Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-08-08

ths defendant company ~ contained IN
instructions 70 conductors T" Afs re-
sopable and do not interfere with OF in-
fringe any rights Of The plaintiff BE-
longing 70 him in common with others,
to BE- carried safely, peacsably, and
comfortably, and with convenient dis
patch over the conpanys roads. 1t
wss The clear, explicit, ana expressed
intention and agreement Of the plaintiff
and defendant, II the time the contract
Of carriage was entered into, that tho
conductor should detacb the coupons for
the number of miles the plaintiff In
formed him be intended TO travel, and
the conditions and stipulations Of
the special contract Of carriage
"ceupons not good for passage
IL detached %; conductors will
detsch coupons" &c. "coupons
from this book must not, under any
circumstances, be accepted for passage
If detached"-were made to prevent
imposition and fraud upon the COM
papy, and ss Q reasonable and neces-
ssry instruction Of the railroad com
psDy to its conductors ~ TO what shall
be evidence to them Of the right Of the
holder of the commission ticket TO be
a passenger upon its trains end to
enjoy the rights and privileges OF
a passenger ct the reduced rate
of fare; and the plaintiff expressly
sgreed to present the book or ticket to
the conductor as . whole, so that be
could comply faithfully and obediently
with the orders Of his superiors; and
It was . plain violation Of his contract
for the plaintiff to detsch the coupon
and to demand that the conductor should
receive it in q mutilated form. The
plaintiff says that he knew all about
these rules and regulations, and read
them before be signed the contract; and
without this condition, that the conductor
should detsch the coupons, and not the
holder Of the ticket or book, the COM
pany would not have made the contract
with the plaintiff. If be had insisted,
or even intimated, before the ticket was
delivered to him, that this condition or
rule should be eIpunged. or he would
not sign the contract, then he could
not have purchased the ticket. Mr..
Pope, the general passenger and
ticket sgent, would have then re-
fused TO sell him the ticket, and
be would have besn compelled to buy
the regular tickets At the full rates
Of frst-class passenger fare. The COM
pany would have had the absolute
right to refuse to sell the plaintiff this
Communication ticket if be had insisted
upon the right, as he now does, to de-
tsch the coupons and there is no power
to compel the company to sell these
tickets at reduced rates, except upon
such terms and conditions as they
choose to make with the buyers Of them.
The railroad company has the right to
make these reasonable conditions and
The violation Of any Of these conditions
forfeits the right Of the holder of the
ticket TO be carried Us apassenger upon
the ieims OF the ticket, and he may be
expelled from the train by the conduc-
tor without any liability for damages
upon the company, provided that no I'M
necessary force be used. The plaintiff
in this case contracted with express
refe, epce to and recognition of this
necessary and reasonable rule Of the
company, for the direction Of the con-
duc,ors 10 prevent fraud, deceit, and i'm
position and the plaintiff he'd no right to
contend and squabbls with the conductor
about a construction Of his contract,
and to insist that the conductor should
violate the express orders OF his supo-
riors in office ard put hinislf in the at
tituds Of disobedience, and to demand
tha, be should stop the train and expel
him, TO the annoyance, delay, sud dis
comfort of the other passengers. with
the direct and sinister design OF suing
tie company, and, under the guise
Of law and the aid Of the courts,
20 mulct them in verdict for
d.mages. The verdict Of the jury
is for excessive, punitive, and exem-
plsry damages, and it should have been
set aside by the Court. Such damages
belong alone to sctions Of tort and
there is no evidence Of a vilful and ma
licious purpose or intent by the COM
pany or its servants TO wrong or injure
the plaintiff, or Of any neglect Of duty
TO the public, or Of negligence or indif-
ference; but. on the contrary, the evil
denee is full and conclusive that the
plaintiff 60. upon the defendants train,
expecting to be expelled, and so con-
Quoted himself ss to compel his expul-
sion from the train. with . view OF
suing the company for wrongful OK
pulsion, With the systematic and per-
sistent design Of making money by his
self-sousht and sslf.iDficted msrtyrdom.
He must take nothing by his false
clamor. Enlightened policy IS we'll as
sound and impartial administration of
Justice will, while railroad companies
Is carriers are held to strict perform
.pce Of all their difficult and dangerous
duties under the law, shield them from
excessive and oppressive verdicts where
hey are not in fault. The verdict Of
,be Jury in this case must be set aside,
he plaintiffs declaration be qusshed,
and the judgment Of the Circuit Court
be reversed and annulled, with costs in
favor of the plaintiff in error.
Recersed-
NnrnD Efah