souri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. A. E. Want that they were about to be introduced into In& Co., 179 S. W. 903. dian territory.-Id.

90 (Mo.App.) A shipment of liquor by an express company "C. O. D." means that the purchase price of the liquor shall be collected by the company from the consignee upon delivery.-Danciger v. American Express Co., 179 S. W. 797.

-Id.

(F) Loss of or Injury to Goods.

133 (Ark.) In an action for injury to a shipment of goods, evidence of their market value at their place of destination held admissible.-St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. Laser Grain Co., 179 S. W. 189.

136 (Ark.) In an action for damages for a carrier's failure to supply refrigerator cars for the shipment of fruits, the question of its negligence held, under the evidence, for the jury.St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. Laser Grain Co., 179 S. W. 189.

(G) Carrier as Warehouseman.

An express company is not required by its 140 (Mo.App.) When a shipment arrives on common law duty to receive, transport, and de- time, and the carrier places the goods in wareliver packages C. O. D., as the duty of making ceases after a reasonable time for their removal, house to await delivery, its liability as carrier such delivery arises solely by private contract. although no notice is given to the consignee, and Express company compelled to receive C. O. its liability thereafter is that of a warehouseD. shipments of liquor which by subsequent man only.-Danciger v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 800. law could not be made without license tax, pen-Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 800. alties, etc., held thereby excused from delivery C. O. D.-Id.

(H) Limitation of Liability.

requiring shipper to make claims in writing within a specfied time as a condition precedent to recovering for injuries to the property transported is valid.-St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. Laser Grain Co., 179 S. W. 189.

An express company under mandatory injunc-159 (Ark.) A provision in a bill of lading tion to make C. O. D. deliveries of liquor which were subsequently declared unlawful without license tax, etc., was not bound to trust to the preliminary order or to the shipper's bond or solvency to idemnify it from loss by reason of delivery in violation of the law.-Id.

Where a carrier made no objection on the A shipper of intoxicating liquors, C. O. D. by ground that shipper had not properly presented an express company compelled to make such its claim in accordance with bill of lading, but delivery under temporary injunction from a proceeded with negotiations, it waived the right United States Circuit Court acquired no vest- to object to the manner of presentation.-Id. ed rights under the order, as the right to have 160 (Ark.) A stipulation in a bill of lading, the express company collect was a right aris-limiting the time in which suit shall be brought, ing solely through private contract.-Id. is valid.-Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Bull, 179 S. W. 172.

91 (Mo.App.) Express company refusing to deliver shipments of intoxicating liquors to 163 (Ark.) Where the carrier set up the consignees in another state because of laws of shipper's noncompliance with requirement of such state held bound to return packages to bill of lading that complaint be made in a specshipper and for failure to do so liable for conified time, the shipper has the burden of proving version. Danciger v. American Express Co., compliance.-St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. 179 S. W. 806. Laser Grain Co., 179 S. W. 189.

92 (Mo.App.) Where consignee of goods arriving at defendant's station at C. on August 21st and 22d did not live at C., the reasonable time allowed for their removal before liability as carrier ceased had not elapsed when they were seized by a federal officer on August 22d and 23d.-Danciger v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 800.

A carrier is excused from liability for failure to deliver goods which are taken from its possession by process of law, without fraud or collusion on its part, by an officer acting under apparently valid authority, and where it gives notice thereof to the consignor.-Id.

Carrier's required notice to consignor that goods had been taken from its possession under process of law held satisfied by notice given shortly after they were taken, when, under the circumstances, no notice could possibly have enabled the consignor to protect his inter

ests.-Id.

Where officer of United States Indian Service had authority to take intoxicating liquors from the possession of defendant carrier while awaiting delivery, defendant would not be liable, even though the officer had no authority to thereafter destroy them.-Id.

Where Indian officer had apparent authority to take liquor from carrier's possession as about to be introduced into the Indian territory, the carrier, as against the consignor, was not bound to construe the law, nor foresee a subsequent ruling that the officer could not act outside the territory.-Id.

Agent of carrier held not required to resist Indian officer's taking of liquors on suspicion

III. CARRIAGE OF LIVE STOCK.

205 (Mo.App.) The duty of a carrier of live stock begins when the stock is delivered into its receiving pens for shipment.-Hardesty v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 725.

213 (Tex.Civ.App.) Carrier held not liable for delay in transportation of cattle, due to burning of bridge without its fault, and instruction that burning, though unavoidable, would be no defense, was erroneous.-Ft. Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v. Morgan, 179 S. W. 901.

215 (Mo.App.) It was the duty of a carrier of live stock to keep its receiving pens in a reasonably safe condition to hold cattle offered for shipment until loading, considering the ordinary habits of cattle in such situation.Hardesty v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 725.

215 (Tex.Civ.App.) A carrier receiving cattle for transportation held liable for injuries caused by placing them in pens without shelter, too small to accommodate them properly.-Andrews v. McGill, 179 S. W. 1087.

218 (Ark.) Stipulations in in an interstate stock shipping contract as to notice of damage and time for bringing suit held not avoided because the shipper was not given an unrestricted contract, where he had the choice of shipping under such contract.-St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. v. I. W. Haynie & Co., 179 S. W. 170.

Stipulations in an interstate stock shipping contract as to notice of claim of damage and time for bringing suit held not invalid as not

218 (Ark.) Shipper of jack under stipula-247 (Ky.) One who attempts to board a tion that he should notify railroad of injury in moving train is not a passenger, though he may transit within a day after delivery was excused have purchased a ticket entitling him to passage from giving such notice where the injuries did thereon.-Kentucky Highlands R. Co. v. Creal, not become evident until more than a day had 179 S. W. 417. elapsed.-Eoff & Snapp v. Scullin, 179 S. W. 663. Stipulation between common carrier and 280 (Ark.) As to a person on a station platshipper of live stock, setting a time within form waiting for a train a railroad company is which the shipper must give notice of injury bound to exercise ordinary care to avoid into the stock as a condition to recovery, held un- flicting injury, and may assume that the person enforceable as unreasonable, where the notice will not be negligent.-Cook v. St. Louis, I. M. period expired before the injury became evident. & S. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 501. -Id.

316 (Tex.Civ.App.) The custom of a railroad company to allow persons to enter its trains to assist passengers excuses plaintiff, in jumping from the train after it started, from showing notice to the company of his intent to alight.-Ft. Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v. Allen, 179 S. W. 62.

317 (Ky.) In an action for damages for annoyance by a drunken passenger, evidence of conduct after notice to the conductor is admissible. -Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Bell, 179 S. W. 400.

318 (Tex.Civ.App.) In passenger's action for injuries in derailment, evidence held to sustain a finding that defendant was negligent in failing to maintain a safe rail.-International & G. N. Ry. Co. v. Berthea, 179 S. W. 1087.

319 (Ky.) Where a passenger is disturbed by the drunkenness of another passenger, she is entitled to such damages as would fairly compensate her for the humiliation, mortification, annoyance, and mental anguish.-Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Bell, 179 S. W. 400.

An award of $500, in favor of colored women who were passengers on defendant's train, who were annoyed by a drunken, profane and obscene negress, held not excessive.-Id.

320 (Tex.Civ.App.) In action for injuries in derailment, evidence held not to show, as a matter of law, that the breakage in the first rail struck by the train was the proximate cause of the derailment.-International & G. N. Ry. Co. v. Berthea, 179 S. W. 1087.

a train, that fact will not justify plaintiff's negligent presence in a place of danger, although, had he not been there, he would have missed his train.-Id.

336 (Tex.Civ.App.) Statement by brakeman to person alighting from moving train to "jump with the train" held not to be an invitation or command so to do.-Ft. Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v. Allen, 179 S. W. 62.

Where a person was alighting from a moving train, the act of the brakeman in making room for him on the step held not an invitation to

alight.-Id.

347 (Ark.) Whether a space between moving trains was so dangerous as to charge plaintiff, injured therein, with contributory negligence, I. M. & S. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 501. held a question for the jury.-Cook v. St. Louis,

Whether plaintiff, standing in a space of 32 feet between moving trains for the purpose of boarding one train, was negligent in failing to stand in the exact center of the space, held a question for the jury.-Id.

347 (Ky.) In an action against a railroad for death of a passenger, evidence as to defendant's negligence after its servants had discovered decedent's position of peril held insufficient to take the case to the jury.-Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Stokes' Adm'x, 179 S. W. 47.

347 (Tex. Civ.App.) Stepping from the platform of a railroad train in the daytime, where the distance to the ground was about three feet without a footstool, held not contributory negligence as a matter of law.-Aransas Harbor Terminal Ry. v. Sims, 179 S. W. 895.

321 (Mo.App.) In action by passenger for injuries while alighting at regular stopping place, received through starting of street car, an instruction omitting element of conductor's (F) Ejection of Passengers and Intruders. knowledge of plaintiff's alighting or ascertain-352 (Ky.) A railroad responsible for the apment thereof by reasonable care held good. pointment of a special police officer could not Paul v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. regard him as a de facto officer after his office was vacated by failure to take the oath, etc., since it was bound to know that he was an officer de jure before he was given employment on its trains.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Cundiff, 179 S. W. 615.

787.

321 (Mo.App.) In a passenger's action for injury, held, that an instruction was not objectionable because not requiring a finding that defendant's conductor knew that plaintiff was alighting, when such fact was conceded by the evidence.-Clark v. Dunham, 179 S. W. 795.

In an action for injury while alighting from street car, where the facts hypothesized in an instruction constituted negligence in law, it was not necessary for recovery to require a finding that conductor's act in suddenly starting car, with knowledge of plaintiff's position, was negligence.-Id.

In view of Ky. St. § 3755, railroad held responsible for acts of special railway police officer whose office had been vacated for failure to take oath, etc.-Id.

374 (Ky.) Railroad employé summoned by special railway police officer without authority thereto to aid in ejecting and arresting a passenger held liable as a trespasser.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Cundiff, 179 S. W. 615.

322 (Tex.Civ.App.) In a passenger's action for injuries by derailment, a finding that a de-381 (Ky.) In an action against a carrier fect, in that one of two broken rails which and its special police officer for wrongful ejecfirst gave way, could not have been discovered tion, where the evidence justified compensaby the highest care, held not to require a judg- tory damages only, evidence as to the officer's ment for defendant.-International & G. N. Ry. motive in making the arrest was inadmissible. Co. v. Berthea, 179 S. W. 1087. -Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Cundiff, 179 S. W. 615.

Finding in passenger's action for injuries by derailment that a hidden defect in the first rail giving way was not discoverable by the highest care held not in conflict with another finding that defendant had not used a high degree of care to have the rails in a reasonably safe

condition. Id.

(E) Contributory Negligence of Injured.

Person

382 (Ky.) Where defendant carrier's special police officer and another employé used no unnecessary force or any insulting language, etc., in ejecting and arresting a passenger, punitive damages were not recoverable.-Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Cundiff, 179 S. W. 615.

Verdict of $4,000 for passenger's wrongful ejection and arrest without excessive force or

brutal treatment held excessive.—Id.

327 (Ark.) A person on a station platform waiting for a train is bound to exercise ordinary care to avoid receiving injury, and may assume that the railroad company will not be negligent.-Cook v. St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. See Animals. Co., 179 S. W. 501.

A person injured while standing on a station platform in a narrow space between tracks can

not set up the invited use of the space, where See Action.
it would be apparent to a reasonably prudent
man exercising due care that it was danger-
ous.-Id.

Although it was necessary in order to board

CATTLE.

CAUSE OF ACTION.

CERTIFICATE.

See Appeal and Error, 641; Corporations, 95; Elections, 156; Levees, 34.

For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

172 (Mo.App.) In replevin for furniture See Monopolies.

claimed under a chattel mortgage executed to secure the purchase price, held, that whether

COMITY.

plaintiff had accepted a subsequent note and See Courts, 511.
mortgage in payment and release of the orig-
inal mortgage was for the jury.-Western Auc-
tion & Storage Co. v. Shore, 179 S. W. 769.

VIII. PAYMENT OR PERFORMANCE
OF CONDITION, RELEASE, AND

SATISFACTION.

COMMERCE.

I. POWER TO REGULATE IN GEN-
ERAL.

8 (Ark.) Under the state statutes allowing recovery for mental anguish in actions for 241 (Mo.App.) The taking of a new note negligent failure to receive, transmit, or deas absolute payment of one secured by a chat-liver a telegraphic message, no recovery can tel mortgage extinguishes the lien thereof, be had where the message is interstate in charwhich is a mere incident to the note.-Western acter, and therefore subject to federal Interstate Auction & Storage Co. v. Shore, 179 S. W. Commerce Law.-Western Union Telegraph Co. 769. v. Stewart, 179 S. W. 813.

CHAUFFEURS.

See Master and Servant, 301, 302.

CHILDREN.

See Adoption; Bastards; Guardian and Ward;
Infants; Negligence, 96; Parent and
Child.

CHOSE IN ACTION.

See Assignments.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

See Homicide, 234.

CITIES.

See Municipal Corporations.

CITIZENS.

8 (Ky.) No state regulation of the shipment of intoxicating liquors is valid unless the shipments to which it applies are intended for use in violation of the state law, and thus specifically within the Webb-Kenyon Act.-Commonwealth v. White, 179 S. W. 469.

Ky. St. 1915, § 2569b, subsec. 3, cannot make it unlawful to refuse to give information regarding interstate shipments of liquor intended for a lawful use, since the Mann-Elkins_Act prohibits the giving of such information.-Id.

8 (Tenn.) The federal Employers' Liability Act in the cases to which it applies is necessarily supreme.-Howard v. Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 380.

II. SUBJECTS OF REGULATION.

27 (Mo. App.) Where a railroad company accepts a car billed from a point without the state and transports it to a point on its line for delivery to the consignee, the shipment constitutes interstate commerce, although the car was billed only to the point of connection with

See Constitutional Law, 206, 207; Rail- defendant's line.-Trowbridge v. Kansas City & roads, 9.

2 (Ark.) The word "citizen" will not be construed to include a corporation, unless meaning of statute seems to require it.-St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. State, 179 S. W. 342.

CIVIL RIGHTS.

See Constitutional Law, 83-88.

CLAIMS.

W. B. Ry. Co., 179 S. W. 777.

Return of an empty car billed from a point outside the state, after unloading at a point on defendant's line, held to be interstate commerce within the federal Employers' Liability Act.-Id.

40 (Ky.) Sale of machinery by foreign corporation through traveling salesmen held interstate transaction, despite measurements of proposed location taken by agent.-Louisville Trust Co. v. Bayer Steam Soot Blower Co., 179 S. W. 1034.

See Corporations, 565; Executors and Ad-40 (Mo.App.) Missouri corporation, selling ministrators, 206-227; Receivers,

CLASS LEGISLATION.

155. goods to one denominated its sales agent in South Carolina, title vesting in the agent, the business conducted by him being his own, was engaged in interstate commerce, and need not

corporations.-Watkins v. Donnell, 179 S. W.

III. MEANS AND METHODS OF REG.

80 (Ky.) Ky. St. § 571, requiring foreign See Courts, 247. corporation to maintain agent for process, held inoperative as to interstate commerce transactions.-Louisville Trust Co. v. Bayer Steam Soot Blower Co., 179 S. W. 1034.

COMPROMISE AND SETTLEMENT. See Appeal and Error, 781; Attorney and Client, 150; Payment.

6 (Tex.Civ.App.) Agreement by claimant of property levied on under execution to pay the judgments by delivery of the property levied on, at an agreed price, held not without consideration.-Grisham v. Ward, 179 S. W. 893. CONCLUSION.