Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1917-10-13
SUPREME COURT
Personal Damage Suit
Closed Friday
Verdict Of S3737.5o for Plaintiff in Case
Of Mrs. AIzada Thurston Of Burnham
VS.. the Benton & Fairfield Street
Railway co.-Jurers Finally Excused

A verdict of s3737.50 for the plaintiff
was returned by the jury at the Fri
day session of the Supreme court in
the personal damage suit brought by
Mrs. Alzada Thurston of Burnham
against the Benton & Fairfield Street
Railway Co, which was opened Thurs
day morning. AS this was the last
case for trial this term the jurors were
finally excused after they had returned
their verdict and court was adjourned
until 10 o'clock Monday morning.
The first witness when the defense
in the case was resumed was DR.. For
rest c. Tyson Of Augusta, who was
present at the examination made of
Mrs. Thurston on Thursday morning.
He said that in the examination which
he carried on in the presence Of other
physicians, he made inquiry as to the
history Of the case and learned that
Mrs. Thurston, Il years of age. had
complained Of pains in the back of her
neck and her left side, that she at
times had periods of dizziness and was
subject to headaches occasionally. The
doctor had first examined Mrs. Thurs
tons eyes and he testified regarding
the results of that examination. He
found two white clouded areas in the
iris and the edges Of the pupils very
yellow and the blood vessels promin-
ent. He found cataracts in the eyes,
these being a common occurrence in
the eyes of people over so vars of age.
according to his testimony. He tes-
titled that 1t would be difficult to state
how long there had been cataracts in
the eyes but he judged it would have
been several years and he said that 1t
would not have been caused in all
probability by blow on the head un-
less the eye was the recipient of that
blow
Dr. Tyson said that when the curtain
begins to close over the eyes, it
usually closes quite quickly He had
found that Mrs. Thurston had iritis
and he thought that she must have had
ii several years ago. He thought that
that condition existed previous to the
time Of the accident. He described a
cataract as gradual development but
he said that after it had run a time
its final effects shut down quickly. He
attributed her pains in the back to
the muscles. He thought that the con-
dition would not be due to blow, al
though 1t might be due to a wrench
ing. And he said that the pains and
aches Mrs. Thurston has, would or
dinarily be spoken Of as rheumatism
or rheumatic pain. He attributed much
Of the pain that Mrs. Thurston suf-
| fered in her legs to the presence Of
varicose veins and he did not attri-
butte the general condition in which he
found Mrs. Thurston to a blow on the
| back Of the neck. He thought Mrs
Thurston's condition about normal ex-
cept for her eyes and legs.
Upon cross-examination by Attorney Clair
Dr. Tyson testified that he was unable to
find the cause OF Mrs. Thurstons pains and
he did not think her pains were so severe
or serious Mrs. Thurston considered. He
said that muscular and nervous trouble in the
side could come from severe wrench and
that curvature OF the spine is sometimes due
TO injuries OF the spine as blow or a
wrench.
! RebuttaI
In rebuttal Mrs sThurston testified that
| DR.. Holt had thought that she had rheuma-
tism Of the eyes but she had never been
! treated for rheumatism. Before the acct-
dent she never had aches and pains in the
back as she has now. according to her testi-
mony.
! 1t was admitted that Mrs LENA Senter
had sent notice TO theA railroad company
| notifying IL for Mrs. Thurston's injury.
Arguments
! The case was then argued to the Jury BY
Attorney Harold E. Weeks of Fairfield for
the defendant corporation. and Fred W. Clair
! Of Waterville for the plaintiff
Attorney Weeks argued that an electric
! railway company is not an insurer OF persons
/ as IL is Of freight. and that company is
I liable only for negligence in not running a
I car properly. And he showed the contention
OF the defense that the agent OF the COM
pany and the company used ordinary care
and caution in the management OF the car
\ on Nov. 8. 1914.
Attorney Clair argued that the railway
company or its agent did not use proper care
! and caution IN the management of its car
and that as result Mrs. Thurston received
/ injuries thee fleets OF which she will prob
ably never recover from.
| Associate Justice Spear then gave the
charge to the jury in the case and the jury
took the case under consideration In the
! Jury room about 8 o'clock. returning its
verdict shortly before 9 p NJ