Daily Republican. [volume] ([Wilmington, Del.]) 1874-1890, 1889-05-21
ALMOST ENDED.
BRILL ANT ARGlJMENT9 TO
THE JURY.
The Case of Henrietta V. Parvis vs.. The
Philadelphia, Wilmington and i;aIii-
more Railroad Company Near
ing the Close.

oupti6OI NOuTL TtCOHNt' tu aL G.OU
O'Clock yesterday afternoon with all the
Judges present. Immediately after the
openirg & George V. Massey, Esq, resumed
bis argument ior the det nse in the case
OF Henrietta V. Pervis vs.. the Philadel-
phia, WI mington and Baltimore Rail
road Company. He contendei that the
track Of the railroad itself was signal of
danger, and that 1t was the duty OF those
who wished to cross railroad to stop
and carefully look If train was ap.
proachlng, and that If they d d not they
assumed the risk themselves ard could
rot recover. He cited number of au-
thonties on this point, and closed his ar
gument at 3, 35 O'Clock.
lie was followed by the Hon. George
Gray, who open his argument by citing
TO the court several cases showing that 1t
was the duty OF person approaching rail-
road to exercise all due care and caution,
and that If he did not do so he assumed
the.risk and danger and could not recover.
Mr.. Gray then addressed himself to the
jury, and contended that they could not
render verdict in behalf OF the plaintiff
until they were satisfied that the defend
ant company had been guilty OF Hegli-
gence in running at an unusual rate of
speed and not sounding warning signal
as required by law. Several witnesses
had testified that they did not know
whether the bell had rung or not, as they
took no notice of 1t.
HE challenged any member of the jury
who had ever Travelled from Philadelphia
to this city to tell when he left the train
how often the bell on the engine had
been rung, or whether 1t had been rung
at every crossing or not, While he was
speaking the clock In the tower tolled
four, and the last sound had scarcely
struck when Mr.. Gray called attention to
the TACT, and said that he ventured to
say that at least Il part OF the jury and q
number Of those present had not heard
it, but he asked would this be accepted
as evidence that 1t had not struck. He
had heard 1t, and others had heard 1t,
and tHis be contended went to show th at
the witnesses who had testified that tue
bell on the engine was rung were entitled
to belief, Notwithstanding the fact that
others testified that they could not
hear 1t.
He said that although it had been
shown that this train was running at q
speed of thltty-flve miles an hour, that
WAS nothing unusual, as he had no doubt
that many OF those present had rode at
the rate OF fifty or sixty miles an hour.
The old style OF running at twelve or
fifteen miles an hour would not do at the
present day; things have changed, and
leople demand rapid travel He felt
sure that persons who were constantly
exposed 10 danger became familiar with
II aud careless. The people who live at
the foot OF Vesuylus would not feel the
same dread when they heard It's rumb-
lings as would be experienced by a stran-
ger. The same was the case with DIR. Par
Wis; he was familiar with tho danger,
and as he was in hurry, took the
chances.
Mr.. Gray spoke until o'clock, and
during his entire argument held the un-
divided attention OF the Court, jury and
large number of spec ators that weee
present.
He was followed by Albert Constable,
Esq, who opened by saying that although
be resided in county adjoining this, he
had never before addressed a Jury In New
Castle county, from the fact that all the
other cases in which he had been inter
ested in this county had been settled be-
tore coming to trial. 1t was impossible
for him to understand what had go hard
ened the hearts OF the railroad people
against his poor widow and her orphaned
beast that he should be run down by this
or any other corporation, but on the con-
trary was careful man, good business
man and man devoted to his famil y,
all of which has been proved by the testi-
mony OF the witnesses.
A railroad company is bound to exer-
else all reasonable care to prevent acci-
dents, and II part of that care is to give
timely warning when train is approach
ing u crossing This is required by law
and there is statute OF this State which
requires the engineers to ring the bell,
bat this does not absolye them from CIV
ing additional warning He thought
that the burden of care to prevent acci-
dents rested on the railroad company,
and that a man who wished t. cross
their road was not obliged to remove his
shoes and use 81 sses when approaching
a crossing as though he were among the
Hindoos and was approaching one of
their idols. All the witnesses have testi-
fled that this was dangerous crossing,
and that the rail- oad company had failed
10 use the care and caution required by
law to prevent accidents.
He analyzed the testimony OF Thomas
Turner, Engineer Grub, Fireman Ryan
anu otner witnesses for the defense and
to speak until 6 O'Clock, when
court adjourned until 10 O'Clock this
The court room was uncomfortably
crowded and every one seemed anxious to
hear the renowned Maryland lawyer,
who enjoys the reputation of never hav-
ing lost case against railroad COM
pany.