256 



CARRYING HORSES. 



Special con- 

 tract must be 

 signed. 



Application 

 of section 7. 



Construction 

 of section 7- 



I'celi V. North 

 Staffordshire 

 HaUway Com- 

 pany. 



declared above the respective sums so limited as aforesaid, 

 and which shall be paid in addition to the ordinary rate of 

 charge." 



It is also provided by this section that such percentage 

 or increased rate of charge shall be publicly notified (/) ; 

 that the onus of proof of value and injury shall lie with the 

 person claiming compensation, and that " the special cmi- 

 tract shall be signed by him or the person delivering the 

 animals or goods for carriage." 



The Act only extends to the traffic on a company's own 

 lines, and section 7 does not apply to a contract exempting 

 a company from liability for loss on a railway not belonging 

 to or worked by the company {g). But where the company 

 contract to carry over their own as well as other lines, they 

 must prove that the loss did not occur on their line, in order 

 to avail themselves of a condition of non-liability (h). 



The principal points of difficulty in the construction of 

 this ill- drawn and ambiguous section are those restrictions 

 on the common law, which it appears to have been its 

 especial object to create. They are. these : First, whether 

 general notices given by such companies are valid for the 

 purpose of limiting their common law liability as carriers? 

 Secondly, what, if any, distinction is to be drawn between 

 the words " special contract " and " condition " ? And, 

 thirdly, whether this common law liability may be limited 

 by such conditions as the Court or Judge shall determine 

 to be just and reasonable ? And, moreover, if this common 

 law liability may be limited by such conditions as the 

 Court or Judge shall determine to be just and reasonable, it 

 is important to consider what conditions have come within 

 that definition. 



Notwithstanding a great divergence of opinion among 

 the learned Judges, the construction to be put upon this 

 section, with especial regard to these points of difficulty, 

 has been defined with cocsiderable exactitude by decisions, 

 which it will be necessary to give in some detail. 



In the case of Peek v. North Staffordshire Railway 

 Comioany («), the whole law on this subject was reviewed 



(/) According to the proiisions of 

 the Carriers Act, U Geo. 4 & 1 Will. 

 4, c. 68. 



{g) ZmK V. South Eastern Rail. 

 Co., L. E., 4Q. B. 539; 38 L. J., 

 U. B. 209; 20 L. T., N. S. 873. 



(h) Kent V. Midland Sail. Co., 



L. E., lOQ. B. 1; 44L. J., Q. B. 



18; 31 L. T., N. S. 430. 



(i) Feck Y. North Staffordshire 

 Sail. Co., 10 H. L. Cas. 473; 32 

 L. J., Q. B. 241 ; 8 L. T., N. S. 

 768; 11 W. E. 1023. 



