The Portland daily press., 1897-10-28
CONDUCTOR TO BLAME.
SO Declares the Jury in The
Mileage Book Case.
VERDICT FOR j. p. PALMER IN THE
SUM OF $4,000.

A Half Day Given Up to the Arguments
| and Charge-The Jury After Being out
LIZ Hours Returns Verdict Against
Maine Central Railroad Company.
The trial Of the interesting case inyolv-
ing the question of the rights of con-
ductor in Identification of the holder of a
non transferable mileage book came to
an end in the Supreme Court, yesterday
afternoon.
At the opening of court Hon. Josiah H.
Drummond, counsel for the defendant
corporation, made his closing argument.
Hescontended that when his client, Con-
ductor Jones, asked the plaintiff, Jona-
than p. Palmer of Someryille, Mass,
who rendered q mileage book for his
fare from Rockland to Lewiston, If it
was his name that was written upon the
cover of the book, the conductor was
simply following one of the company's
rules under the mileage contract, and it
was incumbent upon the passenger to an
swer the. question, not in an equivocating
manner, but so as to be understood; that
the question put to Mr.. Palmer by the
conductor was necessary as means of
| Identification.
! If he meant that it was his name upon
the book said Mr.. Drummond, 'why
did he not say. 80. and prevent all this
trouble. If his acts were such as to lead
the other party into error, he cannot COM
plain. 1t was the plaintiffs own folly
that brought about this controversy and
his arrest
Lawyer Boynton of Somerville, one of
the attorneys for the plaintiff, occupied
nearly an hour in his argument. He said
there is no provision in the mileage book
/ contract to compel holder to state his
name or family history to every conductor
to whom it is presented. He added that
the conductor was officious, his manner
irritating and his pursuit of the plaintiff
persistent Ellis (Jones) blood was
up" continued the attorney, land he
was determined that Mr.. Palmer should
answer his question. in just the way de-
sired or take the consequences of arrest. "
Judge Whitehouse began his charge at
11.15 concluding at IL. As. He said. in
substance, that the whole case hinged on
the question of whether the line of in
quiry pursued by the conductor for the
purpose of Identification was q reasonable
one. Under the contract the mileage
|could not be used by any other person
than the one whose signature it bore
and there must be some means of identi-
fcation, or else the contract would be of
no avail to the company.
4 4 One means that the plaintiff says might
have been employed under the contract,
for Identification, was to have the holder
of the mileage write his autograph in
order that the conductor might satisfy
himself by comparison of signatures.
But it was for the jury to determine
whether it would be practicable for
conductor on whose train are 100 or more
passengers, to go through such n process
as means of Identifying them. That
particular means of Identification WAS
not to be construed as exclusive, against
any other reasonable means of inquiry.
1t was the right of the conductor to re-
sort to any reasonable means of identif-
cation, not more burdensome to the pas
senger than the terms of the contract;
and it was incum bent upon the passen-
ger to answer any reasonable question
asked for that purpose.
The jurors were further instructed, in
effect, that they were to determine
whether kind and gentle answer on the
part of the plaintiff, in response to the
conductors first inquiry ABOUT the name.
would not have settled the whole contro-
versy. The passenger should answer
frankly whether the mileage book is his
own.
He said, in conclusion, that the jury
should determine whether the plaintiff
did, by his own wilful pride and OBJ
! stinacy, in elusive answering, lead the
conductor to believe, and whether the
conductor at the time of the arrest, did
believe-that the plaintiff was not the man
whose name was written in the mileage
book.
The jury retired at II As, and after be-
ing ont an hour land half, returned a
sealed verdict. At the coming in of
court in the afternoon. the verdict was
, rendered. 1t was in favor of the plaintiff,
in the sum of $3.50. 90.
The railroad conn any will enter an
appeal.
THE COMING Y. M. c. A. DEBATE.
The subject to be debated by the Port
land and Biddeford Y. NJ. G. A. associa.
tions is: Resolved, That further terri
, torial enlargement would be detrimental
to the best interest of the United States. -
: The question. after being selected, was
sent out to the Biddeford orators tn
choose whatever side they desired. and
they took the negative. A letter was re.
ceived from City Clerk Freeman yester-
day morning in which he said the mem