Show CANNOT JUMP CONTRACT Contracts between shipper and car carrier carrIer carnor rier nor whereby the former agrees In Inconsideration inconsideration consideration of a i reduced freight rate rule to release the th latter from liability liability ity In iu case of loss except for the value agreed upon are ure binding and andwIl will wIl not nol bo be set hot aside by r the courts unless un Ie ulterior purposes appear or fraud and misrepresentation on are ex ox exercised Such Is 18 tho the decision of o tho the I supreme court in an opinion handed down Friday in the case of Clara Lar Larsen lOn Ben against tho the Oregon Short Line Lino Railroad company Mr Mrs IrD Larsen Lansen turned over oyer to the mil railway way company at Blackfoot Idaho on May 29 1907 household goods goo do In Including eluding a roll of carpet one feather featherbed bed four pillows arid three boxes of or other household effects valued at ai for delivery to Salt SnIt Lake Lalee City In consideration of a n reduced freight rate of or Mrs Larsen Lareen I placed tho the of the tho goods boods at only 5 a hun hundred hundred dred pounds Tho The goods which weighed pounds were lost anti and I Mrs 1 r Larden Jarden sued to recover tho the full rull value District Judge Lewis Gave cave her ber Judgment for fa I In accordance ac aCt with her liar agreement a with tho the railway company compan and she sho appeal appealed ed cd to tho the supreme court which up holds the trial court saying Opinion of ot Court Courtw Courto We w o can seo see no good reason why ri h I rl could COt ld not t be hound by h 1 a if fali tair and reasonable and anti when fairly entered Into lu In which ho he agrees that In I consideration of a re ro reduction r of the freight charges the I carrier currier shall ShaH bo be released rele from Crom liability I Ity in itt case calle of or loss lO except for or tho Uie j value agreed upon No doubt If such 1 an Ull agreement wore were cre entered Into for tor ulterior purposes or if Ir baaed upon fraud or misrepresentation ml of any an kind Iud and such an were present presented presenter er ed and no court would en CD enforce enforce force such a contract In tho ho ah nh sonco of any all evidence Involving bad faith and nud 1 where tho the contract is A 1 Z i h I I I neither opposed to public policy nor b r statute tIm the courts can cannot cannot not declare It void old r t 7 The question whether r contracts like this one are aro ru enforceable in iii cases where hero tho ho property Is loSt o t through the negligence or misconduct of or the carrier or Its agents IH Is not involved and hence Is I not passed pit Justice Frick wrote wr t the opinion his associates concurring |