Rintoul v. New York Cent. & H.R.R. Co.

• Decision Date: 24 August 1883
• Citation: 17 F. 905
• Parties: RINTOUL and others v. NEW YORK CENT. & H.R.R. CO.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

17 F. 905

RINTOUL and others v. NEW YORK CENT. & H.R.R. CO.

United States Circuit Court, S.D. New York.

August 24, 1883

George W. Wingate, for plaintiffs.

Frank Loomis, for defendants.

SHIPMAN J.

This is an action at law, which was tried by the court upon an agreed statement of facts, a trial by jury having been waived, by written stipulation of the parties. The facts which were agreed by the parties, and which were found by the court to be true, are as follows 'The following facts are agreed upon for the purposes of the trial of the above-entitled action:

'(1) The plaintiffs are partners in business at Glasgow Scotland, under the firm name of P. Rintoul & Sons, and are citizens and residents of Great Britain.

'(2) The defendants are a corporation formed pursuant to the laws of the state of New York, and own and operate the railroads known as the New York Central Railroad and the Hudson River Railroad, together extending from the city of Buffalo to the city of New York, in said state.

'(3) That on the thirtieth day of July, 1880, the Yeager Milling Company of St. Louis, Missouri, at said St. Louis, having previously obtained from the Merchants' Dispatch Transportation Company a rate for the carriage of 1,400 sacks of flour, the property of the plaintiffs, from St. Louis to Glasgow, and delivered said flour to one of the railroad companies, connections of the Merchants' Dispatch Transportation Company, operating a railroad eastward from St. Louis, and designated by said company, and obtained a memorandum receipt for said flour from said railroad company, and obtained a memorandum receipt for said flour from said railroad company, surrendered said receipt to one Eugene Field, the several agent at St. Louis of the Merchants' Dispatch Transportation Company and the Allan Line Steam-ship Company, and obtained from him a certain bill of lading numbered '145,' (to be produced by the plaintiffs.) That thereafter said milling company indorsed said bill of lading to the plaintiffs.

'(4) That the Merchants' Dispatch Transportation Company, on said thirtieth day of July, 1880, was a joint-stock association, neither owning nor operating any railroad or railroads, but engaged in the business of contracting for the carriage of goods between points on many of the railroads of the United States, and in procuring the execution by the companies owning or operating said railroads of said contracts, and having contracts with said railroad companies for the execution of contracts for the transportation of goods made by them, the said Merchants' Dispatch Transportation Company, all which facts were, at and before said thirtieth day of July, 1880, well known to said the Yeager Milling Company.

'(5) That in the course of the transportation of said flour by the connections of the said the Merchants' Dispatch Transportation Company from St. Louis eastward, the defendants, one of said connections, received said flour at Buffalo to transport the same to Albany, and there to deliver the same to the Boston & Albany Railroad Company, another of said connections, to be thence transported to East Boston.

'(6) That during the transportation of said flour by the defendants, the same, on the fourth of August, 1880, was in a car of one of defendants' trains which had stopped at Palmyra, New York, for water for the engine, when the rear of said train was run into by another train of the defendants, and the car containing said flour, and said flour, were destroyed by fire caused by such collision.

'(7) That the value of said flour was $1,016.

'(8) That prior to the destruction of said flour as aforesaid an insurance had been effected by the plaintiffs on said flour with the Phoenix Insurance Company of New York to the full value of said flour.

'(9) That after the destruction of said flour, and before the commencement of this action, the plaintiffs received from said insurance company the said insurance on said flour to the full amount of the value of said flour.

'New York, April 23, 1883.

'WINGATE & CULLEN, Plaintiffs' Attorneys. 'FRANK LOOMIS, Defendants' Attorney.'

The bill of lading contained the following terms and conditions, which are material to the case: 'That the said Merchants' Dispatch Transportation Company, and its connections, which receives said property, shall not be liable * * * for loss or damage by wet, dirt, fire, * * * nor for loss or damage of any article or property whatever, by fire or other casualty, while in transit, * * * nor for loss or damage by fire, collision, or the damages of navigation while on seas, rivers, lakes, or canals. * * *

'It is further stipulated and agreed that, in case of any loss, detriment, or damage done to or sustained by any of the property herein receipted for during such transportation, whereby any legal liability or responsibility shall or may be incurred, that company alone shall be held answerable therefor in whose actual custody the same may be at the time of the happening of such loss, detriment, or damage, and the carrier so liable shall have the full benefit of any insurance that may have been effected upon or on account of said goods. * * *

'NOTICE. In accepting this bill of lading, the shipper or the agent of the owner of the property carried expressly accepts and agrees to all its stipulations, exceptions, and conditions, whether written or printed.'

1. The fundamental principle which is applicable to the foregoing facts is stated in the conclusions of the supreme court in Railroad Co. v. Lockwood, 17 Wall. 357, as follows:

'First,

...