Chicago, M. & St. P.R. Co. v. Wallace

Decision Date23 February 1895
Docket Number180.
Citation66 F. 506
PartiesCHICAGO, M. & ST. P.R. CO. v. WALLACE.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

The facts in this case are fully and properly stated in the brief of counsel for plaintiff in error, as follows:

'This is a writ of error prosecuted by the Chicago, Milwaukee &amp St. Paul Railway Company, defendant below, to reverse a judgment of $8,000 recovered against it in the lower court by Benjamin F. Wallace, the plaintiff below, for loss and injury to certain property comprising part of the belongings and equipment of a circus owned by Wallace, and for the loss of performances of the circus owned by Wallace. Plaintiff's declaration is in trespass on the case for negligent violation by defendant of its duty as a common carrier. It contains two counts: The first count avers that on the 7th day of July, 1892, the defendant was possessed of and operating a certain railroad and railroad tracks in the states of Wisconsin and Iowa, and was operating and controlling certain locomotive power and engines upon and along its said railroad and tracks; that the plaintiff was the owner of a certain circus known and described as the 'Cook & Whitby Circus,' consisting, besides employes, of a large number of horses, wagons, tents harnesses, and a large quantity of other property, effects, and paraphernalia, and was also the owner of twenty-four cars; that on the said 7th day of July, 1892, at the city of Prairie du Chien, in Wisconsin, the defendant then and there received, as common carrier, the aforesaid twenty-four cars of the plaintiff, containing the aforesaid property and effects of the plaintiff, constituting said Cook & Whitby's Circus, and the people connected therewith, to be safely transported to the town of Maquoketa, state of Iowa, and to be safely delivered there to the plaintiff on the 8th day of July, before 9 o'clock of the forenoon of that day. The plaintiff avers that it was the duty of the defendant to provide safe, strong, and efficient locomotive power for the transportation of said cars, with the property and effects of the Cook & Whitby Circus, and it was also the duty of the defendant to construct and maintain its tracks and roadbed, at and near the station known as 'Sny Magill,' in the state of Iowa, in a safe and suitable condition; that the defendant negligently failed to provide strong and efficient locomotive power, and negligently failed to construct and maintain its tracks and roadbed in a safe and suitable condition at said point near Sny Magill, and that in consequence four of said cars were damaged, twenty-four horses were killed, other horses injured, and a large amount of harness was damaged; also that by reason of the accident plaintiff was prevented from giving performances of the circus, which he had advertised, in the vicinity of the town of Maquoketa and the city of Davenport, in the state of Iowa, and thereby lost the profits he would have made had he been able to give said performances. The second count of the declaration avers that on the 6th day of July, 1892, the defendant was possessed of and operating and controlling a certain railroad and railroad tracks in the state of Wisconsin, and operating and controlling certain steam locomotive power and engines upon and along the said railroad and railroad tracks; that upon said day the defendant, at the city of Richland Center, in the state of Wisconsin, received as a common carrier the aforesaid twenty-four cars of the plaintiff, containing all the aforesaid property and effects of plaintiff, constituting said Cook & Whitby's Circus, to be transported, by means of fit and adequate locomotive engine power to be furnished by the defendant, over the railroad tracks aforesaid, from said city of Richland Center, in the state of Wisconsin, the said city of Prairie du Chien, in the state of Wisconsin, and to deliver the same at Prairie du Chien on the 7th day of July, 1892, at or before the hour of 9 o'clock in the forenoon of that day; that it was the duty of the defendant to have provided safe and proper appliances at a certain switch located at and near a point south of said Richland Center, and to keep proper and sufficient lights and signals placed at and near said switch to indicate whether said switch was open or closed; that the defendant negligently failed and omitted to perform its duty in this regard, and that by reason thereof the locomotive hauling plaintiff's cars was derailed; that the defendant failed to proceed with due and proper diligence to get its locomotive engine back onto the main track, and that in consequence plaintiff's cars were delayed so long that they did not reach the city of Prairie du Chien in time to give performances, which had been advertised there. The defendant pleaded the general issue to the entire declaration, and afterwards a special plea to the jurisdiction of the court, which was subsequently stricken from the files by order of the court.

'On the trial it appeared that the plaintiff's cars and property were hauled by the defendant under a special contract made and executed June 1, 1892, by the railroad company and by the plaintiff, Wallace, through their duly-authorized agents. This special contract reads as follows:

''This agreement, made and entered into this 1st day of June, A.D. 1892, by and between the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company, party of the first part, and Cook & Whitby Circus, party of the second part, witnesseth: The party of the first part agrees to run a special train, consisting of ten flat cars, six stock cars, six passenger cars, two advertising cars, in all twenty-four cars, to be furnished by the party of the second part, to run between as below, and as below:

Leaving:

Shakopee to Hastings, June 29th, ................ $180

Hastings to Redwing, Jun. 30th, .................. 180

Redwing to Faribault, Jul. 1st, .................. 180

Faribault to Decorah, Jul. 2d, ................... 225

Decorah to Boscobel, Jul. 4th, ................... 200

Boscobel to Richland Center, Jul. 5th, ........... 180

Richland Center to Prairie du Chien, Jul. 6th, ... 200

Prairie du Chien to Maquoketa, Jul. 7th, ......... 200

Maquoketa to Davenport, Jul. 8th, ................ 180 "Deliver to Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway at Davenport, where they leave our line, and carry on said special train, as before described, the circus property of said party of the second part, together with the people properly connected therewith, so far as the same shall be loaded on said train. The said train to be run so as to arrive at its several destinations at or about 6 o'clock in the morning, provided the same shall be loaded and ready to start in time to reach its several destinations at said hour. In consideration thereof the said party of the second part hereby agrees to pay to the said party of the first part the sums as specified above per day in advance (which said sum is a reduction from the usual and regular rates charged by said party of the first part for transportation services of the kind and nature above specified), the sum to be paid to the agent of the said party of the first part at the station from which the next succeeding run is to be made, it being mutually understood that no charge will be made for the use of train or trainmen on Mondays, when the runs for those days are made on the Sunday immediately preceding; and said party of the second part also agrees to load and unload said cars. In consideration of the agreement of said party of the first part to run said special train as above specified, and at and for the reduced rates above named, and also in consideration that, by the running of said special train as above specified, the said party of the first part increases the risks and dangers of operating its railway, and subjects its own property to a greater liability of being damaged, and in further consideration of the premises, said party of the second part does hereby covenant and agree to release and discharge said party of the first part of and from any and all liabilities for claims and damages of every name and nature, by reason or on account of any accident or injury, from whatever cause, that may occur to, or may be suffered or sustained by, any one, or all, of the persons composing or attached to said circus company, or to the cars or other property of said party of the second part, while in or on said train or upon any of the premises belonging to or used by said party of the first part, or by reason or on account of any delays that may occur in the running of said special train, or by failure to reach the several points of destination at the specified time. And, in and for the consideration last above mentioned, said party of the second part does hereby further covenant and agree that he will protect, and forever hold free and harmless, the said party of the first part, from any and all damages or claims for damages that he or they may sustain or incur by reason of any accident or injury that may happen to or be received by any one or more of the several persons composing or attached to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
32 cases
  • Kansas City, Memphis & Birmingham Railroad Co. v. Southern Railway News Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 12, 1899
    ...as a private carrier and to impose such conditions as it saw fit. 4 Elliott on Railroads, p. 2173; Railroad v. Lockwood, supra; Railroad v. Wallace, 66 F. 506; Piedmont Co. v. Railroad, 19 S.C. 353; Coup v. Railroad, 56 Mich. 111; Robertson v. Railroad, 156 Mass. 525; Liverpool Co. v. Phoen......
  • Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Bailey C. Shows v. Olvera
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • May 2, 1941
    ...357, 21 L.Ed. 627; Long v. Lehigh Valley R. Co., 2 Cir., 130 F. 870; McCormick v. Shippy, 2 Cir., 124 F. 48; Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Wallace, 7 Cir., 66 F. 506, 30 L.R.A. 161; World's Columbian Exposition Co. v. Republic of France, 7 Cir., 96 F. 687, 694, 695; Bates v. Railroad Co., 147 Ma......
  • Chicago & NW Ry. Co. v. Davenport
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • August 11, 1953
    ...Clough v. Grand Trunk Western Ry. Co., 6 Cir., 155 F. 81; Wilson v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., C.C., 129 F. 774; Chicago M. & St. P. R. Co. v. Wallace, 7 Cir., 66 F. 506, 30 L. R.A. 161. None of those cases, however, involved a finding of fact as here, that the Railroad was actually operat......
  • Sager v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • December 16, 1908
    ... ... Old Colony ... R.R. Co., 156 Mass. 525, 31 N.E. 650, 32 Am.St.Rep. 482; ... Chicago, etc., Ry. Co. v. Wallace, 66 F. 506, 14 ... C.C.A. 257, 30 L.R.A. 161; Wilson v. Atlantic, ... ...
  • 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