The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1912-02-07
BILLS REGARDED
AS REVOLUTIONARY
Lawyers Say Measures Would
Destroy Doctrine of Con-
tributory Negligence.

With an earnestncss not usuelIv
shown by attorneys appearing before
Legislative committees. arguments were
made yesterday before the House
Committee for Courts of Justice
against four bills designed, 40 /, &c
said. to materially change the prac-
tice OF the courts in all ages. The
committee partially heard the matter
IN the morning concluded public de-
bate In the afternoon and will take
.ho uiiIs up IN executive session this
morning at $3.50.
1t was said that the object or the
legislation in the four bills would re-
suit III wipins out the doctrine of
contrioutory negligence. One In par
ticular was the principal object of at
tack, and Is as follows:
bill prohibiting contributory
negligence to he made q defense In
action for personal Injury.
BE II enacted by tho General As
sembly of Virginia. That in an action
Tor personal injury. whether the same
result in death or not, IL the negli
gence OF the defendant be shown, con-
tributory negligence by the plaintiff
may be shown only In mitigation of
damages"
Hus Wide Effect.
"a. B. Guigon protested most viror
ously. He said the bill goes further
thnn any ever passed by any State I'm
the Union or by any country in the
civilized world using the common law
practice. 1t was manifestly, he said.
gross injustice. 1t would dcpriye
the driver OF motor Cur or the driver
of wagon who Injuries another from
hearing in the courts.
Were farmer, continued Mr. Gui-
gon, driving to town, fall asleep In,
mis- wagon and run over a man who
had deliberately lain down to sleep
on the road. he would DO compelled to
pay damages. the contributory neEIi-
gence being used only to reduce the
amount.
Complimenting juries he said thew
are disposed to be sympathetic with
those who have been injured and this
nil would tie tho h: nds Of courts and
, leave every defendant at the mercy of
sympathetic jury. L: would Irac-
tically eliminate instructions to juries
and would require damages In every
case whore there was negligence on
the part of the defendant. even If tho
accident would not and could not have
occurred without the act of the plain
tiff.
Warming UP to his subject, Mr.
Guigon said hat his library OF law
books, compi.?d In tho course of his
practice for q large public Service cor
poration. would not, IL this bill passes,
be worth the money 1t would cost to
burn 1t up The principle Involved. he
contended. uproots every doctrine OF
the courts end every principle OF law
relative to damages, and overturns
cverp phase of pleading and practice
on this subject.
Murray NJ MCGUIRE was no less en-
phatic. He pointed out that tho bills
! require employers to insure their en-
ployes. Corporations. he, said. cannot
keep their men from getting hurt II
employees insist upon putting them
selves In position to be injured. He
also thought tho doctrine revolutions
airy.
Tao four bills. which were intro
duced by Hugh a. White, were not, he
said prepared by him. but by eminent
|. Richmond attorneys. They are de-
aligned, he continued, to simplify pro-
! cedure. and to give the employee a
! chance to recover I'm all cases If the
defendant were negligent. allowing
the Jury to determine tho amount OF
damages. The committee ID much
divided. u.s. Il s45 ii