Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1868-04-17
l.arEest -Cirralailon IN Citr and STATE.
LEGAL.
Decision Of the Supreme COurf of Ten
nessee, AT Nashville, December Term,

| The right Of action, which person who dies
from injuries received from another. or whose
death ~ caused by wrongful act or omission
Of another. would have had against the wrong
doer. in case death had not ensued, shall not
abate or be extlnguished BY his death, bat
ne ~ ~. W. psFsonal "a M lod
from the claims OF his creditors" Held that
TINS section Of the Code gives the right Of ao-
tion 70 the wife Jointly with her husband for
injuries done her, aud In case death ensues,
the right Of action passes TO her peFsonal re-
presen tatiVe.
ID. Same. The sord person being used in
cludes all classes, and every one Is embraced
who, If death had not ensued. could have
maintained an action"
Philip Bream, admir-, o. r. L. Brown, e1. ale.
This is an action Of trssspass brought
in the Circuit Couri of Davidson county By
the plaintiff in error, as administrator of
his wife, for the use of himself, Catharine
Bream and Bridget Bream, minor children
Of Bridget Bream, deceased, against r. L.
Brown, j. P. Forbes and w. Z. Evans
The gravamen Of the charge is that the de-
PENDANTS were druggists and prescriptionists
in the city Of Nashville, and the plaintiffs
inlestaie being sick, applied to them for a
medicine, hayinga written prescription from
a physician for the medicine known as
colycinlh, and the defendant Evans, the
clerk and the agent Of the defendaDts,
Brown x Forbes, in preparing and mixing
up said prescription did il so carelessly
and negligehtly that he mixed up and pre-
pared other medicines, which we're poison
Gus and which were taken by the interstate,
from which she died. The damages were
laid at twenty thousand dollars in the dec
laralion. A demurrer was fled to the
declaration, which was allowed by the
court, and the suit dismissed, from which
ruling of the court the plaintiff in error has
appealed TO this court.
The important and only question pre-
scented for our consideration is, whether this
action can be maintained. Section 229l of
the Code provides az follows; "The right
of action which person who dies of in
jnries received from another, or when death
is caused from the negligence, acts or omis-
sions Of another, would have had against
the wrong doer, in case death had not en-
sued, shall not abate nor be extinguished
by his death, but shall pass TO his personal
representatives for the benefit Of his widow
and next of kin, free from the claims of
creditors" This section and the section
following, 1892, Of the Code, embody the
provisions Of an act passed the FIRST of Feb
ruary, 1850. BY the common law all per-
sonal actions for wrongs or injuries abated
by the death Of the party. To remedy this,
and throw the protecting influence Of thelaw
around the citizen, the act of LIST February,
1850, was passed, which enactsthat "in all and
every case where any person shall come 10
his death by injuries received from am
other, whether the same be inflicted felo-
niously or not, for which injuries in case
death hsd not resulted, an action of DANA
ges would lie at law. The personal repre-
sentative Of the person thus killed, shall
have the right 10 institute a suit for DANA
gees in either Of the Circuit Courts Of the
State" etc, etc.
la codifying the laws of the State the
provisions of this act were carried into the
Code ia sections 229l and 1922
The language Of section 229l ia broad
and comprehensive in its terms. The in
tention of the Legislature was to protect
the life Of the citizen, by giving compensa-
ton in damages against the party for the
commission of wrongful or negligent acts.
The increased facilities for travel by rail
road and steamboat the negligent con
duct of those entrusted with the lives of
the passengers, with the frequently recur-
ing accidents, which resulted so often in
the destruction of human life, forced the
Legislature 10 pass laws giving the right Of
action for injuries inflicted. The act of
1850 was passed altering the common law,
and giving the right to sue TO the personal
representative, in the case Of death, in the
construction and meaning of the section
of the Code and the rights under it, We
must look 10 the intention of the Legisla-
ture and give to the word all possible
meaning which is consistent with the Ian
gusge used. Ia the sections Of the Code
under consideration the most comprehen
sye words are used TO express the intention.
In giving the right Of action, all and every
individual is embraced in the word person.
Ii is insisted that the word person in this
section of the Code does not include the
wife. as this section by its terms means the
deceased must have left a widow and next
Of kin. That section, 229l, is explained
by section 2292 that the term next Of kin
in the last section referred TO, the language
is, "rhe action may be brought by the per-
sonal representative of the deceased for the
benefit of the widow and children, and If
he decline il, the widow and children may
nlAhk H. hAh HcAilbu ss@oA AlNdllH the
right OF action which a man, whose death
is caused by the wrongful act Of another,
shall not abate il be has a wife and chill
dren in that event the right of action will
pass 20 the personal representatives for their
benefit; in other words the statute provides
for the death Of a raan and not woman.
To this construction of section 229l, we
cannot assent To ascertain the intention
of the Legislature in constituting a statute
Of doubtful meaning, il is we'll settled that
for the purpose Of arriving AT the Legisa-
tive intent, all acts on the same subiectmat-
ter are 10 be taken together and examined
in order 10 arrive at the true meaning when
there are different statutes in payi pnateria,
though made at different periods, or ex-
pired, shall be taken and construed together
IS explanatory. Sedgwick on Constitution
and Statute Law, 247, 20 johnson, 745.
Apply this principle 20 the construction
Of section 1921 Of the Code BY the act of
February lsL 1850, the right of action
was given in all and every case where
sny person should come TO his
death by injuries received from another.
whether ieloniously inflicted or not, and
for which, In case death had not resulted.
an aCllon ioI uAlnaBe5 BOAlu lie, the per-
sonal representatives shall have the right
10 bring the suit.
1t will be seen by this act Of Feb. !, 1850,
that a new cause of action was created,
uaknosn 20 the common law. The terms
os section 229l Of the Code are "The suit
shall not abate nor be extinguished:'
thereby giving the personal representative
the right 10 bring the suit aud IL he decline
il, the widow aud children nav institute
the action, Ii Is insisted that this being
an action unknown 10 the common law,
should Dot he extended beyond the plain
import and meaning Of the words OF The
section.
We admit the CORRECTNESS of the princi-
Pile The language is very broad. The
word person, being used, includes all
classes and every one is embraced who, If
death had Dot eBsued, could have main
tanned an action Section 229l gives the
right of sction, aud section 1922 provides
the remedy. Could the wife in this case
have sued Il she had survived the injury,
and permanent ia health resulted BY
the cannon law the wife cOnld not sue