Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1873-03-25
II. VI. BearCc
W. l. Putnam.
THE RAILROAD CASE

THE RAILROAD CASE.
Silas II. Burnham y. q. L. Il. x. C..
Pin. bought ticket ior Norlhumber
land oil Mr.. Jersey, Depot Master and
Ticket Agent at South Pari-, on the l'th
of Feb. 1871. told Mr. Jersey ho wanted
to stop at Gorlmm. whether hc
should buy = ticket through or get Two
tickets; Mr.. H. said the Conductor
would give stop over ticket, The
ticket said Good lnr this day only y
went to GOrham and asked The Conductor
Mr.. Latham. it he should need = stop
over" ticket; he said the Conductor, had
orders about - week ago not Ia eve stop
over tickets; said il i, were his train TO
morrow he should pass him on The ticket
but didn't know what Gould would do,
who was the Conductor tor next day.
Mr.. Horn was with me-. The next lay
we took the cars at GOrhau. som alter
we got Oh tho train, Mr. Gould came TO
Us and took our tickets, passing on, say
ing nothing When We got 10 West
Milan, Mr. Could came ~ and threw his
ticket at me. and va, very in-Oient; s1II
il was not good, aud must settle the
fare told him the circumstances OF
buying tho ticket IT South Paris. and
what Conductor Latham said The cars
were in The station. When iho car, start
ed, | got on again. aud tic Conductor
ordered me of, and | got OIL. The night
was stormy could not get iut1 the pubic
house because they were fuD. and had 10
sock accommodations alicrwaui; S"l un
to the tram that night | had a bad
hand. having had - iclOu--Sot cold m 1t
by exposure on thai night, wc'.t "Hc~ To-
Dartmouth College. Hanover. and Was
taken sick there with typhoid fever - had
a physician for ten days every ~, aHd
some days twice 4 day Ma, si,N owing
to the exposure Mt Milan.
The defence put in the Deposition OF
T. o. Gould. Conductor, DENYING using
any yioienc. or Insulting lluEUlsc. SAID
that Buinham told him at Wet Milan.
that as his friend did not get ON. ne would
get off, and stopped the train Ter him
Dir. Rand. Tor the defence, cJulcnIcd "a,
u matter OF law, that ii has hccn settled
that X. Il. Corporations can make special
contracts in relation to tickets, limiting
them to the time expressed on them; he
did not propose TO argue the case t. the
the Jury, but would submit il under the
instructions of the Court.
A. A. Stout, Esq. with Mr.. Wilson,
addressed the Jury on the question OF
costs, citing Goddards case, and contend
ing for the whole amount in the writ
S50O.O0.
Judge Daulorlh charged the Juy-that
the question WAS rs TO whether pill vas
righLiully in the cars and he would im'
sLruct them that he was that di>poscs OF
everything but the question OF damages.
He was nut of twice. do not say he
was rightiully there the second time. II
he had been notified To leave and did not
pay his lare, anu got on again, he was
not there rightlully. Are liable for
damages M cessarily resulting from that
act. A. lopunilivo damages. the ease OF
Judge GOddlrd's which has just been
cited, and which is. in my opinion, good
law, has nutuing to DO with the case, be-
cause the circumstances are diitercnt-
punitive damages are only allowed when
the action OF the Co. or Agent is wanton
or willul
Mr.. Rand asked the Court to give the
following Instructions to the jury
That Railroad Corporations may make
special contracts rs TO the transportation
OF passengers. aud may make reasonable
regulations rs TO the mode OF performing
their duties Is Common Carriers.
That 4 contract and rule that tickets
shall be COOS! only Tor the day OF their
issue, and snail entiIle the holder to 4
passage Oh that day only is reasonable,
and will n,l ,ntItlc the holder % pas.
sage ON any other day.
That apon the law and evidence the
dens a.c not liable.
That upon the allegations ia the Writ.
Plif. cannot recover any more than actual
damages, aud leits. are not liable for
punitive and exemplary damages
The instructions were not given.
Verdict for plf Tor $4,000
G.. 4. Wilson, A. A. Strout. Rand.
Albert Hopkins VS. Charles Dunn.
Action ri assumpsit for an amount
claimed To he due for giving up lease OF
defendants farm.
Referred TO presiding Judge.
Judgment Tor plaintiff S25 damages.
Randall, Harlow. Bolster.
L. A. Dumond aud wife v. Bethel.
Action for damages sustained by piif's.
wife, on tho 9Th of April. 1872, by being
thrown from sleigh near w. W. Ma
sons house, on Bethel Hill. The damages
me alleged at $4,000. Pln's wife and son
were reluin ming from meeting, oil Sunday