The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-03-20
LEGAL INTELLIGENCE.
THE s1MoNs HoMIoIDE CASE.


aud was resumed this morning.
The evidence of Maginns and other witnesses for
the Commonwealth was to the eject that Maginnls,
who keeps reed store on Passy unk road having had
hts attention called by woman to the TACT that
man had taken from the front of mis- door one OF
several bunoles OF straw, and had carried it away,
starred out in company with Bernard Kane,
the deceased, in pursuit. II was after night,
somewhere about 8 o'clock and moon.
light. After proceeding q short distance
Simons, the defendant was perceived leaning against
renee. lie was recognized and approached by
Maginnis n VINO was some distance IN advance OF
OF Maplnnls who that following him, and drew
pistol, accompanying this action with oaths
and threats. Magnnis seized hold of him by the
arms above the elbows, and in the sort OF
tussle or struggle that ensued the weapon was
scharged. Maginnls begged OF him not to shoot
AGAIN or he might hit somebody. Notwithstanding
this the weapon was a second time discharged, the
lungs and heart and causing almost instantaneous
oeath IL was in testimony that after this Simons
walked TO the house. into which Kane had staggered
and celed for him 10 come out, as ne had two more
sloads Tor him.
called 10 show thai on the afternoon OF the date of
the killing the prisoner had parakeD freely of liquor
and that, being unaccustomed TO its use, ne
deIed partially craZed by IT. The neighborhoOd was
also shown to be an unsafe and lawess one, particu
| larry after nighttal and 1T was ALLEGED that
imagining Inns If followed by enemies, he had used
! the pistol without any clear ca of what he was
about. 1t likewise ALLEGED that, IN the drunken
state OF the prisoner while held by Mapinnis, 1t
impossible tor him to have taken aim with the pistol
| to shoot any one and that, IN point of fact he
| did not do 80, the weapon beng accidentally dis
| charged
Many witnesses were likewise called as to cha
racer, and it was shown that previous to the
renee he had been a quiet and peaceabe man.
| The evidence was concluded tins morning, and the
counsel the case were speaking to the jury when
| our report closed. District Attorney Mann and T.
Bradford Dwight for the Commonwealth; F. Q.
| Brewster for the prisoner.
| THE RIGHT OF CoLoRED PEOPLE TO RIDE IN CITY
| PASSENGER RAILWAY CARS
| SUPREME COURT AT NISI PRIUs-,Justee ThOmp.
| son.-Martin M. WhIte vs.. The rranktord and
| Southw ark Phla ielpha CITY Passenger Railway
| Company. THIS If an action brought to rec over
| damages for the election of the plaintiff, who
co ored man. from OF the of the defendants.
| From tie evidence II appears that the plaintiff,
commissioned officer in the 24th United States
| colonel troops in company with another non'com-
| mlssoned officer OF the same regiment got on The
front platform OF one the cars OF the defendants,
IN ApIil last, ON their way to Camp William Penn,
where they had been ordered to report az 7 CLOCK
. tter they had been on the car for few moments
the driver toe them that they must got of, that
was not the car Tor them they refused TO leave the
forward to assist IN putting them off They were
then compelled to get off ne conductor IN reply
to the question oil a passenger, whv they were put
OIL said that such were hls orders. Hence the pre-
sent action.
The defense set up is that the defendants as q rail.
way corporation create for the purpose of CARRYING
passengers, have the right to make such rules as
pass engers, and for that purpose may exc ude par
ucular persons and classes, and in the exercise of
that right may exclude black people.
That in the beginning OF 1865 the Company passed
resolutions allowing coIored people to rde in all
their cars, but that it met with so much objection
from Their passengers that four weeks later they
obliged to repeal the same and pass other
luton restricting the right OIL colored people to ride
The case is a very interesting one, from the fact
that the object OF the present. action to test the
rght OF the Passenger Railway Companies OF the city
10 exclude colored people from the cars the toll
LOWING points tor the instruction of the Court TO the
The following are the plaintiffs pOnts:
The learned Judge is requested TO charge the
l. The plaintiff, although colored man, had the
same night OF passage in q railway car of Lae de-
PENDANTS which the law gives to any other person,
and the defendants had no right authority to
fuse to convey him passenger to point on
the line of ther road TO winch he desired to go If he
wes willing to pay his 1are.
g. the jury is satisfied from the evidences that the
plaintiff got the for the purpose of being car
red as passenger, and Intending to pay his fare,
and the conductor refused to carry him, tue plaintiff
LIS entitled to recover damages IN this action.
g. If the plaintiff was ordered by the conductor to
breach of the peace, his compliance with the order IL
not to be considered as voluntary act on his part,
winch deprlves hlm of his right to recover damages
in this action against the Company.
A. The defendants are corporation created Tor
the purpose of constructing and operating railway
lOr the conveyance passengers. Their powers are
limited by their charter. which con4ers upon them
no night to make regulations whereby colored per
sons arc excluded as passengers from particular
cars, such regulations are IN vioauon OF the law,
and the corporation is liable in damages 10 the
plalntin If they enforced against him by the
| conductor or agent of the Company
o. 1t was the outy OF the conductor, If the car was
in motion TO stop II and receive the plaintiff on
board, when notified in the usual manner hat he
desired 10 take passage, unless the was already
filled with passengers; and II the plrintH conducted
himself VITA propriety and decency ana reaOy
aud willing to pay his fare when applied for 1t was
the duty oil the company to carry him in the car to
his point OF destination the line OF their railway.
II the conductor retnsed either TO to carry
the plalltif as passenger, under such clrcum-
Stances he is entitled to recover damages from the
company on this action,
The following are the deiendants' points:-
/. railroad corporation created for the carriage
OF passengers may lay dOwnlrules for the comfort
and convenience Of those whom 1t is bound 20
carry.
q That the right to make such rules extends to
authorize such corporation to exclude particular
individuals or classes OF individuals.
| g. That III the exercise OF such right the said cor.
poration may exclude from particular cars negroes
\ or black persons
A. That the right to decide upon such exclusion is
with the Company; and if they exclude such persons
from conviction tuat if they are admitted such adj
mission will cause persons of other asses TO leave
the or refuse to enter them, then they have ex-
ercred the right upon such considerations as the
Court will not interfere to set aside such rule OF eX
| clusion
Justice Thompson declined to answer all the
points OF the plaintiff except the fourth, which he
answered IN the negative, saying thai the evidence
was that the defendants had provided certain cars
for the conveyance OF colored people, and that the
| plaintiff was not one oil them; tnat the Com
| pany had the right to make this restriction,
and the conductor of the car IN question committed
no trespass in ejectlng the plaintiff and that the
verdict the Jury should be tor the defendants. The
| defendants points, alter this charge, were not
pressed, The jury returned verdict for the DC
| iendants The will now 20 to the Supre ne
| Court in Banc for final settlement. Charles tSib-
bOns Esq APP cared for the plaintiff, and e. Ohm
| stead for defendants.
When were there only two vowels2 In the
\ days OF no q (Noah) before and (you and ~