erty, and this it is undisputed he was doing when it was taken from him by force by a squad of men from the fort, acting under the instructions of the consignee. He protested against this, insisting upon his right to earn his freight by completing the transportation; but all his protests were unavailing, and he finally yielded only to superior force, without resistence, it is true, but this was commendable, as bloodshed would have probably resulted had forcible opposition been interposed.
The master has a lien on the property to enable him to earn his freight. The moment the transportation begins the lien attaches, and is not divested so long as the master is proceeding not in default. The consignor is not bound to pay until the transportation is completed in accordance with the contract, but he may not prevent the master’s earning his freight. If he takes possession of the goods short of their destination, when the master, not in default, is willing and able to complete the transportation, he must pay full freight. He has prevented or waived the performance of the condition precedent. The law therefore regards it as performed. It is true that in this case the performance was prevented by the consignee, and not by the shipper; but in this respect the consignor is represented by the consignee, and the former is responsible for the acts of the latter. The consignor has done his full duty to the consignee when he has paid or agreed to pay freight to a certain point. If the consignee sees fit to take the goods at some other place when the transportation is only partially completed, and when the master is able and willing to perform his contract, he, the consignee, can make no claim against the consignor, and the latter should therefore pay the freight which the master was able, willing, and had a legal right ta earn. “There can be no action unless delivery is either made or prevented from being made by the act or fault of the shipper or consignee.” 1 Pars. Shipp. & Adm. 220. The consignee, under our statute, controls the delivery of the freight, even in cases where there is a conflict between him and the consignor. § 3846, Comp. Laws. He certainly has no greater right to prevent the carrier’s earning freight than has the shipper. The shipper cannot, although he owns the property, stop the trans-
