The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-04-24
FORHUSBAND'SDEATH
manage Suit For Franklin
Mine Disaster on Trial.
..ee GOES TO THE JURY TO-DAY.
r.,.eupt Case Against sutherland Dis
,.Issed Administrator Accused
OF RemI-@ne-s.

erss Of the series OF damage suits
-s-.s toe Oregon Improvement Com
- growing out Of the Franklin mine
ss.s,sr OF August a. 1884. was on trial
- Judge Osborn yesterday. and bids
- 70 20 70 the jury today. 1t Is the
.-ss.1 for 5000 brought Ia the name OF
- Toha Pugh and her Ave children.
:. olseat a girl Of II. for the death OF
Sssashaud and father. The case yester-
= made good progress. all the testi-
- for the prosecution having been
s~.ieted shortly before 5 O'Clock, when
:. desessSe moved for non-suit-
- attendance at the trial was un-
..s,ly heavy for case In the civil de-
..~u,snt, and nearly every chair was oc-
s-ss.d In the front row were seated
~S~szl OF the women whose husbands
,s->xsed In the disaster, each of them in
go. ard some OF them caressing their
.-5ssrrn. IN the other seats were miners.
80 said the closest attention TO the pro-
~~zrgs. Among those In the court room
x,ss AIRS. Pugh. Mira. Hall. Mrs. Reese,
r. Hooker Mrs. Macpherson. Tom
rawsen. Jack Phillips. Jim Cave, Will
s,r Cook. r. Daniels, james O'Brien,
Eer9e Washington Smalley. John Sny-
ssr. John Morgan, David Boweg. Frank
r.rniehael. Israel Stevens. G.. #. Har-
- Carmen .. Emenuei, John Adams
~ David Edmonds. the latter state mine
rsvctor The jury was obtained with
5, sny great difficulty. II is made up
= f5Il0ws. II. III. Bicknell. James Col
-, w. s. Hanks. n. J. Hunt. Charles r.
esYpeater. ". j. Shinn. Frank Ls!del. r.
? 1Fsrgan. NJ. Kelley. j. j. Hays. J. @.
Msp and F. A Marshall.
y first witness TO 90 on the stand
Il 10 stFgs
breast 81 when the alarm was given.
ssssns was a few feet In advance Of Pugh
sna escaped. while his companion was
eseysaken by the choking SMOKE. Stew
sas testimony. together with that OF the
sghY witnesses. was TO the effect that
ths shutsing off Of the fan at the top OF
TIE shaft was the main reason why the
msn sere caught by the smoke and
smaihsred.
re defense endeavored 20 bring out as
fact that Pugh did not heed the warn
sag given by the superintendent. and that
n could have escaped had ne hurried
sst after Stevens; therefore. that he took
Sc risk upon himself and was guilty OF
oatrfbutory negligence. This position
sss made the basis or the motion for a
pn-suit. In passing upon the motion
snd denying II, Judge Osborn said;
.sThe motion places upon the court the
task OF measuring time. The evidence
shows that Stevens escaped. and the
aas.stlon arises, how far was Pugh be-
ntna him? The court IL unable TO say
II pugh remained there until the smoke
overlook him. ne was guilty Of contrib
niory negligence. but the question oc-
ours. Can the court say what should be
the lapse Of time between the calling out
10 the men and the shutting down OF the
fam Undoubtedly the company had the
right % shut down the fan. but a. was
also the duty Of the company 10 give time
for the men % get out OF the mine. After
fhe warning. the men could not remain
with the expee tation that the fan would
continue going. while the fire burned In
definitely: but the company had not the
right 20 stop the fan until there had been
reasonable time for the men 80 escape.
ne company would not have the right 10
sslgh It's property against the lives OF
= men. but n would have the right 10
nserve It's property after the men were
asA The question OF time Is a question
q fact do not believe that the court
hs the power TO determine whether the
seeeased was guilty OF contributory neg
hFslSe"
After denying the motion. Judge Osborn
ertsred an adjournment until go O'Clock
tbs morning.