The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1870-04-09 00:00:00

ACTIONS AGAINST RAILWAYS.

At Leeds assizes. the enure of " Hurst v. the Midland
Railway Company "lute been heard. The plaintiff, wee a
',lumber and glazier at Sheffield, who also, before the Slh of
O.:tuber, 186 S, kept a well-ft equ.nted inn at Kilnhurst, from
which he derived an annual profit of £4OO or Li: .0 a year. lit
the evening of the hilt of October lie was travelling from
Ihmcaster to Mulioro', on the defendants' line, o hell a col-
:talon with a standing roods train took place near Masborti
station, and the plaintiff was 00 da.hedalaint that he has been
disabled front ally active employ ment ever since, and has been
compelled to let his nubile-non, This scion was brought
to ri.cover d images from the ..,,,mpany for negligence.

.• . _ _
Mr. Overmal addres- ed the jury in mitigation of
damage., the ne ligtri- imputed to the defendants
beii g admitted. lie said the expenses to wh:ch it was
said the plaintiff had been put had been exaggerated
For instance, during fifteen months wine had cost, it
was said, £l4O, which was a bottle and one-fifth per
day—rather an extraordinary quantity for a man whose
constitution nasa complete wreck. For one excursion
of six days £2O was charged, and for twenty-six days at
Scarborough, 1:60. No doubt the plaintiff and his wife
had induLed is luxuries at Scarborough which they
would never have thought of at home, but £6O for
less than a month was, under any circumstances, down-
right extravagance. The learned counsel pointed out that
Mr. Blytham, of Swinton, the plaintiff's regular medical
man, had charged 13.. breach visit. That, he contended
WWI a charge Mr. Blytham would never have made if
it had not been imppused the railway company would
have to pay it. Ti show the tebdency to paralysis in
the plaintiff, a clinical thermometer had been used.
Mr. Overend paid, amid loud laughter, that he had
been holding that very thermometer in his right hand
fur some time, and he was eorry to announce that his
right hand 'WM paralysed. It was in vain that he had
grasped it in his hand, for do what he would he could
not get the thermometer to rise about ti.ro. (Laughter.)
He argued from this that the euggestion of paralysis
was not to be depended upon; though probably the
real fact was that the thermometer was out of repair.
The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—damages
1. he plaintiff's original claim waa £3,000.

JONES AND WIPE V. NORTH WEsTERN RA/LWAY COMPANY.

On the sth of May last Mrs. Jones, the wife of a
wireworker and innkeeper. Brookfield-street, Leeds,
went with her daughter on the defendants' railway to
Garfurth. The train, on arriving there, only stopped
when the carriage in which Mrs. Jeers was had gone
inveen or twenty yards pest the end of the platform,
the door on the side to alight ass locked, anti when
the statiommiutter opened it he said, "Make haste,
the train must be inoviig." Mrs. Jones got on the
step and then descended to the ground with the assi-t.
ante of the station.mas'er's arm. The station-master
said, "Leave loose, I must close the door." Mrs.
Jones kt go her hold slid fell to the ground. Th.
statiommaater left her, and went to the station. Mrs.
Jones because sick, and had great pain in the kt ee,
but elm went with Mitienlty to the house of Mr. Archer
at Garf..rrh, three 4 1.1., rs .f smile frkee the statton,
which clibtauce it totta Mrs. Jones two hours to walk.

After the sth of May Mr. Jones. kept her bed for a
month, and Mr. Jones had paid £2O to a charwoman
and £ll 24. to a surgeon. Mr. Jones lived two miles
from the eurgery, and Mr. Price had only charged da.
a visit, medicine included.

The defence was that the carriage door was not
h eked, and the station-master did not see her until
Me got on the step. The carriage MIA then only two
yards from the end of the platform. Some one on the
engine called out, "Keep your seats, and we'll put
hack." She alighted from the step quite firmly, but
then sat down and complained that she had sprained
her 'ancle. The fireman, stoker, and staticnmaeter
deposed that these were the real facts of the occur-
rence, and Mr. Overend said if the jury did not be-
lieve them it would be tantamount to saying that they
had been guilty of wicked and dreadful ps ijury. The
defendants' csse was in short that the plaintiff had
made a clumsy jump from the step; but Mr. Sey-
mour, in his reply, maintained that substantially the
plaMtiff's case was inc ntradicted.
. . .

The jury return, d a verdict for the plaintiff
danotgep, forty shill ngs.
'rite Jug.: It is a sery remarkable verdict ; any.
tbiu g but s tosfantor3. I the jury intended to find
:or the plintclf, they ought to have given greater
datnage,.
Mr. Ovsrend :But it is nnt acase for a certificate.

The Judge : I wall c-rtify, httt not that it wa. a
proper ease for a Prwcial jory. Th-: claim was a 1.11.11
one, and I thick a common jury naigh; have disputed
of it.

His lorlbip, however, rave the defendants leave to
move to set a•ide the verdict.

Mr. Moore, a land-sent and surveyor, sued the
Metropolitan District Railway Comp my for negli-
gence. He was a passenger from Gloucester-road to
Westminster in April last, and received several cuts
shout the head, owirg to the train running against the
buffers at the Westnrinster state n. De was ordered to
go to Margate, where he remained for five moths, and
Iris expenses were £8 a week. Damages were laid at
£3,000, but the jury returned a verdict for I:450.

Mr. Mealey, an ex-publican, brought an action to
recover dainages for injuries which his wife had received
while alighting from a carriage at the London Bridge
tri mini', of the South E..sttrn Railway. It was con.
tended that the station was not mutticiently lighted
with gas, and further that the train was pulled up
beyond its proper stopping,-tvEnt. The company
pleaded that the accident arose from Mrs. Mealey's
fault, and that trie injuries were of a ought nature.
The jury found a verdict for the company.

Mr. Ebenezer Cox, a ropemaker of Fhietwood, re.
covered £3OO damages from the Furness Railway Corn.
party, for injuries sustained while getting on board
one of the defendants' steamers, in Stpiember,
The came was tried at the last assizes, and a verdict
given in the plaintiff's favour ; but a rule for a new
trial had been granted by the Court of Queen's Bench.