Blessing v. St. Louis, Kansas City & Northern Ry. Co.

Decision Date30 April 1883
PartiesBLESSING, Plaintiff in Error, v. THE ST. LOUIS, KANSAS CITY & NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Error to St. Louis Court of Appeals.

AFFIRMED.

A. R. Taylor for plaintiff in error.Wells H. Blodgett and Prosser Ray for defendant in error.

HENRY, J.

This is an action by which plaintiff seeks to recover the statutory penalty of $5,000 for the death of her husband, Chas. W. Blessing, which occurred under the following circumstances:

Blessing was an engineer in the employment of defendant, and, on the morning of the 28th of November, 1877, left Moberly in charge of his engine with a train of which one Austin was conductor. West of Moberly, at coal mine No. 2, they passed a work train under the charge of one Johnson. At mine No. 2 there were side-tracks, but there was no telegraphic communication between mine No. 2 and Kansas City, the western terminus of defendant's road, or Moberly, or any other station on the road, which fact was known to Blessing. Austin's train went to Brunswick, forty miles west of Moberly, and at three o'clock that same afternoon, Austin and Blessing started back to Moberly on another train, an extra. Before reaching Huntsville, a station six miles west of Moberly, and two miles west of mine No. 2, they received an order from the train dispatcher at Kansas City to run to Moberly, avoiding regular trains, and to look out for Johnson between mine No. 2 and Huntsville. They arrived at Huntsville, and after whistling as many as twenty times to notify Johnson, they pulled out for Moberly, and when going around a curve, between Huntsville and mine No. 2, without sending flagmen ahead or taking any other precaution to avoid a collision with Johnson's train, except to run their train at a slow rate of speed, six miles an hour, the trains collided with each other about 5:40 o'clock p. m., and Blessing was killed.

Johnson testified that he had no orders in regard to this extra train, and that he should have been notified of it; that his waiting orders were between Huntsville and mine No. 2, avoiding regular trains, flagging against two extras going west; that he was running at a speed of twenty miles an hour, when he was apprised of the approach of Austin and Blessing's train by sparks from the smoke stack; that he whistled for brakes, had the tender brake set, reversed the engine full stroke, and threw the throttle wide open, and that his engine was running at a speed of ten miles an hour when the collision occurred.

...

To continue reading

Request your trial
39 cases
  • American Bridge Co. v. Seeds
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • March 9, 1906
    ... ... 323, 20 Sup.Ct. 85, 44 L.Ed. 181; ... City of Minneapolis v. Lundin, 58 F. 525, 527, 7 ... C.C.A ... 994, 25 ... L.R.A. 710, 47 Am.St.Rep. 392; Blessing v. Railway ... Co., 77 Mo. 410; 2 Bailey,Pers.Inj. §§ ... ( St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern R. Co. v ... Needham, 63 F ... locomotive ( Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Hambly, 154 ... U.S. 349, 14 Sup.Ct. 983, ... ...
  • Guthrie v. Gillespie
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 18, 1928
    ...39 C.J. 939; Higgins v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 104 Mo. 413; Shaw v. Constr. Co., 102 Mo. App. 666; McGowan v. Railroad, 61 Mo. 528; Blessing v. Railroad, 77 Mo. 410; Sheehan v. Prosser, 55 Mo. App. 569; Ryan v. Board of Publication, 199 S.W. 1030; Brown v. Ry. Co., 67 Mo. 122. The cases which ho......
  • Guthrie v. Gillespie
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 18, 1928
    ... ... Lusk, 187 Mo.App. 327; ... Koerner v. St. Louis Car Co., 209 Mo. 158; 26 Cyc ... 1144; 39 C. J. 434; ... Redwood Co., 38 P. 451; ... Chicago City Ry. Co. v. Leach, 100 Am. St. 216; 39 ... C. J. 939. On ... 666; McGowan v ... Railroad, 61 Mo. 528; Blessing v. Railroad, 77 ... Mo. 410; Sheehan v. Prosser, 55 ... ...
  • Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. v. Elliott
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • April 9, 1900
    ...70 F. 28; Millsaps v. Railway Co., 69 Miss. 423, 13 So. 696; Railroad Co. v. Hoover, 79 Md. 253, 29 A. 994, 25 L.R.A. 710; Blessing v. Railway Co., 77 Mo. 410; 2 Bailey, Inj. §§ 2061, 2190; Railroad Co. v. Poirier, 167 U.S. 48, 17 Sup.Ct. 741, 42 L.Ed. 72; Oakes v. Mase, 165 U.S. 363, 17 Su......
  • 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