Omaha daily bee., 1883-05-23

New York Thu ss.
The courts have recently given the
benefits Ct justice, In two notable
cases, to railway passengers. These
persons were travelling upon tickets
which had been bought In the usual
way, and they were violently elected
from railway trains by the conductor,
OF n Of the most powerful Of our
railway companies. The verdicts In
dictate once more that the traveller
whose rights have been ignored upon
railways can look with confidence to
the courts for fair treatment, and may
reasonably expect to a round
sum of money from the offending
company.
The case of w. j. Conuell, OF
Omaha, against the Pennsylvania
railroad company has been tried
twice, and at the end of each trial
the plaintiff has recovered $15 600,
which was all that he demanded. Mr..
C)nnell came to Washington In 1880
Having made an argument before the
supreme court he undertook to come
to this city. He had come from the
west upon an Unlimited, or stop.over,
ticket, which gave him transportation
over the Baltimore e. Ohio road to
Washington and over the Pennsylvania
road from Washington to this city.
Soon after leaving Philadelphia \ con
ductor refused to honor his ticket, on
the ground that a COZ ltct between the
B ,ltimore & Ohio company and the
Pennsylvania company had led the
last named company to discontinue
the sale of tickets allowing q passenger
to travel part Of his way on one road
aud the remainder of his way on thu
other. Mr. Connell refused to pay any
additional money, and uas thrown
from the train by several employees
Of the road. It appeared during
the trials that the pooling arrange.
msnt had not been broken until after
MI, Oonnell had bought his ticket,
and that the Pennsylvania company
had received Its pro rata for the iden
teal ticket which the conductor re
fused The defense was 80 weak thai
the only question for the Jury to con
slider was whether the passenger
rights had been affected because hi
stopped yer at Washington, although
his ticket allowed him to do go TIT
The jury gave the plaintiff $15, 900
as has already been stated,
The other s was that of Franz
Spicker, a salesman, who was travel
Ing In 1881, between Willismspor
and Philadelphia, upon an excursion
ticket, which one conductor accepted
and another refused. Spicker wa
pushed from the train and left In tn
open country while 1t was rainiu,
heavily. The fact that the ticket hal
been paid for was not denied, but !
was shown that the company had b,
advertising tried to call in tickets o
that class. The jury gave the plant
IS. 900.
1t appears from the published re
ports that the company's defense A
each Of these cases hardly deserves
consideration. The plaintiffs had bot
the law and the facts on their side
Yet they have been compelled to wal
two or three years for justice. Man,
persons who are wronged by rsilwa,
} companies are either unwilling or un
able to BEGIN q long and costly conteu
3 10 the courts. The courts, however
have almost uniformly protected an
vlndicated those who have choten t
: appeal to them, and II every WRONGS
and abused railway traveller could b
induced to place his case before a jur
the companies would become less ty
ranniosl, and travellers on every rail
way in the country would have cauu
for Thanksgiving,