The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1899-01-05
her DAMAGE CASE ON TRIAL.
Is Against The Pswtuyet Valley Electric
Road and Is For $4,000.
JUDGE WILBUR REFUSED A NON-SUIT.
Motion Was Made by Mr.. Vincent Because He
Charmed no Negligence on the Part Of The
Company Had Been Shown.

Testimony regarding an accident on
the Pawtuxet Valley Electric Street
Railway company on May 10 last was
heard by jury i'm Judge Wilbur's court
today. Alice u. Murray is suing the
railway company to recover $4,000 for
personal injuries received in that ac-
cident. Mrs. Murray was a passenger
on a car owned by the company when
the accident happened. and her coun-
sci told the jury the injuries sustained
by her would probably result fatally.
The defendants motion for a non-suit
was denied. and the defence is that the
defect that caused the accident could
not have been discovered by reasonable
inspection.
Frank p. Murray testified he now re-
sided in Boston. where his wife was
undergoing medical treatment. At the
time OF the accident he lived at Fiske-
Vile Four Corners. on the day his
wife was injured he left Fiskville ter
minus with Mrs. Murray. Had gone
| from the starting point, when without
| a moments warning the motor dropped
! out OF the bottom of the car and struck
] ur1-tf7p ground There was a severe
| concussicn and the back part OF the
| car tipped up and he was thrown down
| and dased. Witness thought his wife
| had gone through the bottom or the
| ear Mrs. Murray went from the seat
\ i'm the rear of the car To the front or
il and suffered concussion OF the brain.
/ The injured woman was taken In car
\ riage to her home and kept there until
November. when she was taken TO Bos-
| ton 10 be placed under the care of rela-
| tives. From the time of the accident to
! the present time witness said his wife
| had been under the care of physicians,
| though before that time she never mad
| a doctor.
| ON cross-examination Mr.. Murray
admitted he had a suit against the de-
| fendant company. He and his wife
were the only occupants OF the car
when the sudden stop took place He
talked with the conductor after he sent
his wife home Witness admitted he
aid not know much about machinery
and could not tell what defect In the
! car caused the accident. The car, ht
said. had just gone around a curve
quite swiftly.
Thomas Knapp testified he was 8
barber at Fiskeville and took Mrs
Murray on the day of the accident IRON
where the car stopped TO her home II
| his carriage He noticed the 'front.' par
| or tha car had dropped down. Oh
| cross REORGANIZATION witness SAID Mrs
| MURRAY got out of the buggy withou
| assistance, while he held the morse
, ! head. and also went into her hous'
without aid.
DIR. Legris of Arctic testified he at
fro, "a
tober. An examination OF the plalntir
made by him just after the acciden
showed Mrs. Murray to be badly IN
iured about the head and other part
of the body and to be suffering from
conclusion of the brain. When sh
| went to Boston she was having memoir
rhages OF the lungs, and his opinio
: then was she would not live over
| month or two. He could not say as I
! the longest time she could i've. %
| cross-examination witness salu Mfi
? Murray old not have consumption, an
said that conclusion of the brain wa
! | 80 yaryinp, severity. ON redirect IN
said that concussion OF the brain woul
cause a general debility, ana TN
D would. i'm his opinion, cause hemor
. rhages.
DIR. Walter ]. Smith testified he mad
o an examination Of the physical coma
y tion of the plaintiff on september Sot
9 and found her very weak anc IN du
: mental state When asked If her cor
d dition resulted from this accident II
= repIv was i'm the affirmative ana u
n soid he could not tell wether her cor
i dition was such as would lend 10 III
J. mediate death.
Tr Rohert NJ. smith sa,d the woman
condition was vciy serious 10 days arr
Tho accident but he thought she wou
racover IL the hemorrhages contil
ned &c, Obtober with increasing seNe
In NV however her chances or recover
would be slight.
Dr. Mansfield Of Boston testified
~. last saw the plaintiff Tuesday. Wh'
- ~, first saw her it was about noon ol
- da,, earlv I'm October ne thought -
J. would not live till the night came. y
,.asr v.ns nos. a chronic one and nc II
moi visit Lcr daily. In his opinion the
v.n. no prsgibilitv cf Mrs. MurraNs =
lc covcry she might not live a week ~
vet might hold on a couple oi monif
~ He thought the injuries coul9 nav
Io suited from the accident ana that I
~ bcmorrages resulted from injuries
~ arteries i'm the chest.
walter Il. Vincent. counsel FOR {
defendant corporation, said the plai
tih"s declaration was limited TO I
want of inspection OF the car that W
de the only negligence charged. The
had been no proof as To how the ac
dent Happened. the jury had no tes
a ,oonv on which TO say whether the ,
!, ferdnut corporation was responsil
le Tor II or not. SO far az II appeared
IN accident was unavoidable. The co
m pany was not responsible for an u
ne ayoidable accident and he asked foi
n non suit.
100 Charles II. Page counsel for
n | piaintiff. argued that the defendant
i'm ing "A common carrier was bound
CONTINUED on Page TwoD