Evening journal., 1896-01-15
COMPANY'S DEFENSE.
Efforts to Show That Wright
Was Negligent.
FROG PIECES WE'RE BoLTBD DOWN
No Pieces OF Loose Rail Between the
Traohs-The Car struck ARainst the
Abutment OF the Bridgs-schIepf Says
That Wright Told Him He Wrapped
His Arm Around the Braks-Lever.

Abutment OF the Bridgs-schIspf Says
That Wright Told Him He Wrapped
His Arm Around the Brake-Lever.
Joseph Hootsn Was put on the stand
for the plaintiff In the csss Of John w
Wright va the WILMINGTON City Railway
Company yesterday afternoon He said
that the woodwork under the frog was
worn out Until four months ago he
worked for the defendant company.
William K. 6ovsns, colorsd, who passed
over Eleventh street. bridge seven times
a week, swore that the frog was broken.
His statement wEa corroborated by
Charles Govsns, who had several eggs
broken sns day by this jolt OF the car
when It passed over the defective frog.
Mr. Cooper rested aud Mr.. Salisbury
was given until this morning to errsu 70
his defense.
Mr. Salisbury made bis opening this
morning A model of car No 81 was
produced. II was a beautiful piece OF
work, in nickel pleted iron and hard
wood Walter d Hayes, = member Of
the bar not engaged In the case declared,
ia q stage whisper, that II was better
than the cars be was In the habit of
using on Eighth street. The motors and
top of the car we're not represented
Ia the model, which WAS four feet long,
but it showed the inner and outer
brake clamps
Mr. Salisbury held that the accident
was caused by Wright'B own negligence.
Hs declared that Wright had one brake
PULLED back and his arm around the
thumb lever when the wheels struck
rise at the bridge This caused the
isrring OF the brake lever, the lever wss
thrown forward, resulting in the injury
to the arm de would show that
Wright had bssn under treat
ment Rt the Delaware Hsspitsl
for injury to bis back, member
Of ths hospital stsf treating him. De
fsndRnt would show that Ia February.
after the accident, he helped carry large
stone from a house to q wagon aud had
used his right and left hsnds indiscrim
iDRtely In carrying buckets Of saud
Weighing fifty pounds Wright signed
for TIE company an absolute release from
any aud ell claim for tho iDjurios aus
taint d, and he continued IN the employ
Of the company, but left before the suit
vas brought.
Architect E. L Rice was called and
produced and sxemplifed a plot OF
Eleventh street bridge aud the tracks.
which he had prepared for the defense
Chief Dispatcher Edward soblepf
swore that Wright told him that some
thing about the brake brske, an his
arm vas rjured in eo1ssqusncs.
Foreman James F. Taylor, Of the
company's blacksmith shoD, testified
that he built the model When asked
why be nickel plated IL he replied that
It was 30 prevent hurting the eyes when
It was looked at
When the mo odal was offered IN evidences
Mr. Cooper interpossd no objection
Mr. Taylor explained the workings OF
the levers and brakes When be In
sFectsd car No 81 be found everything
all right excepting the coggls-joi ard
brake-shoes. In his opinion Wright
could net have had his arm hurt unless be
had his arm wrapped around the brake
lever aud thumb-larch.
In cross-sxGnination Taylor said that
the model WAS one quarter as large as
car No. 81 ia all its parts. Car No 81
had bson in service elk years. A broken
piece Of iron In the brake shoe would
have stopped the car suddenly and with
a heavy jar aud thrown the right lever
forward. With the car going at a speed
of from six to eight miles an hour the
motorman Usuld BE- thrown forward
The lsver would be thrown forward
faster than the man becauss the power
at the fulcrum iE nine times greater than
at the top Had the metorman a proper
hold upon the top Of the lever no coulI
not possibly have had his arm iammed
between tbs lovsr and the front Of tho
csr, because the lever would go 70 much
faotsr than the man. Later on he sd
mitted that under certain conditions q
shook OF tho kind detailed by the plant
ih might throw tho arm bstWesn the
lever and the car
Walter Craig an employe in the black
amith shop took the stand. He went TO
car 81 on Church street and found the
coggle-ioint, brake shOe broken Wright
tod him that mis- arm was hurt Wright
told him thst he had his arm around the
brake lever and showed him how the
accident happened Witness told him
Il was 3 foolish thing to do and Wright
replied that he knew 1t was but he had
often done Il before
Alfred A. DannsnbAusr foreman Of the
msn Whs we're sent to Eleventh street
bridge to repair the broken frog, testified
that tha frog was broken In two about
two feat six inches fr0n the end There
we're three bolts holding down both
pieces. Only one bolt was taken out
before he left to got longer bolts TO
replaes the old ones. BE WAS away from
thirty to forty Eve minutes and not
present when the accident occurred.
When he got back the two bolts were
still In the broken piece. Neither Of the
broken pieces Of frog had BEEN removed
to the bsst Of his knowledge The play
OF the frog was not more than an inch
The track was safe for cars TO 60 over
He had heard complaints about the noise
caused by cars going over that broken
frog, aud went out there 10 fix It
4 lThenRs Harrington told how the og
was being fixed and the manner in
which the accident occurred The pi9ce
Of the coggle Joint sirack against the
abutment Of the bridge. Neither pisce
OF the frog was up. There was no loose
rail Of any kind on or bstwoan the
tracks that it would have been possible
for the car to have struck.
There might have bssn q crowbar,
but he was not sEro. He did not zee the
joint catch agsinst the abutment The
broken frog remained at the brldgs two
months after the ace dent The car did
not ju@p forwards and backwards sew
eral times after It struck. II did not move