left hand, while in her right sits an impudent puppy-dog a few months old.

A dog-law, or the free introduction of strychnine would be a blessing. If the dogs were useful or possessed of any beauty, there might be some excuse for petting them, but among all the yelping brutes that come barking around the stranger's heels, no one ever saw a high-bred animal fit for any better purpose than to make mutton-pies in London. Indeed it is darkly hinted that the curs are put to a similar use here, and that when roast-pig is enjoyed at a native hut, it is much more likely to be roast puppy with a pig's head and tail skilfully attached to deceive the haole. Quien sabe? One cannot find dog chow-chow exposed in the streets as at Canton, but it is recommended to eat nothing that has life, except chickens, and even then to be careful to know how they are cooked. In fact it is often a necessary precaution to see them drawn before they enter the pot. It is very difficult, too, for a foreigner to master the repugnance for poi after seeing the process of preparation, and poi, roast pig (dog) and raw fish, constitute the daily diet in the native huts.

Poi is grounded taro, or kalo, mixed with water until of the consistency of starch (which, in fact, it is, starch from taro-root) and suffered to stand long enough to slightly ferment. Generally the natives prefer it rather sour. The style of eating it with the fingers is well known, and where so many hands are in the dishes, no matter how clean they are, and where it is not uncommon for the dogs as well as the children to suck from the fingers of the women, a man who is at all particular, does not care to join such a mess. If he has seen it made, it is useless for him to try to relish it or any other native dish, for the filth and perspiration dripping from the man who pounds this dirty-looking mass of dough, and the careful economy with which those sitting by collect the scraps to throw back into the trough as they fly around on the dirty sleeping mats of the family, are enough to disgust the strongest stomach. However, the islanders are fond of it, and if with poi and raw fish they can be happy, so much the better for those who employ them. Eating this food cold they generally have fine teeth, and certainly they grow very fat on it, but it is noticed that their robustness is rarely accompanied by great physical strength, however well-proportioned they are generally. The vegetarians might take a lesson from the fact that on the sugar plantations it is found necessary to furnish them with meat regularly, for when they live on poi alone, they are not able to do as much work as with a mixed diet. The old women, living on poi and doing no work, become bloated to an erormous size, and among them this inability to walk from fat, is esteemed a mark of high family, like the tiny feet of the Chinese ladies. None of the high chieftainesses weigh less than two hundred and fifty pounds.

Although it would be easy for this people to raise any kind of fruit or vegetables enjoyed by man, and although they now possess a greater variety than most nations, they appear to care very little for them. The demand from whale ships had induced many of them to plant potatoes, especially in the district of Kohala, on the island of Hawaii, and yet it is questionable if one native family out of twenty cares to cook them for their own use. They are very fond of sugar-cane, yet few will take the trouble to plant it.

Bread-fruit is another easily obtained and excellent food, and yet there

are not many bread-fruit groves, except at Lahaina, on Maui. Rice was raised in considerable quantities last year, but almost entirely for export, while very little wheat or corn are planted, and then only by foreigners. Indeed it is only too evident that the natives care little to better their condition, if the advantage is to be gained by the cost of hard work. And yet when we examine the churches which have been erected in various parts of the islands with great labor, and stretching over a considerable period of time in their construction, it would appear as if they were capable of great and persevering efforts with a motive sufficiently powerful to arouse them. These noble churches and the daily habits of the Kanakas contradict each other. The churches were the free-will offering of the nation in the early enthusiasm of conversion, and when we consider them as the work of a people naturally so indolent that they have not done for themselves what they united in doing for their religion, these really great works are proud monuments in the national history, worthy of being mentioned with honor beside the achievements of any race of men. It is sad to reflect that a nation once heathen, but possessing the intelligence and vigor of their own accord to throw off their dark and bloody superstitions, even before the arrival of the missionaries; and then, immediately after their acquaintance with the truths of Christianity, to make such prodigious strides in civilization and general intelligence as the Hawaiians have done, should melt away so rapidly and surely that it is now a fact, easily demonstrated, that with the next generation its existence will cease, and that before half a century has passed away it will be almost forgotten.

COMMERCIAL LAW.-NO. 14.

THE CARRIAGE OF GOODS AND PASSENGERS.

A PRIVATE CARRIER.

ONE who carries goods for another is either a private carrier or a common carrier.

A private carrier is one who carries for others once, or sometimes, but who does not pursue the business of carrying as his usual and professed occupation. The contract between him and the owner of the goods which he carries is one of service, and is governed by the ordinary rules of law. Each party is bound to perform his share of the contract. The carrier must receive, care for, carry, and deliver the goods, in such wise as he bargains to do, whether this bargain be in words, or implied by the law from the nature of the service which he undertakes to render.

If he carries the goods for hire, whether actually paid or due, he is bound to use ordinary diligence and care; by which the law means such care as a man of ordinary capacity would take of his own property under similar circumstances. If any loss or injury occur to the goods while in his charge, from the want of such care or diligence on his part, he is

responsible. But if the loss be chargeable as much to the fault of the owner as of the carrier, he is not liable. The owner must show the want of care or diligence on the part of the private carrier, to make him liable; but slight evidence tending that way would suffice to throw upon him the burden of accounting satisfactorily for the loss. And if there were such negligence on the part of the carrier, or of a servant for whom he is responsible, the carrier is liable, although the loss be caused primarily by a defect in the thing carried. Thus, in an English case, the plaintiff had sent a cask of brandy, by the defendant's wagon, from Shrewsbury to London. Before the wagon reached Birmingham, it was perceived, by persons in the wagon, that the cask was leaking fast, and the driver was informed of it; but though he stayed three hours in Birmingham, after his arrival there, he made no examination of the cask, nor took any step to prevent the leakage. He passed in like manner through Wolverhampton, where the wagon also made some stay, without regard to the cask; but at the next stage beyond Wolverhampton, having some parcels to deliver, he took the cask out, and the remainder of the brandy was saved. It was left to the jury to consider whether the injury arose from the negligence of the defendant's servant, the wagoner, in not examining the cask, after he was informed of its leaky state, at either of the places where he halted; and the jury found in the affirmative, and an applica tion to set aside the verdict was refused by the King's Bench.

If he carries the goods without any compensation, paid or promised, he is, in the language of the law, a gratuitous bailee, or mandatary; he is now bound only to slight care; which is such care as every person, not insane or fatuous, would take of his own property. For the want of this care, which would be gross negligence, he is responsible, but not for ordinary negligence. In an early English case, on which much of the law about carriers is founded, the defendant undertook to remove several hogsheads of brandy, then in a cellar in D., and safely lay them down. again in a certain other cellar in Water Lane; and the defendant and his servants managed so negligently that one of the casks was staved. And the court were unanimously of opinion, that, if a man undertakes to carry goods safely and securely, he is responsible for any damage they may sustain in the carriage through his negligence, although he was not a common carrier, and was to have nothing for his carriage.

Whether a private carrier has a lien on the goods he carries, for his compensation, or, in other words, whether he may hold them until that be paid, is not certainly determined, but we think he has. If he incurs expenses about the goods, for sufficient reason, and in good faith, he has undoubtedly a lien on them for those expenses.

We sum up what may be said of the private carrier in the remark, that the general rules which regulate contracts and mutual obligations apply to the duties and the rights of a private carrier, with little or no qualification. But it is otherwise with a common carrier.

THE COMMON CARRIER.

The law in relation to the rights, the duties, and the responsibilities of a common carrier is quite peculiar. The reasons for it are discernible, but it rests mainly upon established usage and custom. And as these

usages have changed considerably in modern times, this law has undergone modifications, and on some points may be considered as even now in a somewhat uncertain state.

He is a common carrier "who undertakes, for hire, to transport the goods of such as choose to employ him from place to place"; or, as we should prefer to say, from some known and definite place or places to other known and definite place or places. He is one who undertakes the carriage of goods as a business; and it is mainly this which distinguishes him from the private carrier. In one or two of the courts of this country there has been a disposition to annul this distinction; and to affect all persons who carry goods for hire, whether casually and by special employment, or as a general business, with the same liabilities. But this disposition is not general, and we do not believe it will be permanent anywhere; for we see nothing in the condition of our country, or of our carrying business, which calls for this change in the law.

The rights and responsibilities of the common carrier may be briefly stated thus:He is bound to take the goods of all who offer, if he be a carrier of goods, and the persons of all who offer, if he be a carrier of passengers; and to take due care and make due transport and delivery of them. He has a lien on the goods which he carries, and on the baggage of passengers, for his compensation. He is liable for all loss or injury to the goods under his charge, although wholly free from negligence, unless the loss happens from the act of God, or from the public enemy. These three rules will be considered hereafter.

Truckmen or draymen, porters, and others who undertake the carriage of goods for all applicants from one city or town to another, or from one part of a city to another, are chargeable as common carriers. So, proprietors of stage-coaches are chargeable as common carriers of passengers, and of the baggage of passengers; or of others, if they so advertise themselves. So are hackney-coachmen within their accustomed range.

If drivers of stages or omnibuses, commonly carry and receive pay for goods or parcels which are not the baggage of passengers, and are held out or advertised, or generally known, as so carrying them, they are common carriers of goods, and the proprietors are liable for the loss of such parcels, although neither they nor the drivers were in fault. But if there is no such habit or usage, and the driver receives such a parcel to be carried somewhere, and is paid for it, the driver carries it as a private carrier, and not as a common carrier, and is chargeable only for negli gence or fault. And if the line of carriages is established for passengers, and the driver does not account for what is paid him for occasional parcels, but takes it as his own perquisite, the proprietors are not answerable even for the driver's fault or negligence, unless circumstances in some way bring the fault home to them.

In this country, in recent times, the business of carrying goods and passengers is almost monopolized by what are called expressinen, by railroads, or by lines of steam-packets along our coasts, or upon our navigable streams or lakes. These are undoubtedly common carriers; and although their peculiar method of carrying on this business is new, and will presently require from us especial consideration, there can be no doubt of their being, to all intents and purposes, common carriers.

Ordinary sailing-vessels are sometimes said to be common carriers.

We should be disposed to restrict this term, however, to regular packets; or, at most, to call by this name general freighting ships. It is not, however, necessary to consider this question, as water-borne goods are now almost always carried under bills of lading, which determine the relations and respective rights of the parties; and these we shall consider in an article on the Law of Shipping.

The boatmen on our rivers and canals are common carriers; and ferrymen are common carriers of passengers by their office, and may become common carriers of goods by taking up that business. A steamboat usually employed as a carrier may do something else, as tow a vessel out of a harbor, or the like; and the character of common carrier does not attach to this especial employment and carry with it its severe liabilities. Therefore, for a loss occurring to a ship in her charge while so employed, the owner of the steamer is not liable without negligence on his part, or on the part of those whom he employs.

The same person may be a common carrier, and also hold other offices or relations. He may be a warehouseman, a wharfinger, or a forwarding merchant. The peculiar liabilities of the common carrier (to be spoken of presently) do not attach to either of these offices or employments. Thus, a warehouseman is liable for loss of the goods which he takes for storage, only in case of his own negligence; he is not, as a common carrier is said to be, an insurer of the goods. The question then arises, when the liability of such a person is that of a warehouseman, and when it is that of a carrier.

If a carrier receives goods to be stored until he can carry them,—a canal boatman, for example,—or if, at the end of the journey, he stores them for a time for the safety of the goods or the convenience of the owner, while thus stored he is liable only as warehouseman. But if he puts them into his store or office only for a short time, and for his own convenience, either at the beginning or end of the transit (or journey), they are in his hands as carrier.

Where these relations seem to unite and mingle in one person, it may be said to be the general rule, that, wherever the deposit, in whatever place or building, is secondary and subordinate to the carriage of the goods, which is therefore the chief thing, the party taking the goods is a carrier; and otherwise a depositary only of some kind. If, therefore, goods are delivered to a carrier, or at his depot or receiving-room, with directions not to carry them until further orders, he is only a depositary, and not a carrier, until those orders are received; but when they are received, he becomes a carrier; and if the goods are afterwards lost or injured before their removal, he is liable as a common carrier. Thus, in a late case in Maine, it was held, where a railroad corporation, being common carriers, have a warehouse at which they receive goods for transportation, and goods are delivered there with instructions to forward them, while the goods remain in the warehouse for the convenience of the railroad, until they can be forwarded in the usual course of business, the railroad holds them as common carrier, and is liable for them as such. But if the goods are kept back in the warehouse for the convenience of the owner, and by his order, while they are so detained the railroad will not be liable as common carrier, but as depositary only. And instructions to forward goods forthwith may be inferred from an established course of