Houston & Great Northern Railroad v. Meador

Citations

• 50 Tex. 77

Syllabus

<p>1. Principal and agent—Neglect of a duty.—Where a person is bound to perform an act as a duty, he intrusts its performance to another at his peril, and upon failure of such person to perform it, whether he stood in the relation of contractor or of servant, the person on whom tiie duty rests is liable for such failure or neglect.</p> <p>2. Eminent domain—Eight of way.—Where the State, by virtue of the right of eminent domain, authorizes the appropriation of private property, such a right can only be exercised under the protection of tiie legislative grant, and under the conditions and liabilities which the statute attaches to the grant.</p> <p>3. Duty imposed by general railroad act touching inclosures.—The statute (Paschal’s Dig., art. 4925) evidently implies that railroads are to be so constructed as to preserve inclosures unimpaired.</p> <p>4. Same—Neglect of contractor of duty creates liability of the railroad company.—Tiie duty of placing stock-guards, preserving or supplying the fences, so far, at least, as on the right of way, and protecting the inclosure from injury, in the construction of a railroad, is a duty from the railroad company to the proprietor of the inclosures through which the road passes, annexed by statute to the privilege granted the corporation; and for the failure to perform such duty the railroad company is liable, though resulting from the negligence of a contractor in the construction of the road.</p> <p>5. Same.—A duty to the public or to an individual cannot be devolved upon a contractor, and a judgment against a railroad company for damages to growing crops, injured by the negligence of a construction contractor and his servants, held to be proper.</p> <p>6. Same—Consent.—The consent given to the construction of a road would not relieve the railroad company from the duties prescribed by the statute granting them their right of way, touching inclosures.</p>