Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

* ITRETICIP1THEIR'AK Forensic BMWt4f the Moot tou ikai ir Ressita. The ae last Wedfelday ni~ ~ t t* e' iusin of i i usua in $nd e w bly ar-e gued by counsel for both parties. Messers. Fulton and Bellinger a V9pp9e,l . th_p.lainiff and Hamer and Galbraith for the de fendant. 'The facts of the case are sufficiently sQt. out in the opinion. The case 'was "'argiied before Mr. Alan Johnston, C. J. and E. W. Mullins, A. J. The facts invlved in this case - are not in dispute and are as fol - lows: Wn. Smith & Co.- bought . a large quantity of cotton linters from Columbia Oil Mill Co. The oil mill at Smith &Co's re quest shipped same as cotton in order to get a lower freight rate. Smith & Co. took the bill of lading to plaintiff, who cS took the bill of lading as collat is eral security for a loan. The :a notes were not paid when due and the bank then.. finds out . they 'have only linters instead of cotton, and 'sell with a loss of $I3, 000. i'he bank then brings this action ainst tbe il ., . recover their loss. This is an action of deceit and the principal question before this ,court is as to whether the plain tiff is entitled to, recover the amount alleged to be due in the complaint. The fact that the oil' mill inten tionally represented the linters to be cotton certainly amounts to a fraudulent misrepresenta tion of a subsisting fact. But it was earnestly urged by the learned counsel- for the defendant that there was no in tent on the part of the defend ant that the misrepresented facts should be acted upon by the plain tiff, as the defendant had no knowledge that the bill of lading was to be transfered to plaintiff. We think this contention is un sound upon both reason and au thority. In the case of Munro vs. Gairdner, 3 Brev. 31, the court said: "An intention to de ceive is material, but if the false . hood asserted or imposed Is in its nature or character calculat ed directly to defraud and injure some one in particular, or all per sons generally, an intention to de ceive and injure anyone who may be' thereby deceived and def'rauded may be Implied.'' While it Is true that the forego * ing language of the court was nhot necessary for the determina tion of the case and must be re garded as dicta yet we think it expresses the tue rule and it aopa not atho'ity to sup prt it. " 'lafflin. vs. Corn. insurpnce. Ci. 110 U. 0. 95 14 A. . F.: ny ,of Law (nd Ed.) 2122 an cases ited therein. Also Ceit. big., title 1raud, -see 9, 16, 24. It is Iurther insietea by the counsel or-defendant that there is noprivity between plaintiff and defendant. But we. are concern ed in thjo case with the law of rraud. It is not disputed that defendant made false represen tations as to the commodity de cribed ii the bill of lading. If this were an action for ' simple negligence or breach of' warran ty, the question of privity be tween the parttes might. possibly arise, but we think it can have no application to the case at bar. The defendants also contend that~a bill of lading is nothing more than a contract between the railway company and the shipper .pnd is not negotiable, and therefore the defendant had no reason to auticipate the fact that the plaintiff or any one else might be defrauded. But the Supreme Court of South Carolina in Thomas vs. Railroad Co., 85 S. C. 587 lays down the law that while a bill of lading is not nego tiable it is quasi-negotiable and that title thereto passes by trans fer or delivei-ing and that it is in the liighest degree important to the lai-ge commerce universally *iowf U't? eiutlt'Apon the trans fer of bills of lading, that there should be confidence in their re citals. Benjaman vs. .Sinclair, 1 Bail. 174, Bank of Batavia vs. R. R. Co. 60 Am. Ref. 452, Brooke vs. R. R. Co. 108 Pend, 526. We think tlat the defednant when he pro cured the false bill of lading was changeable with the knowledge that the same was to pass thru the Chamber of Commerce and would ii all prpbability, fall in the harlds of a third party. For the reasons herein stated the judgment is reversed and the case remanded. - S. C. Press Association Meets. The South Carolina College Press Association met tnis week at Erskine. The University was represented by J. S. Dudley, edi tor-in-chief of the Carolinian, R. Schwartz, executive committee man from the Carolinian staff, and E. R. Jeter, editor-in-chief of the Gamecock. This delegation was instructed by the two literary societies to invite the college, journalists to meet at the University next year. College newspapers are a potent factor in student life, and the University will be fortunate in getting the inspiration to be gained from having the Press Association meet here. Do you la4e The Bird? "As Cope.and Go... so Cos b Fasoa." LEARN THE WAY J. Q. O'Briea.. Tailor-Made Cam Asent Suits Our Specalty Suits and Overcoats-$12.50 to $35.00. Corner Main and Taylor Street. Stop and Think! Of getting a business educa tion at a first class business college for only $25.00. Call or Write B. B. Williams, Jr. 24 Thornwell, U. S. C. REMEMBER BOYS! PRINTING -FOR ATHLETIC GOODS PL US Habenicht-McDougall Co. 1631 Main St. Phone 690 1631MainSt. hone690 There's more to printing than simply paper, ink and type. You are always yielcome Printing plus Service -The _____________________ State Co.'s kind gives you When you want the best and most immeasurably more for your up-to-dae as well as most reason able in price in the way of money. Send your "Copy" CLASS RINGS. DIAMOND for irsents or own use, don't select esinyuproitnisrs unti you have seen our selection. PHONEn00ing plsSrie-h FULL DRESS SUITS kORdStates'you Peteru0.HuitrWateleen nEr estinyoupopstomnsrs MERCHANT TAILOR FRIEDMAN'S BARBER 1204 LADY STREET SHOP (Old Y. M. C. A. Buildingwuu .c 0 .&E g