New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-12-20
-.,,I,ed to leave the conveyance and, Il h. r.

- rfred II
/. not obliged to carry person az pas.
- cbeesn able and he may tender hi. fe) IL the
- sn q the Per.on 10 TO Interfere with and preju.
q 80 ce.,. Il has been said BY of the most dts
y Sr me-. ,h. an nnkeepeI Is not bound TO entertain
ssd ssnt Of rsa house, whose business there Is 10
- su o. he some limitation TO the general right OF the
p. General obligation of the carrier The carrier
ne ~ ,esson Of the general obliger receive every
Ases * 40 doing he may seriously damage his business
10 ssr,cse of ds,er~nins the reasonsbene, Of the
Of admitting blacks into their 10 iscrim
= esI de whites 10 matter tor your consideration
.w.y. wI.,SS, 10 l1s Sa instance S the
so 20 by virtue Of role regulation, then whether
-. OF regulation !. REASONABLE and proper Ta.t will be
question reasonable ana proper under all the crcqm
go ne Company bad hight to prescribe them II they
asbie an no passenger has right 10 violate them.
~ I be ef opinion that they reasonable aud pro-
ibsir bens known % plaintiff bound to
y sssd 90 10 do, have taken his stand on the
- rsrn choice between the two hsvias been given
On bic refusal to do 90 L was lawful for the conductor
Nm using only such force might be necessary for
,ose II by resson Of his resistance Injury occurs 10
- K Cor pany not responsible IL the regulation
~ md proper one, made known to the plain.
notice the evidence leaves Doubt the psinf
to have submitted, and any injury he may have
s,.si,tins forms no ground for claim for damage
s-ee used In removing was not more than necessary.
not 10 snd %ss to the
election lawful. and the defendants are La
XII: regulation. you mus. take al the eiIc an
SO IN the case into consideration and the probable
~ tho business and interests Of the Company fom
s??hl,ofs IN equality passengers with whites. shall
you with any comments on this question 80 far
r /. extends IL one Of those which call
800 exercise Of great wisdom candor and fairness
- Jury ana one In respec. to which any admixture
ssj.ss passion in dstet@i5os the qes.oSn may tend
This however you will bear in mind. viz: the ones.
not whether the Company furnish accommodation suf.
q o. ~ :. have 'ire.dy .d tia. the ps5 was obliged
.ss this because he could not get accommodation in
tn hair Ia
., ,ss,ber The rule by which the plaintiff wss coored
,rcaded from this car was under all the circunssnees,
sss y law the Company have nigh, to exclude
ss II persons. class, from their cars; aud If this
iii his case, and the question Of rsssOnablsnss,
: a. rule does not arise. On that point 1t 10 my duty
VIII e1cSS 81 sqis S% S:
~ tSurs but for the purposes Of this trial shall rule
developed in this csse reasonable and proper
set then the Company had the right In sw, to make it,
ssn As the plaintiff bound have submitted to It,
he did not defendants will be entitled TO your
unless s1Psss rns e.G,n iIm .he Ana ne on hi.
% Of the degree of force proper TO use proper th:
" t1ii II ss DssI ss effort %
t Company responsible Tor the consequences Of
aOns Of the increased force rendered necessary by such
M proper further 10 say that the plaintiff have claim
for any violence which may nave been nsea 20 pre-
nd It. His legal rights do not depend on any such attempt
3, tbo i io sht tic to this .Son
been perfect IL now 10 after all his resistance
90 shall find that this not reasonable and proper resu
= then the plofif 10 entitled TO verdict at your hands
Z he only question will be as to damases In law, hsexpul
would be unjusthabe trespass aud assault the
sues a. may deea reasonable having reference TO the
~ and publicity the assault and the injury TO the plain
reputation and person. But 10 proper to remind
y what the pls'ntiHs counsel himself admits that the OBJ
q this action much damages TO test the ques
: hsvs effect that question do not no xever BY this
.rut intend to limit your discretion In this matter
Ire Jury retired TO their room, but sent in three
ne or further instructions before they finally retained
,yxdiet They wished to know, l. Whether they
mi decide according to the lay 2. Whether, If the
psepeers requested that DIR. p. be put out, II was
sxpnsble for the conductor to put HIM OUT and 8.
Shst was reasonable regulation. The answers to
,se qu,s ons are anticipated in the charge which Is
usa in full above.
lAer an absence of couple of hours, the Jury
vught in q verdict for the defendants.
IRENE CoURT-sr.oIAL TEsn-Dsc ls-BefOre Judge
CLERKE.
MOTION TO DISCHARGE ON BAIL.
imotion was made TO discharge Frances Leon (slias
s Dupres) on bail Two Indictments psndus against
a fslopiousy stealing pieces Of silk first from Stewart IN
xu, 1850 and second rom 0 hewh' D. I0dsf TO- II"
s motion was argued BY Jones Brady for the applicant
Assistant District Attorney Sedgwick for the people
dse Cleke denied the application the ground that TO
NTH would DO to with the province Of the Court OF
NE moobsnicS Bank sgt. the Enterprise Insurance Co.
Dsisult to be- opened Receiver to have ten days 70
iwa,
,T1T OF COMMON PLEAS-SPEcIAL TERM-DEc. l9-
Before Judge DAILY.
John w. Con ssll ast- The Mayor, &c
Notion for leave to amend the complaint granted
@. B. Greenlesf sst. Robert Jarvis
JudQment for plaintiff on demurrer, with liberty to
ssdsn. to amend on payment OF costs. nc ..,
Charles BoutCn, &c. sgt. Augustus Sunneit
n~Io init a