CARUYING HOUSES. 279 



The plaintiff having sued the defendants for the loss, it 

 was held by the majority of the Court of Exchequer: 

 first, that the meaning of this ticket, the whole of which 

 must be read together, was, that if the value of a dog was 

 above 5/., and its value was not declared, and the extra 

 price paid accordingl}^, the defendants would not be liable 

 at all, even for loss or injury caused by their own negligence, 

 and that the Condition was therefore within 17 & 18 Vict, 

 c. 31, s. 7 ; secondly, that this Condition was not just and 

 reasonable, inasmuch as the extra charge of Two and a 

 half 2^er cent, (without proof to the contrary, which it lay 

 on the defendants to give) appeared excessive and un- 

 reasonable ; and, thirdly, that the Condition being void, 

 the plaintiff, although there was no negligence on the 

 part of the defendants, was entitled to recover the full 

 value of the dog against them as Common Carriers. 



The judgment in this case was reversed in the Ex- 

 chequer Chamber {e), and, as reversed, was the subject of 

 some discussion in As/iendon v. T/ie London, BrigJdon and 

 Soiif/i Coast Railicaij {/), where it was held that a Condition 

 that a Railway Company will not be liable " in any case " 

 for loss or damage to a Horse or dog above certain 

 specified values delivered to them for carriage, unless the 

 value is declared, is not reasonable, as it is in its terms 

 unconditional, and would, if valid, protect the Company 

 even in case of the negligence or wilful misconduct of their 

 servants ; and the Court further gave its opinion that the 

 judgment of the Exchequer Chamber was in effect over- 

 ruled by Peek v. Nortli Staffordshire Raibmij Compani/ (rj). 



But where the Condition as to an increased rate for Where value 

 increased value is not objectionable on the ground of "^'^*^„^^^ *^' 

 excess or otherwise, a wilfully false statement as to the 

 value of a Horse to be conveyed made by the plaintiff in 

 order that it might be conveyed at the lower rate will 

 disentitle him from recovering in damages, if it is injured, 

 upon any other value than that which was falsely declared 

 to be its real value (//). 



In the case of Gregory v. West Midland Railicay Com- Condition as 

 pany (i), a cow and a heifer had been placed by the defen- *° ^T^^vit 

 dants' servants without halters in a sheep or calf truck 



{(■) 31 L. J., Q. B. 113. (It) M'Cancc v. T.oiirlon and XortJi 



(/) L. R., 5 Ex. D. 190 ; 42 L. Western Railway Co., 31 L. J., 

 T., N. S. 586. Ex. 39. 



{;/) Ante, p. 271. (i) Grcgori/ v. IFcst 3Iidland Rail- 



tvaij Co., 33 L. J., Ex. 155. 



