Smith & Co. v. Southern Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 04 November 1909
• Citation: 65 S.E. 1029,84 S.C. 167
• Parties: SMITH & CO. v. SOUTHERN RY. CO. et al.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

65 S.E. 1029

84 S.C. 167

SMITH & CO. v. SOUTHERN RY. CO. et al.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

November 4, 1909

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Orangeburg County; John S Wilson, Judge.

Action by Smith & Co. against the Southern Railway Company and another. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant's appeal. Affirmed.

Raysor & Summers, for appellants. Wolfe & Berry, for respondents.

WOODS J.

The action was brought against the Southern Railway Company and Branchville & Bowman Railroad Company for the recovery of $5.10, the value of 192 pounds of flour, lost between Charleston, S. C., and Bowman, S. C., the terminus of the Branchville & Bowman Railroad, and for $50, the statutory penalty for failure to adjust the claim within the statutory limit of 40 days. After the evidence had been introduced, the court by consent of the attorney for the plaintiffs struck out the name of Branchville & Bowman Railroad Company, and the cause proceeded against the Southern Railway Company as the sole defendant. The magistrate gave judgment for the value of the flour alone holding the plaintiffs not entitled to recover the penalty. On appeal, this judgment was so modified by Judge Wilson as to give the plaintiffs judgment for the statutory penalty of $50.

The first point submitted on appeal to this court is that the penalty could not be recovered, because the claim was not presented to the agent of the Southern Railway at the point of destination. We think the plaintiffs, in filing their claim, complied with the penalty statute strictly construed. The line of the Southern Railway Company does not extend to Bowman, and in transporting goods to that point from Charleston it has to deliver them at Branchville to the Branchville & Bowman Railroad Company. But the Southern Railway Company issued its through bill of lading for the flour from Charleston to Bowman. The claim was filed with the agent, Godfrey, of the Branchville & Bowman Railroad Company at Bowman. There was evidence warranting the circuit court in holding that Godfrey was also the agent of the Southern Railway Company for the purpose of receiving claims against it relating to goods shipped to Bowman on the Southern Railway Company's through bill of lading.

The shipment being wholly within the state, and received by one road and accepted from it by the other on a through bill of lading, the plaintiffs had all the rights, and both carriers incurred all the liabilities, provided in such case by the act of May 13, 1903 (24 St. at Large, p. 1). Venning v Railroad Co., 78 S.C. 55, 58 S.E. 983, 12 L. R. A. (N S.) 1217, 125 Am. St. Rep. 768. Under that act, each carrier of goods, recognizing or acting...