Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. Kerr

• Decision Date: 10 November 1890
• Citation: 68 Miss. 14,8 So. 330
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. R. C. KERR ET AL

8 So. 330

68 Miss. 14

ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD CO. v. R. C. KERR ET AL

Supreme Court of Mississippi

November 10, 1890

October 1890

FROM the circuit court of the first district of Hinds county, HON J. B. CHRISMAN, Judge.

Appellees brought this suit to recover of the Illinois Central Railroad Company the value of three shipments of vegetables delivered at Jackson, Miss., to said railroad company, consigned to Pittsburgh, Pa. Two lots thus shipped reached their destination in a totally worthless condition about twelve days after their receipt by appellant. The third lot was never received by the consignees.

Appellees had been accustomed to ship vegetables over defendant's road to Chicago, Ill., but desired to change and ship to Pittsburgh. Whereupon one of the appellees applied to the shipping clerk of the appellant company at Jackson to know how long a time was required to transport the goods from that place to Pittsburgh, and the clerk, after taking time for investigation, replied that it required about forty-eight hours to take them to Chicago and about the same time to Pittsburgh. Thereupon the vegetables then ready for shipment and afterwards the other two lots, were delivered, consigned to Pittsburgh.

No bills of lading were issued, but in lieu thereof receipts known as dray tickets were given by the defendant company showing in each instance the articles received, their weight the consignor and the consignee, and destination. Defendant's line does not extend to Pittsburgh, but shipments from Jackson to that city are delivered at Effingham, Ill., to the line of a connecting company, known as the Vandalia Line. There was no direct proof of any partnership existing between this company and the defendant company. On the contrary, the general freight agent denied in his testimony the existence of any such relation. However, the defendant made a through rate of freight, and the appellees were required, as a condition of the receipt of the goods to guarantee payment of the through freight to the point of destination.

The defendant's evidence tended to show that it required three or four days to transport freight from Jackson to Effingham, and that the shipments in question were received within a reasonable time at that place and delivered in good condition to the connecting line.

On the trial plaintiffs asked the following instructions:- -

1. If the jury believe from the evidence that the Illinois Railroad Co. received the freight to be transported through to Pittsburgh, Pa., and made a through rate of freight therefor and required the payment of the same to be guaranteed by the plaintiffs, then this is a through contract of affreightment, and if they further find that their goods were lost on the route or were destroyed by any delay of transportation en route, then they will find for the plaintiffs.

2. If they find for the plaintiffs, the measure of the damages is such a reasonable value of the freight lost or spoiled at the place of destination as may be proven, less the freight thereon to the place of destination.

These were refused by the court, and the following given in lieu of both:--

1. If the jury believe from the evidence that the plaintiffs in this case applied to the shipping clerk of the Illinois Central Railroad, who was at the time acting for, and in the office of, the agent of defendant's freight department, for information as to the practicability of shipping and the time required for transporting his perishable freight to Pittsburgh, in the State of Pennsylvania, and was informed that it required about the same length of time to transport said goods to Pittsburgh that it required to transport them to Chicago, and that upon this statement he contracted with defendant's agent to ship said goods, in which contract he was required to guarantee payment of the freight over the intervening lines to the point of destination as a condition of their shipment, and that said goods were delayed on the route for twelve days, and perished because of such delay or were lost, then the defendant is liable for their value and the jury may so find.

The court refused to give the following instructions asked by the defendant:--

2. The court instructs the jury for the defendant, that if they...