The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-11-03
$4,000 DAMAGES
That's the Verdict in
Stewart VS.. S. A. L.
Cases Today.

| The jury In the case OF AdmlnlStra-
trix of Stewart VS.. Seaboard Air Line
Railroad last night returned a ver-
dict in favor of the plaintiff by which
they award her ten thousand dollars
damages for the negligent killing by
defendant of her husband, an engineer
in the employ of the Seaboard. The
case has been before tried in the SUI
perior Court, the plaintiff being nom
lSuited and the case having been sent
back by the Supreme Court for re-
trial on the ground that the questions
as to negligence on the part of the
road in not maintaining sufficient telo-
graph stations and in not operating
what is known as the "block system"
were for the jury and not FOR the
icourt.
Stewart was running an engine and
tender without conductor from Raj
eigh to Aberdeen. He stopped at
VasS, where he got orders to wait one
train but received no orders as to
ianother with which he came in coils
ion at Niagara. The plaintiff claimed
negligence on the part of the opera
tor at Southern Pines and also that
the accident might have been aVerted
if there had been a telegraph station
lat Manly. The defendant relied chiefly
on a book of rules to be followed by
engineers WHICH lHey CldlIIleI IlotI bCCIi
inegligently violated by Stewart and
that such neglect on his part was the
proXimate cause of his death. The
principle involved, as well as the
lamount of damages assessed, render
certain an appeal by the defendant.
Argument in the Stewart case against
the Seaboard Air Line was concluded
and the judges charge delivered to
the jury, which took the case at five
~ No upr1jpt nYnpptp6 until
today, in case of verdict for the de-
PENDANT or plaintiff. Already there was
the prediction of q miS-trial iii the
case, based on alleged character
lists of certain of the jury.
There were four speeches heard in
this case yesterday, these being made
by Messrs. ]. c.. l.. Harris, for the de-
Ifense; c. NJ. Busbee, for the plaintiff
IT. b. Womack, for the defense, and
iW. c.. Douglass, for plaintiff.
There were several judgments sign
led during the day and one or two
continuances. The case of Walter
Pratt & Co., VS. A. V. BaucOm & Co.,
Twas compromised and settled. In T.
NJ Whitaker and wife VS.. the Board
lof County Commissioners of Wake
lCounty, the plaintiffs recovered judg-
ment for $50. w. J. Ellington vs. S.
W. Holloway was continued.
| >psS&S IoS"S'
On today's calendar there were
three damage cases against the Sea-
board Air Line Railroad, which have
lall doubtless been disposed of as far
las this term is concerned. The suit
of \. w. Hatch was compromised and
lsettled, and the suit of Samuel
Branch continued. The case of
Eeartt, administrator, of Brnkley
House was to have been tried, but
| I,I NNny1aClE a "a in, the aftPrnOOn
received telegram stating that an
| important witness for the railroad
could not be obtained, and he VIII,
therefore, doubtless ask a continuance
of the case on the part of the rail
road. Brnkley House, who was well
known in Raleigh, where for years
he sold wood every winter, was killed
lat the Method crossing on the Sea-
board Air Line Railroad some time
iago by fast train No. Sc, which was
late. The accident occurred as the
deceased was driving a pair of mules
!across the track,
With these cases out of the way,
the court will probably reach today
the case of Martha F. Wyatt VS.. j.
Walter Wyatt, in which the plaintiff
sues her husband upon a note for
several thousand dollars, which she al
, Ilege were loaned to him from the
proceeds of land sold, and on which
she claims there has never been
: payment. The defendant sets up that
the note was upon a special contem-
| 0oraneouS agreement to the erect
THAT the loan should bear no interest
| and in case he survived the plaintiff
was never to be paid; but that if the
: lplaintiff survived him, then the princi-
: lpal of the amount was to be a charge
tagainSt his estate, subject to such de-
auctions as he might, in the mean
time have made by way of advance
mentS to his wife. He alleges that
since the execution of the note he has
{ lpaid the plaintiff over $1,000. In
: reply, the plaintiff denies the agree
' ment set forth in the answer, except
| 1 in so far as the note was made with
, tout interest
Summons has been issued between
the parties to this action in a suit
: for divorce from bed and board by
, Mrs. Wyatt, who left the home of her
, husband on the 9th day of Deem
> Der last Time has been obtained in
: the divorce suit by both sides, in
which to file pleadings, and it is I'M
derstoOd that the defendant will con-
test the action. The plaintiff is a
daughter Of the late Governor FOwle
and is we'll known and popular in
Rs!ieigh, while the defendant is a
: prominent and respected farmer of
{ Johnston county.