4.  Ft  Worth  ft  D.  C  Ry.  Co.  v.
AUcn  (Tex.  1916),  189  S.  W.  765.
In  an  action  against  a  carrier  for
injury  to  a  mule  in  transportation,
where  the  animal  caught  its  foot  in
a  crack  four  or  five  feet  above  the
floor  of  the  car,  evidence  hdd  soffic-
dent  to  warrant  the  deduction  of  an
improper  construction  of  the  cu*.  Ft
Worth  ft  R.  G.  Ry.  (>>.  v.  Albin
(Tex.  1916),  185  S.  W.  647.
It  bdng  a  matter  of  common
knowledge  that  die  natond  pro-
pensity of  a  mule  is  to  kick,  it  is  the
duty  of  a  carrier  transporting  such
animals  to  take  into  consideratton
and  furnish  cars  constructed  with
due  regard  for  this  propensity.  Ft
Worth  ft  R.  G.  Ry.  Co.  v.  Albin
(Tex.  1916).  185  S.  W.  647.
