Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1889-09-27

ONE OF THE SUITS FOR DAMAGES
On TrinI before Judge =. N. Tyler Mt
North Hero.
Ono Of the cases against the Central Yer.
mont railroad company, growing out Of the
Hartford bridge disaster in February, 1887,
is on trial before Judge J. NJ. Tyler in the
Grand Isle county court at North Hero. 1t
is one of the test cases in that litigation,
and being, Of unusual interest and import
ance, we give herewith a summary of its
main points, and an abstract ofsome of the
leading evidence gathered from the report
in the Burlington Free Press
The plaintiff, Henry Mott, who lives in
Alhurgh, was a passenger ON the train that
was wrecked ut the Hartford bridge in Feb
ruary, 1887. He was in the Springfield
sleeper, which was the second car from the
rear Of the train, and which went off the
bridge on TO the ice below. He was taken
out of the wreck unconscious and removed
to the Paine house with others of the wound
ed From there he was taken TO the June
tion House at White River Junction, where
he remained several days and was then
sent home in special car. He was injured
in the right shoulder, arm and one hip
burned on the forehead, and suffered a con
fusion and burn on one knee. IL is also
claimed that the accident and exposure
brought on Brghts disease, which has
since troubled him He also claims that by
reason Of his injuries he lost his ambition
to do business, and for this loss and for his
injuries he claims damages Of 500, 600 The
defendants do not admit that he has Bright s
disease, and claim that if he has il cannot
have been caused 10y the accident They
also deny that there has been any falling
of in his business since the accident and
claim that he cannot recover damages, even
if plaintiff was injured and had suffered n
loss in his business. because he was riding
on a pass at the time of the accident. The
plaintiff claims that this pass was given
him in consideration of the large amount
of freight which he was in the habit Of
sending over the road The court has ruled
that for the purposes of this trial the pass
is no defence and probably a special verdict
will be taken on this question, that it may
be decided by the supreme court.
The testimony is Of two kinds. That re
lating to the speed Of the train at the time
Of the accident, as well as that pertaining
the same as that which was introduced at
the trial of the case of the estate Of James
A. Stone VS.. the railroad in the Chittenden
county court last spring Many Of the
witnesses examined at Burlington have tes
titled here and the testimony of others who
were examined there has been read from
the official report 10y consent of both sides
The other portion Of the testimony relates
to the extent of Mr. Motifs injuries and to
the effect which those injuries have had on
his business The plaintiff claims that the
fact that settlements We're made with the
injured Immediately following the accident
is an admission Of liability on the part Of
the defendant The defendant claims that
it had the right 10 make these settlements
and thereby save litigation. Defendant al
so claims that the settlement made with
some of the injured was an act of humani-
ty and was effected out of a desire to keep
up the reputation Of the road for fair deal
ing and 10 keep the good will of the travel
ing public A large amount of evidence
has been introduced on this point
Judge Tyler is presiding at the trial and
the counsel is as follows: For plaintiff, vii
son x Hall and II c. Adams of st. Albans,
and + r. Hard of Burlington for defend
ants, c. w. Writer'S of St Albans, Jed =.
Ladd of Alburgh, Oliver G. Stevens of Bos
ton, and Charles A. Prouty of Newport.
The trial is being carried on under some
difficulties, owing to the factthat no steam
er now lands here and because of the dis
tance from any railroad station.
The evidence with regard to the accident
having been caused by the breaking of the
18th rail from the bridge, with regard to
the speed of the train, the condition of the
roadbed, rolling stock, etc, was summar
lied in The Phrnix last spring. when the
trial of the case of the Stone estate against
the railroad company was in progress. The
evidence given by ex-Gov. John Gregory
Smith, president of the Central Vermont
company, is of interest
Gov Smith stated that he arrived on the
scene of the disaster at 10 o'clock the next
morning and was met by Mr.. Wall, who
said that he had settled with some of the
injured and asked what should be done with
others who desired to settle. He was told
to 20 to the extreme length of what it
would cost to contest the case. These set
Elements had always been made in such
cases as an act of humanity and justice
His general instructions were TO 20 to the
10 relieve the sutferiugs of the injured
The rule relating to the slow running of
trains over bridges was read, and Gov.
Smith testified that the rule was adopted
solely in the interest of economy in order
to save the strain on the bridge. The rule
is not in general force on other roads and
witness had not noticed that trains on 9th
er roads slowed up on crossing bridges,
Witness was asked as to the character of
the pass given Mr.. Mott in 1887. 1t was
given for no consideration and was one Of
a number which he had received during
the previous six or seven years. Gov.
Smith then described an interview which
he had with Mr.. Mott at White River juno
ton after the accident and in which the
latter made no claim for damages. Wit
ness sent him home by special train and
next saw him at Alburgh in April, when he
presided at a meeting, making All address
and showing no signs of mental or bodily
injury In June Mr. Mott came to wit
nesss office and asked for pass Witness
could not give it to him because Of the in
terstate commerce law. After trying To
devise some way of evading the law, Mr.,
Mott left the office, saying that he had re
ceived many favors from the road and
should make no claims for damages as the
result of the Hartford accident. Later in
the month witness received a letter from
plaintiff in which he spoke of the question
of damages, but witness made no reply to
it. Was much surprised at its tone after
what Mr. Mott had said to him. Plaintiff
had received other favors in the way OF
passes for himself and lady and in trip
passes. Gov. Smith then described al
length the working of the road in its sew,
eTal departments The engineer and con
ductor of the wrecked train were first elias.
experienced men. The engine was new
one and the road in good condition. The
cars were heated with the Baker heater
and lighted with the best kerosene such a,
is generally used by railroad companies foI
that purpose.
Elk Gov. Pingree of the railroad com
mission testified with regard to his going
to the scene of the accident and what h,
| found there S. II Russell of Burlington
testified to being pr sent when Mr.. Vial
made settlements with several persons whC
were on the train. Chas. Pierce, the en-
gineer of the wrecked train, told how tn,
train broke in two on the bridge and tn,
cars fell over on the ice one by one.
The plaintiffs evidence in rebuttal begal
ON Friday, and consisted almost entirely o
expert medical testimony showing tina
Mott is suffering from Bright's diseas
which, he claims, is the result of injuries
received at the time of the disaster.
The Vermont Humane Society.