Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-05-09
LIABILITY OF COMPANIES
COURT OF APPEALS DEFINES
THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES.
Passengers Aboard Street Cars Not
Negligent Under the Law When
Riding on Platforms.

The responsibilities Of street car COM
panies to their passengers are set forth by
Justice Robb in the opinion Of the Court
OF Appeals affirming the action of the
District Supreme Court in the case of
Samuel Brown, a passenger who was
thrown from the platform of a Capitol
Traction car while the car was turning a
curve at a high rate of speed. The lower
court in instructing the jury, which found
In favor Of the plaintiff as to the law, held
that the mere standing on a platform of
the car is not negligence on the part Of q
passenger.
This opinion is sustained by Justice Robb,
who also takes occasion to lecture the COM
panies on the overcrowding of street cars
and the running of lone car where they
should run two for the purpose Of increas-
ing profits
The court said: Even though a notice
prohibiting passengers from riding upon the
platform Is posted, it will not make 1t
negligence in law for a passenger to ride
upon the platform IL. the company daily
ignores its own notice, and thereby estab-
fishes custom inconsistent herewith.
Does Not Prohibit.
'It will be observed that the notice in this
case does not prohibit a passenger from
riding upon the platform. 1t merely de-
probably more dangerous to ride upon the
platform than within the car. and the pas
senger. by taking such position, assumes
the risks which naturally ensue from that
position. That Is to say, If the company
runs its cars In a prudent manner, and the
passenger falls off and Is injured, that Is a
risk he assumed by standing upon the plat
form, but, II he has exercised due care.
and is injured because of the negligence OF
the company in running it's car. the COM
hot hot hoe
no right Of action against it when it is re-
sponsible for the practice which resulted In
his injury.
Under the police regulations in force in
this District 1t Is unlawful for an electric
car to attain a speed greater than twelve
miles an hour within the city limits, or a
speed greater than six miles an hour at
street crossings. Assuming that these
regulations are complied with, as well as
certain other regulations applicable to the
construction of cars, we think 1t would De
unreasonable to rule as matter OF law
that the mere riding upon the platform con-
stitutes negligence.
Having consented that the plaintiff ride
upon the platform. we do not think it would
be either reasonable or just to permit the
appellant in utter disregard of its duty as
a common carrier Of passengers, to care
lessly operate its cars and injure the plain
tiff, and then meet his suit for damages
with the statement that If he hadn't been
there they wouldn't have jolted him on
to lessen the practice of oyercrowd1ng cars,
or tend to increase the safety and security
of passengers"
Overcrowding Cars.
Concerning the overcrowding of cars,
Justice Robb remarked:
THAT overcrowding Of street cars, strap
hanging and platform riding are daily In
dulged in and encouraged, no one will deny.
The average American car rider says a
recent editorial, during the hours Of great
est traffic, has only the faintest hope of
ever getting seat, and is glad to accept
strap. He is particularly pleased when he
is permitted a margin Of a few inches Of
room beyond his own girth.- Cars that will
seat forty, usually carry eighty people and
often hundred.
"The cause of this Is obvious. Trans
portation companies run one car where
they should run two, and a corresponding
increase in profits and corresponding in
convenience to the public result. AS In
this case, they usually solemnly post no
tees that 1t is dangerous to ride upon the
platform, and then, day in and day out,
deliberately ignore and neutralize such no.
tees by overlooking their cars and tacitly
consenting that passengers ride not only
upon the platforms, but upon the running
boards thereof.