New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-09-04
ACQUITTAL STIRS NEWARK


dAfAndants-John u. Crimmins. Alexander j.
Csssatt. Dr. Leslie d. Ward J. Roosevelt shan
lev E F. c. Young. Elisha Gaddis and paVlo
Young the man Of morey-and Charles VI snip
man. James Smith, Arthur ". Pratt and Rich
ard Eick the employees. as they awaited the JUS
tees decision at the opening OF the session.
The courtroom was more crowded than at any
time in the trial. many well known lawyers
being cospicuous in the throng.
CHIEF JUSTICE DISCUSSES CASE.
The question, said Justice Gunlnlere' was
whether on the evidence brought out the defend
ants. or any of them. had been negligent In
their duty as to render themselves oriminahy
responsible for the accident. That the crossing
was dangerous could not be controverted: but
the directors must have been guilty of the per-
fornance or omission of some specific act 10
be liable criminally. The State has alleged
gross negligence in the omission Of a derallins
switch and in permitting the crowding or the
front platforms. The facts submitted by the
State showed that the use of derailing switches
was not at all universal in fact, about III per
cent only of all the crossings were so protecteo'
showing that trolley men differed greatly as to
the efficiency of such protection. But for the
protection of it's passengers this trolley COM
pany had provided set OF rules governing the
operation of the road. On the Clifton-ave- line
the motormen were to stop at the top or the
grade. and always. having the car under con-
troll. stop thirty feet from the crossing. wnen
the conductor would go ahead to see II the
course were clear. In two years no car had
gone down the hill not under control. and none
had failed to stop at the thirty foot line
SPECIAL PRECAUTIONS TAKEN
For unusual conditions. there were special pre-
cautions taken. for instance. the sand and IN
structions as to the using of the brakes The
Prosecutor held that the children on the plat
form haa interfered with the motorman' out
the testimony had not shown that enough chill
dren had ever been allowed on the platform 10
hamper the motormen.
His decision went on:
All NJ these things were done IN order 20 insure
the performance Of duty by the motorman, ana. al
OF them taken together. the system or CONSTRUCTION
ss safe method as could possibly have been fur
nished certainly did furnish so safe a metnoa as
10 Justify these directors and officers in supposlng
that additional precautions would not render the
crossing amy more safe d6es %aS em To
whether the addition of derailing switch would
Guided that il would not 1t cannot be said that in
reaching that conclusion they were guilty OF such
gross p;eggen,ffe as to render them '''na'
II seems to me S saiS tbat any one Of the
defendants has failed IN the ~ .in9
~ the care Of the passengers who were riding on
this at that time that there is nothing III ~
part of any one of them render him crnlnally
responsible for the death of this poor chlId Wlos
life lost in the accident that occurred GU
February 10 last, and for that reason eonesivs
II to be duty TO instruct this jury 70 IenueE d
verdict in favor of the defendants in this case
Justice Van Syckel held that 1t was the duty
Of the company 10 construct and run the roau
in a proper manner but the law was so hu-
name that it would not consider a man GRIM
inal if he erred in a case where there was a
difference of opinion. He agreed with the Chief
Justice that the defendants had provided an Ell
fcient system which, IL it had been followed
out would have prevented the accident Jus
tice Dixon too, believed that the system as pro-
vided relieved the defendants of criminal re-
sponsfbility. -,,x
Justice to acquit, with the assurance that all
responsibility for such action rested on the
court, the jurors rose and the foreman Iepeateu'
narrotlile after the clerk. the words which for
naIly acquitted the wealthy trolley directors
and their employees.