Evening journal., 1889-05-20
LAST EDITION
ARGUMENT BEGUN.
nIessrs. Lore and Massey Speak in the
Parvis Case This Morning.

nIessrs. Lore and Massey Speak in the
Parvis Case This Morning.
A large crowd of people were in the
court room at the opening of the Super
ior Court this morning, in anticipation OF
hearing the eloquent arguments of coun-
sci in the Parvis damage case. The en-
tire family of Mrs. Parvis were present
seated, inside the bar, and a number OF
residents of Middletown and vicinity.
All Of the judges were on the bench ana
seated behind them were Mrs AusIln
Harrington and Mrs. Willard Hall Porter.
Inside the bar were ReYs. w. l.. D. Muir
ray. Adam Stengle, w. G. hoons, ). u.
@ Hanna c. A. Grise and other clergy
man. Miss Matte McComb, Miss Hattie
Higgins and several other ladies'
The accident to freight train near
North East. having stopped the running
of trains, Mr. Constable had not arrived
from his home at Elkton, Md. He came
into the court room at TO- o'clock, the
interval having been spent in waiting for
his appearance. The court stated that
three hours would be allowed each side
TO argue the law to the court and the
facts to the jury On the tables before
the lawyers of each side, were piled
formidable array of law books and with
NhobS AbAh hA AdN11 bAAO ASSdA RAdlilS DIt-
pared for their fray.
At 1880 O'Clock Mr.. Lore began his
prayer to the court for instructions to
the jury. He asked for instructions on
the following points, citing numerous
cases and authorities in support of
each.
First The defendant is bound to use
reasonable care and discretion in passing
crossings on the public highway, the
proper degree of care and discre-
tion to be Judged by the jury.
Second: If the bell was rung, the jury
are to decide whether that was sufi-
cient measure of reasonable care and
diligence. If they think the whistle
should have been blown, and by the ne
glect to do so, DT Parvis was killed, the
plaintiff is entitled to recover.
Third: The plaintiff is required to
show some negligence on the part of the
the defendant, which materially con
tributed TO his death, but no further.
Fourth: If the jury believe that DR.
Parvis, while lawfully travelling on the
public highway, was killed by the de
PENDANTS train through contributory
negligence, the defendant must satisfy
the jury that he was guilty of the lacl
of ordinary care and caution.
Fifth: The plaintiff will be entitled to
recover unless it can be shown, that but
for the want of ordinary care and eau
tion on the part Of DR.. Parvis, the mis-
fortune could not have happened.
= Sixth If verdict is found for tn,
plaintiff, the damages must not only b.
for past loss or such loss as the plaintiff
has suffered, but also for what she will
suffer.
At 11.35 o'clock Mr.. Lore began tn
opening argument to the jury for tn
plaintiff. He reviewed the testimony il
a concise and clear speech of fft,
minutes, concluding at IL. 25 o'clock
Mr.. Massey for the defence then begal
to argue the Law before the court II,
opposed the points of Mr.. Lores praye
for instructions and made his own point
as follows:
The evidence of the railroad employe
was positive that the engine bell wa
rung, and that signal was the limitatio
of the measure prescribed by the Legis
lature for indicating the approach of
train TO a crossing.
At o'clock court adjourned until 81
o'clock this afternoon, when Mr. Masse
will deliver Ills argument to the jury
followed by Senator Gray for the defenc,
Mr.. Constable will close for the plainti
and the case win 20 to the jury to-mo
row morning