Common Carriers of Passengers—Contract Exempting from Liability for Negligence—Compensation for Carriage—Public Policy.—Independent of statutory provisions, it is almost universally held that any contract purporting to exempt a common carrier of persons from liability for negligence of himself or his servants to a passenger carried for compensation is void, as being against public policy, and it is immaterial in such cases that the attempted limitation on such liability is agreed to by the passenger in consideration of special concessions in the matter of rate of fare or other departure from the rules applicable to passengers paying full fare. It is enough that there is any consideration for the carriage.

Id.—Passenger Carried Gratuitously—Gross Negligence.—By the great weight of authority, however, in the absence of provision to the contrary, such a contract of exemption from liability for negligence is upheld, at least so far as any except what is called in the opinions wanton or willful or gross negligence is concerned, in the ease of' a passenger who is carried solely as a matter of favor, and without any compensation or advantage whatever to the carrier.

Id.—Who Is a Passenger.—The person admitted to his vehicle by a common carrier for the purpose of carriage for any compensation is a passenger, with the rights possessed by any passenger so far as the exercise of care for his safe carriage is concerned.

Id.—Carrier Liable for Injury to Gratuitous Passenger Caused by Gross Negligence.—Under section 2175 of the Civil Code, providing that “a common carrier cannot be exonerated by any agreement made in anticipation thereof, from liability for the gross negligence, fraud,' or willful wrong of himself or his servants,” such carrier is liable for an injury to a passenger carried gratuitously occasioned by the gross negligence of itself or of its servants.

Id.—When Relation of Common Carrier and Passenger Exists.—On whatever terms a common carrier of persons, as the same is defined in section 2168 of the Civil Code, vountarily receives and carries a person, the relation of common carrier and passenger exists. The voluntary waiver of all claim for compensation for carriage of a person does not take away from the status of the carrier as a common carrier so far as the person carried is concerned. It is still a common carrier as to such person, with all the obligations of a common carrier, except in so far as those obligations are limited by contract provisions which are not inhibited by law.

Id.—Gross Negligence Defined—Want of Slight Care and Diligence.—The term “gross negligence,” as used in section 2175 of the Civil Code, which has remained in its present form from the adoption of the code in 1872, must be construed in accordance with the definition given to that term by sections 16 and 17 of that code, notwithstanding the repeal of the latter sections in 1874. So construed, the term means the “want, of slight care and diligence,” and does not imply anything in the nature of a willful wrung.

Id.—Railroad—Leaving Switch Open—Question of Gross Negligence for Trial Court.—The question whether the. action of a switch foreman in leaving open a switch connecting the main track of a railroad with a siding, contrary to the rules of the company, amounted to gross negligence on the part of such foreman, was one for the trial court, and its finding thereon will not be disturbed by the appellate court.