St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-07-11
Master and Servant.

The Union Pacific Railway Company,
plaintiff i'll error, VS.. James Callaghan.
In error to the circuit court of the
United States for the district of Col
Orado. Affirmed. Opinion by Judge
Sanborn.
First-A master is liable for an injury
to his servant which was caused by his
own negligence and the concurrent
negligence of fellow servant.
Second-What is the proXimate cause
Of an injury is ordinarily question for
the jury.
Third-Severe storms had washed out
the road bed and undermined some of
the bridges of a railroad; a repair train
was running over the road CARRYING men
and materials to put it in proper condi-
ton; one of the rules of the company
required conductors in such cases to
stop their trains and inquire at each
station as to the condition of the road,
and required conductors and engineers
to stop their trains before entering upon
any bridge; the conductor of such
train refused to permit it to stop at
the station nearest the bridge
where the section boss stood ready to
inform him that the bridge was under
mined; the engineer failed TO see the
danger signal on the track near the
bridge and drove his engine upon it
without stopping; the cars fell through
the bridge and injured the plaintiff,
was a workman riding to assist in max
ing repairs. Held, it was question
for the jury whether or not the act of
the conductor in refusing to stop at the
company was the proXimate cause of
the injury.
Special Vs. General Law.
Francis |. CowaD, acting receiver of
the Choctaw Coal and Railway company,
plaintiff in error, VS. Harrie Marley. In
error to the circuit court of the United
States for the Western district of Ar
kansas. Reversed. Opinion by Judge
Sanborn.
First.-Privilege granted by special
act are not affected by general legisla-
ton on the same subject, but the special
charter and general laws must stand to-
gether, the one as the law of the partic-
ular case, and the other as the general
law of the lnnd,
Second-Section of the act of con-
gress entitled, IAN Act to authorize
the Choctaw Coal and Railway com
pany to construct and operate a rail-
road through the Indian territor " (25
U. S. Statutes, 35) IS not repealed by the
acts of March l, 1889, establishing a
court in the Indian territory (25 U. S.
Statutes, 7S3. chapter 33S; Supplement-
Revised Statutes, 6T0), and of May ?.
1890, providing permanent govern
ment for the territory of Oklahoma and
enlarging the Jurisdiction of the United
States court in the Indian territory
(26 u. S. Statutes. 81. chapter 1872; Sup
plement to Revised Statutes, 720).
Third-So far as the jurisdiction of
the court and the rules that measure
the liability of the property in their
hands to respond for personal injuries
inflicted upon employees in their serv-
ice are concerned, the receivers stand
in the shoes Of the railway company.
Difference in Labor.
Fourth-The rule that the master is
responsible for damages resulting to a
servant from defects in machinery and
appliances of which the servant has
notified him and which he has promised
to repair has no application to cases
where the service required is simple
manual labor without tools OR machin-
cry and where no such tools or appli-
ances are necessary to the performance
of the work with reasonable degree of
safety.
Fifth-It was the duty of the plaintiff
and the porter to transfer train box
weighing 250 pounds daily from one car
to another, a distance of six feet when
the cars stood opposite each other. AS
the plaintiff stood in the door of his
car, with one hand on the jam grasping
the handle of the train box with the
other, swinging it across, a rope which
sthey had attached to the other handle,
and which was held by the porter, came
united, and the weight of the box
pulled the plaintiff to the ground and
injured him. Held, the injury was the
result of one of the ordinary risks of
the employment which the plaintiff had
assumed, and the fact he had requested
and the defendant had promised to fur
nish him with skid to slide the box
from one car to the other upon fur
nished no ground for recovery.
General Rulings.
George A. Eddy ct AL, receivers, ap-
peliants, VS.. Annie Letcher, interviewer;
appeal from the circuit court of the
United States for the eastern district of
Missouri; affirmed. Opinion by Judge
Shiras.
GustaYus Herman ct al, plaintiff in
error, VS.. Malcolm Campbell; in error
to the circuit court of the United States
for the district of Minnesota; reversed.
Opinion by Judge Shiras.
julius Haas, plaintiff in error,vs. Eos
ter l.. Balch ct al. in error to the cir
cult court of the United States for the
district of Minnesota; reversed. Opin-
ion by Judge Shiras.
The Board of County Commissioners
of the County of Kingman, Kansas.
plaintiff in error,vs. Corhell University;
in error to the circuis court of the