Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1857-03-12


CouRT-CATTLE MUST BE KEPT OFF THE
RAliRoAD TRAcK.-The following account of
a case recently decided in the Supreme
Court, is from the proof-sheets of the forth
coming seventeenth volume Of Illinois Re-
ports.
TIE Illinois Central Railroad Company
PlainilGin Error, U.s. Henry R:edy Plain.
tif in Error.
ERROR 40 LAsALLE COUNTY COURT.
Trcspass vi ct arms, is not the proper form of ac-
action for injuries. resulting from the negligence
of the servants for corporation; trespass Oh tn
ease, is the proper action, of which justice of
the peace has rot jurisdiction.
Animals wandering upon the tarci OF an unen-
closed railroad are strictly trespasses, and the
Company is not liable for their destruction, un-
less its servants guilty Of w.llfu negligence,
evincing reckless misconduct.
The burden Of proof is on the plaintiff, TO show
negligence. The mere fact that an animal was
killed, viii not render the Company liable.
trains are conducted, witnesses acquainted with
their management, must be examined.
This was an action of trespass begun be-
fore justice OF the peace, fo- killing steer,
by the train Of the defendant, running upon
the railroad in LaSalle county. judgment
was rendered for the plaintiff below, for
twenty five dollars and costs, The case was
taken by appeal to the LoSalle county court.
The case was submitted 10 Fl. G. Cotton,
Judge the County Court, without the in
tervention of jury, who gave judgment for
Rgedy for thirty dollars and costs. The
railroad company thereupon brought the
case in the Supreme Court.
There was but one witness examined who
testified that he was plowing on the 5th OF
May, 1866, when he heard freight train
coming OIL the Illinois Central Railroad;
stopped TO look at it and saw lot Of cattle
on the tack, all Of which left the track, ex-
eept one steer, who ran before the train
about twelve PAGES, when the locomotive
caught him and showed along the track and
then upon one side, both of his hinder legs
were broken, and his fore legs severely
wounded. The steer died of his wounds
That the value Of the steer was thirty dol
lars.
The counsel for defendant maintained tha
the proper form of action was not trespas'
pi et armis, but trespass on the case for neg
ligence Of the servants of the Company
This was not the case in the cause. M
negligence had been complained of on th'
part of the Company or its attaches. l
those put in charge of the train, in conduct
ing ii, behaved carelessly and thereby caused
the injury, such carelessness is the direc
and immediate cause of the injury,for whicl
they might be made liable in trespass; bu
the employer whose act was at most but tn
remote cause Of the injury, could only b
made liable in an action on the case.
But waving this question as to the form
OF the action, the evidence does not shoy
such case of negligence in those havinI
the charge Of the train, so as to render In
Company liable for the injury sustained
The rule laid down by this court in the cas-
of The Chicago and mississippi Ra'lroa
Company Us. Patchin, l6 Ill. 1873, must con
troll this case. 1t had been previously set
tied, that the Company was not bound
fence the road against,o ,or to prevent the IT
trusion Of stock upon it. In this case it wa
settled that animals wandering upon tn
track Of an uninclosed railroad were strict
respassers, and that the Company was M
liable for their loss while on the track, III
less its employees were guilty OF wiilInl
wanton injury, or of gross negligence, evil
cling reckless or wlllful misconduct.
The only point which the evidence Sc
ties is the killing the steer. There is noti
ing testified to, showing the least want 4
care, or that, by the greatest possible exc
tions, the accident could have been preyen
ed. much less, is there that gross and eulp