1. Where the tariff schedules of an express company governing
interstate shipments offer a lower rate for goods below a specified
value and a higher rate for goods more valuable, a stipulation in
an express receipt fixing the lower value in consideration of the
lower rate binds the shipper, although both his agent and the
carriers, in making the shipment, were unaware of the fact that the
value was higher, and the latter knew the former to be thus
ignorant. P.
269 U. S.
41.
2. The sender is bound to know the relation established by the
carrier's schedules between values and rates, and in an action to
recover the value of the goods, it is error to exclude the
schedules from evidence. P.
269 U. S. 42.
157 Ga. 731 reversed.
Page 269 U. S. 41
Certiorari to a judgment of the Supreme Court of Georgia
affirming a recovery of damages for goods not delivered, in an
action against an express company.
MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is a suit against the petitioning express company for the
value of a parcel that was received by the Company for carriage,
but was not delivered. The company admitted liability for fifty
dollars, but alleged that it could not be held for more because the
receipt that it gave fixed that sum as the value of the goods, and
a higher value would have required the payment of a higher rate.
Under the ruling of the court, a verdict was found against the
petitioner for a hundred dollars, interest and costs, subject to
questions of law reserved, and judgment on the verdict was affirmed
by the supreme court of the state, without opinion, by an evenly
divided court.
The goods were delivered by an agent, and, after conversation
between him and the agent of the express company, the latter put
fifty dollars into the receipt as the value, neither party having
any clear knowledge, and the receipt later was handed to and bound
the sender of the goods.
Great Northern Ry. Co. v.
O'Connor, 232 U. S. 508,
232 U. S. 514.
The rate for carriage of property valued at more than fifty dollars
was higher than that charged. The schedules filed with the
Interstate Commerce Commission were offered to show the rates, but
were excluded, and the judgment was affirmed, seemingly on the
ground that the sending agent was not shown to have known that a
lower valuation secured a lower rate, and that the carrier
Page 269 U. S. 42
knew that the agent was ignorant of the true value of the goods.
No argument is made for the respondent, and it is plain that the
judgment cannot be sustained. The carrier's knowledge of the
agent's ignorance of the value was immaterial. It acted in good
faith. The carrier's schedules should have been admitted, and bound
both parties.
Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Carl,
227 U. S. 639,
227 U. S.
652-653;
Southern Express Co. v. Byers,
240 U. S. 612,
240 U. S. 614;
American Railway Express Co. v. Lindenburg, 260 U.
S. 584. The sender is bound to know the relation
established by them between values and rates.
Galveston,
Harrisburg & San Antonio Ry. Co. v. Woodbury, 254 U.
S. 357,
254 U. S. 360;
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Esteve Brothers & Co.,
256 U. S. 566.
Judgment reversed.
