The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-11-03
DAMAGES FOR DEATHS AND IN
JVTRIES

The recent terrible railroad accident In
this city. in which sixteen persons were
killed and about forty more or less injured,
has started popular discussion as to the
liability of the railroad company in dam
ages. 'The popular idea that such liability
exists is correct, but most persons are not
we'll informed as to the extent Of it. 1t is
true that the law holds railroad companies
to a high degree Of care in the carrying
of passengers. A very slight departure
from this rule in the management Of a
train constitutes gross negligence. To en-
able a passenger to recover damages for
a personal injury it is not necessary to
show the absence of all care. or reckless
Indifference to the safety of passengers. or
intentional misconduct on the part of the
agents or officers of the company. A coll
lision in itself raises the presumption of
negligence or mismanagement on the part
of the company or it's employees, and puts
the burden of proof on the company to
show there was no such negligence. There
is no liability against the companies when
accidents are caused by the act of God, as
III law tciilS it-dc Wy a Suudch uoo Va
freshet. or by a broken rail caused by ex-
IRENE cold, or under circumstances beyond
human foresight to prevent. But in all
other cases railroad companies are held to
a very high degree of care and responsible
for the slightest neglect of it on the part
of any officer or employee.
The right of action against a railroad
e. 1911 s-..-. -
is a statutory one. and the laws of the
different States differ somewhat. In this
State the law provides that "'when the
death of one person is caused by the wrong
| full act or omission Of another, the per-
sonal representatives of the former may
| maintain an action therefor against the
latter. If the former might have main
tanned an action, had he lived, against the
latter for an injury for the same act or
omission" In the present case all but one
or two of the dead were minors, and the
right of action is in their parents or guard
ians. These also ave the right to COM
promise the matter and accept payment of
a sum of money from the railroad COM
pany in full settlement. If they choose to
settle in that way. AS to the legal measure
of damages for those killed, that is ma
terially affected by the fact that most of
the victims were minors The general rule
of law is that damage shall be based on
death has ensued the amount of the re-
covery is to be measured by the pecuniary
loss sustained by the persons who have a
right to recover. A parent has a legal right
to the earnings of a son until the age of
twenty-one years, and in a suit for dam
ages for the death of a son il would be
competent to show his capacity to earn
money and the amount of his actual earn
ings. This reducing of the measure Of
damages to a strictly pecuniary basis may
look heartless and cold blooded, but that
is the law. It makes no allowance for
wounded hearts. lacerated feelings, grief
at the loss Of loved ones or deprivation Of
for those who mourn-nothing but an al
lowance for the pecuniary loss they may
have suffered in the present or prospective
earnings of the deceased. II he were a
married man, in business, with consider
able earning capacity and actually earn
ing considerable money. his widow or legal
representatives could recover damages ac-
cordingly. The case of a minor and a
student in college, without any developed
earning capacity and really a source of
expense rather than of income, is very
different. II these cases should come to
trial 1t is probable that under the instruc-
tons OF the court a jury would fix the
damages at a low figure. The court would
instruct them that they could not con-
slider family grief nor the loss to the COM
munity of these bright and promising lives,
but that they must figure out as nearly as
possible the actual money loss, present and
prospective, TO the persons bringing the
suit.
The rule Is much the same in regard to
persons injured but not killed. 1t has been
decided that a passenger on a railway car
who has been injured In q collision caused