The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1890-02-27
$4,000 FOR a BROKEN ARM.
Big Fight Over the Smiths, 3. and
W. Railway Case in the City Court.

Big Fight Over the Smiths, 3. and
W. Railway Case in the City Court.
The session of the city court was taken up
Yesterday with the trial of the damage
case of A. E Smith against the
Savannah, Florida and Western Rail-
way Company. The suit is for $40, 900 dam
ages. alleged to have been sustained by a
collision between a train on which Mr..
Smith was a passenger and freight car
on a side-track at New Branford, Fla, last
August, the plaintiff having his left arm
broken between the shoulder and elbow.
and his left wrist and hand sprained and
bruised.
When the court took q recess last night
the rebuttal and sur-rebuttal testimony re-
NAMED to be heard.
Mr.. Smith testified that he boarded the
train on which he was riding at Live Oak.
Fla. for Gainesville The train was what
is known as a mixed train, and in drilling
cars on a side-track at New Branford the
coach in which he was sitting collided with
a freight car on another sioe-track, too close
TO pass, the freight car striking Mr..
Smiths arm at the Z, open window.
drawing the arm outward and breaking it.
Mr. Smith denied that he had his arm out
of the window at the time of the accident,
or that he had admitted that he had it out
side lulIu6uldlcly dlI6T the ACClQ0QG &C.
Cured. He said that he was resting his elbow
on the sill of the window, with his hand to
hisface, readihn book when the collision
took place.
The railway company introduced the tes-
timony of Conductor Olmstead and Engi-
neer Cross, who were running the train.
which was direct and positive that there
was no collision; also to the fact that Mr..
Smith had said during his paroxysms of
pain: 81 was fool to have my arm out of
the window" or II was foolish to have nv
arm out of the window"
The iuterrogotory evidence of Louisa
Haddock, a passenger on the train, was
also introduced, and showed that Mr.. Smith
had his arm out of the window, with his
hand resting on the window sill, at the time
of the accident, and she heard the bones of
his arm break when it came in contact with
the freight car, which, she said, did not col
Tide with the coach. The testimony of the
engineer was to the effect that the bumper
of the locomotive is nine feet wide. and
that if there had been a collision the
bumper would have struck the freight car
first and carried it with it,.
The testimony of Capt. Ivey, disinter-
ested witness, was to the effect that he had
measured the distance between the freight
car and the outer end of the ties on the
other track nearest the freight car, and
found the distance fourteen inches, and this
was corroborated by the engineer and other
witnesses.
The line of the defense is to show that
there was, in fact, no collision as alleged,
and that the plaintiff did not exercise such
prudence as a reasonable man should have
exercised to enable him to recover.
Mr.. Smith was subjected to a searching
cross-examination by Hon. f. g. duBignon,
and the defendants witnesses were as
rigidly cross-questioned by Col. William
Garrard.
When the plaintiff rested, Mr.. duBignon
made motion to non-Suit upon the ground
that the courts of Georgia had no jurisdic-
ton to try the case; that the plaintiff was
injured in the state of Florida, having
boarded the train at point In that state to
60 to another point in Florida, and that
under the Georgia charter the COM
pany has no life outside of the
state whereby the courts of Georgia
can exercise jurisdiction to recover for a
tort in another sovereign state. and that
there being no evidence to support the dec
laration that the Savannah, Florida and
Western Railway Company, a corporation
organized under the laws of Georgia, has
any individual existence outside of the
state which gives it life; that there had
been no evidence to show that the Savan-
nah, Florida and Western Railway Com
pduy OF FLORIDA ana the savannah, Florida
and Western Railway Company of Georgia
are organized under one and the same
charter, and that it would be difficult SO to
prove if attempted, and that under the
decisions, without the state of Florida had,
before granting It's charter, re-
served the right to sue the de-
tendant railway company In the courts
Of Georgia, it had the same sovereign power
in Florida that the state of Georgia has in
this state, and that in the absence of proof
to the contrary the presumption is that no
such company exists in Florida organized
under the laws of Georgia.
Judge Harden overruled tho motion for a
uon-suit, and held that in the absence of
proof that the Savannah, Florida and West
ern Railway Company of Florida is diff
erent corporation, the presumption is that
1t is not. After the motion was overruled
Mr.. duBignon introduced the laws of
Florida showing that there is a Savannah,
Florida and Western railway organized
under the laws of Florida. which was ad-
mitted by the court as a recognition of the
fact.
The case, if it should be decided in favor
OF plaintiff, is likely to be appealed, as the
counsel for the railway holds that the courts
of Georgia have no jurisdiction, and that,
therefore, no evidence can be introduced
from which legal verdict can be rendered.
The sovereign rights of state and terri
torlal jurisdiction will doubtless continue
To flpIIra in l1o