Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1874-06-17

officers, any individual suffers loss, that loss
must be made up TO him by the responsible
party. No principle Of justice or law is
clearer than this.
The second class of damages consists of
those where the person sustaining them is
clearly responsible As when, for instance,
man is drunk and incompetent to take due
care Of himself; or when he drives an un.
ruy and vicious horse, which takes fright,
or is refractory, aud 40 causes loss where
an honest horse would have borne him
safely or where the carriage or harness is
defective and gives way by reason Of its de.
feet, when a sufficient and sound carriage
or harness would have saved the acct.
dent; or where a want of ordinary judg.
ment and care results in injury and loss
or where the animal is scared by the passing
Of another team, or Of railroad train for
which all travellers are to make provision.
lis not fair nor just that town should be
responsible for any accident which, in its
origin, is clearly the fault of another party.
The town cannot furnish carriages or horses,
or drivers, over its roads nor restrain rail.
roads, and so should be legally exempt from
oil damages incurred by reason Of their de.
fects or faults, or Of the action Of other
parties. 1t is essential that law should fix
aud determine responsibility in such cases,
10 order to protect the public against the
faults and frauds Of private individuals
There is third class Of damages where
the responsibility is mixed, which would not
have been sustained without neglect on both
Sides where neglect on the part Of neither
party alone, would have caused the injury,
but the damage is caused by the wrong Of
both the parties as for instance, when a
vicious horse takes advantage Of defect.
i've part Of the road or drunken and
careless driver meets with an accident at
an insufficient point in the highway,
which a man in his senses, with due care,
would have passed safely. For all such
losses, where the reason is mixed, the dam
ages ought to be more or less mtigated by
the circumstances Of the case. 1t is not
fair that a town should suffer entirely the
consequences of mans folly or stupidity.
1t is fair that it should suffer the penalty
of its own neglect, and where its neglect
and his folly come into conjunction and e.
feet damage, that would not have occurred
but for such conjunction, the loss should be
e1uitably divided and adjusted between
them. And for this end the statute should
make provision.
With the law relating to highways
amended according to these suggestions
two results would naturally follow. We
should first have better and better roads,
constantly advancing toward substantial
excellence, at a less cost to the people OF
the state, with the liability TO accident on
them reduced to the minimum, and the Sc
curity and comfort of them increased to the
maximum. We should, also, by a legal
definition of the various kinds Of response
bility, and a discrimination between the
causes of damages, protect individuals
against the negligence of the public, and
protect the public against the fraud and
rapacity Of individuals.
1t is about time that our legislature
looked carefully into this subject, and re-
vised the law, so as to meet the demands of
civilization and protect the rights both of
persons and of towns.