Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Railroad Company v. State. (4 Cases.)

Decision Date04 February 1905
Citation85 S.W. 85,74 Ark. 159
PartiesCHOCTAW, OKLAHOMA & GULF RAILROAD COMPANY v. STATE.
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Appeals from Sebastian Circuit Court, Greenwood District STYLES T. ROWE, Judge.

Reversed.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

E. B Peirce and T. S. Buzbee, for appellant.

The demurrers to the indictments should be dismissed. 55 Ark 200; 56 Ark. 166; 63 Ark. 200; 68 Ark. 561; 63 Ark. 136. The motion to make indictments more specific should have been sustained. 59 Ark. 169; 69 Ark. 365; 66 Ark. 278. Refusal to give instruction No. 1 was error. 43 Ark. 415; 38 Ark. 519; 40 Ark. 97; 67 Ark. 357; 75 S.W. 929.

Robert L. Rogers, Attorney General, for appellee.

Confession of error.

OPINION

BATTLE, J.

The same question is involved in the above four cases. The same pleadings were filed in each case, and substantially the same evidence was adduced in them.

On January 11, 1902, the following complaint, in the form of an indictment, was filed:

"The grand jury of Sebastian County for the Greenwood District thereof, in the name and by authority of the State of Arkansas, accuse the defendant, Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Railroad Company, of the crime of failing to ring bell or sound whistle at public road crossing, committed as follows, towit: The said defendant, a corporation, owning and operating a line of railroad running through the Greenwood District of Sebastian County, Arkansas, in the county and district aforesaid, on the 9th day of December, 1901, did unlawfully fail and neglect to ring the bell or sound the whistle on a certain engine and locomotive within eighty rods of the crossing of the railroad track of said railroad company and the Booneville and McAlester public road in Road District No. 11, and unlawfully failed and neglected to keep said bell ringing or whistle sounding until said engine and locomotive then and there crossed said public road, the said engine and locomotive then and there being run by said railroad company on the track of said railroad company, against the peace and dignity of the State of Arkansas.

"BEN CRAVENS,

"Prosecuting Attorney Twelfth Judicial Circuit."

The defendant filed the following motion:

"Comes the defendant, the Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Railroad Company and represents to the court that on the date mentioned in the indictment the defendant operated many trains over its line of railroad through the Greenwood District of Sebastian County, some of which trains were passenger trains and some freight trains, some going east and some going west; that from the allegations of the indictment the defendant is unable to determine what particular train is referred to; that defendant cannot defend this suit without greatly impairing its service and at great expense unless the plaintiff be required to set out specifically which of the trains committed the offense alleged.

"Wherefore the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Webster
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • April 17, 1911
    ... ... LOUIS, IRON MOUNTAIN & SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. WEBSTER Supreme Court of Arkansas April ... railroad service, his highest monthly earnings was $ ... In such ... cases as this compensation "must be considered upon a ... state of unpreparedness after having pursued a useless ... Co. v. State, 11 Am ... St. Rep. 395; Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v ... King, 80 Tex. 681, ... ...
  • Louisiana & Arkansas Railway Company v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • January 25, 1909
    ... ... being then and there a railroad corporation operating a ... line of railway through ... only." Choctaw, O. & G. Rd. Co. v ... State, 75 Ark. 369, 87 S.W. 631; ... ...
  • Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Railroad Company v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • May 13, 1905
    ... ... the filing of this motion, and before it was disposed of, and ... on the same day the attorney of the plaintiff delivered to ... the defendant the following notice: ...          "To ... the above named defendant: You are hereby notified that in ... the above entitled cases, being indictments numbered 154, ... 155, 168, 169, 170, 171 and 172, the proof relied upon by the ... State to make out said cases will be as follows: * * * ...           [75 ... Ark. 372] "Seventh. In indictment No. 154, the date is ... May 4, 1902, the hour about 4 o'clock p. m., ... ...
  • State v. Baltimore & O.R. Co.
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • November 22, 1910
    ... ... railroad company for obstructing a ... public road, by ... court, and followed in at least three cases before this, to ... the effect that, in order to ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT