The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1874-11-18
The @ailg Arens.
SPEED OF TRAINS.
Control Over the Matter by Local Police Au-
thorities by the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court.
From the Reading Penn. Times, Nov. II

From the Reading PENN Times, Nov. H.
In the supreme court at Pittsburgh OF
Monday decision was given in the case o
the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, oper
ating the Cleveland a. Pittsburg road
against James and wife. This was an ac
ton brought by James and wife in the dis
railroad company for damages for the death
ton, on the Cleveland Il Pittsburgh road
last August. The court below gave the
parents 81, 900 damages, and an appeal was
taken by the railroad company The latter
claimed that the father contributed to the
negligence, and also that councils had NJ
power to. regulate the speed of trains run
ming through the city. The decision is al
important one, as it settles the latter point,
and the opinion of ChiefJ ustice Agnew is
given here in full
"A distinction is taken between the case
| Of the father or mother bringing an action
for the death Of child aud child bring
my an action for personal injury. In the
former the contributory negligence of the
parent may be used in defence, while in the
latter case the negligence of child of ten
der years will not be available. Clearly
this was not u case where a court could saw
there was negligence per sc. and then with
draw the case from the Jury. The conduct
of the father and all the attending circum-
stances were such as necessarily went to
the jury to enable them to determine
whether the father, BY his conduct, in fact
contributed to the death OF his child, and
was thus guilty Of negligence We see no
error IN rebnttlng the fact to the jury. 1t
they erred we cannot cancel their mistake
Tn the other question we perceive no good
ground to say that a city has no power to
pass an ordinance to regulate the speed of
trains within the city limits, merely be-
cause the place of the accident did not
happen within the lines of street. Where,
as in this case, a railroad passes through
populous city, crossing its streets at various
points, the exercise of the police power
would be of little service to the public, if
it could be only at the street crossings. 1t
may be said that the public has no right
to inhibit the speed of the train within the
company's own domain, provided the com.
pany checks up and crosses the street at
the legal rate of speed But in theexercis |
ing of police powers such as this the actual |
rate of trains must be taken into account
thuS hoU ohiy lIiO ulIhCullS, tlC
lmpossibility, of reducinga speed at the rate
Of twenty five miles an hour to four or five
miles an hour in the short space of 800 or
400 feet, but also the fact that, though |
without right,many persons are found walk
ing upon the track Of the railroad at all |
hours Now, as a matter of police regula |
ton, it will not do to assume let people |
who go where they have no right take care
of themselves. The police power is enact
ed not only for those who exercise prop
er degree of reflection, but for others who
may not Lite is too sacred to place its Sc
curity On a basis so uncertain. Even
the discreet and rejecting make mis-
takes Of judgement as well as of right, while
infants and others may not Judge at all.
Therefore the safety of dense population
is to be guarded by the police power in
great city, even though in doing this the
power may be called into exercise within
the dwellings,, the lots, and the private
ways of the citizens. We see not that the
railroad company has greater rights within
the city than others. Upon the whole
case, we discover no error which ought to
revise this judgement. Judgement af-
rmed.