A railroad, after accepting and transporting without protest, as
mail matter, a shipment of gold in mail sacks consigned by the
Treasury Department, and after receiving the amount fixed by
readjustment for carrying mail matter under its contract therefor,
has no claim for additional pay for carrying the gold and attendant
railway mail guards, whether the shipment was properly mail matter
and the requirements of the statute concerning postal service were
technically complied with or not. P.
258 U. S.
33.
55 Ct. Clms. 536 affirmed.
Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims dismissing
appellant's petition.
Page 258 U. S. 33
MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is a claim for $5,020.65 as the claimant's proportion of
joint through express rates for carrying $5,000,000 in gold from
Philadelphia to Boston, and the passenger fares for seven men who
accompanied the gold as guards from New York to Springfield,
Massachusetts, that being the distance that the claimant carried
the gold. The Court of Claims ordered the petition to be
dismissed.
On October 23, 1914, the gold was delivered by the Treasury
Department to the Post Office Department in one thousand sealed
bags, each weighing 18 3/4 pounds, which were placed in one hundred
and sixty-seven locked mail pouches labeled "Boston, Mass." The
Treasury prepaid the postage required for fourth class mail matter
at parcel post rates, amounting to $420. On reaching New York, the
gold was placed in a vault subject to the call of the chief clerk
of Railway Mail Service. The next day, the chief clerk and other
railway officials took the pouches to the Grand Central Station,
where they were placed in a postal car attached to a regular
passenger train of the claimant. The car, with its contents, was
carried to Springfield, and there delivered to the Boston &
Albany road. It carried with the gold seven officials of the
Railway Mail Service, all having the requisite travel commissions
from the Postmaster General. No protest was made by any carrier,
and the claimant was paid and received without protest the amount
fixed by readjustment orders for carrying the mail over its
route.
The claimant, admitting that it could not demand additional pay
for hauling the mails,
New York, New Haven & Hartford R.
Co. v. United States, 251 U. S. 123,
argues that the transaction was not "mail service" such as it had
contracted to perform or within the classification of mail matter.
It urges that, in view of the weight limit,
Page 258 U. S. 34
eleven pounds, in force July 1, 1913, when its four-year term
began; the weight of these bags, 18 3/4 pounds; of the contents,
gold, and of the fact that the bags were sealed and placed in
locked pouches, the Postmaster General could not make the service
mail service if he tried. We think it unnecessary to discuss the
argument, if there is anything in it. The service here, rightly or
wrongly, was demanded as mail service, was rendered as mail
service, and was paid for without protest as mail service. Whether
the Treasury technically complied with all the requirements of the
statute concerning postal service did not matter to the claimant.
By giving its claim a different name from that passed upon in
New York, New Haven & Hartford R. Co. v. United
States, 251 U. S. 123,
251 U. S. 127,
the claimant does not better its case.
Judgment affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE PITNEY was absent and took no part in the
decision.