Odger's English Common Law

passengers' luggage. 655
however important may be the appointment which he has to
keep. 1
Railway companies usually guard themselves by conditions
against liability for any inconvenience caused to a passenger,
by failure to provide sufficient seating accommodation. But,
apart from such conditions a passenger can always demand
to be carried. That the compartment is overcrowded may
be evidence of negligence ; and the company is liable for the
reasonable and probable consequences of such overcrowding. 2
The company is also liable for injuries caused to a pas-
senger in alighting at his destination, when an invitation to
alight has been given by one of the company's servants. But
the mere fact that the train stops is not such an invitation ;
it would be otherwise if the train stopped and a porter called,
out the name of the station.
Innumerable conditions are attached to the issue of cheap
tickets ; and these are often strictly enforced. Thus, if a
man takes a cheap ticket from A. to B., he is not entitled to
travel beyond B. to C, and there to give up his ticket and
pay the fare from B. to C. He has to pay the difference
between the two fares A. to C. and A. to B. 3
Again, if lie
takes a ticket from L. to M., he cannot travel from L. to X.
with that ticket, although the fares for the two journeys are
the same. 4 Nor is he entitled to break his journey at any
place en route, unless he has leave to do so. s
passengers' luggage.
A railway company is, as we have seen, a common carrier
of goods over land so far as its ordinary goods traffic is
concerned. It is also a common carrier in respect of a
passenger's personal luggage. It is often said that railway
companies carry a certain amount of passenger's luggage free.
i Le Blanche v. L. $ N. W. By. Co. (1876), 1 C. P. D. 286 and ; see Hick v.
Timnnnnd ri8911 2 Q. B. 626, affirmed in the House of Lords, [1893J A. C. 22 Suns
;
T&\y.
Midland Ry. Co., [1913] 1 K. B. 103.
2 Cobb v G. W. By. Co., [1894] A. C. 194.
» 6. N. Ry- Co. v. Palmer, [1898J 1 Q. B. 162 ; cf. Clarke v. West Ham Corp., [1909]
•> K B K58.
"
i G W By. Co. v. Pocock (1879), 41 L. T. 415.
« AsMonY Lanes. # Torks. By. Co., [1904] 2 K. B. 313 ; L. # N. W. By. Co. v.-
Hinchclife, [1903] 2 K. B. 32.