The Tacoma times. [volume] (Tacoma, Wash.) 1903-1949, 1910-10-28

assigned to Root and Root wrote
a decision reversing it. He said:
Respondent (Mrs. Woolf) ar
CUES that 1t must be presumed
that deceased did look and listen.
In appropriate cases 1t would be
proper to indulge this presump-
ton. But this is not one of them. +"
In effect this decision holds
that Woolf, an ordinarily prudent
man, would not, in the absence of
testimony, be presumed to have
acted as an ordinary prudent man
would have acted. 1t holds that
where farmer, travelling by team
alone, is killed while attempting
to cross a railroad track, the law
will not presume that he acted as
a prudent man would have acted
had there been q prudent man
there instead of q farmer. So Mrs.
Woo1f was pauperized and the
railroad company saved $17, 800.
Many courts have held that,
while the rule of stop, look and
listen applies to crossing railroad
tracks on private rights of way,
it does not apply to street car
tracks occupying public streets. 1t
is held by them that pedestrians
and teamsters have the same
rights upon public streets that
street cars have, and that If a
street car runs over pedestrian,
1t does so at it's own peril, the
same as q bicyclist.
For years this was the rule in
Washington. The supreme court
laid it down in the Smith case in
1897, followed it in the Roberts
case in 1900, and again in the
Traver case in 1901. In the Ira
yer case the opinion was written
by Judge White, and it was ex-
pressly stated in the opinion that
Traver did not look or listen be-
fore driving on the track. And
yet the court held that this was
not negligence.
But a new power arose in the
street railway life of Washington.
In 1900 the Seattle Electric COM
pany was organized, and took over
the street railways of Seattle. II
also began meddling extensively
lin local and state politics. And
when the first Seattle Electric
company case, involving this point
reached the supreme court, that
body began to hedge.
This was the Burian case. II
the Burian case the court sale
that failure to look or listen be-
fore crossing a street car track
was not negligence as a matter Of
law, but question to be submit
tied to the jury to determine
whether it was as a matter of fact
/ So on the question of negligenc,
as a matter of fact, in cases wher,
juries found that, as a matter o
fact, plaintiffs were not negli
gent, the court began reversin,
stop, look and listen cases, re
versing them at the instigation o
street railway companies. Thi
was the result in the Skinner case
in the Phillips case, in the Coate
case and in teh Criss case.
This line of reversals reached il
climax nthe Criss case in March
1908. In the Criss case the cour
, held that because Criss did no
stop, look, listen and get out o
the way of street car which ha,
no more right on the street thar
he had, he was, when struck by tn
car, equity of contributory negli
gence, precluding a recovery"
Writers and speakers VIII,
L charge that machine notifies /
dominated by special interests ar
frequently beseeched to point GU
the special interests referred to
This is what / am trying to do il
this series of stories.
TOmorrow's story will tell hoy
the supreme court related tn
taxes of the Great Northern rail
road.