NOTICE ; ACTION ; PARTIES ; PLEADING. 637 



not, in the absence of proof of fraud, prevent the recovery of 

 double damages.*"" Although the complaint alleges the 

 value of the animal to be at the jurisdictional amount, the 

 cause should be at once dismissed where the jury find the 

 value to be less than that amount.***^ 



In an action against two companies, their relation to one 

 another need not be averred.*"^ 



The fact that the plaintifif negligently permitted his stock 

 to stray, whereby the train or engine was damaged, cannot 

 be set up by way of counter-claim.**** 



136. Evidence. — It is not proposed here to discuss at length 

 the law of Evidence as it has been applied in the numberless 

 actions that have been brought against railroad companies 

 to recover damages for injuries to animals. There are some 

 principles of importance, however, that, being peculiar to 

 cases of this kind, require some statement and comment in 

 this place.*"* 



It has been held in nearly all the cases that it is incumbent 

 on the plaintiff, in a common-law action against the company 

 for negligence, to prove such negligence : the mere fact of the 

 injury to the animal is not prima facie evidence of negli- 

 gence.*"® In many of the cases cited in the note the decision 



"° Valleau v. Chic, M. & St. P. R. Co., 73 la. 723- 



"' Louisville, N. A. & C. R. Co. v. Johnson, 67 Ind. 546. 



'" Indianap., C. & L. R. Co. v. Warner, 35 Ind. 5iS- 



"' Terra Haute & I. R. Co. v. Pierce, 95 Ind. 496; Lake Shore & M. S. 

 R. Co. V. Van Auken, i Ind. App. 492; Simkins v. Columbia & G. R. Co., 

 20 S. C. 258. 



And see Louisv. & N. R. Co. v. Simmons, 85 Ky. 151; Centr. Branch 

 Un. Pac. R. Co. v. Walters, 24 Kan. 504; Jenkins v. New Orleans, O. 

 & G. W. R. Co., 15 La. Ann. 118. 



See, in general, on the subject of Pleading, i Rap. & Mack Dig. Ry. 

 Law 246-278. 



*" For a large collection of cases on the law of evidence as applied to 

 suits of this kind against railway corporations, the reader is referred to 

 I Rap. & Mack Dig. Ry. Law 278-319- r- t, <, v,, 



"" See Denver & R. G. R. Co. v. Henderson, 10 Colo, i; Ga. R. & Bkg. 



