Feldman v. Merchants & Miners Transportation Co.

Urner, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The declaration in this case alleges that the American Woolen Company delivered at Boston, to the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company, two bales of woolens, numbered 44833 and 44984, consigned to the plaintiff in the City of Baltimore and to be conveyed to their destination by the Merchants and Miners Transportation Company, and that it became the duty of the latter company to transport and deliver the'two bales of woolens to the plaintiff at Baltimore, but that it failed to make such delivery. It appears from the evidence that the plaintiff’s claim is only for the non-delivery of one of the two bales included in the shipment, the other having been duly received. The bill of lading produced at the trial shows that two packages, numbered 44833 and 44984, were delivered by the American Woolen Company to the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company, and were by it transferred to the Merchants and Miners Transportation Company, under consignment to the plaintiff at the City of Baltimore Subsequently the plaintiff was presented with a freight bill of the Merchants and Miners Transportation Company, for the conveyance,' from Boston to Baltimore, of two bales of Woolens, numbered 44833 and 44984, consigned to the plaintiff by the American Woolen Company.

The freight bill, including an item for ²¹¹ drayage, was brought to the plaintiff by a drayman of the Central Transfer Company, who received payment from the plaintiff, and at the same time admittedly delivered one of the two bales which the bill specified. According to the plaintiff’s proof the other bale, numbered 44833, has never been delivered. After due demand this suit was. instituted to recover its value. At the close of the plaintiff’s case the defendant requested and obtained a directed verdict, in its favor.

The testimony on behalf of the plaintiff was legally sufficient toi prove that lie had received only one of the two bales of woolens ordered by him from the American Woolen Company, and shipped over the defendant’s line, and it may be inferred from the evidence that the Central Transfer Company was acting as the defendant’s agent in reference to the delivery of the goods at the plaintiff’s place of business. But the verdict for the defendant appears to have been directed on the ground that there was no legally sufficient proof as to the contents of the hale which is the subject, of the suit. An invoice of the American Woolen Company, showing* the quantity, style, color and price of the goods contained in package numbered 44833, consigned to the plaintiff, was offered in evidence. Objection was made to the invoice as proof of the