Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1840-08-13

LIABILITY OF STAGE Coach OWNERS.
I'VE publish day or two since the result
of a trial in Columbia, Ohio, in which
Mr.. M'Kinnev was plaintiff, and Neil,
Moore Il Co. defendants, aud in which
the jury returned a verdict Of S5.325 dam
ages. The Importance Of The case indu-
res us to publish the following skclrh OF
the evidence which is reported in The Ohio
State Journal.
The agent Of The defendant, when he
hired The driver. was ignorant of his quail
(ications. and hired him upon his own re-
yrpscnlalinn-rhaI the third or fourth iri?
which he drove he commenced whipping
his horses at the top of hill which he
was about desccnding-ti!at all the horses
were urou ras'sallop but ono, which was a
very fast 'To,lcr; and when he nacrly reach
ed the bottom uf,he hill, the passengers in
side became somewhat alarmed, and those
who we're on The outside had requested him
to usel lie brake or patentlock. lie replied
that there was no danger.
The horses went from The right hand
side of The road TO the left, and the wheels
on lha left hand side went off from the bed
of The road-lle driver then reincd the
horses on the road, and as the wheels
struck the broken stone the stage upset
thai il was straight and smooth. and that
the acciden, occurred in The a(ternoon.-
The Lex of The plaintiff was so bruised and
mansled as to render him cripple during
the remainder of his life. His suffering,
during several months after the upset, was
extremely severe; or, in the simple and
forrihle language Of one of the Witnesses,
..he suffered as much as twenty deaths. ~
Other parts of his body were injured, bur
no wound was SO severe as that upon his
leg.
Alter the evidence was closed, The case
was elaboratciv aud ably argued, by
,lessrs. S,anaberry and Ewing for the
plaintiff. and Mcss:s. Wilcox and Wright
for the defendant.
Judge Mclean then charged the nrv
in substance as follows: rha, Inc fact that
the carriage was upset. and the plaintiff
injured, was prma lacie evidence of care
lessness ON the part ofthe driver, and
throws The burden Of proof on he defcn
danr tha, the accident was not 0ccasioncd
by the carclessness or the fault Of the dri-
ver,-lhai. admitting the carriage was up
SET, il was incumbent on the defendant to
prove that the driver was 81 person ofcon-
pc,enr skill, good habits, in every rcSrccI
qualified and prepared for the business Of
driving, and thai he acted on the occasion
of the upset with the utmost prudence and
caution. And if the disaster was occa-
stoned by the least negligence or want Of
skill, or prudence, on his part, tho defendant
was liable; thar, although the stage Dropri-
tor does noi warrant the safety of his pas
senoerS. ycr his liability and undertaking go
TO this cXteul,--lIIal he or his agent, iii he
acls by agenr.) shall possess competent
skill. and that as far aS human care and
foresight can go, he will transport them
safely
As Slodamagcs, hr charged The jury that
if they should find The plaiurill was entitled
10 any thing h. should be entitled to expen
ses which he had incurred during his ill.,
ness-his loss of timr-,he suffering which
he had endured, and also for the injury
ana inconvenience WIG" NV " NJ shueI WI
account of the crippled state ofIlis leg.
The jury, after retiring Il short time, re-
turned verdict for the plaintiff for five
thousand. three hundred and twenty-five
,lOllars.
s'Fhc same poinls were ruled bv the
Supreme Cmirl the United SIales, in
l3 Peters Rep. p 100.