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


conductors for the regulation and ram
ming Of the trains. And when he re-
ceived the ticket or book he read the
I" instructions TO conductors I" on tho
inside OF the said ticket to which his a.
tsntion was particularly called, and
he then read and signed the
contract on the inside OF the
front cover Of said ticket, and
| paid the said agent the fifty dol
lars, and took the book. On the said
30.h day Of June, 1884, when the con-
ductor Of the train Of the defendant
company, one Cabell Childress, came
into the car, soon after the train got In
motion from Dublin going east, be saw
the plaintiff wysor in the car, aud as
ne approached him to collect bis fare he
saw him in the act Of detaching the cou-
pons from his Communication ticket. lie
a; oneo extended his hand towards tho
plaintiff, saying Stop; don't do that.
IL can't take the coupons if you tear
them ont" The plaintiff disregsrded this
yemopstrance, and rendered TO the said
conductor four coupons. which he hAd
| detached from hrs ticket, representing
eight miles Of travel, or 20 cents, say
| ing 10 the conductor that be could have
the ticket or book TO identify the cou-
pops. but that be must not tear his
book. The conductor refused to take
the coupons thus rendered to him, and
told the plaintiff that unless be would
let hin, have the book 70 detach coupons
himself for the number of miles plaintiff
intended to travel he would be obliged
to put him off; that it WAS his duty
under the express orders and regulations
of the company to detach the coupons
himself. The plaintiff then said. "You
will have to put me off; stop your
rain" The conductor thereupon did
stop the train and told the plaintiff TO
get of. lie (the plaintiff) got up and
walked out the car and off the train
about one. half mile from the station at
which be got on.
The plaintiff Wysor had some time
before that detached his coupons from
his tickle. while passenger upon Chill
dIess's train, and rendered them TO the
eaid Childress, conductor, for his fare,
Who Of first refused to receive them,
but did accept them, and carried the
said Wysor to his destination. On that
occasion Childress called the attention
of Wysor to his contract with the COM
paDy, as contained in his ticket, and tho
instructions to the conductors, 10 which
the said Wysor replied : "You have on
two occasions torn out Of my book too
much. and | don't intend for you to
lear i, agaiD. shall continue to tear
out n; coupons. This is my book; |
bought it and paid my honey for
it, and ! have 3 right to do with it
as please" To this the said
conductor replied that he (Childrsss)
was bound TO obey faithfully and
strictly the rules and regulations Of the
company; and that il the plaintiff did
that with him again he would not re-
ceiye the coupons, and would put him
eff bis train. The said Wysor had had
,Iouble with other conductors on de-
fepd.nt's road about the same matter.
and had been put off the trains by two
other conductors, and he had brought
three suits against the company for it.
The plsintiff Wysor stated in his evil
dence that when Childress and the other
conductors had their attention called to
he fact that they had detached too
many coupons from his ticket they
promptly corrected the mistake, and
handed back to him the excess.
Upon this evidence the plaintiff in
stituted this action, as set forth in the
declaration, upon his contract, which
ne introduced in evidence and relied on
before the jury to recover damages from
The company. The Circuit Court re-
fused TO give the instructions asked for
by the defendant, except the fourth--as
'ollovs: Tho Court instructs the jdry
hat il the plaintiff first deliberately
violated bis contract with the defend
ants, he is not entitled TO recover, pro.
vided no unnecessary force was used to
! eject him." And then the Court, OF
It's own motion, instructed the jury
as follows: 1.-The Court instructs the
Jury: The communication tickets, as
are described by the evidence in this
cause, being sold by the railroad COM
pany at reduced rates under q contract,
the holder thereof should substantially,
in using them, comply with the con-
tract, and in this case Q substantial
compliance with the contract required
that the coupons should be detached,
either by the conductor Of the train to
whom presented or the same be done in
mis- presence and sight, and when 50
done the book or ticket should be pro
sen,ed for examination aud identitica-
Ion along with the coupons, and If the
| evidepc. shows that the plaintiff detsch-
I'd The coupons, or any Of them, without
be presence of the conductor, and
lid so Intentionally to prevent the
,oncuctcr Of the train from detaching
hem. the conductor had right to re-
j'use 10 receive the coupons so detached
and presented, and to demand payment
of isIe before carrying the passenger
81. thsI, and TO eject him IL he refused
| % psy, provided without using un-
receeesry force. But if the evidence
hc~S, on tho contrary, that the cou-
pon, geJe wholly detached IN
pre+enee Of the conductor and were
presented along with tho book or ticket
Tor examination and Identification, then
uxss the duty OF the conductor to re-
ceiye the coupons snd carry the pas
sengsr 10 his destination and to eject
| hin under such circumstances renders
he railroad company liable for dam
ages. TO be estimated according to the
time, place, and circumstances attend
ing the eviction and the inconveniences
AID special damage sustained by the
party evicted."
Under these instructions the jury
found q verdict for the plaintiff for
1850 damages, which verdict the Court
refused TO set aside on motion OF the
defendant, and the Court entered judg'
rnent upon the said verdict for the said
damages and costs against the defend
ant company. We are Of opinion that
the verdict Of the jury is contrary Ia