The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-01-08

severally or jointly sued or indicted
Another au hor-fty said the officers OF
a corporation were liable because sney
did not provide proper precautions 70
prevent nuLnance. and cases were
cited where, under such circumstances,
the directors of companies were prop
erly indicted and convicted. The di-
rectors and officers are primarily re-
sponsible and are therefore the proper
parties to be prosecuted II the defend
ants were before the court under q
criminal prosecution, the fact. as shown
by the evidence. that the nuisance COM
planned of had been carried on Tor q
period of four years. would have pre-
cluded them from making a defense OF
not being responsible and not having
had knowledge of the existence OF the
nuisance. When the legislature adopt
ed the statute governing corporations
DIT was intended that directors should
be held liable for injuries inflicted. Tor
they owe a duty to the public. and see
that their business Is not conducted IN
constant and open violation of law.
Authorities say that directors should,
and, are, individually accountable Tor
damages sustained by any one by rea-
son of their negligent conduct An ap-
solute duty Is imposed upon them by
statute. and a breach OF such duty.
causing damage, holds them liable. III
these parties may be neld criminally
liable, Of which there Is no doubt, I'M
der the authorities, then they are civ
lily responsible for damages. 1t Is ad-
mitted that the two defendants are the
agents of the corporation, and II they
in any sense exercised control over the
premises, they are equally responsible
with their master. the corporation. Ac-
cording to the arguments of the defend
ants counsel. the man circuit was a
sort of convenient automotum. who did
as he pleased, or received his orders
from above and was responsible TO no
one for his actions. II this subordinate
agent, this warehouseman, had been
given absolute control of the business
of the corporation, then the trustees
become liable, because they surrender
ed to him the duty imposed upon them
by statute, and they became the In
surers of his fidelity and are RESPONSE
BILE for his negligence. The nuisance
has been proven to have existed for
such a length of time that the officers
of the company are presumed TO have
had knowledge Of IL. The defense cited
a case in Missouri where the superin-
tendent of a railroad company was de-
clared not liable for the act OF his
agent, who made an assault on a per-
son while the agent was In the dis
charge of his duty. Would 1T be held
for am instant that IL that agent had
committed a continuous wrongful act,
under the eye or supervision OF his su-
perior for a period Of four years, that
the superior WOulQ hot De dldDlc III Ills
agents acts? Where the act complain
ed of was committed but once, and
never again repeated, then no one Is
responsible except the corporation ana
the person directly responsible for the
act, but where the act was carried on
continuously for a great length OF time,
aus in this case, then the law presumes
that the officers of the company had
knowledge of Vt and are responsible for
It, The LIABILITY of the defendants is
fixed by the law, which imposes on
them the duty to exercise such a degree
of supervision as to prevent the COM
mission of the nuisance complained of.
He commits a nuisance who permits IL.
He becomes an actor by failing TO act.
Mr. Walsh cited an array of authorities
and closed his argument by saying thai
the defendants were liable to criminal
Indictment and prosecution, and that
they were therefore responsible, civilly.
for damages.
John F. Forbis closed the arguments
for the defense, and claimed that d.
rector of a corporation could be held
liable only for an act OF commission
and not for an act of omission. The
fact that they might be prosecuted
criminally does not make them respon-
sfble in a civil action. 1t cam not be
claimed that THE officers of the compa-
ny had knowledge of the existence OF a
nuisance committed by an employe in
be imputed in the absence OF any evil
dence that the officer mad knowledge.
II they are liable in this case they are
liable for the action of every member
of the corporation and every employe'
however aowly. Mr.. FOrbis said the au-
thorities cited by Mr.. Walsh were not
applicable to the case at bar and not
in touch with III.
The arguments were concluded short
ly after O'Clock, and the judge In
passing on the matter. said he would
be very brief. in view of the fact that
| IL was the order of the court that
would determine the matter and not
the expression of opinion he might feel
disposed to give. He said he had list
ened to the thorough manner in which
| the question had been presented, and
IL suggested to him the individuality
| of any attempt to answer the argu-
ments made on the authorities pre-
scented.
'I deem II a matter of very great
| Importance, not alone in It's application
| to these cases." said the court. but in
| the general application OF the law TO
like cases that may arise and be pros
ecuted in the future. The court under
| stands II Is Of great Importance to the
parties IN the present suit, but not so
great as to the question as II applies to
general litigation in this jurisdiction.
| The court. after having heard the ar
guments of counsel and the citation of
authorities on the motion for nom
suit as to the defendants, Kenyon and
Connell, and having considered the
| evidence, finds as a fact that these de-
| PENDANTS had no actual knowledge of
| the storage of an unlawful quantity of
powder at the place mentioned and
which resulted in the explosion that
| occasioned the injuries complained of
| by the plaintiff, at the time In ques-
| ton or at any time previous thereto.
| and II is the opinion of the court that
| IL any knowledge of such unlawful sto-
rage of powder can be imputed, IL must
| arise by implication and a presumption
| of the law as borne out by the facts in
| the case. The question Of law arising
| on this motion as to the liability of
these defendants. based on the conclu-
sions of fact, must be determined in