The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1898-07-26
CHILD HAS NO MONEY VALUE.
PARENT CAN NOT RECOVER DAM
AGES FOR AN INFANT.

Under the Rulings in Georgia a
Child Must BE Old Enough and
Capable Enough to BE of Actual
Service Before 1t Has "A Monetary
VaIue-What Can BE Sued for
When n Child Is Killed by a Street
Car or Railroad.
An infant child has no pecuniary value
in the eyes of the law of Georgia. The
/ killing Of such a child by a street car,
even though it be by the grossest negli-
! gence. does not apparently entitle the par
ent to recover damages for the loss sus-
tanned. There is no way of estimating
suffering and aflicdon in money, and
| damages for them cannot be secured. All
that a Savannah father whose child is
killed, when it is of tender years, can
do is to secure from the corporation held
| responsible for its death the actual dam
ages he has sustained in a pecuniary way.
This may seem shocking to parents and
to the general public, but it Is held to be
good law not only in this state, but in
many others. In New Jersey a few days
ago judge Of the Supreme Court brought
considerable indignation down upon him
because he set aside a verdict for 5000
damages for the loss of a child, and gave
expression to the view that child had no
value before the law to entitle its father
to collect such damages from the compa-
ny whose car caused its death. But in
Vestgation brings out the fact that il is
not only good law in New jersey but in
Georgia and many other states as we'll
H. X Richards, ESD, has represented
many damage suits growing out of acct
dents, and IS otherwise thoroughly ac-
qudlhted with the law bearing on such
cases. In the case of the killing of an
infant child in Georgia." said he yester-
gay the parent can only recover the
actual monetary damages he has sustained
as the result thereof. He is entitled to the
expenses of the physician and nurse, to
the funeral expenses, to the cost of a LOT
in the cemetery If one had to be bought
ana TO such other expenses of this cherac-
ter which grow directly out of the injury
10 the child and were an actual financial
damage to him he otherwise would not
nave sustained. He might properly sue for
inc cost OF tombstone, such as It is Gus
toinary 10 place at the grave of a child
ana the jury would be right in granting
MIN 1t along with the other damages re-
Ierred TO. But, beyond that the Jury could
not go, | think, and the verdict be sus-
tanned under the law. The tort to the
chlId damaged the parent in the way
nave indicated, and SO much actual dam
ages he may reasonably sue, for The
mental sufferings to the parent cannot be
considered by the jury, and do not enter
INTO the case. suit for damages Is a
matter OF business and not of sentiment
Under the decisions in Georgia 1 think
a parent cannot recover other damages for
the loss of a child that is not old enough
to be OF pecuniary profit. A baby one, two
or three years old, il is evident to any one
cannot be of service to the parent 1t has
no pecuniary value to him, in that 1t is a
source of revenue, directly or indirectly
10 be OF value does not necessarily i'm
ply the hiring out of the child. If a child
is old enough to be of service about the
house, it has pecuniary value and dam
ages are In order. The test is as to wheth-
er the child killed was old enough or capa-
Bile enough to render services of value
assisting in the fathers business or in any
other way having a pecunary value. A
child or years old may be Of consider
able service In some such way, and the
parent would be justified in suing for dam
ages for its services from the time of
death until q years of age. But if child
of that age, or no matter how old, was
through physical or mental disability, I'M
able to be of service to the parent, no dam
ages could be asked for, no matter were 1t
quite well grown when killed"
A parents feelings, it is evident, are re-
garded as incapable of apportonment and
cannot be compensated