The daily gazette., 1879-12-19

Mb LORE HAS A LOT OF CASES con-
TINUED-ARGUMENT IN THE RAIL
Road CASE.
Specially reported for the GAZETTE.
New CASTLE, Dec. 10,-Court OPEN
ed this morning with Judges Wooten
and Houston on the bench, the Chief
Justice having departed ON the early
tIain.
Mr.. Lore had the following cases con-
tinued, as they could not De tried at this
term David McCanaugbey rs. Isaac
Dillon, constable Enoch Moore, j., us
Mary Quinby Francisco j. Bowers %
Joshua ii. Mccullough, garnishee Of p
+. Hewes; VIM. j. Johi,son %. Simeon
l.. West; Thomas G. Morrison ps. Issac
Grubb; Emily &. Bartholomew us. John
l.. Is. kerns.
He also bad the case of libel brought
by William 7. Croasdsle. editor of
Every Evening, against the several men,
bers OF the Delaware s. ate Fire and Ma
rine Fire Insurance Company continued
with leave to amend defendants special
pleadings. In fourteen other cases, which
had alre ady been continued, he was
granted permission TO amend his plead
ing.
The case of Mccoy against the rail-
road company was resumed, and Mr.. .Gor-
don made his argument. Iu submiting
points TO the Court, on which he desired
the charge to be given, he cited the same
principles as in the Townsend case, and
added that he wished TO have SAID that
II, from the testimony of the hackman,
Mabau, the jury believed that the pre-
ponderance Of evidences went TO show
that the wagon was driven recklessly
across the railroad track, then the YER
dior shnnld N for tho AaCaaAapt
Mr.. Gordon concluded at 11.30, and
Mr.. Lore proceeded TO make the closing
argument, finishing at 12.l5 o'clock.
The court, Judge Houston, then
charged the jury, saying the case was
| a question OF fact, and while the facts
were clear, IL was TO be regretted that
the evidence was SO varied and contra
dictory. The jury were TO reconcile the
evidence where they could do so, and
where that was impossible, to give evil
dence where 1t was most deserved. With
regard to the obstructions, he said that
the only one OF importance In the case
was the car that is alleged TO have
frightened the horse, Qthe Judge here
read the ordinance of the city Of vii
mington, making the leaving Of car OF
track ublawfuD.
The ground, therefore. Is the negu
gence OF the defendan. In leaving tht
car on the track. In view OF the fact, Il
was culpable negligence. The defendAn
also alleges that the plaintiff was negl
gent and II Ia therefore negligence
agai Dst negligence. You have the proc
In this case and must decide In doing ~
you may take into consideration the col
dision OF the defendant on that night.
| If looking into all the facts, you shouI'
hnd that the plaintiff was guilty of an.
negligence he is not entitled to recover
In cases where the plaintiff and defrn
dant are both negligent. the plaintiff
cannot recover, even though his neRl
glence was not SO great as that OF tn
other.
with regard to the repairs of tn
crossing, the sourt said that the defend
| ants had a perfect right to do the work
and il was their duty to do so. The
were therefore engaged in a legal tasi
In considering the question OF dan
ages, the fact was stated that the plainti
had abandoned all claim for personal II
juries, aud that he simply doman nde
, payment for the damage TO The hors
and wagon. The jury should d-cid
what amount the plaintiff Was entitle
to recover. The case went to the jury,
1910. The charge was very clear. AN
fair.
Judgement was refused In the ,ass
Panoo~st & Cravan Us. Carl Speech
Higgins Tor plaintiff and Turner for d
| fense.
Henry Bunting rs. NJ aria Newell. a,
mi nistratrix; Spruance for plaintiff an
Lore for the defense. Judgment for u
plaintiff to the amount of S626.6l.