Evening journal., 1892-03-09

Live Wlre-The Jury Vow Out In ths
Adams Case.
A. 3.25 o'clock yesterday afternoon
Hon. George " Massey began address
ing the special jury in the case Of Adams
VS. the Phiadelphis, Wilmington and
Baltimore Railroad Company. he said,
In substance
81 don't think there is any necessity
for long argument / have no hard
words to say about the young plsintih in
this case, | deny the assertion made by
my young learned friend that railroad
man cannot tell the truth. When man
has bad case he abuses the witnesses.
l contend that the question narrows
down to two points-did Conductor Lodge
rescue Adams from a position OF peril,
or did he commit gross and uncalied-
for assault upon him. Two facts
are conceded They are, that the
plaintiff attempted to board a
moving trsin, and that he was not on
1t when the conductor pulled him away
from the platform He WAS in imminent
peril and Conductor Lodge simply did his
duty. He had to act quickly"
He only spoke for ten minutes and was
followed by Senator George Gray. he
said. in part;
iff IL he INDUCED in Christmas sonvivisl-
tiles. He had perfect right to take
drink IL he wanted to The jury must
decide IT, from the evidence, Conductor
Lodge did not rescue him from position
which endangered life aud limb. he did
not have time to sit and think as you
men sit here In this box and think. BE
had to act and act quickly. An instant's
delay might have proved fatal The
testimony of the witnesses shows
that the train was getting ahead
Of him. He had hold with his
left hand and the least thing might have
sent him under the car. 1t was no time
for gentle words and expostulssions. 1t
was the conductors duty to remove him.
The laws Of common sense and humanity
demanded It.
II believe that my young frieLd (Mr.
Emmons) will be sorry that he said that
railroad men could not be believed on
the witness stand He will learn better
as he grows older, and know that rail
road men do not sell their vsracity and
conscience at 20 much per month"
As soon as he closed the jury was dis
charged until 10 o'clock this morning.
LORE FOR THE PLAINTIFF.
The Superior Court reconvened at 10
CAVCh VI mOAhihB Aho ahtohAeheo
was small. Mr.. Lore began arguing for
the plaintiff as soon as court convened.
He said:
Conductor Lodge handled Adams
without gloves. The assault was unwsr-
ranted. Had Lodge let the man slone he
would have got on the train all right
he was In a place OF absolute safety.
Lodge jerked him from place
OF safety to one Of peril.
It is a blessing that both their bodies are
not 20 day mouldering In the earth. The
books are full Of cases where men are
given limited power and use 1t srb-
trarily. 1t is the same spirit that
prompted Boss Tweed to say, 4 boss
this job.
Adams was just as much entitled to
protection as was George Gray. Thank
G,d he was as much entitled to protec-
tion as President Harrison. or or"
Massey-'David B. Hill who is to be
president. Laughter
This man is entitled 70 damages for
lost time and mental aud physical suffer
ing, Let George Gray be treated In that
way and see what damages he will claim
This man is entitled to just as much
damages as George Gray would be. Elk
suse me for calling him George, but he
calls me Charlie
Massey have not objected
Laughter.
THE JUDGES CHARGE
At - o'clock Judge Cullen charged the
jury. He said
''If he was entering the car while in
motion he was a trespssser and the agent
had the right TO push him aside. This
is rule to protest the public
AB emergency demands immediate
action. You connot act as
you would after due deliberAtion. You
must consider the motives that sctuate
the conductor The force had to be VIC
lent TO remove the man; but you must
consider whether he used more force than
was necessary.
If you are satisfied that he was not in
danger, he is entitled to recover. II not
If you consider that the conductor did
his duty to humanity--t your verdict
should be for the defendant"
At 2.l5 o'clock the jury retired.
CASE OF PARTIAL ELECTRocUTION.
A jury was then drawn in the case Of
John Cook VS.. the Wilmington City
Electric Company. Messrs Bird and
Sanborn represented the plaintiff Hcf
fecker and Hoffecker represented the de.
PENDANTS.
In opening the case Mr. Sanborn said
that Cook was employed in the yard Of
the w. & N. Railroad Company Early
on the msrning of October "a. 1890
the plaintiff was coming homC
from work. It was dark ano
rainy. When he reached Banning anC
Franklin steeets he stepped upon a liv,
wire charged with deadly current oil
electricity. IL seemed to throw him down
toss him up and spin him around lik,
top. In his fall he grsspsd the wire snC
was unable to let 60. He cried for help
A neighbor took a clothes proE
and pushed the wire from
his hand he then fell ovel
insensible. his hands were badly burns;
and his sight affected. The plaintiff will
show that the wire burned through and f
the night before, and the company knev
1t, and will prove that such things ar
common here.
now ELEcTRooUTION FEELS.
Mr.. Cook, the plaintiff. was the frs
witness called. he Is a young man an'
intelligent-looklng BE said;
81 lived at the time Of the accident .
No. 1907 Franklin street am msrrled
was going from my work Of wipinl
engines When / reached Banning street
something struck me at the cap Of tn
left leg II threw me like a spinning
top in the air. l was thrown to th'
ground and did not know any
I ravar a. fIa ~rfu