Mississippi River Logging Co. v. Robson
Decision Date | 05 August 1895 |
Docket Number | 540. |
Citation | 69 F. 773 |
Parties | MISSISSIPPI RIVER LOGGING CO. v. ROBSON. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
This was a suit by John Robson, the defendant in error, against the Mississippi River Logging Company, the plaintiff in error, to recover damages for a breach of a written contract between said parties, that was entered into on August 23 1882. A jury having been waived, the case comes before this court for review on a special finding of facts made by the Honorable O. P. Shiras, before whom the case was tried. The several special findings that are most material to the discussion of the several errors that have been assigned are as follows:
'(2) I find that, for a number of years prior to 1882, the defendant company was engaged in the business of running and driving logs and timber down the Flambeau and Chippewa rivers, in the state of Wisconsin, to the Mississippi river including in such business logs and timber owned by the defendant and logs and timber owned by third parties.
'(3) I find that, prior to 1882, the general mode in which the said business was carried on was as follows: The logs and timber were placed by the owners thereof on the banks or in the water of the said Flambeau and Chippewa rivers and the tributaries thereof. The driving of the logs down the rivers was performed by the defendant corporation or by the Chippewa Lumber & Boom Company, which latter company was under the control and management of the defendant. When the logs reached Beef Slough boom, which was situated on the lower part of the Chippewa river, they were taken possession of by the Beef Slough Boom Company, and were run into the boom managed by said company, and the logs belonging to the different owners were separated from the common mass, and run into pockets. Having been thus assorted, they were then brailed and formed into rafts in proper condition to be taken in tow by the raft boats, which conveyed them to their several points of destination upon the Mississippi river.
'(4) I find that for a number of years prior to the year 1882 the plaintiff, John Robson, had been engaged in the lumber business upon the Mississippi river; that he had a sawmill at Lansing, upon that river, and that he brought the logs sawed at the mill from the lands tributary to the Flambeau and Chippewa rivers in Wisconsin; that he owned a quantity of timber lands tributary to these streams, from which he annually cut a number of logs, and that he also bought logs from other persons, or bought the right to cut logs from lands owned by other persons and tributary to the streams above named; that, for a number of years prior to 1882, all the logs cut or bought by the plaintiff in the regions tributary to the Flambeau and Chippewa rivers were driven for him by the defendant company or by the Chippewa Lumber & Boom Company.
'(5) I find that certain differences and disputes in regard to the handling of said logs, and the prices to be paid therefor by plaintiff, having arisen thereupon on the 23d day of August 1882, the plaintiff and defendant entered into a contract in writing, of the following tenor and effect.
'(6) I find that after the date of this contract, and up to April 4, 1889, both parties recognized their contract to be in full force, and the defendant company took charge of and handled all logs delivered to it by plaintiff in accordance with its provisions.
'(7) I find that on April 4, 1889, the defendant company notified the plaintiff, by a letter addressed to him, and received in due course of mail, that it would no longer be bound by said contract, the said letter reading as follows:
Mississippi River Logging Co. "By F. Weyerhauser, Prest.'
'(8) I find that since said 4th day of April, 1889, and as a consequence of the refusal of the defendant company to further handle, drive, or care for the logs owned by the plaintiff for the prices named in the contract, the plaintiff has been compelled to pay larger sums for the performance of the work necessary therefor, such additional payments amounting to 38 1/2 cents per thousand feet, subject to reduction of the $250 per year, the contract price for driving; and I further find that plaintiff paid the sum of $350.27 as an extra charge for brailing in 1889, in addition to the total of 38 1/2 cents increase.
'(9) I further find that at the date of the contract in question, to wit, August 23, 1882, the plaintiff had upon the banks or in the waters of the Flambeau and Chippewa rivers, below the forks thereof, logs and timber to the amount of 14,901,430 feet according to bank scale.
'(10) I find that since the said 23d day of August, 1882, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Mammoth Oil Co.
...v. Tomlinson (C. C. A.) 296 F. 634; Wisconsin Steel Co. v. Maryland Steel Co., 203 F. 403, 121 C. C. A. 507; Mississippi River Logging Co. v. Robson, 69 F. 773, 16 C. C. A. 400; Farmers' Nat. Bank v. Pratt, 193 Iowa, 406, 186 N. W. 924; Roberts v. Ozias, 179 Iowa, 1141, 162 N. W. 584; Shirl......
-
E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Tomlinson
......403, 121 C.C.A. 507. (Seventh Circuit); Mississippi Logging Co. v. Robson, 69 F. 773, 16 C.C.A. 400, and Crowell v. ......
-
American Trading Co. v. National Fiber and Insulation Co.
...... Co. v. Coon, 150 Mass. 566, 23 N.E. 380; Mississippi. River Logging Co. v. Robinson, 69 F. 773, 16 C. C. A. 400. . . ......
-
Miller v. Miller
...which the parties did when the same was formulated and accepted. Robson v. Mississippi River Logging Company, C.C., 43 F. 364, affirmed 8 Cir., 69 F. 773; New York Casualty Company v. Sinclair Refining Company, 10 Cir., 108 F.2d 65, 69; Peebles v. Prudential Insurance Company, 6 Cir., 110 F......