Vaughn v. Wabash R. Co.

• Decision Date: 22 June 1898
• Citation: 145 Mo. 57,46 S.W. 952
• Parties: VAUGHN et al. v. WABASH R. CO.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

46 S.W. 952

145 Mo. 57

VAUGHN et al. v. WABASH R. CO.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

June 22, 1898.

APPEAL — REVIEW — APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF SUPREME COURT — FEDERAL QUESTIONS — INSTRUCTIONS.

1. Where no protection under the United States constitution was claimed in the trial court, it cannot be invoked on appeal.

2. Where defendant, in his answer, alleges a compliance with a statute of the United States, and plaintiff replies with a general denial, the compliance with the statute, and not the validity thereof, is in issue, and the supreme court has no appellate jurisdiction of the suit under Const. art. 6, § 12, giving it appellate jurisdiction of cases involving the validity of a statute of the United States.

3. Under Const. art. 6, § 12, giving the supreme court appellate jurisdiction of cases involving the validity of a statute of or authority exercised under the United States, it has no jurisdiction over an action for damages, caused by delay in transporting cattle, which defendant claimed were unloaded at an intermediate point, under Rev. St. U. S. § 4386, which prohibits railroads from confining cattle for a longer period than 28 consecutive hours, where the evidence showed they had only been on the road 15 hours, and were unloaded because no train left that day to the place of destination.

4. The court refused defendant's instruction defining its duty as to unloading cattle under the federal statute but gave one of its own motion, declaring the same legal principle and applying it to the facts in the case. Held that the defendant was not entitled under the facts to either instruction but that same could not be assigned for error by the defendant.

In banc. Appeal from circuit court, Audrain county; E. M. Hughes, Judge.

Action by F. B. Vaughn and others against the Wabash Railroad Company. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals. Case transferred to the St. Louis court of appeals.

F. W. Lehmann and Geo. S. Grover, for appellant. W. W. Fry, for respondents.

MARSHALL, J.

Plaintiffs sue for $750 damages for loss in weight of cattle, injury to one steer, and extra expense for feed, alleged to have been caused by the negligent delay of defendant in transporting them from Martinsburg, Mo., via St. Louis, to Chicago. The case was tried in the circuit court of Audrain county, and under the direction of the court a verdict was rendered for plaintiffs for six dollars. Plaintiffs appealed to the St. Louis court of appeals, where the judgment below was reversed, and the cause remanded. Vaughn v. Railroad Co., 62 Mo. App. 461. Plaintiffs then filed an amended petition, making more specific the delays complained of. Defendant answered, admitting its incorporation, denying all other allegations of the petition, setting up the terms of the contract of affreightment, and pleading specially that it had printed and kept open for inspection at its freight offices at Martinsburg schedules showing the various rates and charges for transportation of cattle between Martinsburg and Chicago, and that they were filed with the interstate commerce commission of the United States in Washington, D. C., and that it had complied in all respects with the interstate commerce law, and claimed "that said contract, and all of its conditions, was made subject to and in accordance with the laws of the United States, made by the congress thereof, under the power granted to the congress of the United States of America to regulate commerce among the several states of its Union." The plaintiffs' reply was a general denial. The 64 head of fat cattle were loaded on defendant's train about 12 o'clock Saturday night, June 11, 1892, for shipment to Chicago, via St. Louis. On account of an accident to the train ahead of the one carrying the cattle, they did not leave Martinsburg until about 5 o'clock Sunday morning, and arrived at St. Louis about 9 o'clock that morning. They were delayed in St. Louis about two hours, and were then taken to the National Stock Yards, in East St. Louis, and unloaded there between 11 and 12 o'clock on Sunday. Plaintiffs objected to stopping in East St. Louis, and wanted to go straight through to Chicago, but were told there was no train going through that day, and that the stock yards would not load any cattle on Sunday unless previous notice to that effect was given on Saturday by the shippers, and no such notice was given in this case, and that the laws of Illinois prohibited labor of this kind on Sunday. Thereupon plaintiffs told them to unload the cattle, and not let them stand in the cars. Plaintiffs admit they did not want the cattle shipped from East St. Louis on Sunday night, because they would reach Chicago too late for Monday's market. They did not want them shipped on Monday, because Tuesday is an "off day" in the Chicago cattle market. So they had them loaded Tuesday afternoon about 2 o'clock. They were switched around until 6 o'clock, when the train started for Chicago, and arrived there about 11 o'clock Wednesday, and were sold on Thursday. They had shrunk in weight, one had been injured so it had to be sold for $20 in East St. Louis, and plaintiffs paid some $18 for feed and care in East St. Louis. Defendant relied partly upon section 4386, p. 848, Rev. St. U. S. 1878, which prohibits railroads engaged in interstate commmerce from confining cattle in cars for a longer period than 28 consecutive hours without unloading them for rest, water, and feed for a period of at least five consecutive hours, unless prevented from so doing by storm or other accidental causes. Defendant then contended that the cattle had been confined in the cars for 15 consecutive hours between Martinsburg and East St. Louis, and that the running time from East St. Louis to Chicago was 15 hours and 15 minutes, so that,...