The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1896-02-07
ON DUMPING CARS.
RAILROADS THAT SWITCH CATTLE
CARS HARD RESPONSIBLE

VA no d q LII hIOGON SlDBb
If They Knock the Cattle Down and Bruise
Them They are not Exercising Ordinary
Care and Diligence - So Decided the
Kansas Court of Appeals in a Case From
This County-Number of Decisions are
Handed Down, Nine of Which are
Reversed-The Cases and the Results
in Full.
Railroad companies are responsible
for humping cattle off their feet while
in transit. This is the decision Of the
court of appeals in an opinion handed
down yesterday. This opinion was in
the case of the Atchison, Topeka and
Santa Fe railroad company VS.. Ditmar,
Voris and Vandivere.
The court handed down opinions yes
terday in the following cases:
Archison, Topeka ana Santa Fe rail-
DAD company VS.. Ditmar, Voris and
Vandevere, from Sedgwick county.
District court affirmed.
J. w. Griffis, as sheriff of Chase
county, Kansas, VS.. c. c. Whitson,
from Chase county district court. Re
versed.
State of Kansas VS.. Barney O'Con-
nor, from Sumener county. Liquor
case. District Court affirmed.
F. E. and w. V. railroad company VS..
Joseph c. Lilly, John Lilly and Charles
S. White, from Marion county. Judg-
Of TDicty.saf r,onIiffpd
St Louis and San Francisco railroad
company VS.. Anna Hoover ct al, from
Butler county. Reversed.
J. F. Limerick VS.. S. L. Barrett ct al,
from Sedgwick county. Affirmed.
William George VS.. State of Kansas,
from Sumner county. Affirmed.
The Western Union Telegraph COM
pany VS.. The Getto, McCiung Boot and
Shoe company, from Sedgwick county.
Reversed.
D. B. Curd VS.. S. B. Bown, ct al, from
Marion county. Affirmed.
The City of Wichita VS.. Jane Coggs-
hall, from SedgWick county. Revers-
ed
The First National Bank of Hutch
inson VS.. A. McInturff, from Reno
county. Judgment of District Court
modified.
John W. Jones, Sheriff VS.. W. r.
Marshal, from Reno county. Judg-
ment of lower court affirmed.
Charles F. Harding VS.. The Guaranty
Loan and Trust company, from Sedg-
wick comfy. Reversed.
The Omaha, Hutchinson and Gulf
railroad company VS.. NJ. Deney, from
Kingman county. Judgment Of Dis
trct Court reversed.
Joseph Cannon VS.. Griffith and Ew-
ing, from Lyon county. Judgment of
District Court affirmed.
William Scully VS.. j. H. orter, from
Butler county. Judgment of lower
court affirmed.
Frank Wood. trustee, VS.. w. W. Dill
ct al, from Sedgwick county. Judg-
ment of lower court reversed.
Prick company VS.. William Carson,
from Cowley county. Judgment of low
er court affirmed.
James w. Dobson ct al. VS.. Fred
Shoup, from Barber county. Judg-
ment of lower court reversed.
The Mutual Benefit Life Insurance
company VS.. Samuel Sackett, ct al.
Dismissed.
Manufacturing company, from Sum-
ner county. Reversed
John II. Wheat VS.. Jane r. Brown.
from Barber county. Judgment of
lower court reversed.
E. F. Smith ct al VS.. Caroline Saw
age, from Lyon county. Judgment of
lower court affirmed.
In the Ditmar case the evidence
shows that some cattle were shipped
from Amarillo, Texas, over the Fort
Worth and Denver railroad to Panhan-
die City and from Panhandle City over
the road of Santa Fe railroad to Kan
sas City with the privilege of the
Wichita market; that they left Pan
handle City about 8 o'clock p. m. on
the oath and arrived in Wichita about
3 p. m. on the 26th, making about
fOrty-tWO hours to come less than 400
miles. The cattle We're shipped on To-
cal freight trains; the trains made fire.
quent stops; the motive power was
poor; the trains were heavy and much
switching done. The cattle were fire.
quently knocked down and bruised and
while they had started out good, strong
butcher stuff, they arrived in Wichita
badly bruised and swollen and five
dead. The case was won by the cattle
men below and was appealed to the
Court of Appeals by the Santa Fe COM
pany- Judge DennlSOn IN his opinion
confirming the judgment of the lower
court against the railroad company in
part says: Where the undisputed evil
dence Of the plaintiffs show that the
employees of the railroad company in
switching, bumped the cars and knock
ed the cattle off their feet and threw
them down, and that this occurred sew
eral times, it is not error for the court
- L, 81
was introduced tending to show that
the trainmen shifted about and bump
ed the cars in a needless manner, that
is to say in such a manner that per-
son OF ordinary care would not have
been guilty of"
Judge Dennison says that an ordin-
arily prudent man would have set out
the cars continuing the cattle while the
switching was in progress.
1T WAS SORT OF A BOOM