« PreviousContinue »
Cain, Shuford o..
302 185 474 451
Fairchilds, United States v....
74 140 169 577
93 364 246
Fox, Avery 0....
Pittsburgh, &c. R. R. Co., Haight o...
Thirty-three barrels of Spirits, United States 0......... 311 Three Horses, United States 0..
426 Three Railroad Cars, United States o.'.
196 Turner's Case....
84 Twelve thousand three hundred and forty-seven bags of Sugar, United States v.
Union Horse Shoe Works o. Lewis...
518 United States v. Barrows.
351 United States o. Fairchilds.
74 United States o. Fifty-six barrels of Whiskey.
93 United States o. Finlay ..
364 United States v. Harris
110 United States o. Learned.
483 United States c. McGinnis.
120 United States o. Nelson...
135 United States o. Olney.
275 United States o. One hundred and twenty-three casks of Distilled Spirits...
573 United States c. Rhodes
28 United States o. Sa-coo-da-cot.
377 United States v. Shepard
431 United States o. Simons..
470 United States o. Six Fermenting Tubs.
268 United States o, Stevenson .....
495 United States o. Thirty-three barrels of Spirits..
311 United States v. Three Horses.. .
426 United States o. Three Railroad Cars..
United States o. Twelve thousand three hundred and forty-seven bags of Sugar.....
407 United States v. Walsh
CIRCUIT AND DISTRICT COURTS
THE MARY WASHINGTON.
Circuit Court, Fourth Circuit ; District of Maryland,
April T., 1865.
The duty of a common carrier by water is not fulfilled by simple trans
portation from port to port. The goods must be delivered; or at least landed, and a reasonable opportunity given to the consignee to inspect them. The general rule requires the carrier to notify the consignee of the
arrival of the goods. If a carrier relies on circumstances as excusing
this duty, he must prove them. To show that the carrier was accustomed to store goods in his ware
house, on their arrival, and let them remain there until the consignee should learn from the consignor that they had come, without showing that the consignor knew of and assented to this practice, is not enough to excuse the carrier from the duty of giving notice himself to the consignee. He will continue liable as carrier, until the consignee has received, from some quarter, information of the arrival of
the goods and an opportunity to remove them. The fact that after receiving such notice the consignee refuses to take
the goods, cannot relieve the carrier from liability for injury sustained
by them before that time. The courts of the United States have not jurisdiction of actions
against warehousemen, as such, prosecuted between citizens of the same State.