The sun., 1900-03-07
LOCKED Up LANLESS JURY
We're Unable TO Agree on a
Verdict and Spent Night
Under Lock and Key.
HAVE A DERRICK WITH THEM
Chief Justice Lore Charged the Jury
at 2.3O O'Clock Yesterday After
noon and at $40 O'Clock Re-
tired--At 7.:3O O'Clock Had
Not Reached Verdict.

The jury in the $4,000 damage case of
James F. Lawless' administrator vs.. the
Pusey 4 Jones Company retired about
2.4O o'clock yesterday afternoon and at
7.30 o'clock last night had not agreed on
a verdict. Chief Justice Lore then
ordered them locked up for the night
and adjourned court till 10 O'Clock this
morning.
The jury at the suggestion OF one Of
the attorneys 5hen took with them TO
their room, the small derrick, which has
figured So prominently throngbout the
trial. Ii is 4 model Of the one at Pusey
x Jones shipyards.
Chief Justice Lore charged the jury at
tle opening of the afternoon session at
, 30 o'clock. He sale it was not disputed
that Lawless came to his death on
december l0 1897, by being struck on
tile back wifi the mast end Of the boom
which broke loose. 1t was claimed BY
the plaintiff that the derrick was not
suitable or reasonably safe for the pur-
pose. The defendant asserted shat the
derrick was properly constructed aud
reasonably sale for the purpose used.
The Judge continued; cit is the pri-
able and reasonably safe machinery for
the servant and if he fails to do so, he is
liable to the servant for any injury he
may sustain. The master must use all
reasonable care and his care Of his en-
ploye's safety must be in proportion to
the danger. The choice OF suitable ma
chinery lays with the master. 1t
must not necessarily be of the latest de-
sign. The true test is not alone whether
others use it but whether it is reasonably
safe, and what careful and reusonablf
, men would use under like circum-
stances.
aWhiIe it is the primary duty OF The
! master to provide reasonably safe ma
/. chinary, the servant Is supposed To take
J ordinary risks, having contracted fol
! employment with reference to such risks
/ He is presumed to know 4baut THESE
ordinary risks and dangers. Tie qaes
tian il III TO hether the derrick Was
reasonably safe machine under the law
:; u ouf state. II il wa8 reasonably SAT-
7 then the accident aid noy result ifan
negligence hut was one of the risks ~
curred by wolkmen, Is rests 0n Whethe
or not there was negligence ~ tAe psh'
Il oi the defendant.
= Negligence in never presumed hu
4 muet bc proven, There ~ practically II
L liispale on tile laW. The issue il one {
! iact anG il Is Tor you 10 FAY whether I'll
y dcrricl. was reasonSbly suItaale ana saft
y y IN you tind verdict for tAe detal
= dant ii must be iOr such sum as i
7 might have earned Ia life ard lett as i
rs estate, taking into consideration his az
- ability, disposition tor labor ana 1.
~ ptnditurcs. La arriving at this sum yt
II iaus3 he governed By reasonable raj
u growing OFT ei experience and the {
!. : tates lett by otheis."
u, Walter II. Hayes and James
- Ponder, for the defense, submitted thE
prayers yesterday morning.
In their prayers emphasis was laid
the, question Of accident, a quotati
"a being given from the case Of Higgins
4 n Canal Co., in third Harrington. In tt
III case the Court said, "The liability
~ corporations or others who, under
ala sanction of the law have made this a
= other great public Improvements,
~. answer in damages TO those who may
~. injured by accidental occurrences rest
.be ing from such Improvements, and
~a3 legal as we'll as rational principle on d
Az subject seems to be that for n4ere &c
bt dent which human foresight and Vi
Nh lance cannot have loreseen, and agall
ale which proper prudence and Jndgm'
could not be expected to provide,
company is not iiahle.
= HAIRY z. Joslyn OF counsel for III
HE less administrator, opened the afgum
uM to She jury and maintained Chat the q
ilts rick WAS not properly constructed q
that The company Tas negligent IN ailt
ing it to be ueed. He was followed
nth James W. Ponder and Waiter i. HaA
~ 4 In
day iilles Tor the plainillt, VINO closed an
mo | ~