
    Jules Levois v. James Gale, Captain, and owners of Ship R. D. Shepherd.
    The shipper is not bound to discloso the valuó of tho goods, unless asked; but the carrier has tho right to inquire, and to have a truo answer; and, if deceived, he will not be responsible. If he make no inquiry and no artifice mislead him, he will bo responsible for any loss, however great the value of tho articlos.
    from the Sixth District Court of New Orleans, Beaumont, J.
    
      George L. Bright and J. TV. Gurley for defendants and appellants.
    
      J. L. Tissoifor plaintiff.
    
    The laws of tho port of shipment, not of destination, govern a contact of affreightment, Hampton v, Thaddeus¡ é M. 584; Hennen’s Digest, 1423, No. 1; Felix, Droit International, privé, vol. 1, Nos. 96 et 210.
    Connaissement, C. Com. Art. 222. Le capitaine est responsable des marehandises dont il se charge.
    H en fournit nne reconnaissance. Cette reconnaissance se nomme con-naissement. Ord. 1681, liv. 2, tit. 1, art. 9; C. N. 1782, 1783; C. Com. 281, 293, 420.
    Responsabilité, Pardessus, droit commercial, Com. 2, p. 364, No. 541.
    Le voiturier doit remettre les objets qu’on lui a confies á celui de qui il les a re§us, ou a celui qui lui a été indiqué par l’expéditeur, etc.
    Lorsqu’il ne remet pas les choses qui lui ont été eonfiées, il doit les payer, au prix qu’elles valaient au moment oil la remise a du s’exécuter, etc. No. 542.
    Le voiturier doit veiller a la conservation des marehandises pendant le voyage, et les rendre dans le mime état qu’il les a regues. O. N. 1782, 1915.
    Sa responsabilité commence á l’instant mime ou elles ont été remises it lui ou á l’un de ses préposés, soit sur le port, soit dans quelque local public dont la surveillance n’appartient ni á l’expéditeur, ni á des personnes dont il répondent. C. N. 1783. Cassation, 19 mars, 1814. C, voyez aussi No. 495; C. N. 1782.
    Les voituriers par terre et par eau sont assujettis pour la garde et la conservation des choses qui leur sont eonfiées, aux mémes obligations que les aubergistes, dont il est parlé au titre du dépót et sequestre. L. 1, in pr., 1, 2, 3, 4; C. 1952, 2102, 6, Com. 101,103, 222; O. pén. 386 — 4,475— 3,476.
    O. N. 1983. Hs répondent non seulement de ce qu’ils ont déjá re<;u dans leur batiment ou voiture, mais encore de ce qui leur a éte remis sur le port ou dans P entrepot pour étre placé dans leur batiment ou voiture. C. 1382; C. com. 97, 103.
    Boulay Paty, Com. 1, p. 406.
    Si le capitaine ne représente pas toutes les marehandises portées au connaissement, il est tenu de payer la valeur de celles non représentées, auprix du lieu de décharge, (market value). Argument tiré de Particle 134 du code de commerce.
    Le capitaine est responsable des marehandises et effets des voyageurs qu’il prend a son bord, moyennant un salaire convenu. 7 fév. 1829 Bied-filles; Journal du Palais, 22, 661.
    Code de commerce “ Du capitaine.”
    Le capitaine est garant de ses fautes mime légeres. C. Com. Art. 216, 293, 405, 407, 435, 438.
    H est responsable des marehandises dont il est chargé, Art. 222.
    11 en fournit une reconnaissance qui en est la preuve. Art. 281, 293y 420.
    Gouget et Mergé, droit commercial, Tom. 2, No. 97.
    Le capitaine est tenu d’opérer ou de surveiller le ehargement, etc. LeS affréteurs ou chargeurs mettent seulement les marehandises sur le quai a la disposition du capitaine.
    No. 112. 31 opere les acquits de paiement ou a caution des douanes, c’est-a-difé les expéditions constatan! soit l’aequittement préalable des1 droits de sortie, soit les garantios moyennant lesquelles la sortie est aeeor-dée sans paiement des droits. Y. acquit k caution, douanes.
    Encyclopedic clu droit obligations da eajutame. 'Tom. 3, p. 383, N. 148, 149, No. 151.
    II est mandataire responsable.
    No. 152; déchargement; 150, 157, 158, 164, doit rendre les marchan-dises telles qu’il les a revues.
    Repertoire du Journal du Palais, vol. 1, p. 819, No. 425, 449, 459, 484, 512, tenu de payer les marchandises perdues.
    Granveaux, transports, responsabilité du transport des marchandises, p. 597, No. 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 23, 24.
    Dépot et séquestre, mernes obligations.
    Troplong, No. 2, commentaire sur O. N. Art. 192, p. 49, No. 64, 65.
    C. C. Art. 2722. Carriers and watermen are subject, with respect to the safe keeping and preservation of the things intrusted to them, to the same obligations and duties, which are imposed on tavern-keepers in the title of deposit and sequestration.
    Hennen’s Digest, p. 1475. Ship owners and masters are liable for the whole loss suffered in consequence of non-delivery of the cargo at the place of destination. 1 Mar. p. 39.
    They are accountable for the value which will bo fairly estimated at the invoice price. 2 N. S. 236.
    C. C. 2723. They are answerable, not only for what they have actually received in their vessel or vehicle, but also for what has been delivered to them at the port or place of deposit, to be placed in the vessel or carriage. <
    C. C. Art. 2725. Carriers and watermen may be liable for the loss or damage of the things intrusted to their care, unless they can prove that such loss or damage has been occasioned by accidental and uncontrollable events.
    Hennen’s Digest, p. 1425, No. 11. Though a bill of lading acknowledging the goods to be in good order, be open to examination, still its recital cannot be overthrown nor qualified, except by very clear evidence; it cannot be weakened bjr a conjectured showing. The policy of the law holds the carrier to a very strict accountability. 6 An. 801; 8 An. 292, p. 1426.
    No. 2. The master is liable for levissema culpa. 11 Martin, 598; 6 An. ■410.
    No. 6. Where notice that a ship would not be responsible for jewelry, unless the value were disclosed, is broxight home to plaintiff, who, without disclosing the nature or value of articles, intentionally ships them so as to conceal their real character, the owners are not liable. 9 B. 468.
    No. 7. Publication of a notice in one or more newspapers, no matter for how long a time, open intention to be responsible for particular articles, unless their contents and value be disclosed, will not release the carrier. The notice must be brought home to the shipper. 9 B. 468.
    Hennen’s Digest, p. 1426. Where there is no notice or rule, the better opinion seems to be that one sending goods is not bound to disclose their value, unless asked; but the carrier has the right to inquire and to have a true answer; and, if deceived, will not be responsible. If he make no inquiry, and no artifice mislead Mm, he will be responsible lor any loss, however great the value of the articles. 9 B. 468.
    In cases of common carriers, where there is no notice, the better opinion seems to be, that the party who sends the goods is not bound to disclose their value, unless he is asked. But the carrier has the right to make the inquiry and to have a true answer, and if he is deceived, and a false answer given, he will not be responsible for any loss. If he makes no inquiry, and no artifice is made use of to mislead him, then he 'is responsible for any loss, however great the value may be. Story’s Commentaries on the law of Bailments, 567; 2 Kent, p. 597, \ 40, and the authorities cited by these two eminent authors.
   Labauve, J.

The plaintiff alleges that, on the 19th August, 1859, in Havre, he skipped, and the captain received, on board of said ship, a package, marked T. L. No. 18, containing “watches, music boxes, and articles of jewelry,” of the value of $2,415 17; that the ship failed to deliver said package to the consignee, in New Orleans, according to the bill of lading. He prays that the defendants be decreed to pay, in solido, for the non-delivery of said box, the sum of $2,415 17.

Defendants answered by a general denial; they further answered, that the box was described in the bill of lading as a package of merchandize, to induce defendants to believe that the box contained merchandize of but little value, and to avoid the payment of freight according to its value, etc.

The District court rendered a judgment for $2,415 17 in favor of plaintiff and against defendants, in solido.

The defendants took this appeal.

The following words close the bill of lading: “Dated in Havre, the 19th August, 1859. Contents unknown to. Signed, James Gale. ”

The defendants contend, in argument, that, as the box contained watches, music boxes, and articles of jewelry, the plaintiff was bound to disclose that fact; and, having failed to do, so, the defendants are not responsible.

The rule seems to be settled that the shipper is not bound to disclose the value of the goods, unless asked; but the carrier has the right to inquire and to have a true answer; and, if deceived, he will not bo responsible. If he make no inquiry, and no artifice mislead him, he will be responsible for any loss, whowever great the value of the article. Baldwin v. Collins, 9 Rob. 468.

Nothing shows that the captain made any inquiry ; he took, then, upon himself the •whole responsibility of delivering the articles so shipped, according to liis contract, opto show that he was prevented from doing so by accidental and uncontrollable events. C. C. Art. 2725. The bill of lading and the admissions show clearly that the captain received the box and its contents; and the testimony, which is very long, and which we have carefully examined, has failed to prove, even by presumptions, that he had delivered said box; it was incumbent on defendants to make out a clear case in their defence. They have failed to do so.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.  