St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1890-06-05
COUNTY COURT.
An Interesting Case on Trial.

Judge II. Henry Powers of Morris
vile, presiding, and Hon. Cloud
Harvey of West Barnet and Hon. J.
T. Gleason of Eyndonville, assistant
judges.
After prayer by Rev. F. D. Buckley
and the courts instructions to the
petit and grand jurors, for this is a
grand jury term, the jury calendar
was taken up and the following dis
position of the cases made: for trial,
Geo. Ranney, admr, VS. st. I. & l.. c.
r. r. Co, Aldrich 6, Remick VS. Phil
]. & James H. Baird, apis, Bingham,
Aldrich & Remick VS.. Phil. !. & J. II.
Baird & Trustees, Drew, Jordan &
Carpenter VS.. Phil. ]. & Thos. Baird
& ]. H. Baird and Tr., Ashley Bishop
VS.. Herman Durkee, Chas p Palmer
ct uX. apis. VS.. Luther S. Jewett,
David Silsby VS.. Truman c. Fletcher
ct ais, Alex. Roy VS.. William Roy,
H. G. Darling VS.. George H. Stuart,
apt, Hall & Chase VS.. E. E. Simp-
son, apt, Harvey K. Morse VS.. Ches-
ter F. Wiley; continued, Luther B.
Harris VS.. Herman d. Chapman,
Stephen ]. Johnson VS.. Howard Stev
ems ct ais, |. p. Titus VS.. James Kelso
ct al; settled, Parmenas w. Saxby
VS.. Town of Burke, Don M. Gray,
apt, VS.. Charles Bradshaw, Clifford
Pinard VS.. John Dumas, ct ais.
In this last case the plaintiff names
$500, John Dumas, one of the de-
fendants, paying $3.50 and the re-
ham Duclos and Joseph Derosche, the
Il IL. ~,
lawyers fees makes about $25 apiece.
This covers all claims for personal in
jury. They have yet to settle with
the state This is the case involving
damages inflicted upon Mr.. Pinard's
stallion, Buffalo Bill" and the dam
ages to his barn.
The first case to be tried and now
on trial is that of George Rannev,
admr., VS.. ST. J. & l.. c. X. r. Co.
George Ranney is administrator
upon the estate of Ruth H. Richards
of Kirby, deceased, who met her
death on Sept. 6, 1888, from injuries
received from said railroad at the
depot in this place. This is an action
upon the case i'll two counts. First
to recover damages for the sufferings
of Mrs. Richards from the time of the
accident to the time of her death,
about 10 hours, the same as she
might have recovered had she lived
the second to recover damages, under
a statute that provides, when a per-
son is killed by the negligence of an
other person Incorporation, that the
personal representative of such per
son killed may bring action to re-
cover such damages as such last
named person might have received
had he lived, for the benefit of wife
and next of kin, such money damages
as the wife and next of kin may be
shown to have sustained by reason
of such death, in all amounting to
$15, 900. The court ruled that the
plaintiff could recover not thing under
the second count. The principal wit
nesses for the plaintiff are Mrs Frost,
her daughter, Mr.. and Mrs Fuller of
Bloomfield, Rev. F. E. Dawson, Fran
els Switser, L. F. Gaskill, Dyer Hill,
Cephas Hill, Charles West, E. T. Ide
and A. r. Ransom, who were present
at the time the accident occurred.
Their testimony shows that on the
9th day of September, 1888, Mrs.
Ruth H. Richards, a lady 67 years of
age, of Kirby, accompanied by her
daughter Mrs. Frost and grandchild
of Lowell, Mass, took passage at
West Concord on the defendants
road for Lowell, Mass. 1t was nee
essary for them to change cars at
this place. At this time at the ST.
Johnsbury depot there was a plat
form about 12S feet long and z feet
wide to the east of the main line, upon
which passengers alighted from the
defendants trains. The train carry
ing the above party and large
number of others drew up to the east
side of this platform and discharged
its passengers. Almost Immediately
the Lake train from the west came in
on the main line. Nearly all of the
above passengers were inclosed by
the trains on this platform In the
confusion Mrs. Richards while walk
ing to and near the north end of the
platform, assisted by her daughter,
being required by the crowd to take
the side next to the moving train,
was by some unknown agency
thrown from the platform and under
the wheels, two trucks at least pass
ing over her limbs, severing one and
crushing the other She was imme-
diately removed to the Avenue house
and about one hour later to the home
of her niece, Mrs. E. c. Grant, at
Paddock Village, and there expired
at 7.15 o'clock
1t also shows that nothing was
done on the part of the railroad to
protect their passengers from the
moving train.
The plaintiffs to recover must
prove negligence on the part of the
railroad in the protection of its pas
sengers at this station on this occa-
sion. This they deny and introduced
evidenceto show that there was con-
tributory negligence on the part of
Mrs. Richards, and therefore she can
not recover.
The evidence is that the train from
the east had drawn in; that its pas
sengers, or most of them, were stand
ing or walking upon the platform as
the train from the west came in; that
a man walked up the track in front
of the coming train to warn of its
approach, but said nothing; that
somebody warned back some from
the edge of the platform next to the
track of the moving train; that upon
inquiry Mrs. Richards said that she
was dizzy and fell; that with care
there was no danger.
The witnesses who have testified in
defense are P. d. Blodgett, w. H.
Ward, Warren Lewis, John Marsh,
Otis Mitchell, engineer of the train,
and DIR. Goyette. The jury visited
the scene of the accident this morn
ing. The evidence is nearly all in,