LOST DOG CASE.
JUDGMENT AGAINST THE FURNESS RAILWAY COMPANY.
At the Ulverston County Court on Saturday, HIS HONOUR, JUDGE STEAVENSON gave judgment in the case of GILBERT R. HARTLEY, of Dalton-in-Furness v. the Furness Railway Company, which was heard at the June Court.
The defendant, he said, contracted to carry a dog in a hamper, with a chain and collar on its neck (but the collar was not drawn tight), to MR. MILLER, of Rutherglen. The dog arrived at Rutherglen station in a hamper.
A porter in the Railway Company's employ, took the dog out of the hamper, and proceeded to lead it by the chain, because, as he said, it was easier than carrying it in the hamper. He did not tighten the collar as he should have done in taking it. The dog accordingly slipped its collar and chain, and broke loose, and was not seen afterwards.
The defendants did not carry out their contract, which was to deliver the dog in the hamper.
The value of the dog was not declared, and the 1-1/2 per cent. extra was not paid. He found that the dog was lost through the neglect and default of the Company's servants.
The Company had contended that they were not responsible beyond the sum of £2; but according to the cases quoted, he was of opinion that the conditions were not reasonable, the 1-1/2 per cent. extra being charged whatever the distance.
By the contract the defendants exempted themselves from all liability for loss, injury, and damage, except it could be proved that the same arose from wilful misconduct of the Company's servants; and he held that the evidence that the dog had been removed from the hamper, instead of the dog and hamper being delivered together, amounted to wilful misconduct.
He therefore gave judgment for the plaintiff for £8 0s 6d, being the value of the dog, the chain and collar, and hamper.
MR. R. B. H. JACKSON (for the defendant Co.) asked for a stay of execution pending a possible appeal.
MR. JOHN POOL (for the plaintiff): I don't object.
HIS HONOUR granted a stay of execution till the end of November.