tfaetr  rctam  to  the  place  of  destina-  A  carrier  is  liable  for  all  loss  sus-


258


THE  LAW  OF  LOSS  AND  DAMAGE  CLAIMS


tained  to  a  shipment  unless  occa-
sioned either  through  the  fault  of  the
shipper,  the  inherent  character  of  the
shipment,  an  act  of  God,  or  the  oper-
ation of  law.  When  a  shipper,
in  an  action  to  recover  the  value
of  grain  lost  in  transit,  introduces
in  evidence  a  bill  of  lading  call-
ing for  a  delivery  of  a  certain
specified  amount  of  grain  at  the
point  of  destination,  and  then
proves  that  a  less  amount  was  de-
livered, the  presumption  arises  that
the  loss  was  caused  by  the  negligence
of  the  carrier,  and  it  then  becomes
necessary  for  the  carrier  to  prove  the
contrary  by  a  fair  preponderance  of
evidence.  Natl.  Elev.  Co.  v.  G.  N.
R.  Co.  (Minn.  1917),  163  N.  W.  164.
Where  a  tank  car  was  unloaded  by
removing  a  tap  on  a  pipe  in  the  bot-
tom and  connecting  a  pipe,  and  then
opening  a  valve  from  the  top  of  the
tank,  the  railroad  is  not  liable  for
loss  of  oil  by  reason  of  the  valve
being  open  when  the  tap  was  removed
at  destination;  the  tank  being  filled
by  the  claimant  before  starting.  H.
&  T.  C  R.  Co.  V.  Oriental  Oil  Co.
(Tex.  1917).  198  S.  W.  601.
Where  a  railroad  engaged  to  carry
mules  free  of  charge  for  its  contrac-
tor to  do  repair  work  to  the  place
where  the  work  was  to  be  done,  the
road  was  liable  for  ordinary  negli-
gence resulting  in  the  injury  of  a
mule;  the  carriage  being  for  the
benefit  both  of  the  road  and  the  con-
tractor. Bush  V.  Beacon  (Ark.  1917),
198  S.  W.  130.
