We have carefully examined the evidence and considered the assignments of error. Conceding that the company is not liable in this action as an inn-keeper or common carrier, yet a reasonable and proper degree of care is imposed on the company. Whether it did exercise that degree of care under the circumstances was for the jury. The main object in taking passage in such a car is to permit the passenger to sleep. While in that helpless condition, a duty rests on the company to provide reasonable care and precaution against the valuables of a passenger being stolen from his bed or from the clothes on his person. This is not the case of a robbery by force and violence, but by stealthy larceny. Unless a watchman be kept constantly in view of the center aisle of the car, larceny from a sleeping passenger may be committed without the thief being detected in the act. While the fact that another passenger in the same car was robbed the same night was not relevant to prove that the defendant in error was in fact robbed, yet it was admissible as bearing on the *85absence of proper, care by the company. This case was submitted to the jury in an able and correct charge. We see no error of which the company can complain.
Judgment affirmed.