Fisher vs.

Yangco Steamship Case Digest

Fisher vs. Yangco Steamship
(31 Phil 1)

Facts: The complained alleges that plaintiff is a stockholder in Yangco Steamship

Company, the owner of the large steam vessels, duly licensed to engage in the
coastwise trade of the Philippine Island; that on or about June 10, 1912, the directors of
the company, adopted a resolution which was thereafter ratified and affirmed by the
stockholders of the company expressly declaring and providing that the classes of
merchandise to be carried by the company in its business as common carrier do not
include dynamite, powder or other explosives, and expressly prohibiting the officers,
agents an d servants of the company from offering to carry, accepting for carriage or
carrying said dynamite, powder or other explosives.

Issue: Whether the refusal of the owner and officer of a steam vessel, to accept for
carriage dynamite, powder or other explosives for carriage can be held to be a lawful
act?

Held: The traffic in dynamite gun powder and other explosive is vitally essential to the
material and general welfare of the inhabitants of this islands and it these products are
to continue in general use throughout the Philippines they must be transported from
water to port to port in various island which make up the Archipelago.

It follows that a refusal by a particular vessel engage as a common carrier of

merchandise in coastwise trade in the Philippine Island to accept such explosives for
carriage constitutes a violation.

The prohibition against discrimination penalized under the statute, unless it can be
shown that there is so Real and substantial danger of disaster necessarily involved in
the courage of any or all of this article of merchandise as to render such refusal a due or
unnecessary or a reasonable exercise or prudence and discreation on the part of the
ship owner.