The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1906-06-29

III s
Rmarks of Judge Ferguson in n
fencing Switchman Welker to Peni-
tertiary on Conviction for Man.
slaughter. |
Charles T. Welker, the young South
ern railway switchman who was con-
victed of m~anslaughter in the supe-
riOr court Thursday afternoon, was
sentenced by Judge Ferguson yester-
day to two years work on the roads.
The importance of the case and its far
reaching influence made the remark
of Judge Ferguson, before passing
sentence, of much interest and OF sig
nal value. Judge Ferguson said:
THE case will be carried to the SUI
preme our nj reviewed by n or
the ablest courts, Of this or any other
country. If the rules given for he
guidance of the jury are not rules OF
law applicable to the facts OF this case
then the error will be declared and
any Judgment which I shall pronounce
will be revised. This is the right of
every American citizen before he Is
deprived Of his liberty, provided he
can find surety that he will obey the
final judgment of the courts. | shall
not say anything for the purpose OF
narrowing the feelings Of b defend
ant. For one who feels that he is the
immediate cause of the death Of a fel-
low being must suffer enough for the
consciousness that he had taken human
life without just cause.
"One who is at all familiar with the
current history of the times cannot
close his eyes to the fearful fatality
among railroad employees resulting
from negligence somewhere. The
state is interested in the health Of IFS
citizens and takes precautionary and
often expensive measures to procure
the best of sanitation. The state in
terests itself for the moral protection
and intellectual development OF the
children of the state. Why should the
state close its eyes to the conditions
in railroad circles. which shows a
death roll among it's employees almost
equal to that Of an army in time OF
war. Whether this comes from the
railroad authorities employing incom-
petent men, or working them hours
beyond which human vigilance cannot
exist, | don't know. The railroad
companies have been by the statutory
law of the state made financially re-
sponsible, not only to the public gen.
orally, but to it's employees for inJu-
ries caused by negligence, who ever
may be guilt of b negligence, put
the damages must be assessed ON the
dollars and cents basis-the money
value of life taken. The state does not
and should not know any money value
of a human life. Before the law all
stand equal. The question is: was a
reasonable creature slain without just
cause and who was the party respon-
sibIe for the death. Then again, while
the railroad is responsible in damages
the negligent emplOye had hitherto
in this state, so far as | know, been
subject to no penalty except such rs
the railroad company may impose,
which usually is dismissal from Ser
vice. The defendant has been DISMISS
ed from the service OF the railroad
three times; once because he
declined to work at the place he nad
Geen assigned; once because ne
had a fight on the railroad yards, ana
y once because he left a switch open,
which caused heavy property loss ana
-the death of several men. Is 1t posi-
ble that human life and the penalty
for negligently destroying it snail
stand on the same plane OF decllna-
dion 10 work where assigned or a fish
cuff in which no serious injury to per-
son or property occurred.
The man on the engine unn1n at
..3:5 miles an hour was as helpless as TN
infant in the face of the death trap
left open by the defendant. The open
switch was SO dangerous to the engl-
neer on the moving train as an CD
struction left on the track; as hanger
GUS to the engineer standing on inc
track as a cannon a from a gun lev
eled at a point where II stood WIN
out notice or warning Of the 1mpono
ing danger. The defendant was espe-
cially charged to see that the sWltcn
was closed, with full knowledge or the
dangers attendant on leaving 1t open
and the consequences which did 1ol-
IoW-he knew would naturally Hollow
if he failed to close the switch, ano
with the knowledge OF the conse-
.rIences which would flow from his
responsibility a. to not close the
switch. he is responsible for the conse-
saueaces which followed and was the
immediate result of his negligen'
omission of duty, and ought not TO DE
heard to complain if he is held amen
40le TO the law lO1 lis hCSAiSSASS 49,
withstanding the fearful consequences
which resulted from the defendant
negligence I will not impose the fnl
sentence of the law for the reasof
that the law itself, on account OF tae
want of vigilance in the past, h a De
come almost a dead letter, and tnose
in the position the defendant was
were spurred to vigilance only by a de
sire to remain in the service and hopes
of promotion and deferred from negll'
gence in the performance of the duty
with which they were specially charg
ed, only by the fear of losing their job:
this prosecution and conviction ant
the punishment which follows tnousI
if is mild, I trust will be sufficient e
teach others in like position that the!
are responsible to the law of the state
The Judgment of the court is that tn
defendant be imprisoned at hard laoo
in the state prison for the term OF I'VE
wears and the sheriff of Guilford coun
~ will execute this Judgment by delly