Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1899-10-10

had an opportunity to be seated. with
sudden and violent jerks and jolts,
which threw her against the seat OF the
car, causing permanent injury to her
person. 1t appears from the record that
Mrs. Moore had reached the depot in
tDanyille, Twigss county, for the pur-
pose OF taking passage over. defendants
road to Macon, Ga. She was accompa-
MED by two gentlemen, at the home of
one of whom she had been visiting. She
had in her charge, travelling with her.
q little girl. She also had hand bag
gage and parcels to carry with her on
the train. The only accommodation fur-
nished by the railroad company for Its
passengers over this road was what IS
known as q linked" train. The Particu-
lar train furnished for this purpose con-
sisted of one passenger coach and a
number of freight cars. This passenger
coach had a partition in 1t, one end OF
the coach being set apart for the ac-
'commodation of lady passengers. When
the train reached DanVille it was some
what behind time, and there was some
evidence OF the conductors being i'm
patient to leave. His attention was call
ed by enc of the men assisting the lady
to the parcels and baggage that had to
be gotten on the train, and there was
testimony as to his making some inn
patient remark about being behind
time. The front end Of the passenger
coach, where the conductor WAS stand
ing, stopped at point convenient for
this lady passenger to board the car at
that end. AS soon as the train stopped
she entered the car. assisting the little
girl ahead OF her. One Of the gentlemen
followed with a valise, and the other
succeeded in placing the parcels or va
llse he had charge OF on the car, but
did not undertake to follow the lady,
ewing to the fact that the car had COM
menced to move off before he could
oven escape from the platform. The
portion OF the coach for ladies was the
rear half OF 1t, and before Mrs. Moore
reached the partition door the train
started off with sudden jerks and jolts.
which seem to have thrown her against
the partition door, and at the same
time to have thrown the man fmme-
diatcly in her rear against her, and thus
she WAS knocked down upon the back
or arm OF a seat. This fall, it Is claim
ed, resulted in the permanent and Sc
rious injuries set forth in her petit
ton.
There was n verdict and Judgment for
the plaintiff for $4,000, and defendant
appealed.
The Court says:
We do not mean to say that railroad
company. IL 1t sees proper, may not use
what Is known as n. "nniXed train" for
the purpose OF transporting people as
well as freight. provided it can be done
with reasonable safety to life and limb.
But 1t matters not what the means
employed may be, the law always en-
joins upon such carriers the duty of
extraordinary diligence in protecting
passengers. and it would seem that, the
more dangerous the means employed,
thn irrtl Nj o,,I
rier should be in guarding against in
jury to passengers. If the construction
Of the train on which this defendant in
error claims to have been injured was
Of such q nature as seems to have been
commended in this casc-that certain
jerks of the train were unavoidable in
starting from station, and these were
attended with more or less danger to
people on the car who We're unseat ted,
then, manifestly. extraordinary dill
gence required those in charge of the
train to stop at stations sufficient
length of time to enable those desiring
to take passage on the train to be seat
ed. If such time has been given and
there has been no unnecessary jolting
Of the train, or it extraordinary dill
gence has been used to prevent it's vio-
lent jerking on starting Off, the COM
pany has complied with the obligations
imposed upon 1t by law in this parti-
cular. One the other hand, it is the duty
of the passenger. in boarding such
means OF conveyance, to exercise ordi-
nary care and diligence in promptly
placing himself in a seat, and. if he
should be injured on account OF ur-
necessary delay in so acting, without
any fault on the part OF the company,
there can, OF course, be no recovery for
such injury. The controlling issue of
fact In this case, so far as concerns the
liability OF the company. for whatever
Injury the plaintiff sustained, is
whether or not the company's agents In
charge Of the train gave her fair and
reasunabtE opportunity to be scated- be-
fore starting from the station where
she boarded the car. A passenger who
enters such mixed train, with knowl-
edge of its peculiar structure and
movements, assumes the risks conse-
quent upon its unavoidable Jerks when
starting; and the degree OF diligence he
should exercise should have reference to
such necessary movements of the train
But he has also the right to rely on an
exercise Of extraordinary diligence by
the railroad company In it's manage
ment of the train in such a way as to
avoid danger of injury to its passen-
gers: and when he has used ordinary
diligence for his own safety, under the
circumstances, the company is liable
for damages to him resulting even from
its slight neglect. Affirmed