Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1891-06-25
DEPEW ALL RIGHT.
Also the Other New Haven
Railway Officials.
THE END OF A CELEBRATED CASE

Judge Van Brunt Orders the Jury to
Acquit the Directors, and the Jury Ac-
quits the President in Spite of the
Judge-Jay Gould Comes Near Being
Ground to Pieces a Railway Track
A Very Close Call-Statue to Beecher
Unveiled at Brooklyn.
NEW YORK, June 25-The prosecution
of chauncey NJ Depew, John D. Rookie
feller and other directors of the New York
and New Haven railway came to an end
yesterday, by Judge Van Brunt ordering
the jury to acquit them. He said, refer
ring to the argument made by the district
attorney, who cited number of prece-
dents, that all of them were cases where
principals had directly authorized their
agents to do certain things. The present
case was quite different. The directors OF
the railroads are co-servants and agents
with the car-builders and others, and the
New York and New Haven Railway COM
pany is alone responsible. The evidence did
not connect the directors closely enough
with the heating Of cars by stoves.
Acquitted All the Dire ctors.
The directors were indicsed as individ-
uals, and not as directors. They could not
be held liable, in accord with the doctrine
of respondent superior, because they them
selves were the servants of the railroad
corporation and the co-servants of those
who actually heated the cars contrary TO
law. There was no ground for holding
them. AS to the president, theye was some
ground of belief that he had active partici-
patton. He therefore advised the jury to
acquit all the defendants except President
Clark. This was promptly done.
President Clark on Trial.
Charles b. Clark, president of the New
York, New Haven and Hartford railway,
then took the stand and was examined.
He said that he had been in the railroad
business for twenty-one years. The Baker
heater was the standard system of heating
on the New Haven road when he became
connected with it. That system continued
in vogue until the day of the Harlem tun
mel accident. No feasible or better plan
OF car heating had been suggested TO the
board of directoCs during his term OF
office
The Judges Charge.
Other testimony was taken. and the law
yers summed mp. Then the judge charged
the jury. He declared thar the company
came under the provisions of the statute
of lSSS, known as the car heating statute
that the use of such system of car heat
ing as the Baker system was in violation
of such statute. If the jury considered
that the evidence showed that Clark had
authorized the dispatching of trains heat
ed with the Baker system, he was guilty
under the Indictment A general aurhori-
cation was sufficient to warrant such a
verdict.
The President Acquitted.
The jury went out to deliberate at 40
O'Clock. At $50 the jury came into court
for instructions. They wanted to know
what constituted guilty knowledge
Judge Van Brunt replied there was 10
such thing. If Mr.. Clark had any knowl,
edge, that was all that was necessary II
was not question of whether defendant
were an officer or MOTT was question OF
individual responsibility. The jury
thereupon retired once more. The jury
returned at $50 with a verdict OF not
guilty. President Clark was heartily con.
graduated ty his friends and colleagues
upon lis acquittal.