The Van Buren press. [volume] (Van Buren, Ark.) 1859-1914, 1896-11-07
Decision In Case Of Meyers vs.. Iron
Mountain and Pullman Companies.

| From the Little Rock Democrat
A decision was handed down in the
United States circuit court of Appeals
at st. Louis Monday affirming the
decision in Judge Williams court,
which recalls remarkable story. On
February II, 1891, IsadOre Meyers
boarded the southbound Iron Mountain
train at Bald Knob, Ark. and took a
seat in the Pullman sleeper. In the
same car was a lunatic named j. w.
| Graeter, without the attendance of a
keeper, and no measures seem to have
been taken to restrain him from an out
break of violence. After the car started
Graeter fell into a fit of rage, and
before he was secured, shot and killed
Meyers, whom he had never seen up to
that moment. The conductor also met
his death at the maniac 8 hands.
The widow of Meyers brought suit
against the Iron Mountain and Pullman
companies. jointly, alleging that the
companies had knowledge that Graeter
was insane, and negligently left him in
the car without keeper.
The companies denied any knowledge
of Graeter's insanity, but the proof
showed that three weeks before the
killing Graeter. then violently insane
had been sent to Indiana in care of two
keepers, and had travelled north on the
Iron Mountain train in a Pullman
sleeper, manacled that he was violent
when put on the train and at times
exhibited homicidal tendency. On
the day of the killing Graeter S appear
ance was such as to alarm Miss Mary
Walrath, passenger in the same
sleeper, and she communicated her
fears to the conductor, saying: II am
afraid of that man. The conductor
then informed her that he had brought
the same man north three weeks before
in condition of violent insanity.
Objection was made to the introduce
ton of testimony that the conductor
knew the man was insane. Upon thi:
point Judge Caldwell says: 1.-The pas
sengers in the car were under the care
and protection of the conductor. If he
knew or had reason to believe that
Graeter was dangerous lunatic, it wa:
his first and highest duty to take proper
action at once for the security and
protection of his passengers against the
violence of the insane man. Failing t.
discharge this first and highest duty, il
was clearly his duty to communicate Il
the passengers the facts within hi:
knowledge which showed, or tended tC
show, that they We're riding in the cal
with violently insane man, who was
under no guard or restraint. to the END
that they might themselves take suitable
precautions for their safety. 1t viii be
observed that the conversation had with
the conductor was when he was at his
post of duty, with passenger 10 his
charge, and entitled TO his protection
who had become alarmed for hel
personal safety, and who was rightfully
seeking information from the conductor
as TO what he knew abOut Graeter
whose appearance and conduct had put
her in fear. Under these circumstances
it would have been gross violation OF
his duty if the conductor had not
impaired to the passenger the inform
alton he possessed concerning Graeter.
What he then said on that subject was
in the discharge of duty imposed upon
him by his Office. and is clearly part
of the res gestR. He was acting
strictly in the line of his duty. though
not up to the full measure of his duty
for which he paid the penalty with hi.
life, for he, too. was killed by Graeter
The Judgment Of the circuit court i:
affirmed.