Scale & Fixture Co., Barron v.. 342 States Life Ins. Co., Taylor v.. 356 Stone v. Columbia, Newberry & Laurens R. R. Co.... 433 Sweat v. Wolfe... 512 Wallace, In re. Waller, State v. 534 297 Waterloo School District v. Cross Hill School District. 292 Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Bollin..... Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Glencoe Cotton 45 Mills. Wheeler v. Corley... White v. Atlantic Coast Line R. R. Co.. 133 319 337 Wilson v. Harby.. Trexler Wiles, Aughtrey v.. Wiley, State v.. Willimon v. Furman. Wolfe, Sweat v... W. Gordon McCabe & Co. v. Colleton Mercantile & 7 15 416 437 159 512 REPORTS OF CASES ARGUED AND DETERMINED IN THE Supreme Court of South Carolina Justices of the Supreme Court During the Period Comprised in this Volume. HON. EUGENE B. GARY, CHIEF JUSTICE. 9533 BYRD v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. CO. (90 S. E. 181.) 1. CARRIERS CARRIAGE OF GOODS-DISCRIMINATION.-Under the statute prohibiting carriers from making discriminations, where a railroad issued two bills of lading for plaintiff's machinery and furniture, respectively, the goods were not shipped as one carload lot, and the road and plaintiff could not validly agree that the shipment should be considered and treated as a carload lot of either or both. 2. CARRIERS-CARRIAGE OF GOODS-REGULATION OF RATES.-Under the rule of the railroad commission that the charge for less than a carload shipment must not exceed the minimum charge for a minimum carload of the same freight at the same rating, a shipper of less than a carload of machinery was entitled to the minimum carload rate thereon. 1-S.C.-106 Statement of Facts. [ 106 S. C. 3. CARRIERS-CARRIAGE OF GOODS-PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO PAY CLAIM FOR DAMAGE-FULL RECOVERY.-In a shipper's action against a railroad for damage to the goods, where plaintiff proved damage to the amount claimed, the reduction of the amount by the road's valid counterclaim for charges did not defeat plaintiff's right to recover the penalty for the road's failure to pay his claim for damage. Before SHIPP, J., Florence, Summer, 1915. Affirmed conditionally. Action by H. W. Byrd against the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. On or about February 9, 1915, the plaintiff in this action applied to the freight agent of defendant at Coosawhatchie, South Carolina, for permission to ship over its line to Florence, South Carolina, certain machinery, weighing, subject to correction, 10,900 pounds. None of the machinery in the car was crated. Nothing appears to have been said about freight rates. Subsequently, the plaintiff asked the freight agent at Coosawhatchie if he could load a lot of household goods in the same car with the machinery, and the freight agent, after conferring with the superintendent of the railroad company, told plaintiff that he could do so. No authority, however, was obtained by the freight agent to treat the two shipments as one carload of any one class of freight. Thereupon the freight agent issued and delivered to plaintiff two bills of lading, one covering one lot of machinery, weight, subject to correction, 13,800 pounds, and the other covering one lot of household goods, weight, subject to correction, 2,900 pounds, both loaded in A. C. L. car 25688. To this stage of the transaction nothing, so far as the testimony shows, had been said by either party as to rates. The car in question reached Florence about February 12, 1915, and a freight bill was made up at the office of the freight agent at Florence, S. C., in which the amount due by plain |