The Red Cloud chief., 1882-02-02

W. l"hA VI ~ - W :
if it was fortuitous-if it could not
have been anticipated and provided
against-therc was no liability. But in
a case like this negligence must be af-
Tentatively proved. There was no
ground for prc>umine il. The ears
We're at a standstill: there wa no jar or
breaking of machinery: the lady was
alighting without any interference from
the company; and. if the step appeared
too high. she might have demanded bet
ter facilities.
a car on the Northern Pacific Road
left the track, and, n ii Wa bouncing
along, one of the passengers ~cndcavorcd
10 save himself bv rushing Il the plat
form and jumping off. He was badly
hurt. but. a. the result proved. h"
would probably have been safe If he had
remained in the car. The company
urged that the injury WAS clearly his
own fault. But the Court said that the
wisdom of jumping in such a ease i not
10 be determined by the result. The
passenger must Judge Of the compare
tive danger of remaining still or at
tempting to get off 10y the circumstance
a. they appear to him. He has Ia act
upon the probabilities At the time. The
jury must Judge the case in the same
way. If the leap was an act which a
person of ordinary prudence might do
under ia" circumstances. il does not
prevent the passenger from recovering
damages.
Two recent cases have occurred Of in
| jury To an cmployc occa~iuncd 10y his be-
inc knocked from the top of Il car 10y a
bridge over the road. Both HAY" been
decided. in accordanc" with. previous
decisions. that = company i N" bound
toward employees Ia place il, bridges
HIGH enough 10 admit of a man standing
erect ON underneath. Injury from
low bridge i ON" of the risks of Il brake
man employment.
An Illinois decision discusses the cf-
feet of a conductors urging a person Ia
a dangerous act. \ long freight train
ran into the city Of Knoxville and was
left standing on the track III such posi-
ton that the middle part of the train
stood opposite Il street. and thus the ears
INSTRUCTED any one i'll crossing. This
street was thcnatural passage forpcr>onS
coming 10 take passenger trains. The
trainmcn ought Ia have divided the
freight train; but ;hcy had not done 50.
Mr.. Sykes. approaching with intention
IF boarding an expected train, found
( himself hindrrcd bv the freight ears. and
stopped ON the sidewalk, hrSitating how
tn cross. The conductor called Ia him.
Come on under; YOU will have plenty
of time" Thus encouraged, Mr.. sykes
tried Ia creep under the freight cars, but
at that moment the engineer started
them. and Mr.. Sykes was fatally injured.
The Court said that Il conductor has not
unlimited authority 10 invite persons 10
take risks, and 4 Traveller or passenger Is
not Justified in doing what i evidently
foolharly because a conductor tells him
Ia. But. under circumstance like these,
the jury might well consider the compa-
nv AZ doublv liablc: /. for fault in not
dividing the train: ,. for the conductor 5
invitation. The negligence, if any, at
tributablc To Sykes, was too slight 10 de-
feat an action for damages.
The question has often been discussed
what agents have authority 20 bind the
company by calling Il physician or sur
%con to treat a person suddenly injured
! bv a railroad accident. Alaborcr "n the
! AtchiSon IL Nebraska Railroad had his
foot nearly cut of 10y some accident
with the machinery in use. and the
=. boss" of the gang in which he WAS
working tc~legraphed to the General
Superintendent to know if he might
get a doctor for him The Supcrin-
tcndcnt tclrgraphcd in answer: Yes
do all Won can To save the foot and make
him comfortable" The Court held that
bv this telegram from the General SUI
pcrintcndcnt the boss was authorized
Ia employ a physician or surgeon, and
also To engage reasonable board while
the foot was being treated. Board and
care while one is suffering from Il wound
are within the direction ito make him
comfortable And it was not necessary
To wait for Il formal letter signed by the
Superintendent Il telegram was Sutii-
cient. When an cmployc goes Ia a tel
cgraph office and sends a dispatch Ia
his superior, and in a short time receives
from the same operator what purportS
To be an answer from his superior To his
dispatch. he * warranted i'll p%resuming
that the dispatch received is genuine,
and in acting according to it.-Rait.
road Gd-GHo.