Missouri Ry Co v. Cann

Decision Date22 May 1899
Docket NumberNo. 11,11
Citation19 S.Ct. 755,43 L.Ed. 1093,174 U.S. 580
PartiesMISSOURI, K. & T. RY. CO. v. McCANN et al
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Geo. P. B. Jackson, for plaintiff in error.

J. H. Rodes, for defendants in error.

Mr. Justice WHITE delivered the opinion of the court.

A statute of the state of Missouri, found in the Revised Statutes of that state(Rev. St. 1889, c. 26), reads as follows:

'Sec. 944. Whenever any property is received by a common carrier to be transferred from one place to another, within or without this state, or when a railroad or other transportation company issues receipts or bills of lading in this state, the common carrier, railroad or transportation company issuing such bill of lading shall be liable for any loss, damage or injury to such property, caused by its negligence or the negligence of any other common carrier, railroad or transportation company to which such property may be delivered, or over whose line such property may pass; and the common carrier, railroad or transportation company issuing any such receipt or bill of lading shall be entitled to recover, in a proper action, the amount of any loss, damage or injury it may be required to pay to the owner of such property from the common carrier, railroad or transportation company, through whose negligence the loss, damage or injury may be sustained.'

While t is statute was in force the defendants in error shipped from Stoutsville, in the state of Missouri, on the line of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway, to Chicago, Ill., which was beyond the line of that road, 99 head of cattle. At the time of the shipment a bill of lading was delivered to the shippers. The portions of the contract pertinent to the questions here arising for consideration are as follows:

'This agreement made between George A. Eddy and H. C. Cross, receivers of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railway, parties of the first part, and M. B. Smizer, party of the second part, witnesseth that whereas the receivers of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railway transport the live stock as per above rules and regulations, and which are hereby made a part of this contract, by mutual agreement between the parties hereto: Now, therefore, for the consideration and mutual covenants and conditions herein contained, said party of the first part is to transport for the second party the live stock described below, and the parties in charge thereof, as hereinafter provided, namely, six cars, said to contain 95 head of cattle, m. or l. o. r., from Stouts- ville station, Missouri, to Chicago, Illinois, station, consigned to Brown Bros. & Smith, care Union Stock Yards, at Chicago, Illinois, at the through rate of 17 1/2 c. per hundred pounds from Stoutsville, Missouri, to Chicago, Illinois, subject to minimum weights applying to cars of various lengths as per tariff rules in effect on the day of shipment, the same being a special rate, lower than the regular rates, or at a rate mutually agreed upon between the parties, for and in consideration of which said second party hereby covenants and agrees as follows:

'(1) That he hereby releases the party of the first part from the liability of common carrier in the transportation of said stock, and agrees that such liability shall be that of a mere forwarder or private carrier for hire. He also hereby agrees to waive release, and does hereby release, said first party from any and all liability for and on account of any delay in shipping said stock, after the delivery thereof to its agent, and from any delay in receiving same after being tendered to its agent.

* * *

'(4) That the said second party, for the consideration aforesaid, hereby assumes, and releases said first party from risk of injury or loss which may be sustained by reason of any delay in the transportation of said stock caused by any mob, strike, threatened or actual violence to person or property from any source, failure of machinery or cars, injury to track or yards, storms, floods, escape or robbery of any stock, overloading cars, fright of animals, or crowding one upon another, or any and all other causes except the negli gence of said first party; and said negligence not to be assumed, but to be proved by the said party of the second part.

* * *

'(13) And it is further stipulated and agreed between the parties hereto that, in case the live stock mentioned herein is to be transported over the road or roads of any other railroad company, the said party of the first part shall be released from liability of every kind after said live stock shall have left its road, and the party of the second part hereby so expressly stipulates and agrees; the understanding of both parties hereto being that the party of the first part shall not be held or deemed liable for anything beyond the line of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railway, excepting to protect the through rate of freight named herein.'

When this bill of lading was executed an ancillary agreement was indorsed thereon, as follows:

'We, the undersigned persons in charge of the live stock mentioned in the within contract, in consideration of the free pass furnished us by the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railway, Geo. A. Eddy and H. C. Cross, receivers, and of the other covenants and agreements contained in said contract, including rules and regulations at the head thereof and those printed on the back thereof, all of which for the consideration aforesaid are hereby accepted by us and made a part of this contract, and of the terms and conditions of which we hereby agree to observe and be severally bound by, do hereby expressly agree that during the time we are in charge of said stock, and while we are on our return passage, we shall be deemed employees of said receivers of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Railway, for the purposes of said contract stated, and that we do agree to assume, and do hereby assume, all risks incident to such employment, and that said receivers shall in no case be liable to us for any injury or damages sustained by us during such time for which it would not be liable to its regular employees.

'[Signed] J. O. Richart.

'M. B. Smizer.'

The cattle were transported over the line of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway to Hannibal, Mo., and from that point the cars in which they were contained passed to the line of the Wabash Railway, destined for Chicago. At or near Chicago an unreasonable delay was occasioned in the transportation of the cattle by the negligence of employees of the Wabash Railway, resulting in damage, for which the shippers subsequently brought an anction against the receivers of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway to recover for the breach of the contract of shipment. Judgment having been entered upon the verdict of a jury in favor of the plaintiffs, an appeal was prosecuted by the receivers to the supreme court of the state, and was heard in division No. 2. There was a judgment reversing the lower court, and a motion for a rehearing was denied. Between the time of the decision of the supreme court and the overruling of the motion for a rehearing, both the receivers had died, and the railway company had resumed possession of its road. This fact having been called to the attention of the supreme court, the railway company was substituted as appellant, instead of the receivers, and a rehearing was ordered. The case was transferred to the court in banc, and was argued before that tribunal. Thereafter a decision was rendered affirming the judgment of the trial court, and motion for a rehearing was denied. 133 Mo. 59, 33 S. W. 71. The case was then brought by writ of error to this court.

By the assignments of error it is asserted, and in the argument at bar it has been strenuously urged, that the Missouri statute above quoted is in conflict with the constitution of the United States, because it is a regulation of commerce between the states, and that the supreme court of Missouri hence erred in giving effect to the statute in the decision by it rendered. The statute, as interpreted by the supreme court, is asserted to operate to deprive the railway of the power of making a through shipment of interstate commerce business over connecting lines without becoming liable for the negligence of the connecting carriers. In other words, the argument is that the effect of the Missouri statute, as in terpreted by the highest court of that state, is to deprive a railway company, transacting the business of interstate commerce, of all power to limit its liability to its own line, and hence compels it, if interstate commerce is engaged in, or a through bill of lading...

To continue reading

Request your trial
50 cases
  • Miller v. Crawford
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • June 7, 1904
    ... ... Rep., 887; Patterson v. Kentucky, 97 U.S ... 506; Turner v. Maryland, 107 U.S. 38; Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 ... Wheat., 119, note; Emert v. Missouri, 156 U.S. 296; Railroad ... Co. v. Patterson Tobacco Co., 169 U.S. 311; Plumley v ... Massachusetts, 155 U.S. 461; Capital City Dairy Co. v. Ohio, ... ...
  • Clark v. Southern Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • May 16, 1918
    ...etc., Co. v. Solan, 169 U. S. 133, 18 Sup. Ct. 289, 42 L. Ed. 688;McCann v. Eddy, 133 Mo. 59, 33 S. W. 71, 35 L. R. A. 110, affirmed in 43 L. Ed. 1093;Skipper v. Seaboard, etc., Co., 75 S. C. 276, 55 S. E. 454, 7 L. R. A. (N. S.) 388, 117 Am. St. Rep. 901, 9 Ann. Cas. 808, and note; Ohio, e......
  • Lash v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • March 16, 1943
    ... ... natural context and administration are so repugnant to the ... organic law. Missouri Kansas & Texas Ry. Co. v. McCann et ... al., 174 U.S. 580, 586, 19 S.Ct. 755, 43 L.Ed. 1093; New ... York, Lake Erie & Western R. Co. v ... ...
  • Lash v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • February 24, 1943
    ... ... Constitution of the United States unless its natural context ... and administration are so repugnant to the organic law ... Missouri, Kansas & Texas Ry. Co. v. McCann et al., 174 ... U.S. 580, 586, 19 S.Ct. 755, 43 L.Ed. 1093; New York, Lake ... Erie & Western R. Co. v ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT