Idaho County free press. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho Territory) 1886-current, 1888-03-23
RAILWAY PASSENGERS.


Are Bound to Respect.
An interesting case has lately been
decided by the court of last resort in
Pennsylvania, where the plaintiff had
recovered in an action against the Lake
Shore q Michigan Southern Railway
Company damages to the very unusual
amount of $4,000. The suit was
brought on account of severe and per-
manent injuries which the plaintiff re-
ceived in consequence of being put off
In the middle of the night from the linn
tied express train running eastward
from Cleveland, o. He had a ticket
which entitled him to a first-class pas
sage from Cleveland to Erie, and about
midnight he took his seat in a car of
the limited express. to which he was
directed by brakeman standing by.
1t appears, however, that ordinary tick
cts are not good on this train, for
which special rate of fare is charged.
The plaintiff was ignorant of this fact
until the conductor refused to take his
ticket. telling him that it was ''no
good;' and that his orders were to stop
the train and eject Immediately per-
sons who endeavored to ride on such
tickets. The plaintiff offered to pay
his fare in money, and when this offer
was refused, begged that at least he
should be carried to the next station.
The conductor, however, would not
accede even to this reasonable request,
but stopped the train and put off the
plaintiff where there werc many tracks
and switches, where locomotives were
constantly passing and where "broken
trains were '.foated." While trying
to reach the nearest station the plain
tiff was struck in the back by some OBJ
ject which the jury must have inferred
was either locomotive or car, and
so received the injury on account of
which the suit was brought.
The railroad company in their de-
Tense contended for principle. which,
If once established, would be extremely
convenient for such corporations and
quite the reverse for their passengers.
They maintained that travellers by rail
are bound to know the rules of the road
in regard to the tickets which they buy
just as a citizen is bound to know the
laws of his State and city; and conse-
quently that the plaintiff, in taking a
seat in the limited express, was tres
passer, and could lawfully be treated
as such by the company. The court
rejected this pretension, saying: "A
passenger who has an open way to an
open car going to the place to which he
bought and holds a ticket, without
knowledge that the tickets not good
on such ear, is not to be treated as a
wrong-doer, endeavoring to ride with
out payment of fare, or to ride in car
which he knows his ticket gives no
right to enter" The plaintiff, there
fore, was entitled to pay his fare in
money, and the company had no right
to eject him. Another point as to dam
ages, almost equally important, was
also decided in this case. The Judge
who presided at the jury trial charged
that punitive" damages, that is dam
ages which would be more than q com
pensation for the injury, and in the ma
ture of II punishment-might be given
if the jury found that the plaintiff was
put off from the train at dangerous
place. The court sustained this ruling
saying that the act of the conductor
amounted either to wilful misconduct
or reckless Indifference to the safety OF
the plaintiff; and that inasmuch as the
plaintiff could have recovered punitive
or exemplary damages against him, he
could also recover them against his en-
ployer, the railroad company. The
court added with some humor: 1T is
unnecessary now to consider whether
the company may put off trespasser
to whom it owes no duty, at a place
where there is probability that he will
be killed. "-Boston Transcript.
Q