Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co., 196 U.S. 1 (1904), was a case before the United States Supreme Court.

1902) On August 5, 1900, Johnson was acting as head brakeman on a freight train of the Southern Pacific Company, which was making its regular trip between San Francisco; California; and Ogden, Utah.

On reaching the town of Promontory, Utah, Johnson was directed to uncouple the engine from the train and couple it to a dining car belonging to the company that was standing on a side track for the purpose of turning the car around preparatory to its being picked up and put on the next westbound passenger train.

The engine and the dining car were equipped, respectively, with the Janney coupler and the Miller hook, so called, which would not couple together automatically by impact, and it was, therefore, necessary for Johnson, and he was ordered to go between the engine and the dining car to accomplish the coupling.

On trial, after plaintiff had rested its case, the Court granted defendant's motion to instruct the jury to find in its favor (directed verdict).

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment and held that whether cars were empty or loaded, the danger to employees was the same.

The doctrine that statutes in derogation of the common law are to be construed strictly does not demand that the act of March 2, 1893 (27 Stat.

1901, p. 3174), compelling interstate carriers to adopt automatic couplers, in which there is an undoubted intention to make some change in the existing law, should be so construed as to defeat the obvious object of Congress.

The rule that penal statutes are to be construed strictly does not permit such a construction as defeats the obvious intention of the legislature.

Automatic couplers which will both couple and can be uncoupled without the necessity of men going between the cars are meant by the provision of the act of March 2, 1893 (27 Stat.