ABUTTERS.

See Injuries to Property.

ACCIDENTS ON TRACK.
See Carriers of Passengers.
Frightening Teams.
Contributory Negligence.
Contributory negligence of
persons on street injured
through negligence in man-
agement of street car does
not preclude a recovery un-
less it enters directly into
and forms a part of the effi-
cient cause of the accident.
Oates v. Metropolitan St.

Ry. Co. (Mo.), 916.
Doctrine that remote negligent
act of injured party will not
bar recovery was not appli-
cable where act of plaintiff
in driving in front of electric
car and that of conductor or
motorman was so substan-
tially concurrent that it was
impossible to separate con-
duct of injured party from
injury itself.
Rider υ.

Syracuse Rapid
Transit Ry. Co. (N. Y.),
635.

Of mail carrier in stopping his
push cart too near the train.
Mabbott v. Illinois Cent. R.
Co. (Iowa), 114.

Of man killed on track in
railroad yard.

King v. Illinois Cent. R. Co.
(C. C. A.), 875.
Sufficiency of evidence of such
wanton and gross negli-
gence as will render una-
vailable a plea of contribu-
tory negligence, in action
for killing person on track
in railroad yard.

King v. Illinois Cent. R. Co.
(C. C. A.), 875.

Sufficiency of evidence where
person was injured by train
seen by him before attempt-
ing to cross tracks.

Alexander v. Louisville & N.
R. Co. (Ga.), 572.
Liability for injury to mail car-
rier, sufficiency of evidence.
Mabbott v. Illinois Cent. R.
Co. (Iowa), 114.

APPEAL Continued.

action for damages to live
stock in transit.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Mc-

Carty (Tex.), 654.

Weight of evidence.

ATTORNEYS.

See Death by Wrongful Act.

BAILEES.

See Carriers of Freight.

APPLIANCES.

See Master and Servant.

ARREST.

Effect of act of police officer in
changing the charge, in action
for false imprisonment of per-
son for using car as refuge
from weather.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Cope
(Tex.), 906.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Parker
(Tex.), 906.

Effect of plaintiff being found
guilty of another charge, in
action for false imprisonment.
Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Cope
(Tex.), 906.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Parker
(Tex.), 906.

Effect of plaintiff's unlawful act
in action for false imprison-
ment of person using car as
refuge from weather.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Cope
(Tex.), 906.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Parker
(Tex.), 906.

False imprisonment of person
using car as refuge from
weather.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Cope
(Tex.), 906.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Parker
(Tex.), 906.

False imprisonment of person
using car as refuge from
weather, scope of employment.
Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Cope
(Tex.), 906.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Parker
(Tex.), 906.

ASSIGNMENTS.
See Bonds.

ASSUMPTION OF RISK.

See Master and Servant.

See Master and Servant.

BARRIERS.

See Master and Servant.

BILLS OF LADING.
See Carriers of Goods.

Carriers of Live Stock.
Common Carriers.
Connecting Carriers.

Pledge, effect of subsequent
delivery of bill where property
had been seized at suit of
pledgee's creditor.

Cameron v. Orleans & J. Ry.

Co., Limited (La.), 829.
Rights of transferee under Wash-
ington statute declaring bills
of lading to be negotiable in-
struments.

First Nat. Bank of Pullman
v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co.
(Wash.), 4.

Under commercial usage carrier
should deliver articles only
on productions of bill of lad-
ing though it names the con-
signee.

First Nat. Bank of Pullman v.
Northern Pac. Ry. Co.
(Wash.), 4.

BONDHOLDERS.

Amendment of South Carolina
statute withdrawing right of
bondholders to reorganize in
case of foreclosure of rail-
road mortgage, except on con-
dition of submission to certain
rates for transportation, not
an impairment of property
rights.

Com'rs of Railroads v. Grand
Rapids & I. Ry. Co. (Mich.),
665.

BONDS.

Equitable assignments, suffi-
ciency of evidence.

Cushing v. Chapman (Mo.),
852.

Equitable liens, sufficiency of
evidence.

Cushing v. Chapman (Mo.),
852.

BONDS-Continued.

Judgment creditor of railroad
company had no enforceable
equitable interest in bonds
issued to other parties, under
contract with railroad for ac-
quisition of bonds to be subse-
quently issued.

Cushing v. Chapman (Mo.),
852.

Power of legislature to compel
creditor corporation to accept
payment of bonds before ma-
turity.

Little River Tp. v. Board of
Com'rs (Kan.), 437.

BOUNDARIES.

See Right of Way.

BRAKEMEN.

See Master and Servant.

BRIDGES.

See Crossings.

Master and Servant.
Water and Water Courses.

BURDEN OF PROOF.

See Carriers of Freight.
Contributory Negligence.

CARRIERS.

See Damages.

CARRIERS OF GOODS.
See Bills of Lading.
Carriers of Freight.
Common Carriers.
Connecting Carriers.
Constitutional Law.
Interstate Commerce.
Mandamus.

Admissibility of evidence that
expressman receipting for
goods at depot looked at box
containing them and made no
complaint, in action for dam-
age by water.

Mears v. New York, etc., R.

Co. (Conn.), 668.
Application of statute fixing

rates where reorganization by
purchaser at foreclosure sale.
Com'rs of Railroads v. Grand

Rapids & I. Ry. Co. (Mich.),
665.
Breach of contract requiring
notice to be given consignee of
receipt of wheat at destina-
tion must be pleaded.
Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v.
Darby (Tex.), 1.

CARRIERS OF GOODS-Con-
tinued.

Consignee not estopped from
showing that goods were wet
by fact that his agent looked
at them and signed clear re-
ceipt without making com-
plaint.

Mears v. New York, etc., R.
Co. (Conn.), 668.
Constitutionality of statute pro-
viding penalty for failure to
pay damages on freight.
Porter v. Charleston & S. Ry.
Co. (S. Car.), 657.

Contract requiring notice to be
given consignee of receipt of
goods at destination and its
breach must be pleaded.

Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v.
Darby (Tex.), 1.

Conversion of goods, sufficiency
of evidence.

Collins v. Illinois Cent. R. Co.
(Mo.), 37.

Conversion of wheat recovered
and retained by carrier, during
delay in carriage and delivery.
Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v.
Darby (Tex.), 1.

Damages.

Excessive verdict for delay in
shipment of corpse.

Louisville & N. R. Co. v.
Hull (Ky.), 56.

Interest cannot be recovered
in actions ex delicto.

Southern Ry. Co. v. Horner
(Ga.), 47.

Legal interest on capital in-
vested the proper measure
of damages for negligence
in failing to deliver ma-
chinery, and not special
profits not claimed in com-
plaint.

Sharpe v. Southern Ry. Co.

(N. Car.), 652.

Mental suffering from delay
in shipment of corpse.
Louisville & N. R. Co. v.
Hull (Ky.), 56.

Special damages recoverable
under allegation as to differ-
erence between value of
goods as delivered and as
they should have been de-
livered.

Texas & N. O. R. Co. v.
Bigham (Tex.), 34.
Discrimination justifying the
issuance of mandamus to com-
pel common carrier to move
and transport interstate traffic,

tinued.

or to furnish cars or other
facilities for transportation.
United States v. Norfolk & W.
Ry. Co. (W. Va.), 19.

Duty of carrier to prorate supply
of cars on hand.

United States v. Norfolk & W.
Ry. Co. (W. Va.), 19.
Duty to protect employees of
consignee unloading car.

Ryan v. New York, N. H. &

H. R. Co. (N. Y.), 699.
Following consignee's directions
as a defense where goods were
injured by cold.

Gillett v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry.

Co. of Texas (Tex.), 45.
Jurisdiction to order destruction
of road and sale of materials
by receiver where operation of
road would be an actual loss.
Jack v. Williams (S. Car.), 10.
Liability for conversion of
wheat destroyed by unusual
storm during delay in car-
riage and delivery.

Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v.
Darby (Tex.), 1.

Liability for injury to adjacent

property from explosion of
contents of car during delay
in delivery.

Ft. Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v.
Beauchamp (Tex.), 52.
Liability of carrier as

ware-

houseman where it has refused
to deliver goods.

Frederick v. Louisville & N. R.
Co. (Ala.), 43.
Limiting Liability.

Authority of agent to ship
goods carries with it author-
ity to accept bill of lading
and enter into contract lim-
iting carrier's liability.
Adams Exp. Co. v. Carna-

han (Ind.), 677.
Burden of proving that delay

was caused by carrier's neg-
ligence where carrier had
contracted against liability
for delay not caused by neg-
ligence.

Anderson v. Atchison, T. &
S. F. Ry. Co. (Mo.), 42.
Burden on carrier where goods
are injured by water to show
that injury was not due to
its negligence.

Mears v. New York, etc., R.
Co. (Conn.), 668.

tinued.

Contracts limiting liability
not measured by different
rules than where carriers
are not parties.

66

Adams Exp. Co. v. Carna-
han (Ind.), 677.
Evidence that persons ship-
ping goods was offered two
modes of shipment, one
called "owner's risk," at a
certain rate, and the other
shipper's risk," and chose
the former, was admissible.
Mears v. New York, etc., R.
Co. (Conn.), 668.
Presumption that court prop-
erly submitted to jury the
question of existence of
agreement as to value of
horse.

Southern Ry. Co. v. Horner
(Ga.), 47.

Presumption that freight rate
is based on valuation.

Adams Exp. Co. v. Carna-
han (Ind.), 677.

Negligence in failing to deliver
car load of explosives, question
for jury in action for injury to
property from their explosion.
Ft. Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v.
Beauchamp (Tex.), 52.
Negligence not inferred from
mere fact that goods are wet
while in carrier's possession.
Mears v. New York, etc., R.
Co. (Conn.), 668.
Presumption as to condition of
goods from recital in shipping
receipt.

Mears v. New York, etc., R.
Co. (Conn.), 668.

Question asked local carrier as
to state of weather on day he
carted goods to plaintiff's
house inadmissible in action
for damages by rain.

Mears v. New York, etc., R.
Co. (Conn.), 668.

Railroad cannot be compelled to
maintain and operate road at
actual loss.

Jack v. Williams (S. Car.), 10.
Records of weather bureau as
evidence in action for dam-
age to freight by rain.
Mears v. New York, etc., R.
Co. (Conn.), 668.

tinued.

Rev. St. U. S., secs. 3100, 3102,
and 1 Supp. Rev. St. U. S.
1891, pp. 294, 540, does not en-
title carrier to subrogation to
lien of government on account
of duties paid by him.
State v. Bland (Mo.), 38.
Shipper was not entitled to de-
duction from freight rates
fixed by railroad commissioner
where his cotton was not com-
pressed in transit.

Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co.
v. Orthwein-Fitzhugh Cot-
ton Co. (Tex.), 679.
Shipping receipt as contract.
Mears v. New York, etć., R.

Co. (Conn.), 668.

South Carolina statute provid-
ing penalty for failure to pay
damages on freight within
sixty days pot unconstitu-
tional as in violation of inter-
state commerce clause of
constitution.

Porter v. Charleston & S. Ry.
Co. (S. Car.), 657.

Sufficiency of evidence of defect
in car door, in action for injury
to employee of consignee un-
loading car.

Ryan v. New York, N. H. &
H. R. Co. (N. Y.), 699.
Sufficiency of evidence to raise
presumption of negligence
where delay in shipment of
freight.

Anderson v. Atchison, T. &

S. F. Ry. Co. (Mo.). 42.
Under count seeking recovery
against railroad company as
voluntary bailee of goods de-
stroyed before delivery to con-
signeee, burden of proof was
on plaintiff to show negligence
alleged.

Frederick v. Louisville & N.
R. Co. (Ala.), 43.

Unjust discrimination in dis-
tributing cars
among coal
shippers.

United States v. Norfolk &
W. Ry. Co. (W. Va.), 19.
Whether joinder of action ex
delicto with statutory action
constitutes joinder of action
ex contractu with action ex
delicto.

Southern Ry. Co. v. Horner
(Ga.), 47.

See Carriers of Freight.

Carriers of Goods.
Common Carriers.
Shipping Receipts.

Admission of evidence to show
nature of insecurity of pens
under general allegation as to
insecurity.

Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. v.
Trammell (Tex.), 685.
Company contracting to ship
cattle over its own and con-
necting line and sued for
injury occurring on connect-
ing line could not complain
of judgment over in its favor
against connecting company.
Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Mc-
Carty (Tex.), 654.

Damages.

Measure of damages recover-
able against connecting car-
riers for improper treatment
of cattle.

Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v.
Houghton (Tex.), 697.
Degree of care, instruction.
Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Trib-
ble (Tex.), 32.

Evidence as to cost of horse
inadmissible in action for
its loss.

Galliers v. Chicago, B. & Q.
R. Co. (Iowa), 28.

Liability

where cattle were
placed in insecure pen at
midnight as affected by
plaintiff's refusal to receive
them and pay freight
charges.

Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. v.
Trammell (Tex.), 685.

Limiting Liability.

Reduced rates as consideration.
Mears v. New York, etc., R.
Co. (Conn.), 668.

Limiting liability, presump-
tion that question was prop-
erly submitted to the jury.
Southern Ry. Co. v. Horner
(Ga.), 47.

Railway company contracting
to ship cattle from its own
and connecting line to cer-
tain point was liable for
injury occurring on connect-
ing line.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Mc-
Carty (Tex.), 654.
Raising new issue by amend-
ment, in action for loss of