Page:Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. Porter (168 Ark. 22).pdf/3

24 The Federal law applicable here permits the carrier to stipulate for exemption from liability for loss by fire. 226 U.S. 491; 112 U.S. 331, 28 L. Ed. 717, 720; 194 U.S. 427, 48 L. Ed. 1053; 204 U.S. 505, 51 L. Ed. 590; 279 Fed. 929, 933

J. C. Marshall, for appellee.

If Crawford & Moses' Digest, § 843–844, controls, that ends the controversy, because it prohibits any contract or rule or regulation which limits the common law liability of a carrier. That statute, we contend, does apply to this shipment. 169 U.S. 133; 28 L.R.A. 718; 128 N.W. 663, 115 N.W. 230; 80 S.W. 488; 25 L.R.A. (N.S.) 938; 64 S.W. 511; 22 L.R.A. 335; 3 L.R.A 129; 70 N.W. 508; 64 S.E. 38; Id. 35; 3 L.R.A. (N.S.) 183; 94 Ark. 407; 101 Ark. 310; 111 Ark. 102.

The Carmack Amendment is confined by its terms to interstate shipments. The Cummins Amendment enlarged its scope by including shipments to adjacent foreign countries, saying nothing about export or import shipments which pass from or to nonadjacent foreign countries. Therefore, as held by the interstate commerce commission and by Federal and State courts, the Carmack and Cummins Amendments have no application to these last-named shipments. 212 Fed. 324; 281 Fed. (C.C.A.) 385; 114 Alt.Atl. [sic] (Md.) 905; 52 I.C. 671; Roberts, Fed. Liability of Carriers, §§ 322, 327. The statute has no application to interstate shipments, as was held of the Iowa statute (Ry. v. Cramer, 232 U.S. 490), but until counsel can point to a Federal statute which has done the like as to the inland haul of shipments to or from nonadjacent foreign countries we must maintain that our statute is still intact as to that. 61 Mass. 53; 46 S.E. (Va.) 911; Traffic Law, § 2005; Id. § 3037 A; 91 L.R.A. (Va.) 511; 150 Ark. 571; 209 U.S. 56; 101 Ark. 313; 244 U.S. 147; 169 U.S. 613; 234 U.S. 412; 236 U.S. 434; 187 U.S. 137; 219 U.S. 453; 234 U.S. 280; 128 U.S. 96; 165 U.S. 628. See also 254 U.S. 357. Where Congress has not spoken at all, but