Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Cooledge
| Decision Date | 10 November 1890 |
| Citation | 12 S.E. 264,86 Ga. 104 |
| Parties | WESTERN UNION TEL. CO. v. COOLEDGE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Error from city court of Atlanta; VAN EPPES, Judge.
Action by Cooledge against the Western Union Telegraph Company to recover a statutory penalty for defendant's neglect in transmitting a telegraph message. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant brings error.
Bigby & Berry, for plaintiff in error.
J. F Daniel, for defendant in error.
1. The controlling question in this case is whether the act passed by the general assembly on the 12th of November, 1889, as to telegraph companies, (Acts 1888-89, p. 175,) repeals the act passed on October 22, 1887, (Acts 1886-87, p. 111,) relating to the same subject-matter. The last-named act is "An act to prescribe the duty of electric telegraph companies as to receiving and transmitting dispatches, to prescribe penalties for violations thereof, and for other purposes." The first section of this act makes it the duty of every electric telegraph company with a line of wire wholly or partly in this state, and engaged in telegraphing for the public, to receive, during the usual office hours all dispatches, whether from other telegraphic lines or from individuals; and on payment or tender of the usual charge according to the regulations of such company, shall transmit and deliver the same with impartiality and good faith, and with the due diligence, under penalty of $100, which penalty may be recovered in a justice or other court having jurisdiction thereof, by either the sender of the dispatch or the person to whom sent or directed, whichever may first sue. The first-mentioned act (that of November 12, 1889) is declared by its title to be "An act to encourage and authorize the construction of telegraph lines in the state of Georgia, and conferring certain privileges, powers, and penalties on the owners thereof, and to provide a penalty for divulging the contents of any private message by any person connected with such telegraph company." The first section authorizes any telegraph company, chartered under the laws of this state, or any other state of the United States to construct, maintain, and operate lines of electric telegraph upon, along, and over the highways and public roads, and across and under any waters in this state, by the erection of posts, piers, abutments, and other fixtures, except bridges, necessary to sustain the wires of its lines; but it shall not incommode the use of any highways or public roads, or endanger or intercept the navigation of any waters. The second section makes it the duty of every telegraph company to receive dispatches from and for any other telegraph company or association, and from or for any person, on payment of the usual charge for the transmission of dispatches, according to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mathis v. Western Union Tel. Co.1
...a claim for damages against a telegraph company did not apply to the statutory penalty. To the same effect, see Telegraph Co. v. Cooledge, 86 Ga. 104, 12 S. E. 264. Thus it has been settled that a claim for damages and a claim for the penalty are separate and distinct things. In none of the......
- Western Union Tel. Co v. Cooledge
- Gavin v. City of Atlanta
-
Mathis v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
... ... But in Telegraph Co. v ... Janes, 90 Ga. 254, 16 S.E. 83, it was held that the ... contractual limitation of 60 days for presenting a claim for ... damages against a telegraph company did not apply to the ... statutory penalty. To the same effect, see Telegraph Co ... v. Cooledge, 86 Ga. 104, 12 S.E. 264. Thus it has been ... settled that a claim for damages and a claim for the penalty ... are separate and distinct things. In none of the cases above ... mentioned, however, was the question presented in the case at ... bar made or passed upon. The identical question ... ...