Ryder & Mitchell v. B., C. R. & N. R. Co.
Ryder & Mitchell v. B., C. R. & N. R. Co.
Opinion of the Court
It is evident that the title to the hogs did not pass to the stranger. The consignees paid the wrong man. They, and not the defendant, are liable to the plaintiffs, unless there was something in the act of defendant which justified the consignees in assuming that the stranger owned the hogs. The defendant allowed the drayman and the stranger to take the hogs from the car. But in this we see no negligence on the defendant’s part. The drayman and the stranger took the hogs from the car ostensibly for the consignees. The former appears to have been employed by the consignees as their general drayman, the consignees owning the dray. He was accustomed to "take hogs from the defendant’s cars to the
A copy of the expense bill is given in evidence. It purports to be an account for the transportation of the hogs. But the amount charged does not appear, because the charges were prepaid. What purpose could properly be served by rendering an expense bill where the charges had been prepaid, does not appear from the evidence. It was demanded by the stranger, and appears to have been given because demanded. It did not show that he had paid the charges. The inference would be that they were paid by the consignors, but the expense bill did not show who they were. It contained the names of the consignees: Au expense bill, if rendered at all, is, as we understand it, to be rendered to the consignees. The stranger, in demanding it in this ease, represented that he was the agent of the consignees. The possession of it, so far as we can see, did not tend to show that he was consignor. If anything was to be inferred from his possession, it was, we think, that he had demanded and obtained it under a pretense of representing the consignees, which was the real fact. They were not justified, then, in being misled, and we see nothing in what the defendant did, to render it liable to pay for the hogs. The instruction given allowed the jury to so find. We think the court erred.
Beversed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.