The independent-reporter. [volume] (Skowhegan, Me.) 1909-1955, 1912-12-26

{. / nat the possession OF rage, the
original lessee, was not actually dis
turbed until the very day on which this
writ was brought.
s. That as the original lease was
in full force until that date, the de-
PENDANTS estate existing under 1t con-
tinued according to the terms of its
creation. The defendant was right
fully in possession unless the plaintiff
saw fit to assert its rights in a legal
way, and this it did not do. The de-
PENDANT was not trespasser at the
date of the writ, and had not been
prior thereto.
Judgment for defendant.
DECISION IN THE BIGELOW CASE.
Catherine Bigelow VS.. Maine Central
Railroad Co, Rescript, Spear, J.
This is an action on the case brought
by the plaintiff against the Maine Cen
trail Railroad Co, to recover damages
for injury to her health alleged to be
caused by unwholesome and poisonous
food served to her by the defendant in
its dining-car on the 25th day of Feb
rary, 1910. The case comes to the
Law Court on report The food speci-
fically complained of what was canned
asparagus served on toast, upon the
consumption of which the plaintiff was
soon after taken violently Ill. Upon
the assumption that the asparagus was
poisonous and was the proximate
cause of the injuries of which the
plaintiff suffered, Is the defendant
then, under the evidence in the case
liable?
The undisputed evidence shows that
the train crew on the dining-ear vas
experienced and intelligent. The con-
ductor had had long experience and
the chef had served IS years as cook.
The can of asparagus from which the
plaintiff was served was purchased by
/ the eommissary agent of the COMPANY,
1 who was at the time, handling the din
/ ning-ear service upon the Boston {
/ Maine and Maine Central Railroads.
! He purchased this particular can with
others either on February 18th or 18th
Of the month in which it was served,
/ Of S $. Pierce Copany, Boston. It was
/ a we'll known brand. called "The Red
/ Label Brand and the only kind used
upon the dining-ear Ii was guaran-
teed by the S. S. Pierce Co. as pure,
under the Pure Food and Drug Act OF
/ 1896
The plaintiff, however, contends, ad-
hitting all these things to be true.
4 that the strict rule of law which pre-
walls in this class Of cases will hold
the defendant responsible In other
words, the plaintiffs contention is that
| the defendant in this class of cases is
! an insurer of the quality of the food
product which he serves. We are I'M
able to believe that this is sound
rule, when confined to the sale or use
Of canned goods.
1t has been the boast of the common
law that it was able to adjust itself to
/ the inevitable vieissitudes and changes
that occur in the development of in
dustrial life, business methods, social
progress and scientific invention.
Within the last century has appeared
! from time to time the discovery of de
vises that have revolutionized the
4 methods and accomplishments of hui
man effort. The snbiugation Of steam
J and control Of electricity, and the con
cquent inventions for their practical
/ Use. have become instrumental in in
PRODUCING an epoch in history of sci
cnce Industrial. commercial and Ii
nancial projects have also assumed
new forms and employed new methods.
| Yet, to the adjustment Of all the new
and varied relations, arising from the
adoption application and use of these
new agencies and new methods, tho
principles of the common law have
4 adapted themselves so aptly as to rem
der almost impereeptble the radical
/ transitions that have taken place.
OF little less importance than the
appearance of the great achievements
referred to Is the establishment and
development OF the canning industry,
in this country and in other
parts of the world. 1t may be said
that the art of canning, If not invented
/ within the last century, has at least,
assumed the vast proportions which it
/ has now attained, within a compare
| lively few years. II involves a unique
and peculiar method of distributing,
| for domestic and foreign use, almost
every product known to the art of hus-
/ lauary. The wholesaler, the retailer,
and the user Of these goods, whether in
! the capacity Of caterer, seller or host,
S., tain an entirely different duty, re
speeling a knowledge OF their contents
and quality than prevails with regard
to knowing the quality Of those food
! products which are open to the in
! speetion of the seller or victualer.
! With reference to these it may we'll be
-onsidcred. as has been held that hay
7 Q s---.t 3