Page:Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. Porter (168 Ark. 22).pdf/5

26 the compress at Earle, Arkansas, and not set by defendant; that the only issue in the case is whether, in view of the execution of the bill of lading with the condition hereinafter referred to in regard to loss by fire, the earner is liable for such loss and damage by fire; that said export bill of lading, under and pursuant to which this shipment was made, provided that the carrier should not be liable for loss of said cotton occasioned by fire; that claim for the loss in question was timely filed and declined by the carrier, and suit thereafter was timely filed for said loss."

The provision in the bill of lading exempting appellant from liability on account of fire is a limitation upon appellant's common-law liability, and is void under § 843 of Crawford & Moses' Digest, if the shipment was controlled by the laws of the State.

Appellant contends that the shipment was governed by the Cummins Amendment of 1915 and 1916 to the Carmack Amendment, because the Cummins Amendment evidenced an intention on the part of Congress to occupy the field of regulating foreign commerce, jnst as the Carmack Amendment evidenced its intention to enter the field of regulating interstate commerce. Congress has exclusive power to regulate both interstate and foreign commerce, and, when it has entered upon the field of regulating either, and does regulate either, the effect is that the regulatory acts of Congress upon the subject will supersede State statutes relating thereto, and all interstate and foreign shipments will be governed by Federal legislation and the common-law rules as applied in the Federal courts. C. N. O. & T. Ry. Co. v. Rankin, 241 U.S. 327; ''So. Exp. Co. v. Byers, 240 U.S. 612; St. L. I. M. & S. R. Co. v. Starbird, 243 U.S. 592; Mich. Cent. R. Co. v. Myric'', 107 U.S. 102. Carriers are permitted, under the law applicable in the Federal tribunals, to stipulate their exemption from liability for loss by fire, except that it cannot exempt itself from consequences resulting from its own negligence. Hart v. Pa. R. Co., 112 U.S. 331. Liability in the instant case, then,