Commonwealth v. Coburn

Decision Date04 May 1882
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
PartiesCommonwealth v. Jesse J. Coburn & another

Argued October 7, 1881 [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material]

Worcester Indictment, under the Gen. Sts. c. 160, § 34, in two counts. The second count, upon which alone the case was submitted to the jury, was as follows:

"And the jurors for the Commonwealth aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do further present, that Jesse J. Coburn and Jehiel C. Coburn, both of Worcester in said county, on the fourth day of July in the year eighteen hundred and seventy-nine, at Worcester in said county, were the proprietors of a certain steamboat employed by the said Jesse J. Coburn and the said Jehiel C. Coburn for the conveyance of passengers for hire from a certain place called and known as Lincoln Park, situate in said Worcester on the west side of Lake Quinsigamond, so called, said Lake Quinsigamond being a body of water within this Commonwealth and not within the maritime jurisdiction of the United States of America, upon and over said lake to a point on the easterly side of said lake, called and known as Quinsigamond Park, in Shrewsbury in said county, and were common carriers of passengers for hire on and over said lake on and by the route aforesaid, and, being such proprietors and common carriers of passengers, did, on said fourth day of July at said Worcester, as and while said steamboat was lying at her landing at said place called and known as Lincoln Park, and was then and there receiving and had received on board of her the passengers for the trip of said steamboat, then about, and soon, to commence on and over said lake, conduct, operate, manage and control said steamboat, on board of which said steamboat one Patrick Cahill was then and there a passenger for hire; and said Jesse J. and said Jehiel C. then and there had the custody, care and management of said steamboat, and, by the negligence and carelessness of said Jesse J. and said Jehiel C., said steamboat was then and there suffered to be and was defective and unsafe, and furnished with a hurricane deck, which endangered the safety of said steamboat and of passengers riding thereon; and said hurricane deck of said steamboat, by the negligence and carelessness of said Jesse J. and said Jehiel C., was then and there suffered to be, and was improperly, overcrowded and overloaded with passengers, and by the negligence and carelessness of the said Jesse J. and the said Jehiel C. an undue and disproportionate number of passengers, in view of and as compared with the whole number of passengers then and there on board said steamboat, was then and there suffered to go, be and remain on said hurricane deck; and, by the negligence and carelessness of said Jesse J. and said Jehiel C., said steamboat then and there was, and was suffered to be, overloaded with passengers, by means and reason of all which said hurricane deck was then and there broken and torn off from said steamboat, and precipitated into the water, and said steamboat was then and there violently rocked and thrown over upon one side of her, whereby said Patrick Cahill was then and there violently thrown out of said steamboat into said lake, and was then and there choked, suffocated and drowned with the water thereof, of which said choking, suffocating and drowning said Patrick Cahill then and there instantly died; and so the jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the life of the said Patrick Cahill, being a passenger as aforesaid, was then and there lost by reason of the negligence and carelessness of said Jesse J. and said Jehiel C. in manner and form aforesaid, whereby said Jesse J. and said Jehiel C. have become liable to a fine, not exceeding five thousand dollars nor less than five hundred dollars, to be recovered by indictment and paid to the executor or administrator of said deceased person for the use of the widow and children of said deceased person in equal moieties, but if there are no children of said deceased, then to the use of the widow of said deceased, and if there is no widow of said deceased, to the use of the next of kin of said deceased; that Bridget Cahill of said Worcester has been duly appointed and now is the administratrix of said Patrick Cahill deceased, and of his goods and estate; and said Bridget Cahill is the widow of said deceased person; that there are three children of said Patrick Cahill deceased now living, namely, Mary A. Cahill, Lena Cahill and Agnes T. Cahill."

Trial in the Superior Court, before Pitman, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows:

It appeared in evidence that, in the summer of 1879, there was a pleasure steamer plying on Lake Quinsigamond in Worcester, called the Isaac Davis, which made trips around the lake starting from and returning to Lincoln Park so called, which park was owned by the defendant Jesse J., and was the terminus of the Worcester and Shrewsbury Railroad running from Worcester; that, on July 4, 1879, a large number of pleasure-seekers being upon said boat while she was moored at the wharf at Lincoln Park, preparatory to one of her trips, her hurricane deck broke and slid off, precipitating many persons into the water, among whom was Cahill, who was drowned; that on July 3, 1879, the defendant Jesse J., anticipating a crowd at the lake and Lincoln Park on the succeeding day, applied to the mayor of Worcester for a detail of police to attend at said park, which was in Worcester, which detail was promised by the mayor, and the city marshal was ordered by him to send the same, but no detail was furnished by the marshal and no police officers were there on July 4 until after the accident, which occurred between one and two o'clock P. M.

It also appeared that the boat was licensed under the St. of 1876, c 100, after an inspection of the same by the mayor and city...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Kuhlen v. Boston & N. St. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • January 1, 1907
    ... ... This is the unvarying ... doctrine of our own decisions. Treat v. Boston & Lowell ... Railroad, 131 Mass. 373; Commonwealth v ... Coburn, 132 Mass. 555; Bryant v. Rich, 106 ... Mass. 180, 8 Am. Rep. 311; Dodge v. Boston & Bangor ... Steamship Co., 148 Mass. 210, 19 ... ...
  • South Covington & C. St. Ry. v. Vanice
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • December 11, 1925
    ... ... This is the unvarying doctrine of our own decisions ... [278 S.W. 119] ... Boston & L. R. Corp., 131 Mass. 373; Com. v ... Coburn, 132 Mass. 555; Bryant v. Rich, 106 ... Mass. 180, 8 Am.Rep. 311; Dodge v. Boston & B. S. S ... Co., 148 Mass. 210, 19 N.E. 373, 2 L.R.A. 83, 12 ... ...
  • Renaud v. New York, N.H. & H.R. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • October 19, 1910
    ... ...          Of the ... 13 cases relied on by the plaintiff in support of her ... contention on this point, one only (Com. v. Coburn, ... 132 Mass. 555) is a case for a penalty for the death of a ... passenger or other person. There is nothing in that one (Com ... v. Coburn, ... ...

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