The Detroit times., 1915-11-30

! iptdl tUltlhlS nave never NtdIu Oh
conviction being obtained any.
where IN the state. TIE principal
reason seems 20 he that the criminal
code las never been brought down
the way OF trGfiic. II has been
amended 10 cover the carrying of
Weapons and several things like
thai but takes no cognlzsnce OF the
motor car In the streets.
Take the case OF John Dreaver.
Wbo drove his furniture truck on
the wrong side Of street car at
rrumbull and Abbott and killed a
boy The jury in the inquest which
was held declared the boy came to
his death by being struck by truck
driven by Drcaver. but declared
Dreayer had no criminal intent.
\ prosecution will probably follow
as soon as the evidence is written
up. but there is little likelihood of
Dreaver getting any punishment
greater than tile prosecution of the
| case viii Prove because the su.
premc court has declared itself In
no uncertain terms on the matter Of
criminal intent in manslaughter
cases.
The most recent and most com
plete exposition OF the attitude Of
the courts in such cases came in the
case of William c. Barnes. a young
man. v no on May 27. 1911. struck
girl named MARY Robb on East Mich
igan.aye.. in Lansing. between the
city proper and the Agricultural col.
lege The evidence in the case
showed that Il; was daylight, clear
day and a clear road. that the car
could be seen approaching for a half
mile or more. that Barnes, In the
car. saw the girl and sounded his
horn. but continued 10 drive in suoh
manner that when the girl disre-
earded the signal and stepped into
the road. although there was plenty
of room left for hlm TO swing out
and pass her. nc struck her. She
died of her injuries and Barnes was
charged with manslaughter.
In the trial OF the case Barnes,
like most other drivers who have
accidents, testified that he was go
ing very slowly when the girl step.
ped into his path so suddenly he
could not get away from her. but
other witnesses said he was driving
20 miles an hour or better and with
care could have avoided the girl.
The Jury believed the other witness
es and found Barnes guilty
The supreme court reversed the
decision and in the decision. writ
ten by Justice MacAlvay and con-
Cured in by Justices Brooke. Kuhn.
Bird. Moore and Steere. Justice Os-
trander not sitting, making II unan-
imous decision OF all the justices
who heard the case, the following
declaration Is made:
"In this case, in order to warrant
the conviction OF the respondent II
should have clearly appeared that
Mary Robb's death ensued as di-
rect and natural result of the reck-
less or gross negligence OF the re-
spondent. The crime sought TO be
proven was involuntary homicide,
cadsed by culpable negligence, and
10 make an act carelessly performed
resulting in death a criminal one the
carelessness must have been gross,
implying an Indifference to consc-
auences which may ensue and in.
different TO the rights of others that
is equivalent TO a criminal intent"
The Job of proving that the motor
lst who gets careless in his driving
is guilty OF disregard OF conse-
quences and indifference TO the
rights of others that is equivalent TO
criminal intent. is one which has
always stuck the prosecuting OFF,
GERS. Since the automobile came into
general use on the streets there
have been about a dozen prosecu-
tions for manslaughter based on
street accidents In three or four
Of these cases the judge has inter
vened and directed n verdict for the
defense. the rest have gone to juries
and verdict or mot guilty" render
cd in each ono. The two best known
cases are the one where Irwin
Scrimger killed an old man named
Simon r Rote sonic years ago. Here
the case was taken from the jury by
Judge Connolly and verdict for