WHEN THE DELIVERY IS SUFFI CIENT TO RELEASE THE CARRIER. The re ceiving carrier who has not contracted for through shipment may relieve himself from further responsibil ity by delivery to the connecting carrier; as regards the shipper such delivery must be actual, but as regards the connecting carrier a constructive delivery is suffi cient. Placing goods on the connecting carrier's side of the depot has been held an actual delivery by the re ceiving carrier. (95 U. S. 43; See Bancroft v. Merch. D. F. Co., 47 Ia. 262.) Carriers by coach, wagon and express companies are ordinarily held to deliver to the consignee person ally, or at his residence or place of business, other car riers, as by water, at their docks, and railroads at their regular stations. (Browne, Bailments, 130.) The car rier is not required to adopt a different mode of trans portation to deliver at consignee's residence, unless such is his custom; when personal delivery is not made the carrier should notify the consignee of the arrival of the goods, and carriers by water must give notice and are liable as carriers until there has been reasonable time to remove the goods. (Shenk v. Pa., Etc., Co., 6o Pa. St. 109; Herman v. Goodrich, 21 Wis. 543.) Carriers by rail, upon giving the required notice to the consignee, are only liable as carriers for a reasonable period, and if goods are not removed within this time they are regarded as warehousemen and not carriers.
Reasonable time after notice in which to remove goods is a question of law for the court.
Express companies in the habit of making personal delivery at all important towns must do so where they have delivery wagons, and notice to the consignee of the arrival of the goods is not sufficient to relieve the company of this duty. (99 Mass. 259.) But where the consignee is dead, absent, or refuses to accept the goods, the company holds them as warehousemen, and is not obliged to notify the consignor unless notified that he is still the owner. (44 N. Y. 505.) Where the goods are sent "C. 0. D." the carrier can deliver only upon cash payment, and he is a common carrier of the money returned. The consignee has a right to inspect the goods so sent, and the carrier should permit him to do so. (Lyons & Co. v. Hill & Co., 46 N. H. 49; Daylight Burner Co. v. Odlin, 51 N. H. 56.) The carrier must deliver to the right person, and this he must determine at his peril. A delivery to the true owner will protect him though he is not the consignee, and for failure to so deliver he is responsible as for con version. (5o N. Y. 213) So where goods were ordered by a swindler in the name of a fictitious firm, the car rier was held responsible for delivering to the swindler as agent of the firm. But this strict liability- to deliver to the right person continues only while the carrier is such, and when he becomes warehouseman he is only required to exercise ordinary care in the delivery of the goods. See note to Browne, Bailments, iv.