The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-04-21
Needed Legislation.
I The Times. I)lst)ntcl,:

E1u! tOr DL.IHn Il1nGg-DlBpHtcll:
slr,--Tliare. nre. IN my opinion, two
reforms needed in our laws or court
procedure. in which Il lapge part or
ll population IL deeply inter
ssa,,,,, ana Il seems to Ile tho voters
sent them III tho Legislature to pledge
tt,n, ~. to work for those reforms.
The matter, IL technical. but OF tho ut I
inost practical Importance, and ! VIII
reader.
The first Is tl,aA Il railroad Company
should be forbidden to plcnd contribti-
10Y 10y ne hesligsnce where Il is shown
si en ear, A. ms -. 6es jursa BY is
brakeman Is crippled for life BY tic
grosscEt negligence OF tho railroad com-
pnny. yet II 1t can show that tho brake
man himself was guilty OF the smallest
What happens? Tho poor brakeman is
at the utmost possible DISADVANTAGE in
q, contest with the railroad company.
The witnesses are invariably employees
upon It for their daily bread. and II
Uses tho power this fact gives 1t for
NIL It Is worth. and those accustomed
to court procedure know what that
means. The poor brakeman. without
! means or friends. is lost In tho contest
that arises. There Is no Injustice In
making the railroad pay II It has hurt
the brakeman through Its negligence
Tho rule that lie shall not recover II
he was himself In fault grew out Of
principles OF public policy when there
were no railroads and when conditions
were totally different from what they
now are.
The second Is that the Court OF APP
pcals should be forbidden to reverse n
Judgment for the plaintin because the
lower court erred in overruling a de-
murrer to the declaration. This is very
technical. but l think can make the
Inv ranGpr 1fnHerqfnpH ~
The declaration Is the plaintiffs
statement OF his case. RI the defend
ant does not think the plnintiT has
stated case TINT makes him liable he
says the case stated doeN not make
him liable. II tho tr!a; court agrees
with him It sustains the, demurrer,
which ends the case II there Is no
j with him 1t overrules the demurrer.
which means that tho case Is tried on
the plaintiffs statement OF 1t.
What .happcns? Demurrers arc con-
case is tried on the merits. and there
is Judgment for the plaintiff for $4,000
damages. But the defendant lies back
smiling Oh. says he. when 1 get to
tho. Court of Appeals Will convince
that tribunal that It was technically
wrong for tho trial court to override
that demurrer to the declaration, and
Il will reverse the Judgment and send
the case back for tho PLAINTIFF to make
a new statement OF his case in his de-
claration, and for new trial to be
had upon that new statement
This happens every day. although no
injustice whatever WAS done The de-
PENDANT by the first trial. He was not
taken by surprise In any way whatever
at the first trial He knew exactly
what the plaintiffs case was and came
to the trial prepared to meet 1t, 80 mat
the Judgment has been reversed and
tho plaintiff forced to second trial
for whit was nothing in effect but
formal matter.
II the trial judge holds the declara-
ton to be sufficient, that should end tho
defendants right to object to 1t.
The charters OF all the railroad COM
panies could be amended so as to forbid
them to plead confributory negligence.
WAI L. ROYAL