Delaware gazette and state journal., 1899-11-09
husband the executor after his wife

died?"
Mr.. Bird-"It was a joint action" !"
Mr.. Sanborn said there were two
actions. one joint action for suffering
aud pain and the other for loss of
services. Under the common law it
should be joint action. The executor
takes the exact position of Honora
Donahoe and no more.
'Suppose, asked Judge Bradford,
1.-THE executor of tho deceased was
another party and the husband was
Joined and the Jury gave a verdict,
then who would get the money!
Mr.. Sanborn--" it please the
court, | am not prepared to say
The other propositions covered the
law points in reference to negligence
on the part of the company or con-
tributory negligence on the part of the
plaintiff.
Mr.. Biegs replied that the question
raised by the defendant hau been care
fully considered by him and his col
league for days The meaning of all
the statutes is that the executor can
sue individually. When the wife dies
the husband ceases to be her husband.
He can marry some one else ii he
desires to do go.
John X. Bradford opened for the
plaintiff and reviewed the testimony.
The principal thing about this
disaster, he said, is that the conduutor
and brakeman were at the front end of
the car and no one at the rear. 1t has
been testified that there was no one at
the rear end, although passengers
entered there.
Mr.. Bird opened for the defendants.
He said the employees who were wit
nessos were on that train as much for
the passengers as for the railroad com
pany. He contended that there was
no negligence on the part of the COM
pany. Ample time had been allowed to
get OF, and if tho train was moving
when Mrs. Donahoe was on the plat
form she should have remained thele,
as only minute was required to stop
the train.
Mr.. Bird called attention to the
testimony OF the Clhytons and pointed
out that they had time to put their
aunt on the train and put her in n seat.
He said the company settled cases where
people had cases against it. but in the
present instance the company consider
ed there was no case against it, as the
accident was the result of negligence
Ou but pufb Va bu6 pihiDbil. lnG SOti-
| pany is bound to take more than ordi-
| nary care of its passengers and he COM
| sidered it had done SO in this case.
Michael Donahoe, the plaintiff, was
moved to tears wheE Mr.. Bird said Mr.
Donahoe was more interested in the
suit than Conductor Perry, being not
only interested from a standpoint OF
dollars and cents, but also because he
blamed the railroad company for caus-
| ing the death of his wife.
Mr.. Bird emphasized the fact that
DIS. Chandler, Palmer and Pyle had
| testified that Mrs. Donahoe told them
she had fall q few days before the
accident.
MIR. Bind finished speaking at 1.05
o'clock, when recess was taken until
2.30.
The damage suitofg Michael Donahoe,
executor Of his wife, Honora Donahoe,
against the receivers of the Baltimore
| Il Ohio Railroad Co. was given to the
| Jury In the United States Circuit Court
Saturday. John Riggs, counsel for
the plaintiff, made The closing aigu
ment TO the jury Saturday afternoon.
Judge Bradford began his charge to
the jury Mt 10. 15 O'Clock Saturday
and spoke ior % minutes. The plaintiff,
he pointed out, had alleged that Che
accident was due to tine negligence OF
the Iaill oad company; that proper steps
had not been provided for the deceased
to aiight from the car that the train
was not allowed to stand at the station
long enough to permit Mrs, Dcnahoe
tc get off and was started without any
warning tc her or the defendant.
He instructed the jurors that the
plaintiff could recover, if at all, only
for the physical and mental pain, suf
fering and distress of his wife, and thai
he was not entitled to recover for hel
death or tho loss of her assistance
society OF companionship.
If the plaintiff or his wife had beer
guilty of contributory negligence at the
time OF the accident the plaintiff wa.
not EMIT ed to recover but If there
was no such contributoiy negligence
ard the accident was due to negligence
on the part of the railroad company ane
accelerated or contributed to veal
heart and produced the pain and suffer
ing, the Jurors should allow such
damages as they considered commen
surate with the pain and suffering O.
tho deceased.
There was no evidence to show tina
the train was started with jerk, bu
il the Jurors believed the train was no
stopped long enough to allow the de
ceased 10 alight then they should fine
for the plaintiff; but if they believed
Honora Donahoe did not attempt tt
leave the car until after the train hat
started and did so voluntarily or at th'
request or command of her husband
she was guilty OF contributory nesli
gcnoe, and the jurors should find fo
the defendant.
Railroad companies, he said, arr
bound to exercise proper care in tht
handling OF passengers, and it deyolvet
uEon the jurors to determine whethe
the company had complied with tho re
quirements in the present case.
At TO- 40 O'Clock the jury retired.
| The suit Of Michael Donahoe of thi
city, executor of his wife, Honor;
Donahoe, against the receivers o
A which he sought to recover damage
for injuries to his wife, which h,
alleged resulted from an accident a
Delaware avenue station, came TO al
ond in the United States Circuit Cour
on Saturday afternoon, when the iur,
returned verdict for the defendant.
The case was given to the jury a
10. 40 O'Clock in tho morning. At =. Al
o'clock in the afternoon the jurors ap
peared before Judge Bradford ant
asked what they should do in cas-,
they decided tnat both the defendan
and Honora Donahoe had been negii
gent The judge instructed them tina
in the event OF such decision tho,
should find for the defendant, al
damages should not be allowed where
they decided there was contributor,