95 U.S. 439 (1877), Baltimore & P. R. Co. v. Jones

Citation:95 U.S. 439, 24 L.Ed. 506
Case Date:December 10, 1877
Court:United States Supreme Court

Page 439

95 U.S. 439 (1877)

24 L.Ed. 506




United States Supreme Court.

December 10, 1877

ERROR to the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.

This was an action by Jones against the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad Company, to recover damages for an injury received on the road of the company. Judgment was rendered in his favor, and the company brought the case here.

The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.


Mr. Enoch Totten for the plaintiff in error.

Mr. Edward C. Carrington and Mr. Campbell Carrington, contra.


MR. JUSTICE SWAYNE delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant in error was the plaintiff in the court below. Upon the trial there, he gave evidence to the following effect:

Page 440

For several months prior to the 12th of November, 1872, he was in the service of the company as a day-laborer. He was one of a party of men employed in constructing and keeping in repair the roadway of the defendant. It was usual for the defendant to convey them to and from their place of work. Sometimes a car was used for this purpose; at others, only a locomotive and tender were provided. It was common, whether a car was provided or not, for some of the men to ride on the pilot or bumper in front of the locomotive. This was done with the approval of Van Ness, who was in charge of the laborers when at work, and the conductor of the train which carried them both ways. The plaintiff had no connection with the train. On the 12th of November before mentioned, the party of laborers, including the plaintiff, under the direction of Van Ness, were employed on the west side of the eastern branch of the Potomac, near where the defendant's road crosses that stream, in filling flat cars with dirt and unloading them at an adjacent point. The train that evening consisted of a locomotive, tender, and box-car. When the party was about to leave on their return that evening, the plaintiff was told by Van Ness to jump on anywhere; that they were behind time, and must hurry.

The plaintiff was riding on the pilot of the locomotive, and while there the train ran into certain cars belonging to the defendant and loaded with ties. These cars had become detached from another train of cars, and were standing on the track in the Virginia avenue tunnel. The accident was the result...

To continue reading