The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-03-19
WELLS |NSTRUCTS
FOR DEFENDANT
Motorman Martin Loses Slit
Against Street Car
Company.
CASE COMES TO SUDDEN STOP
Mandatory Instruction OF Court
New to Practice Of Rich
mond Courts.
CASE COMES TO SUDDEN STOP

The suit Of Iotorman C. w. Martin
against the Virginia Railway and
Power Company came to a sudden
close shortly before o'clock yestcr-
day In the Law and Equity Court.
when Judge Ernest H. Wells, who was
presiding for Judge John Ii. ingram,
Instructed tho jury to render a YER
dict for tho defendant. rho action OF
tho court is new to tho practice OF
Richmond courts. although it is tho
custom IN Federal practice. ana IN
man" States. There have been in
stances s,.'c elsewhere In Virginia, and
inc Court Of Appeals has sustained,
them In two cases which wero cited
Alter hearing two expert witnesses
Tor the company. Of forty or moro Wit
ncSscs summoned, and the plaintiff
Offering no evidence to oorltrovort
them, the court instructed the jury
that the evidence in the case did not
JUSTLY verdict for the plaintiff on
any count. and therefore tho jury was
Instructed to find for the defendant.
Saved Setting Verdict Aside.
II was explained that IN view OF the
law Of evidence, and the established
presidents OF the courts, had Il YER
dict been rendered BY the Jury It would
have been tho duty OF the court TO
Judge Wells took the bull by The
horns and gave mandatory Instructions
regarding tho verdict itself
The case Will be carried TO Tho
Court OF Appeals by Messrs Wise and
Chichester. who appear for Mi. Mar
tin a. 3, Guigon and Thomas r.
Bryan represented the street car COM
pany.
Martin was motorman on tho Eirs,
Street line OF the Virginia Railway
ana Power Company, running big
double truck car from First and Broad
street 10 Ginter Park and back Dur
Ing the rush hour the company operat-
ed Il trailer, or small car. which runs
only TO tho First Street viaduct, thus
relieving congestion and limiting the
number of stops Of the through car
on single track line. At first and
Broad Streets the cars reverse The
small car came in from the bridge in
front on tho afternoon OF July .. last.
and stopped on First street just north
OF Broad, the motorman in front put
ting on his brake. The big car ran
In behind It and also stopped.
Caught Between Cars
Motorman Martin got down and was
engaged in changing his fender and
lights. when in some manner the brake
OF the small car became disengaged
and the car rolled down on him Mar
tin was caught between the tenders
and seriously injured. \ compromise
offered by the company on tho ground
that he was faithful onployc Injured
In the scrvicc was rejected, and Martin
h!ed suit for damages III tho sum OF
$4,000. The trial began on Friday,
and there was little conflict as to tho
ertual facts OF tho accident though
the company had summoned moro than
forty eycwitnesscs. TWO expert street
Men from ont n town opo f,or,,
Lynchhurg and one from Baltimore,
were called at their request out Of
the usual order, that they might re-
turn home
The evidence showed that the fns-
tcning OF tho brake by tho motornan
at tho front end at such reverse points
wos the universal practice: that to
have the brake applied by tho conduc-
tor from the rear end was dangerous
to traffic, and that because OF mcchan-
teal reasons. the application OF the
brake from both ends at once render
Cd 1t the more liza bio to slip out OF tho
cog wheels and become loose. the brake
wheels q either end OF Tho car prac-
ticaily working against each other.
and only ono being intended TO be used
ct one timo.
No Negligence Shown.
a large part Of tho morning was
snont In argument on tho law points
involved before Judge Wells in cham
bcrs, Supreme Court cases being cited
to show that Ii was Virginia practice
that public service corporation was
not guilty OF negligence unless lack
Of ordinary care of It's employees could
be shown. According to these opinions
tho unbendinS test of negligence Is the
common usage of business in that line
the court having held The consensus of
usage to be presumably the safest
plan.
Judge Wells decided that it was not
question of lay opinion as to the
safety Of appliances, but that tho pro-
per test was whether the appliances and
methods usually used in such work
were employed. The witnesses from
Baltimore and Lyfchburg testified that
the method of applying the brakes and
reversing the cars at single track
terminals was tic usual custom OF
tho street car business, and 1t was
shown that il had been going OH at
this particular point aud elsewhere
for years without acciGcnt, and tina t
no evidence had been offered to show
that either Of the cars or their brakes
were defective or out OF order
ShortcDa Procedure.
The action of Judge Wells shortened
tho procedure by several days. as had
all IF tho witnesses called been eX-
anlincd, it would haVc taken several
days III merely cumulative evidence
The court having admitted that the
plaintiff had failed 10 make out his
case, through having given no cvi-
dcncc to controvcrt tho unbcndins
test of usage in that line OF business,
attorneys for the company asked for
and secured mandatory instructions
thus not only saving time iii the OK
animation OF other witnesses, but say
Ing the necessity OF setting aside The
verdict had tic jury decided the case
otherwise.
Mandatory Instructions Of this char
acter are new III the practice OF Rich
mond courts, and being far from GUS
tom in Virginia practice the progress,
Of the case OH appeal will be watched
with interest In Federal courts it is
no unusual matter for the Judge to in
struct the jury that tpc plaintiff has
failed to make out a. case, and direct
a verdict for the defendant, thereby
procedure and saving the