770 FEDEEAL EEPOBTEE, �compliance with their bills of lading, and in their rate of charges for freight. One advertisment in an AUegheny newspaper was offered in evidence, in which the Mollie Moore, one of the steam- ers attached, is announced as forming, with the Yaeger and three other steamers, the Kountz line steamers, running from St. Louis to New Orleans, from the Kountz line wharf-boat, St. Louis, and the public were invited to apply for further information to "John W. King, Kountz line wharf-boat. St. Louis, Mo. ; " "G. L. Brennan, Kountz line office, 106 Gravier street, New Orleans;" "or to W. J. Kountz, AUegheny, Pa." �But the evidence establishes that the aceounts of each of these boats were kept upon the booka of the Kountz line separately, and that in these accounts each boat was credited with all its own earuings, after deducting $150 as the charge of the Kountz line for each trip ; that each boat was charged with the priee of goods purffhased for and forwarded by it, and was separately credited with the pro- ceeds of all the goods carried by it when sold. The evidence also shows that in two of these boat corporations a dividend had been declared, and that in case of one of these boats the corporation which owned it, out of its earnings, had built a second boat, which it con- tinued to own, and which also ran under the management of the Kountz line. �The question presented is whether the bills of lading issued by King, agent of the Kountz line, for goods shipped by the Yaeger, bound the owners of the Yaeger alone, or whether they bound the owners of all the boats which ran in or constituted the Kountz line steamers. �These bills of lading were issued by the "agent of the Kountz line," i. e., by the Kountz line, and the question is whether the relations of the boats were such, either when viewed as actually existing or when considered as they were held out to the public as existing, as to make the Mil of lading issued for one boat the act of the owners of all the boats which were operated by a eommon agent, and were so con- nected that they constituted one line. �The questions as to the joint liability of carriers for the acts of a eommon agent bas most frequently arisen with reference to transportation over connected lines, but in principle the question is the same where the owners, having a single agent, represent, not different sections of a continuons route, but different vehicles trav- ersing the same route. The cases with reference to this question divide themselves into three classes: ��� �
