Johnstown weekly Democrat. (Johnstown, Cambria County, Pa.) 1889-1916, 1890-06-13
TARBELL CASE CLOSED.
The Points Submitted Upon Which Beth
sides Depend.

The Points Submitted Upon Which Beth
sides Depend.
The trial of the suit of Tarbell against
the P. R. r. in the Pittsburgh Court was
concluded Wednesday.
When the testimony had been finished
counsel for plaintiff submitted the follow
inf points of law upon which the Court
was asked to charge the Jury:
First-When railroad company un-
dertakes the transportation of passengers
the contract has the implied consent of
the passenger to all reasonable rules of
the company for entering, occupying and
leaving the cars, and if any injury befall
befall the passenger by reason of his dis
regard of rules that are necessary to the
conduct of the business of the company
are not liable in damages.
Second--On the part of the Company
the contract implies that they are pro-
vided with safe and sufficient railroad
to the point of destination that the cars
are staunch and roadworthy, that all safe.
guards be provided, and that the ser.
wants in charge of the train are tried,
sober end competent men.
Thitd-When passenger is injured or
hurt while obeying the reasonable rule of
the Company without fault on his part,
the law raises presumption of negligence.
Fourth--The legal presumption may be
repelled by proving that the injury re-
suited from inevitable accident, or as it is
commonly called, the act of God, or that
the injury was caused by something
which no human foresight and prudence
could provide.
There were two or three other points
submitted and then the defendants SUBJ
mitted the following points on behalf of
the railroad
F1rst-There is no presumption of neg
ligence on the part of the defendant [.
hence it must he proven to the satisfaction
of the jury before recovery can, be had
in the case.
Second-A railroad company is not
liable for unforeseen and unprecedented
accidents.
Third-The jury must only determine
whether or not in the light of all the
knowledge and experience which the off.
GERS and agents of the defendant company
had or should have had prior to the disas-
ter their action, under the circumstances,
was such as cautious, prudent and com.
petent men would have taken.
Fourth-Uuder the uncontradicted evil
dence in this case the plaintiff s wife and
children were drowned in sudeden. ex,
traordinary and unprecedented flood in
the Copemaugh river caused by the break.
ing of dam, and if the jury believe from
the evidence that the defendant officers
and agents had no such information or
knowledge as would have induced reason
able and prudent men to believe that the
train in which plaintiffs wife and child.
rem were passengers was in place of
danger, the plaintiff cannot recover and
the verdict must be for the defendant,
Fifth-H the jury believe that the
plaintiffs wife and children were drowned
by an extraordinary outpouring of water
from the breaking of dam at the time of
an unprecedented flood in the Conemaugh
river; that the train upon which they
were passengers had been placed upon a
track in the Conemaugh yard which had
never been flooded that the defendants
officers had knowledge and experience of
other high floods, including the breaking
of the same dam in 1862, thus showing
that they had selected, in view of past
experience, an apparently safe place for
the trains The verdict must be for the de-
| PENDANTS.
The Court reviewed the points, and di-
rected counsel to proceed to address the
jury, which was done.