...Company v. Lockwood, 17 Wall. 357, 368, the question was as to the extent to which a common carrier could stipulate for exemption from responsibility for the negligence of himself or his servants, and notwithstanding there were decisions of the courts of New York thereon, the State in which the cause...

...exemption from responsibility, when such exemption is not just and reasonable in the eye of the law; (2) that it is not just and reasonable in the eye of the...responsibility for the negligence of himself or his servants; (3) that these rules apply Abrams va. Milwaukee, Lake Shore & Western R. Co. both to common carriers...

...case of Railroad Co. v. Lockwood, 17 Wall. 357, the court placed its decision that a carrier could not stipulate for exemption from responsibility for the negligence of himself or his servants upon that express ground. The English statute, already referred to, in using the expression "just and...

...exemption from responsibility when such exemption is not just and reasonable in the eye of the law; 2. That it is not just and reasonable in the eye of the...responsibility for the negligence of himself or his servants; 3. That these rules apply *9a both to common carriers of goods and common carriers of passengers for...

...unreasonable in their terms could not be imposed by any carrier and held, to use his own language, that "it is not just and reasonable in the eye of...responsibility for the negligence of himself or his servants." This is the settled rale in almost all American jurisdictions. Ry. Co. v. Curran, 19 Oh. St. 1; Ftinn...

...lawfully stipulate for exemp'tion from responsibility when such exemption is not just and reasonable. t2) It is not just and reasonable, in the eye of the law,...responsibility for the negligence of himself or his servants. (3) These rules apply both to the carrier of goods and to the carrier of passengers for hire, and with...

...the United States holds that common carriers can not lawfully stipulate for exemption from liability when such exemption is not just and reasonable in...not just and reasonable in the eye of the law for them to stipulate for exemption from liability for the negligence of themselves or their servants ;...

...ship' screw, is a passenger." In considering the question as to how far a common carrier can lawfully stipulate for exemption from responsibility for the negligence of himself or his servants, the courts have recognized persons who were conveyed without compensation as passengers. Mr. Justice...

...from responsibility when such exemption is not just and reasonable in the eye of the law ; secondly, that it is not just and reasonable in the eye of the...responsibility for the negligence of himself or his servants; thirdly, that these rules apply both to carriers of eoods and carriers of passengers for hire, and...

...exemption from responsibility, when such exemption is not just or reasonable in the eye of the law; (2) that it is not just and reasonable in the eye of the...responsibility for the negligence of himself or his servants." While the weight of authority is perhaps against classing a telegraph company as a common carrier,...