The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1905-10-25
"That Meaaeing Judgment
itor The Manning Times:

In piancinc over your issue OF the llth,inSt. con
siderable space, it appears. Is taken up III aus
crssinc - verdict rendered in the case OF ThoS
II. Fielder rs the North Western Railroad Com
nany. in which was the plaintiffs attorney
,ndcr the caption "A menacng Judgment and
nm interview with your personal friend Captain
Thomas Wilson. the president of this road III
which he invcghS against the great injustice
done him in this and other cases 1T recent ;ern
OF court
In my twelve years practice the Juries OF tins
county have often decided against me Dat ciili
say without hesitation their verdictS nave III
the main been just. aud with Intelligent people
this jury's verdict would need no defense at my
| hands. but as the less thoughtful may be leu
atstray by your SpeclouS arguments. IN ni@h1
br well for me 70 point out i few OF your errors.
| With the facts in this case propose 10 have
nothin. 20 do for two reasons: First. because
the iur; have already resolved them in Fielder 5
favor. and Secondlc. becausca motion for new
trial is now pending and it would maNileStly be
improper for me to discuss them. But 90 de-
sire TO say this that it will be very hard lor you
! or Captain Wilson TO convince any lnteIhSeht
man in this County that negro would ever get
q verdict against white man, unless he show
ed 4 clean pair of heels and had absolute justice
| on his side.
In YOUR interesting comments upon this yer
dictvou doubt whether it is law for 4 person 70
recover of Il corporation for the willful tortS OF
it's agents. and say. If law, it is very DANGER
GUS Don't you know that the railroads OF
this country are represente led on all occasions by
able LAWYERS. and If not s,ood law never would
have cotton to the jury with this case, but that
| counsel on the other side would have put me
ont of court on 4 demurrer or = motion for
non-suit:
Now as TO the dangerous feature: You must
| remember that corporation can act only
through agents; if say this railroad paraIe!eo
one OF our public roads and the engineer seeing
a man approaching with mettleSome horse
commences to blow his whistle and let OH steam
with view Of further frightening the morse
and the horse runs away and throws the man )
wife out and Injuries her for life. Will any one
say that road is not responsible for the act OF
it's servant who may not be worth a dollar, ana
that it should compensate the man for the
wrong done him: Would any one say . verdict
| for the man would be dangerous in this case:
It would be very dangerous law dld ne not nave
redress. for he would likely take the law IN ms
own hand and settle the matter with the ensl-
neer, and under such circumstances 4 hea'!
verdict against the road would make IL more
ca reful in the selection Of its employees IN 'he
future.
Again. NJ. Editor. suppose you were on tralh
and the conductor came along ana coLec'eo
your fare: after awhile he came around AGAIN
and said Mr.. Applet, will now take your lafe'
rou reply. Conductor. have paid you: he says
no you have not: you say, but have: ana ne
mark you calls you liar: you return II ana ne
| Jumps on you, chokes you and elects you from
| train-will any man OF common sense say chaV
road should not respond in damages Tor the
wilfui tort OF it's conductor:
Now our law books TEEN Win JUST socn
cases and society has never felt any i'll effects
from rerdicts rendered for the plaintiffs IN sucn
cases: and it is no lawaeither framed oE some
little lawyer member OF the legislature VINO
had in view the mulctius Of corporations DIS
YOU profess to believe, but it is law orouSht D!
the first settles Of this country from Sns!aAo
and is = part Of the common law ana mas
! been the law before there vas Such tnlns is
railroad. and for such length OF time that the
memory OF man runneth not to the contrary.
and it was reserved to The MANNING TIMES 10
discover a great source Of danger in It's recos-
milton as the law Of the land when appllea 10
| its ncrSonal friend in Clarendon County
yonr illustration of clerk in store getting
into = controversy with a purchaser and the
purchaser calling him scoundrel, which clerk
resents. is not parellei case to the FEEDER case
\ ,a,NfSr
pie reason that in your illustration, the pur-
chaser uses the offensive language 'h''' oiiusS
on dificulty. while in the ones mentioned D!
me and in the Fielder case the ralIro'u GU
ployce brings on difficulty Had YOU pech
present and heard the judges charge III 'he
Fielder case. YOU would not have fallen into TINS
error for he distinctly charged the 1ur! lhaI
being an agent did not take away the rlshe "a
self defense and that before Fielder coulo Ec-
cover the jury must be satisfied that the agent
struck him without Justification or excuse.
Apparently the jury so found
In short. If bring about difficulty with an
| agent. even though il is about 1.-THE Company $
business. and get the worst OF the tsht mat
follows no jury in South Carolina "ou!o ever
give me verdict. l must be without laui'
myself.
Remembering this cantor the life OF me
| see the danger Of this verdict becoming known
| to certain clement you refer TO.
! Now. one word in reference to Captain wal
sons interview. and I am done: You should
not allow the Captain Ito punish hlmsei1 ana
the town Of Manning for the acts OF j lew
Whose acts are you talking about: Not Feluer
for he doesn't live here. Not mine surely 1or
have sued his road for citizens OF PaNTliie'
summerton and Silver and got verdicts in two
instances, the other still pending, and | nave
not heard Of his Furnishing these towns oy Iear-
ing up his road and leaving them. Not because
Of the jury, for only TWO OF them IN the feloee
case are residents OF Manning. and MS com
plaint OF unjust treatment must therefore DC
against the whole county. for the other ten
men are pretty we'll scattered. Moreover 1he
foreman Of the jury in the $1,000. Eerdlct was
from the town of Summerton, to which ne says.
Inv interests are nearer" and we must look
for some other reason. ! think, Mr.. Edltor,
we will find it in the constitutional objection OF
OF every litigant to loSing-the proneneSS TO
byarne somebody for . bad case-the interest Of
Mr.. wilson and not the interest OF the town OF
l Nj
here in Manning that Mr.. Wilson doesn't bring
his road here because OF two little verdicts
against it: but the people here can see that II
Mr.. Wilson is Il Stockholdcr OF the Atlantic
Coast Line Railway. and the Atlantic CoaSl
Line is already 1T Manning. IL would be OF no
real advantage to Mr.. Wilson for his road 10
come in here.
In other words, Mr.. Editor, have never yet
heard Of a private corporation doing anything
for q town simply for the sake OF that town. out
that the interest Of the corporation is first and
foremost in the minds Of its officers. and that
in this particular, whenever the officers OF the
Coast Line and Captain Thomas Wilson ind 1t
to their interest to bring the North Western TO
Manning it will come regardless Of the suits
brought against it by W. c. Davis as IN attor-
ney. and the verdicts rendered against II oE
iuries OF Clarendon county.