The Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1837-1867, 1855-07-07

At the recent term of the County Court
in this County, Judge L. P. Poland presid
ing, the following case was tried and decided
We have taken some pains to obtain a full
and correct report Of the case, inasmuch a
the principles involved in it are Of more tina.
ordinary importance to some of our custom
ers:
Connecticut & Passumpsic Rivers Railroad
Company vs.. Thomas Nelson. This was ar
action on the case. The declaration alleged
that the defendant carelessly ard negligently
permitted his cattle to be in the highway
and that they therefore went upon the plain.
tiffs Railroad where the highway crosses the
track Of the Railroad, by reason of which
the plaintiffs cars we're thrown from the
track and nearly demolished, and that the
track was thereby much injured, and claim.
ed to recover the damage which the Compa-
ny sustained in consequence thereof The
defendant plead the general issue. Trial by
jury. The plaintiff introduced testimony
tending to show that upon the evening of the
18th Of July, 1854, the plaintiffs by their
servants we're running their evening passen-
ger train over their road at their usual time
and at their usual and ordinary speed, and
with proper care, and that at highway eros
sing near CLAY Island" in Ryegatc, the
train came in contact with the defendant
cattle, some of which we're on the Railroad
at the crossing, and others very near the
track.-that the engine threw one of the an
imals with great force considerable distance
from the track, killing it Instantly that an
other became cntangled under the rear car
car of the train and was killed; that this car
was thereby thrown from the track a great
distance, and badly damaged, and that the
track was much injured. The plaintiff fur
Their gave testimony to show that the defend
ant had frequently before permitted his cattle
to run at large in the hi hway, and that the
fences between the defendants pasture and
the highway were insufficient to restrain cat
tie. The defendant introduced testimony
tending to show that at the time the car went
off the track the train was passing over a
curve in the road at great and improper
speed, and had been thrown from the track
before it reached the cattle, so that the car
was not overthrow by reason of the cattle.
Also that the cattle guards at this crossing
were not properly located, and that the de-
PENDANT had placed these cattle in his pasture
on this evcnln. before the accident
The Court (Judc c Poland) charged the
Jury in substance that if they found the cat
tie were not the cause of throwing the car
off from the track, but that it got off BY some
other means, they should return a verdict
for the defendant that if thew found that
the cattle guards were improperly 10 a'el
and that hat was the cause of the car being
thrown of, the defendant would be entitled
to verdict. Bat if they found, from fair
balance OF the testimony, that the car was
thrown of by the cattle. and also found tha;
the defendant was guilty of negligent in
relation to the cattle icing there at the time,
then the plaintiffs would he entitled to a YER
dict for all the damages they had sustained
That the defendant had no right to have his
cattle in the highway unattended and if III,
Jury found that they were so that of itself
was trt.HH f,ct" evidence OF nccliccncc on
the Iart OF the defendant and in that case
the burden would be cas-: upon the defendant
of satisfying the Jury that he had used orll-
nary care and proper vigilance to restrain
his cattle from going into the highway.
The jury rendered a verdict to- thc PLAIN
tiiTs for S!j9 damages and costs
5. ". Sladc 4 s. b. Colby for plaintiffs
j. Potts for defendant