Evening journal., 1905-07-12
GELATINE DID
NOT EXPLODE
This Is Contention of De
fense in Case of Todd VS..
P, A. &. w. r. R. Co.
ALL TESTIMONY is PRESENTED

The judges sitting in the Superior
Court refused the motion for a nom
suit in the case Of Ella NJ Todd, ad-
ministrator against the p. 3. & w.
Railroad, which was made by counsel
for the defendant yesterday. The
grounds for the motion were that 1t
had not been shown that the explosion
was responsible for Mrs. Todd's death
and that IL was not proven that the
explosion was on the grounds Of the
defendant company. Andrew G. Gray
counsel for the company and Hugh NJ.
Morris counsel for the plaintiff, argued
the matter before the court all yester-
day afternoon. Chief Justice Lore an
nounced that the motion was denied,
when court convened this morning.
Mr.. Gray in opening for the defense
stated that the explosion must have
happened at a point where there was
hole in the ground. He said they
would prove by witnesses that car No
1887, which was loaded with gelatine.
was at least $50 feet from the hole, that
this car was burned and that there
was no explosion in It. He said the
lplaintim failed to prove whether the
gelatine in the car was an explosive or
food. Mr.. Gray said II was strange
that of three physicians who attended
Mrs. Todd before the accident, after it,
and also at the time of her death, not a
one of them was called by the plaintiff.
He said they would produce testimony
to show that the two cuts received by
Mrs. Todd. alleged to have been caused
/ by the explosion had nothing to do with
Mrs Todd's death.
The rst witness called by the defense
this morning was Harry V. Easom,
who was conductor of the head train
in the collision. He testified that his
train was run into by extra train No.
5l60 at Greenwood. that his caboose
and first car next to the caboose were
totally demolished. The second, third
and fourth cars from the caboose were
derailed. Mr.. Easom said he cut loose
from those cars and pulled the re-
mainder of the cars. "a in number on
the siding. The witness stated the ac-
cident happened at either 12.11 OF 1912
O'Clock on December ., 1903. After
pulling the remainder Of his train on
the siding, Mr.. Easom said he went
into the telegraph office to call the Su-
lperintendent for wreck train, and
while he was looking for the operator
the explosion occurred. at about 1929
O'Clock. No car in his train ex.
report for that train and showed that
Union Line Car No i4.5S7, said to havl
been loaded with gelatine was the thirt
car from his caboose and was one o.
lthose derailed.
The large hole in the ground. Mr.
Easom said, was in the rear of the
tender of the engine Of the other trair
and was from $50 to 175 feet from cai
No 1887 Of his train. Car No 14.3Si
witness said, was burned but did moi
explode
The witness was closely cross-ex-
amined by Mr.. Morris as to the time o.
the explosion. but he stuck to 1922
o'clock and said he looked at his watcl
just before the explosion. He ais,
stated on cross-eNamination that thl
derailed cars We're standing upright
and that fire flashed from all of then
at once.
DR.. Frank r. Palmer, of Greenwood
who attended Mrs. Todd at the time O
the accident. was called. There was
difference Of from five to ten minutes
in the time that DR.. Palmer and thl
preceding witness fixed the explosion
DR.. Palmer said he attended Mrs. TodS
not later than 1920 o'clock and h,
thought it was 1215 o'clock. which wa
after the explosion. Witness foun,
Mrs. Todd suffering from two cuts oi
the forehead, but found no nervou
: shock. He said he attended Mrs. Tod,
: for indigestion before the accident
! DR.. William T. Sudler. of Bridge
, vile. testified that he attended Mrs
Todd In August. 1904. and she was thel
suffering with Indigestion. He was ais
the attending physician at the time o
her death and gave a certificate o
death caused by stomach trouble. Th
condition he found her in, witness said
7 could not have been caused by a shock
e Both sides rested about 1890 o'clocl
4 and the case will he argued to the jur
this afternoon.
L The next case set for trial is that o
q Samuel Bowring VS.. the Wilmington
Malleable Iron Company, which may b
started this afternoon. L. Irwin
Handy and John G. Gray represent tn
lplaintiff and Thomas L. Bayard an
j. Harvey Whiteman the defense.