The Republican journal., 1878-10-31
Supreme Judicial Court
jGnGE BARnoWs PRESIDING.

NH'N " Isd NJ patterson VS.. the CIV 81
belfast on trial when our report Of last week end
co. was concluded on Thursday night Pln claimed
70 recover $1,000, IN compensation for Injuries re-
eelved IN December, 1877 on a road in poor,s Nils
| dstrlct As PHI and her husband xara arrip,
nome on that night they passed over that road
@Au met with the accident which forms The basiS
% thls sult The road runs along an enhancement
WITHOUT rahin5 supported BY stone wall. from
the top OF which wall 10 the level ground Il rar
pendleuar distance of about five feet pm car-
rage went over the edge of this embanknent. and
'iie occupants were thrown out. Medical gentle
men testified as 10 the extent Of her INJURIES which
were III 'he region Of the small of the back ana 50
severe that she has since been confined to Her bed
u paralysis resulting from conclusion Of the spin
Many witnesses were introduced to show IT,. An
dluoh OF the road also, that the district surveyor
had knowledge and notice Of It's bad condition
Leighton, stage driver over the road testified
lAat on Monday before the accident he saw team
OF the bank also that he told Miller. the survey
or II was dangerous place Jordan Wentworth
testified that as he was coming to Belfast the next
day he met Miller who told him he was going 10
look al the place and asked Wentworth to ride
PACK with him Luther Pitcher testified that be
was over the road and told Miller that II was icv
ana dangerous On the other hand Miller testified
that ne had no knowledge of the bad condition Of
the road and had received no notice 10 that effect
The defelee denied that plf was driving over the
road with ordinary care. and contended that Diff
and her husband we're forced over the embark
ment bT collision With a carriage rapidly driven III
other .ilrppf1 CIV IL
nesses testified 70 declarations bv Patterson at lf
terent times and places, that he was run into by
team at the time Of the accident that be did not
know who i was and that the driver did not stop
Frank y Berry swore that lie was the driver Of
the carriage that passed pill. at that time and
place, and that no collision occurred
Judge Barrows III committing the et,e ID the
Jury SAID il was his duty to see that tie rules Of
evidence were observed. to see that tie urv had
an understanding Of the law and there bis duties
end lie i not 70 express an opinion Ut u settle
questions of fact The Judge and Jury are to di
vest themselves OF al sympathy and prejudice
This is ntteu ditdcllt as there is tendency III all
men to alleviate suffering and desire IA come 10
conclusions that viii ad in ts relief. This case Is
TO be considered SIMPLY as TO the truth ot the eli
dence and - the law bearing upon IL All prcIp
dlees ID he Inardei against and MT allowed to
operate, and the Jury j, 10 decide according to the
law and evidence given In order 10 obtain ypr
diet Ia her favor the plf must establish TN bic
pouderance IF evidence certain facts nv law #
is made the duty of towns and cities 10 make hish
WAYS safe and convenient The LEGISLATURE ha,
provided that any one who suffers by reason Of
defect iu the highway shall recover DAMAGES Tba
plff brings such an action The burden Of proof
is On her She is bound to establish The following
facts First. TIE existence of A way wbicb tbe HI
thorities Of a town are bound to keen ii repair
Second defect il tia: way. Third. actual notice
to some municipal authorities Or surveyor Fourth
that plfi had suitable horse carriage harness
and a reasonably careful driver Finn tbat the
damages resulted solely by reason 81 tho defect il,
the way. and that nd other cause contributed III
Seventh sgch evidence rs shall enable tLc fu7v ~
property estimate damages Is ; admitted tLat Hi
way existed blt the defect IS coutroyerted what
Is defect That Il a question for tne igry Tbe
law respecting highways Oloes not mean thar +}al
shall be made absolutely safe that woull ~ FL!
possible but HAT they shall re reasonable Nh,
and convenient This is a Question fyr VII MA.
Tile defect alleged was absence ~ rslI,,- .r., T.,
with slippery Inclination toward IN balk I.i.
for Tou h. detena IL whether Ills MIN VII H.
feetive.
The 1lt. Is boaad 10 SHOW THAT tler. WI actual
notice Of the defect > hours before tAe ael leu-
Had Miller d, surveyor. notice l'ror M ISL
the law vas such that proof that any iahabitaut III
the city BIZ town lad notice was enough Now uo
nee must be given to some muuleital officer ii
may be Ny information 1t may be ny theevileuces
Of his own senses It is claimed "a Nth wars
here ThIs the surveyor denies II i FIX the sarv
to say is not necessary that he should recognize
It as defect oat that should be substantially B.
SET forth In the wrir The next point i one ~ faot