The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1898-04-01

the power is it not to be deemed an exc
cution thereof
.. though A. Is not styled trustee I'm
the deed to Moore that Is a circumstance
OF little might, since the deed could not
have full effect unless deemed to be an
execution OF the power w. will be
deemed in such case that that deed was
made in the capacity in which he had
the power TO make IT and TO give effect
according TO its purport. Terry VS.. Rod
man. 20 Ga. 21S Doe VS. Sturges,
Taunton 2i7; Allison vs.. Kurtz, 2 Watts
1S5.
A DAMAGE CASE.
W. Alexander and Mt. Vernon Electric
Railroad Company VS.. Quayle by etc.
Affirmed. Opinion by Judge Harrison.
An employee named Jones Of the COM
pany. acting both as mOtorman and con-
ductor. was alone in charge Of one pas
senger car and two gondola freight cars.
Quayle and other lads got on the cars,
when Jones in violation OF the city ordi-
nance. increased speed to ten or twelve
miles an hour and then ordered Quayle,
IN an angry and threatening manner TO
get off. He, greatly frightened by the
angry tone and acting under its influence.
jumped from the car falling on his face
with his leg under the wheel OF gondola,
by which it was so injured that II had to
De cut of.
AT the trial defendants counsel object
ed to the question Would you have
jumped off II he had not ordered you of, -
as incompetent was overruled, and eX-
cepted
Held: The question was leading. and.
therefore Objectionable Ia form; the evil
dence perfectly competent If brought cut
by a proper question. Objection should
haxr laa q
question. The form could have been
changed. The objection to competency
was calculated 10 mislead both counsel
and court. The evidence brought out by
the question had already been laid fully
before the jury, so the company was not
injured by the Objectionable form
As to the instructions
Held: The two Instructions refused
were TO the effect that IL the Jury be-
lieved from the evidence that Quayle was
a trespasser they must find for the COM
pany, This is not law. and the instruc-
tons were properly rejected. The law in
It's humanity does not permit wanton or
reckless injury even 20 a wrong doer.
Granting that he was a trespasssr, the
company had no right TO put him in peril
Nv Increasing speed 10 an unlawful and
dangerous rate and then require him TO
was d duty TO reduce speed TO a degree
that he might have left the car with
safety.
So Also, it was proper that the jury
should consider the age. experience and
and intelligence Of Quayle In determining
how far he was responsible for his mis-
fortune; not his age only. but his inteIli-
gence, capacity and ability TO know the
danger and avoid it. Instructions must
be construed as whole. and though one
or more be incomplete, they may be
cured by a complete statement OF the
law in another. or others. so that when
read together the court can see that the
jury could not have been mislead By the
incomplete instruction.
A general ordinance prescribing n max.
imum rate of speed applies To each and
all the streets and the instruction that
the ordinance fixed a limit on the street
on which the accident occurred was not.
amenable to objection as misleading.
CARE AT CROSSINGS.
Rangeley's admir-. VS.. Southern Railway
Company. Affirmed. Opinion by Judge
Buchanan.
The plaintiffs intestate was killed by a
train at street crossing in Danviile.
Action, and verdict for defendant COM
pany.
Held; A person approaching a railroad
crossing where gates are required a. be
kept and lowered upon the approach OF
trains. has no right TO presume. II the
gates are not lowered. that no train Is
approaching. While the sams degree OF