of the foregoing provisions of this article shall be valid.' R. S. Tex., art. 278. To avoid the effect of this statute of Texas, the defendant takes the position that this is an interstate bill of lading; that, under the constitution of the United States, it is not competent for the legislature of a state to prescribe the terms of...