Middletown transcript., 1874-05-30
Letter from New Castle.
Ne " CAsrLE, DEL. MAY 2stI

NEW CASTLE, DEL, MAY 26th, 1874.
Dear TranscrPt:-
The case Of Lyman Us. the P. w. h B. R. r.,
which was pending when my last was written,
was concluded by non-suiting the plaintiff.
1t is only repeating common remark, to say,
that this decision Of the court is very unpopular.
Nor would it be exaggeraion to add that the dis
satisfaction does not simply declare itself in an
acquescent aisapproval of, and disagreement
with the theory OF the Court; for there is more
than that. Indeed, there seems to be a ground-
swell of discomfort if not Of ill-teeling and in
dignaton, which will doubtless, express itself
in demand for legislative action.
Without Questioning the uprightness of the
Court, or the legal soundness of their conclusion
and Its agreement with the current of decisions
in similar cases confess TO being one of those
who regard the result of that trial one-sided, and
deficient in the element Of equity.
Does the fact that party 'contributed" it may
be IN The smallest possible degree-to the sum total
of neglect Which eveEtuated in a catastrophe
that proped disastrous to herself, release from all
cHlpdbathy or responsibility TO The other neylectfM
''contributors to the sad, and it may he, ruinous
result? Is It just, upon the single ground of
"contributort neglect to throw such case out
OF Court, and to refuse the consideration, by q
jury, OF the question of the relatipe comparative
fduitiness Of dH The parties concerned? think not.
Why the rery idea and essence OF n ''contribution'
is that there is multiplicity or duality at least, Of
sources or causes to produce result. The deri-
vation of the word icon and tribuo) confines its
meaning to associated action, working conjointly
literally g'ping together; and if these parties
together, conjointly, brought about this disaster,
why say to one I" You must suffer all the evil
consequences, because you contributed " semc-
what to the prod action of the accident" and to
the other. 'you may go Scot free, notwithstand-
ing you were grossly neglectful and by your neg
ligence you have rendered the woman miserable
for life, because she did not use unusual precau-
ton by stopping and prckng her ears to listen
for your approach - Granting that there was
mutual neglect, ought there not to be reciprocal
suffering, or damages? At least, so it seems TO
me, and such, in brief, are some of my reasons
for the opinion that jury ought to have been
permitted to weigh the evidence Of relative guilt,
and proportion the amount OF consequential dam
ages.
The next most exciting case during this term,
was that of Miss Meredith ps, P. w. h B. R. r.,
for damages for injuries sustained in the terrible
catastraphe at Ellersie last year.
Messrs. Bayard and Gordon, as before, repre-
sented the r R. and Messrs. Lore and SWAIN the
latter of Philadelphia, were counsel for the plain
tiff. The trial was racy chiefly in consequence
OF sharp passages between the contending law
yers, which were, at times, more personal than
respectful, and more pointed than courteous.-
Such things are in bad taste. The jury award
ed to Miss Meredith 81, 0o0 a much smaller sum,
am told thhn the X. IL. Company were willing
| at any time 10 have given TO her. And | here
take occasion to say that, from what ] have
learned Of tleir dealings with the sufferers from
that accident, the company have been governed
| by spirit Of liberalty.
| There is little left for courts to do at this
town, and il is probable that they will adjourn
| tomorrow
| noticed he card OF Rev. Mr. Prettyman cor
rectng" a Statement in my last letter | beg
| to he permitted to assure Mr. P. that ! did not
desDnedly ndisrepresem him. Nor was my state
ment carele4sly made, as based upon infer
eRce 1t is true, | saw him rise, Immediately
after it became palpable that the application for
License would be granted, and approach Mr.. ].
| @. Townsend, shake his hand, and, with smil-
ing countenA Ance move his lips as though talking
| 1t is true, also, that thought the action strange
and inconsistent, and was not susprised by the
criticisms which persons standing near me made
but, as would not eonscientously do Mr.. Prel-
lyman injustice, 10 satisfy myself ard others
asked Mr. Townsend what Mr.. p. said TO him,
and his reply was " he congratulated me-" My
| report was therefore, based upon IN formation
and not upon inference. | would not give the
inference deduced from
The hearty manipulation.
Which to who not dreaming,
| Has, in truth, SIR all the seeming
Of unm xed felictaton.
but sought for the facts from what | considered
a reliable source. MORE ANON.