INTERSTATE COMMERCE-Continued.
to Omaha, but may charge an increased rate in view of fact that
shorter line competes for traffic. Lincoln Board of Trade v. Bur-
lington, etc., R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 583.
Connecting lines. Controlling interest in. One company owning con-
trolling interest in connecting lines cannot make rates from points
upon that line which operate as an unjust discrimination in favor of
points upon its own lines or upon other lines controlled in similar
manner. Brady v. Pennsylvania R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 603.
Connecting lines. If companies form through lines operated for con-
tinuous carriage, they cannot escape responsibility for unreasonable
charges by claiming that haul is divisible according to length of
each line. Brady v. Pennsylvania R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 603.
Constitutional law. Regulations of interstate commerce act are in
nature of police laws, and fact that it affects existing contracts does
not bring it within prohibition against laws which impair the obli-
gation of contracts. Kentucky & I. Bridge Co. v. Louisville & N.
R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 630.
Discrimination. Jurisdiction of commission. Where peaches were
shipped from point in New Jersey and addressed to persons in New
York but delivered in Jersey City, held, that no point affecting in-
terstate commerce was presented of which commission could take
cognizance. New Fruit Exchange v. Central R. Co. (I. S. C. C.).
592.
Exchange of traffic. Facilities. Fact that railroad has already a num-
ber of yards in which it exchanges traffic does not entitle it to re-
fuse facilities to new carrier although such carrier connects at point
where there is no yard. Kentucky & I. Bridge Co. v. Louisville &
N. R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 630.
Exchange of traffic. Public convenience. One railroad cannot refuse
to exchange traffic with another on ground that road of latter is
not required to supply the public, and that public were sufficiently
furnished with means of transportation before such road was built.
Kentucky & I. Bridge Co. v. Louisville & N. R. Co. (I. S. C. C.).
630.
Freight rates. Distance. Competitive lines. 590 n.
Freight rates. Newly settled country. In view of circumstances, the
sparsely settled country, the expense of keeping road open and the
conditions of the traffic generally, the rates between St. Peter,
Minn., and Pierre, Dak., held, not excessive and the rule that the
rate per ton per mile must decrease for the greater distance while
total aggregate charges increases is inapplicable. Business Men's
Assoc. v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co. I. S. C. C.). 711.
Local rates. Competing lines. Under circumstances, held, that the
rule, that while the aggregate charge is constantly increasing, the
rate per mile per ton should be constantly decreasing did not apply
owing to competition which caused adoption of same rates between
St. Paul and Lake Superior, on the defendant's road, as those adopted
by the St. Paul & Duluth R. Business Men's Assoc. v. Chicago,
St. P., M. & O. R, Co. (I. S. C. C.). 724.
Parties to proceedings to adjust tariff. Manufacturer complaining that
goods shipped by him over a railroad to points on other lines are
improperly classified need not make connecting lines parties to the
proceedings. Hurlburt v, Lake Shore, etc., R. Co. (I. S. C. C.).
596,
Car-load lots of oil in barrels. Rates charged for oil when
INTERSTATE COMMERCE—Continued.
shipped in barrels in car-load lots, held, to operate unjustly in favor
of shippers of oil in bulk in tank cars. Carriers must make rate by
weight which should be by the 100 lbs. instead of by the barrel.
Scofield v. Lake Shore, etc., R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 685.
Tank cars. Haulage. Carrier may arrange with shipper that the lat-
ter shall furnish cars at terms agreed upon, but carrier is charged
with duty of seeing that neither directly nor indirectly is a higher
rate given to such shipper than to others who are dependent on
carrier for cars. Scofield v. Lake Shore, etc., R. Co. (Î. S. C. C,).
685.
Tank cars. Power of Commission.
Interstate commerce commission
has no power of directing carrier to supply itself with an equipment
of cars, and cannot order company to furnish tank cars to shippers.
Scofield v. Lake Shore, etc., R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 685.
Traffic agreement. Competing bridges. One road cannot lawfully re-
fuse to receive traffic brought across a bridge which is a rival with
another bridge with which such railroad and another have con-
tracted to transport their traffic across the river, although the traffic
brought across the new bridge is in violation of a contract made
between the two railroad companies. Kentucky & I. Bridge Co. v.
Louisville & N. R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 630.
Trans-continental lines. Competition, As the Canadian Pacific no
longer competes with lines in the United States in transportation
from the Pacific to Missouri River points, there is no jurisdiction
for higher rates from or to points nearer Pacific, than from or to
points on Missouri River. Martin v. Southern Pac. R. Co. (I. S. C.
C.). 612.
Undue preference. Municipal subscription. Fact that municipal
subscriptions and land have been given to railroad cannot be taken
into consideration in determining whether a city is discriminated
against. Lincoln Board of Trade v. Burlington, etc., R. Co. (I. S.
C. C.). 583.
Expulsion from train. Cause of action arising for expulsion of pas-
senger arises at the place where the passenger is expelled. Max-
well v. Atchison, etc., R. Co. (C. C.).
Federal courts. Personal injuries. Circuit court will not entertain
action of tort for recovery of damages for personal injuries when it
is obvious that amount of recovery would be less than $2000. Max-
well v. Atchison, etc., R. Co. (C. Č.). 574.
Federal question. The fact that a State court decided in an action for
damages sustained by vessels in navigating a river that a bridge
had not been built as required by Congress, rendered the railroad
company liable irrespective of the question of improper construc-
tion, does not present a federal question. Hannibal & St. Jo. R.
Co. v. Missouri R. Packet Co. (U. S.). 157.
Liability of lessor. Railroad has no power to lease its road without
statutory authority, and plea by lessor that it had leased the road
is not sufficient. International & G. N. R. Co. v. Underwood.
(Tex.). 570.
Passenger. Negligence. Action to recover damages sustained by be-
ing thrown from street-car falls within limitation of three years ap-
plicable to actions for personal injuries resulting from negligence
under New York code. Webber v. Herkimer & M. St. R. Co.
(N. Y.).
Personal injury, application of statute to action for. 583 n.
MASTER AND SERVANT, SEE CONTRACT.
Assaults by servants upon passengers. 380 n.
Assault upon passenger. Street car company is liable to passenger for
wilful assault upon him by driver of car. Winnegar v. Central
Pass. R. Co. (Ky.). 462.
Baggage master has no authority to invite or permit persons to ride on
train; such permission cannot create relation of carrier and passen-
ger. Reary v. Louisville, etc. R. Co. (La.). 277.
Brakeman. Authority. It is within the scope of a brakeman's author-
ity to prevent passengers from getting on train and to remove those
wrongfully thereon, but if he does not exercise due care the com-
pany is liable. Kansas City, etc., R. Co. v. Kelley (Kan.). 281.
Conductor on branch road represents company as to his own route, but
not in giving information as to running of trains upon main line.
Atchison, etc., R. Co. v. Gants (Kan.). 290.
Conductor. Scope of authority. Conductor represents the company in
the discharge of his functions; and in the line of his duty, company
is liable for any abuse of authority. Southern Kansas R. Co. v.
Rice (Kan.). 316.
Declarations of servant.
Declarations made by section master concern-
ing sufficiency of culvert, not falling within the scope of his duties,
are inadmissible in action for overflow of land. Waldrop y. Green-
ville, etc., R. Co. (S. Car.). 204.
Evidence of employment. In an action by a special policeman to re-
cover arrears of salary, where the defendant claims that during a
certain period plaintiff had not been recognized as a special police-
man a letter directed to him during such period by the company's
yard master is admissible. Porter v. Richmond & D. R. Co. (N. Car.).
137.
Exemplary damages. Newsboy pushed from step of street car by con-
ductor and run over, held not entitled to recover exemplary dam-
ages, there being no evidence that the act was wilful or wanton.
Philadelphia Traction Co. v. Orbann (Pa.). 432.
Exemplary damages: recovery of, for torts of servants.
Newsboy selling papers on street car not an employee on or about the
road within meaning of Pennsylvania statute. Philadelphia Trac-
tion Co. v. Orbann (Pa.). 432.
Persons "engaged or employed on or about roads," etc., who are within
meaning of Pennsylvania statute.
Risks assumed by servant. 276 n.
Risk of employment. If through neglect to keep track in suitable re-
pair an injury occurs to one lawfully on the train, and without fault
of his own, he may recover. Rosenbaum v. St. Paul, etc., R. Co.
Scope of authority. Company is responsible to passenger for injuries.
MASTER AND SERVANT-Continued.
caused by negligence of engineer "learning the road," although he
had been placed on engine by material agent who had no authority
to employ any person. Lakin v. Oregon Pac. R. Co. (Ore.). 500.
Scope of employment. Instructions. An instruction in an action for
injuries caused by company's servants that if employees permitted
engine to be moved without consent of engineer, whether within
the scope of their employment or not, the company would not be
liable for the injuries, held not a ground for reversal. Lakin v.
Oregon Pac. R. Čo. (Ore.). 500.
Scope of employment. Presumption. Where servants are on com-
pany's premises performing duty for company as they had on other
occasions, it will be presumed that they were acting within the
scope of the authority given them. Atchison, etc., R. Co. v. Johns
(Kan.). 480.
Special finding by jury, in action for servant's tort that he was not
acting in the course of his employment, is a conclusion of law and
may be set aside. Fick v. Chicago, etc., R. Co. (Wis.). 378.
Ticket agent. Assault. Person left in charge of office during absence
of regular agent is a servant of the company, which is liable for an
assault committed by him. Fick v. Chicago, etc., R. Co. (Wis).
378.
Torts of servants. Exemplary damages. In action for injury received
through negligence of servants, exemplary damages may be re-
covered where injuries are wanton, although act may not have been
previously authorized or subsequently ratified. Philadelphia Trac-
tion Co. v. Orbann (Pa.). 432.
Unskilful employee. In an action against a street railway company for
personal injuries caused by driver's negligence, instruction as to
failure of defendant to employ prudent drivers held argumentative
and improper. Hays v. Gainesville St. R. Co. (Tex.). 97.
Sale of road before construction. Where one company sells it road to
another before completion, and enters into a contract to complete
it, a third person with whom it enters into a contract for work
stands in the relation of a sub-contractor and is entitled to a lien
only in the event of his complying with the statute. Templison v.
Chicago, etc., R. Co. (Iowa).
Sub-contractors.
Where one company sells its road to another and
enters into a contract with a third party for the construction of the
track, such third party cannot acquire a lien for material and labor
against the purchasing company unless they are sub-contractors.
Templison v. Chicago, etc., R. Co. (Iowa). 107.
NEGLIGENCE. See BRIDGE; DEATH; MASTER AND SERVANT; PASSENGER;
STREET RAILWAY; SURFACE WATER; TRESPASSERS; WATER.
Active and passive negligence. 21 n.
Comparative negligence: doctrine of, has never been recognized in Mis-
souri. Hurt v. St. Louis, etc., R. Co. (Mo.). 422.
Due care. Evidence of positive act. Where an employee in an elevator
was found lying dead across the track soon after cars had been sent
violently into the building, held, that the case was not one in which
it was necessary to show some positive act of the intestate in order
to prove that he exercised due care. Maguire v. Fitchburg R. Co.
(Mass.). 9.
Gross negligence. Averment that plaintiff was injured through de-
fendant's "gross negligence" will not limit plaintiff's right to re-
cover for an injury inflicted by the wilful act of another. Hays v.
Gainesville St. R. Co. (Tex.). 97.
Instruction precluding plaintiff from recovering for injuries unless he
exercised prudence to avoid the injury is erroneous, there being no
rule of law which requires him to use more than ordinary caution
to shield himself from the consequences of contributory negligence.
Hays v. Gainesville St. R. Co. (Tex.). 97.
Omission of statutory duty as affecting company's liability. 5 n.
Omission of statutory duty. Where an act is expressly enjoined by
statute the act is within all degrees of diligence, even the very lowest,
and its omission is negligence per se.
Central R. & B. Co. v. Smith
(Ga.). I.
NEGLIGENCE, CONTRIBUTORY.
Instruction as to effect of plaintiff's contributory negligence and defend-
ant's negligence, held not open to objection that it charged that
even if negligence of plaintiff as well as defendant contributed to
injury, defendant is liable. Dougherty v. Missouri R. Co. (Mo.). 488.
Instructions. If other instructions sufficiently instruct jury as to effect
of contributory negligence, instruction that if jury find defendant
negligent, they must find for plaintiff, is not such as to warrant a
reversal. Dougherty v. Missouri R. Co. (Mo.). 488.
Instruction that it was not enough that plaintiff may not have used
ordinary care, but such want of care must have contributed to the
injury to bar recovery, held not erroneous. Ohio & M. R. Co. v.
Hecht (Ind.). 447.
Knowledge of danger will not impute contributory negligence. 9 n.
Knowledge of defects. A person crossing a bridge is not guilty of
negligence contributing to injury caused by defects in such bridge
although he attempted to cross in the knowledge of such defects.
Gulf C. & S. F. R. Co. v. Gascamp (Tex.). 6.
Liability notwithstanding. If by the exercise of reasonable care on the
part of the company an accident might have been avoided, the com-
pany is liable notwithstanding the contributory negligence of the
plaintiff. Troy v. Cape Fear, etc., R. Co. (N. Car.). 13.
Liability notwithstanding. Plaintiff may recover for personal injuries
even though guilty of contributory negligence, if defendant could
have avoided injuring him by the use of such means as a prudent
man would have employed. Hays v. Gainesville St. R. Co. (Tex.). 97.
Recovery notwithstanding contributory negligence. 102 n.
Recovery under statute. Under Georgia statute giving a right to re-
cover partial damages where person injured has been guilty of
contributory negligence, plaintiff cannot recover if he has trespassed
upon track and been grossly negligent. Central R. & B. Co. v.
Smith (Ga.). I.
Defective bridge. Where the erection of a bridge causing overflows is
a continuing nuisance, in consequence of which a recovery is limited
to damages accrued, a judgment in one action is no bar to a second
action. Omaha, etc., R. Co. v. Standen (Neb.). 179.
|