The Wenatchee daily world. [volume] (Wenatchee, Wash.) 1905-1971, 1910-03-18
IS HUSBAND
PERSONAL
PROPERTY
UNIQUE CASE is BEING ARGUED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
U. s. TODAY BY WIDOW OF
MAN KILLED IN GEORGIA.

Washington, D. c., March it,
Whether a husband may be consid-
cred the personal property of his
wife, and whether the "Blow-Post
law" of Georgia is constitutional are
two of the questions at stake in the
unique suit of Mrs. Josephine King,
of Georgia, against the Southern
Railway company, argued today be-
fore the supreme court of the Unit
ed States. 1t comes up at time
when the only bachelor justice of the
court, Justice Moody, is too i'll to
consider the case.
The suit is for damages, arising
out of a railroad accident. In the
autumn of 1893, Mrs. King, her hus-
band, A. o. King, and her daughter,
Miss Inez King, were riding along
a country road in Georgia behind a
mule. A high bank obscured the
view of the tracks of the Southern
Railway company just ahead of
them. AS the mule got squarely
upon the track, a through passen-
ger train from Washington to At
lanta struck. it and the buggy, kill
ing King, and injuring the wife and
daughter. Mrs. King got damages
in the state courts for injuries to
her person. She also sued on the
death of her husband. It is this
suit which was argued here today
before the supreme court.
IN the lower court, the railroad
company contended that the recov-
cry in the state court for injuries to
her person estopped Mrs. King from
maintaining an action for the death
of her husband. The circuit court
Of appeals for the fifth circuit in
passing on the judgment OF Mrs.
King for $3,250 for the death of her
husband, considered the argument
by the railroad:
"The contention is made that the
injuries to the person of the wife
and the loss occasioned by the death
of her husband" said the court,
constitute single cause of action
and that separate actions will not
lie. This contention appears to be
seriously made, but in the practice
and procedure of the several states
1t would appear to be legally nov
city without law or precedent. If
1t be conceded that the deceased
husband was the personal proper
ty' of the plaintiff herein, then the
contention would be supported by
the decisions of every state court but
one.
Where injuries to the person and
the physical property of the injured
party occur out of the single tort,
then, and in that event, the tort to
the person and the property consti-
tutes a single cause of action and as
previously suggested the same would
be presented In single suit. This is
the English term and the holding
is the same in all American courts
with the one exception. The declar-
alton that the husband Is the per
sonal property of the wife has not
as yet received the sanction of court
Nor text writer's. The rule as to a
single cause of action has no appli-
cation where the injury is suffered
in a different capacity or by differ
ent persons.
The personal property" question
was not dealt with by the counsel
for the railroad in brief in the
case submitted to the supreme court
before the argument today. The
railroads fight before the supreme
court is on the constitutionality OF
the "Blow-Post Law" At the time
of the accident, the trial court held
the railroad negligent because it was
violating this law. So it became ma
teriai for the railroad to show that
the law was not valid.
The law was passed in 1852 81
have found nothing like 1t anywhere
else," said John J. Strickland, coun-
sci for the railroad in his brief. /,
requires a railroad engineer to blow
his whistle from a blow-post 40O
yards from every highway crossing
until he arrives at the road, AMI tc
simultaneously check and keep
checking the speed of his train, SC
as to stop in time should any per.
son or thing be crossing the track
on the highway.