Steamboat Virginia v. Kraft
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Law Commissioners Court. One Whiting, acting as a forwarding merchant in New Orleans, shipped for St. Louis, per the steamboat Virginia, five cases of scythes. When said goods were received on board of said steamboat, the said Whiting demanded and the cleric of said steamboat paid to said Whiting the sum of $153 42. Said sum was entered as “ charges” in the bill of lading.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Law Commissioners Court. One Whiting, acting as a forwarding merchant in New Orleans, shipped for St. Louis, per the steamboat Virginia, five cases of scythes. When said goods were received on board of said steamboat, the said Whiting demanded and the cleric of said steamboat paid to said Whiting the sum of $153 42. Said sum was entered as “ charges” in the bill of lading. Of said sum of $153 42, a portion — $147 92 — formed no part of the charges paid by or due Whiting on account of the said merchandise shipped on the Virginia; it was a charge made by Whiting on account…
1Opinion of the CourtScott, Judge
In the case of White v. Vann, 6 Humph. 73, the court said it was “ proved by several enlightened merchants and well-informed owners of steamboats, that it is the long and well established custom and usage of trade, not only on the Tennessee river, but throughout the United States, for freighters of goods to advance to the forwarding agents the existing charges upon them, which the consignees and owners are liar-ble to refund; that this usage is indispensable to the successful prosecution of commercial operations, and of great and mutual advantage to all parties.” We have copied the above…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Berry Coal & Coke Co. v. Chicago, Peoria & St. Louis Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1906
- Pearce v. Wabash RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- Cantwell v. Terminal RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- Pearce v. Wabash RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- Pearce v. Wabash RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901