The carrier's contract to transport and de liver freight imposes on it obligation to transport the freight safely and promptly to the point of destination and then to deliver the same to the consignee ; Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. King, 104 Ark. 215, 148 S. W. 1035 ; who is bound to receive it when ten dered at the proper place, though there may be delay ; Higgins v. Exp. Co., 83 N. J. L. 398, 85 Atl. 450.
A carrier is not required to keep a car equipment sufficiently extensive to meet the maximum output of freight offered by ship pers for transportation at any time of the year, but is only required to furnish car facilities to shippers to meet a demand, ad justed and regulated to utilize the company's car equipment with uniformity and regular ity throughout the year ; Montana, W. & S. R. Co. v. Morley, 198 Fed. 991. A carrier is not required to provide in advance for an un expected and unprecedented rush of business. It will be excused for delay in shipping or receiving goods for shipment until such emer gency is removed ; St. Louis S. W. R. Co. v. Clay Co., 77 Ark, 357, 92 S. WI. 531.
See EXPRESS COMPANIES ; FACILITIES ; IN TERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION. See infra as to the Hepburn Act.
Since the enactment of the Hepburn Act, it is beyond the power of a state to regulate the delivery of cars for interstate shipments. It was so held as to the reciprocal demur rage law of Minnesota of 1907 ; Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. Elevator Co., 226 U. S. 426, 33 Sup. Ct. 174, 57 L. Ed. 284, 46 L. R. A. (N. 203; and of Arkansas; St. Louis, I.
M. & S. R. v. Edwards, 227 U. S. 265, 33 Sup. Ct. 262, 57 L. Ed. 506.
The exclusive grants to railroad companies are to be strictly construed in favor of the corporation, and liberally expounded in fa vor of public rights and interests ; Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge, 11 Pet. (U. S.) 420, 9 L. Ed. 773 ; Richmond, F. & P. R. Co. v. R. Co., 13 How. (U. S.) 71,14 L. Ed. 55; Com. v. R. Co., 27 Pa. 339, 67 Am. Dec. 471 (Judge Black's celebrated opinion).
The power to build a railroad includes the power to build switches ; Cleveland & P. R. Co. v. Speer, 56 Pa. 325, 94 Am. Dec. 84 ; but all customers have not an equal right to have switches built for them ; Butchers' & D. S. Co. v. R. Co., 67 Fed. 35, 14 C. C. A. 290, 31 U. S. App. 252.
Railroad grants of lands by congress are granted in prcsenti, and take effect upon the section of the land when the road is defi nitely located, by relation, as of the date of the grant ; St. Paul, M. & M. R. Co. v. Phelps, 137 U. S. 528, 11 Sup. Ct. 168, 34 L. Ed. 767. See Wisconsin Cent. R. Co. v. Price Co., 133 U. S. 496, 10 Sup. Ct. 341, 33 L. Ed. 687. When different grants cover the same premises, the earlier takes the title ; Oregon Ry. & Nay. Co. v. R. Co., 130 U. S. 1, 9 Sup. Ct. 409, 32 L. Ed. 837 ; U. S. v. R. Co., 152 U. S. 284, 14 Sup. Ct. 598, 38 L. Ed. 443. Title does not pass until the act is complied with. Merchants Ex. Bank v. McGraw, 59 Fed. 972, 8 C. C. A. 420, 15 U. S. App. 339. See LAND