have the necessary room, he should make his contract conditional with reference to the uncertainty. Otherwise he will be liable to damages for the failure to carry, although it may be impossible for him to do so for the want of room.5 59 The passenger upon a railroad car, of course, is not bound to surrender his ticket to the conductor, in obedience to a regulation of the company, until he has been furnished with a seat.60 But while the passenger may refuse to surrender his ticket until furnished with a seat, he cannot insist on riding without a seat and without giving up his ticket. He must either leave the train and keep his ticket, or surrender his ticket and accept such accommodations as the carrier can furnish. In other words, he cannot insist on riding free while standing.61 Sec. 1114. (§ 610.) Same subject-Extraordinary and unexpected demand will excuse.-It has been held, however, that railroad companies cannot refuse to carry those who apply to be carried, or those who have become entitled to be carried by becoming the holders of their tickets, for the want of room, because their trains are capable of extension by the addition. of sufficient coaches for the accommodation and carriage of as many as may apply to be carried.62 But such a rule could certainly have no application when the refusal was bona fide for the want of room at a way-station at which such additional coaches were not provided, if the company had made arrangements at starting to accommodate as many travelers as might be reasonably expected to apply. And any unexpected or extraordinary circumstance occasioning the necessity for taking on an unusual number of passengers, by which its vehicles 59. Williams v. Railroad Co., 28 Tex. Civ. App. 503, 67 S. W. Rep. 1085. 60. Davis v. Railroad Co., 53 Mo. 317; St. Louis, etc. R. Co. v. Leigh, 45 Ark. 368; Hardenbergh v. Railway Co., 39 Minn. 3; Memphis, etc. R. Co. v. Benson, 85 Tenn. 630. 61. St. Louis, etc. R. Co. v. Leigh, 45 Ark. 368; Hardenbergh v. Railway Co., 39 Minn. 3; Memphis, etc. R. Co. v. Benson, 85 Tenn., 630. 62. The Great Northern R'y Co. ads. Hawcroft, 8 Eng. L. & E. 362; Lafayette, etc. R. R. v. Sims, 27 Ind. 59. were filled before the person desiring to be carried had applied, under circumstances which made it impossible to remedy the inconvenience, would, as in the case of the refusal to accept goods for carriage by the common carrier, excuse the refusal to carry persons as passengers, by railway companies as well as other passenger carriers.63 Sec. 1115. Same subject-When passengers are carried in baggage car. Where a passenger has acquired a contract right to be conveyed in one of the carrier's passenger coaches, but he is invited to ride in a baggage car, it must appear that the carrier has availed himself of all the means at hand to procure a passenger coach for the accommodation of the passenger before he will be justified in using a baggage car for such purpose.64 Sec. 1116. (§ 611.) Carrier must allow customary intervals for refreshment and give notice of departure. The carrier is also required, where the length of the journey makes it necessary, to allow the customary intervals, and at the usual places, for refreshment of his passengers; and such usages cannot be varied at his pleasure or caprice; for every passenger is understood to contract for the usual reasonable accommodations of this kind, and they may have been the reasons for preferring his conveyance to the less convenient arrangement of another carrier.65 And when the carrier has stopped his conveyance temporarily on the route for such purpose, or for any other, he cannot start again without giving due warning to the passengers who may have taken advantage of the delay to leave the conveyance during its continuance,66 63. Gordon v. The Railroad, 52 N. H. 596; Burton v. Ferry Co., 114 U. S. 474. 64. Railroad Co. v. Swann, 81 Md. 400, 32 Atl. Rep. 175, 31 L. R. A. 313. 65. Story on Bail. § 597. See, also, Dodge v. Steamship Co., 148 Mass. 207; Peniston v. Railroad Co., 34 La. Ann. 777; Jeffersonville, etc. R. Co. v. Riley, 39 Ind. 568. 66. State V. The Railway, 58 Me. 176; Mitchell v. The Railroad, 30 Ga. 22. Pitcher v. Railway Co., N. Y. Suppl. 389. Where the conductor is asked by a passenger how long the train Sec. 1117. (§ 612.) Passenger must be put down at usual place of stopping. The passenger is entitled not only to be properly carried, but he must be carried to the end of the journey for which he has contracted to be carried, and must be put down at the usual place of stopping; and in an old case it will stop at a certain station at which they are just arriving, and the conductor says five minutes, the company will not be liable to the passenger who is left behind because the train does not wait five minutes where the passenger does not tell the conductor that he intends to get off. Missouri Pac. R'y Co. v. Foreman, 73 Tex. 311. But after stopping at a wood station for wood, the carrier is not bound to give notice to passengers before starting. Malcolm v. Railroad Co., 106 N. C. 63. 1. Dudley v. Smith, 1 Camp. 167; Ker v. Mountain, 1 Esp. 27; Railroad Co. v. Martelle, 65 Neb. 540, 91 N. W. Rep. 364; Caldwell v. Railroad Co., 89 Ga. 550, 15 S. E. Rep. 678; Hoyt v. Railway Co., 112 Mich. 638, 71 N. W. Rep. 172, 9 Am. & Eng. R. Cas. (N. S.) 818. This statement of the rule has been approved by the Supreme Court of Indiana. White Water R. Co. v. Butler, 112 Ind. 598. In this case a mixed train, carrying both passengers and freight, and scheduled to stop for both at M., stopped for passengers to alight at a switch or side-track near the station, but not at the depot. The plaintiff, who was a passenger for that station on that train, did not get off there, but waited, expecting the train to stop at the depot. The name of the station was not called at the switch, nor was any invitation given to passengers to alight there. The train passed the depot without stopping, and when it had gone about half a mile the plaintiff was ejected. "These facts," said the court, "entitled the appellee to a recovery. It was the duty of the carrier to stop at the depot where passengers were usually received and discharged. A right to be carried from one regular station to another includes the right to a safe alighting place at the depot of the carrier, kept and used for that purpose. A person buying a ticket entitling him to passage to a town or city cannot be required to alight at any part of the town or city it may please the carrier to stop, but he is entitled to be carried to the regular depot of the carrier. The carrier's duty is not discharged when an opportunity is offered the passenger to alight alongside of a switch or side-track distant from the usual and regular alighting place." The court here quote the rule of the text, saying: "The authorities fully support the author's statement of the law. Terre Haute, etc. R. R. Co. v. Buck, 96 Ind. 346. It is probably true that a railroad company may make a distinction between trains employed exclusively in transporting passengers and those employed in carrying both freight and passengers, and require passengers on has been held that, when such usual place was an inn yard, it was not sufficient to put him down outside of the gateway of the inn. If the carrier refuses without good reason to put him down at the usual stopping place, the passenger will have a right of action for all damages he sustains thereby, and especially would this be true where the refusal is malicious.3 So the passenger is entitled to have the train come to a full stop at his destination, and not merely to a slackening of speed, for, if the carrier accepts fare to a particular place, he is bound to stop there, unless the carrier's servant accepted the fare in violation of the carrier's express regulations. We have already noted that it is the duty of one about to take passage upon the carrier's conveyance to ascertain for himself whether it will carry him and put him off at the destination to which he wishes to be carried.5 Following the the latter trains to alight at a safe place other than the regular depot; but unless a distinction is made, the passenger has a right to be carried to the regular depot. We decide this case, as the evidence fully warrants us in doing, upon the theory that no distinction was made between the two kinds of trains, and, proceeding on this theory, adjudge that it was the appellant's duty to stop at the regular depot a sufficient length of time to allow the appellee to alight in safety." One who takes passage upon a freight train to a designated city is entitled to carriage thereon only to the point or place in such city or its suburbs at which the run of the train upon its usual and regular schedule is terminated, and cannot demand the right to be transported thereon to a station to which only passenger trains are carried for the discharge of passengers. Railway Co. v. Howard, 111 Ga. 842, 36 2. The carrier will not be liable for refusing to stop at a station to permit passengers to alight where its failure to do so is brought about by the drifting of snow upon the track in front of the station platform, and the train stops at a more favorable place some distance beyond. Reed v. Railway Co., 100 Mich. 507, 59 N. W. Rep. 144. 3. The carrier is liable for refusing to stop at a customary stopping place to let a passenger off where he does so to retaliate upon the passenger for not giving him his business. Brulard v. Alvin, 45 Fed. Rep. 766. 4. Railway Co. v. Bandy, 120 Ga. 463, 47 S. E. Rep. 923. 5. See ante, § 1060. Also, Pittsburgh, etc. R'y r Nuzum, 50 Ind. 141; Ohio, etc. R. R. v. Hatton (Sup. Ct. of Indiana), 6 Cent. L. Jour. 389, May same line of reasoning it has consequently been held that, if according to the regulations of a railroad company, the train upon which the passenger is being carried does not stop at the station at which he wishes to get off, the conductor has no authority to bind the company by a promise to do so for the accommodation of the passenger. Such a power cannot be implied as within the proper duties of a conductor, nor would it be consistent with public policy. A railroad company which holds itself out as a common carrier of passengers, establishes its route stations, and advertises its running arrangements, thereby pledges itself to the public to run accordingly; and if it was in the power of a conductor to stop at different stations from those established for the line, or alter the running arrangements of the road to accommodate a particular passenger, he might thereby greatly incommode the public generally for the sake of a single passenger. The duty of a conductor is to run the trains according to public arrangements, and he has no power to change them; and a passenger has no right to infer that a conductor has any such power from his general duties as a conductor, and no reason to suppose that he can bind the railroad company by any such agreement." Sec. 1118. Carrier must give sufficient time to alight.When the conveyance has reached the destination of the passenger, the carrier must exercise the highest degree of practicable care, diligence, and skill in affording the passenger suffi 17, 1878; Dietrich v. The Railroad, 71 Penn. St. 432; Cheney v. The Railroad, 11 Met. 121; Boston, etc. R. R. v. Proctor, 1 Allen, 267; Johnson v. The Railroad Corporation, 46 N. H. 213; Cleveland, etc. R. R. v. Bartram, 11 Ohio St. 457. 6. Ohio, etc. R. R. v. Hatton, supra; Ohio, etc. R'y v. Applewhite, 52 Ind. 540; Schiffler v. Railway Co., 96 Wis. 141, 71 N. W. Rep. 97, 65 Am. St. Rep. 35. (In this last case the conductor promised to slow up the train at a certain point for a passenger, and when that point was reached the train was slowed up somewhat. The passenger supposing that it was thereby intended that he should alight, jumped from the train and was injured. The court held that he had no right to rely on the promise of the conductor.) |