Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1905-05-19

ficient number of cross ties to give
reasonable support to said defendants
said track. Defendant was negligent
likewise in the manner Of the main
tenance Of the said trestle and the
track thereon laid, in that 1t had
become so weakened by decay,
by long use and by inadequate re-
pair, by the constant jarring and VI
bration produced by running over
them its said mentioned trains, that
the same was wholly inadequate to the
demands made upon It; all Of which
was we'll known to the said defendant,
or should have been known had the
said defendant exercised proper care
in that behalf. That the flanges on
the wheels of said engine, tender and
cars. constituting the said mentioned
passenger train, were broken and
worn to such an extent, and the brake
beams and brake shoes used thereon
were so broken, loosened and dilapi-
dated as to render the use of said en-
gine, tender and cars dangerous and
likely to cause derailment Of said
train; and the said defendant having
knowledge or In the exercise Of prop
er care and diligence, should have
known thereof, was grossly negligent
In permitting the said engine, tender
and cars to be used In such condition" "
The plaintiff alleged that he had
been born with a rupture: that the
rupture had been healed at IL or 13
years of age: that he was In good
physical condition when he entered
the mail service and up to the time
of the wreck; that as the result of
being thrown against iron mail racks
In the overturning of the car and be-
ing covered with debris, the old trou-
BILE was aggravated and renewed to
such an extent that 1t could not be
again cured; that he was incapacitat-
ed from making a living and by reason
of these things he demanded judgment
against the defendant in the sum of
$4,000.
The defendant In reply set up that
II the plaintiff was injured ass he
claimed, which fact was not admitted,
his injuries were due to his own con-
tributory negligence, in not putting
forth such efforts as he might have
put forth in getting out Of the way of
harm.
The opening testimony in behalf of
the plaintiff was principally that OF
physicians as to his condition before
and after the wreck, and at the pres
ent time, and intended to prove his al
legations as to his injuries. On this
testimony the plaintiff rested, and the
defendants counsel moved a non-suit,
holding that the plaintiff was on the
train as an employe, or at most as
licensee, and that as such, without
showing the negligence, etc., he had
alleged, he had no right to hold
the defendant responsible for such In
juries as he had sustained. The ques-
ton was argued at length on both
sides, and the court overruled the
motion for a non-suit, holding In ef-
feet that the plaintiff occupied the
same status as a passenger, and that
as the defendant had not carried him
safely, 1t must show the reason why.
Under the conditions 1t was incumbent
upon the plaintiff only to show that
he had not been carried safely.
The motion for a non-suit having
been overruled, the defendant devoted
itself to proving that in the first place
the plaintiff was not injured so badly
as he claimed, and In the second place
that the trestle at which the wreck
occurred was, previous to the wreck
In first -class condition, 1t having been
entirely rebuilt within a year or two.
There was testimony to the effect
that some Of the fish bar plates bore
evidence of having been removed with
malicious intent, and one Of the wit
nesses testified to having found
monkey wrench In tree near the tres
tie. Several witnesses who were on
the scene during the morning after the
wreck, testified to the soundness OF
the timbers Of which the trestle was
constructed as far as they were able
to see; but none Of these witnesses
were willing to swear point blank that
there were no unsound timbers In the
structure-only that they did not see
them.
The plaintiff claims that while the
upper portion OF the trestle may have
been sound enough. as a matter OF
fact it was rotten at its foundation.
He holds that the piles upon which
the structure rested had been for
long time subjected to alternate per-
lods of submerging and drying out,
and as the result had become thor
oughly rotten, and consequently in
adequate to support the heavy trains
that were being run over them.