Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1877-07-28
WHO'S TO PAY?
Bad News for the Losers IN IN,
BlFike,

Strike.
Chicago Tribune.l
The question, WHO ia to a for all
the property destroyed during the
striker is by no means an unimportant
one. A reporter called last evening on
Mr.. Thomas Dent, Of the law firm Of
Dent d Black, for the purpose OF obtain
lug that gentleman's opiHion as to the
responsibility for the losses incurred,
and q conversation somewhat like the
following occurred;
Can the insurance companies be held
liable under their policies, or will they
be exempt under the provisional clauses
covering such ~emergencies2"
They would very likely be excused,
as they do not insure against riot or
losses arising from riotous proceedings"
How do the railroad companies
stand2"
They are legally liable for any loss
which they a prevent-nOt only any
loss which arises from their own fault,
but also from any losses which they
might avoid by care or diligence. If the
strikers can be said to be in the employ.
ment of the railroad company, there
would be no doubt that the company
would be fully liable for any acts they
might commit But if they we're not the
servants Of the railroad company speci.
ally, but were rather public enemies, it
would he doubtful whether the companies
would be liable or not. They will be
very great sufferers in respect to their
own property, and the State, city or
county eannot be held liable for the
loss"
Municipal authorities have not been
held liable for the acts of rioters. Some
times the States make voluntary contri
buttons, but q State is not legally liable
Tor any such loss of property. Laws
have been proposed sometimes to hold
particular localities liable. 1t was pro.
posed u few years ago in congress to
have such a law, but it was not enacted
The main question would be, as between
the third parties, whose goods were de-
stroyed in transit, and the railroad com
pauies, whether these third parties could
hold the companies liable for tie loss of
goods intrusted to their care. Now,
without having given this subject special
consideration, | should say that the
companies cannot excuse themselves,
unless it be on the ground that these
men who committed these acts of depre-
dation were public enemies"
us there any doubt about their being
Of that character
mo, not in the ordinary sense OF the
expression. | suppose the railroad com.
panies would not admit that these men
we're their employees when they COM
mitted these riotOus acts. Still, the
companies might not have given them
their discharge. 1t would seem as if it
was the mob hat caused thia destruc
ton Of property, but whether the VIC.
lence was c~hargeabie to the strikers or
to the outside mob would, to some ex-
tent, be difficult to prove. If these acts
we're those of the outside mob, it would,
of course, be hard to fix the RESPONSE
bility upon the railroad companies for
the acts of all"
Much of this merchandise is shipped
by the fast freight lines. What would
be the chance of recovering from themR'
They are much harder to reach than
the railroad companies. They are
shielded behind q kind Of a fiction. That
is, they have the name, but when you
try to reach them you find that the rail.
road companies have agreed to prorate
with them and divide their business to
some extent. No, it would be better for
third parties to go directly to the rail-
road companies than to try to recover
from the fast-freight lines"
But it is pleaded that, since the rail.
road companies pay tax for the purpose
Of protection, and since they have not
been protected, the civil authorities
should be responsible fer the losses in
Cured through the absence of that guar
anteed protection"
THAT is a suggestion as to what the
law ought to be rather than "a 10 what it
really is"
Altogether, then, the chances Of re-
covery are quite small
ut would seem so. If the persons
committing the depredations we're at the
time in the employment Of the railroad
company, the rules which have generally
been applied in such cases would make
the company responsible. The proba.
bility is, however, that the railroad com
pAny will deny that the rioters had re
manned in their service, or were undis.
charged at the time Of the riotous acts
and will insist that the persons commit
ting the d%epredations were the mob o.
public enemies, and the modern doctrine
would, in that state of the case, seem tc
excuse the railroad company. On the
other hand, neither the State, county
nor city can he held liable. The loss
therefore, falls on the railroad company
as to its own property, and it will b.
quite questionable whether third partie.
a recover for the loss of their prop
erty. AS an off-hand opinion, | should
suppose that the insurance companies
would be bound to be guarded by the
provisions in their policies from Losses
arising from the mobs and mob violence
In other words, people will be obliged
to quietly pocket their lossesY"
1T doesn't seem as il there was any
relief, although of course efortsiwill bt
made through tho courts to recover.
One lesson to be drawn from the strike
/ think, is that something should be
done 80 that hereafter the public interests
will DO more guarded in such emergen
%cies."
From all OF which it would appeal
that the railroad companies, as we'll Al
private sufferers, are left without an,
hope Of relief.