HAB'l V. PENNSYLVANIA B. CO.
company would take of the animal would be very much greater had. they had notice of its value, and they would probably demand and receive a larger price for its transpor;' tation. I do not see, therefore, myself that there is anything unreasonable, and so contrary to natural justice and equity, in a stipulation of this kind, as to make it absolutely void, when it is signed by the shipper as well as by the company. I therefore hold that the recovery must be limited by the amounts fixed in the contract." MCCRARY, C. J., subsequently charged the jury as follows: .. Gentlemen of the Jury: The amount of the recovery of the plaintiff here must be determined by the construction the contract under which the horses were shipped. It is for the court to construe the writing. It provides that Lawrence Hart, the plaintiff, delivered, to be transported in safe and suitable cars of the Pennsylvania. Railroad Company, from Jersey City to St. Louis, Missouri, live stock of the kind mentioned, upon terms which are admitted and accepted by the plaintiff as just and reasonable. The defendant, the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, as common carriers,. assumes a liability on the stock to the extent of the following agreed valuation: 'If horses or mules, not to exceed $200 each;'if for a chartered car, $1,200 for the car load.' The contract then proceeds to give the values of certain other live stock, which it is not necessary ·to read. "The court has considered, as well as we could in the brief time we have had, as to what the true construction of that contract is, and as to whether it is a valid or a void contract. It is not necessary that I should go into any discussion of the question in the charge 1 give to you. We have reached a conclusion, as you have already learned, that it is competent for a shipper, by entering into a written contract, to stipulate the value of his property, and to limit the amount of his recovery in case it is lost. This is the plain agreement that the recovery shall not exceed the sum of $200 each for the horses, or $1,200 for a car load. It is admitted here by counsel for the defendants under this charge that
the plaintiff is entitled to recover a verdict for $1,100, and, o.1so, under the charge of the court the plaintiff agrees that. is' alL It is simply your duty to find a verdict for that a:rnount. "
NOTE. See Museif' v. Am. HiD. ao. 1 FED. REp. 382; Hall v. Penn. R. Co. Id. 226: Wertheimer v. Penn. Hi Co. Id. 233; Unnevehr v. Hindoo, Id. 627; Ormsby v. U. P. R. 00. 4 FED. REP. 700; MaJJ v. P()'I()hatan, 5 FED. REp. 375.
ORE KNOB COPPER CO. and others.
(Oircuit COU'l'tW. D. NQ'l'th Oarolina.
ESTATE IN FEE-DEED WITHOUT CONSIDERATION-NORTH CAROUNA.
This civil action was originally commenced in the state superior court for Ashe county, to recover the possession of the· minerals and metals in a certain tract of land described in the complaint. The pleadings and proceedings are in conformity to the state .code of Civil Procedure. Under this