Commonwealth v. Fitchburg R. Co.

Decision Date06 May 1876
PartiesCommonwealth v. Fitchburg Railroad Company
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

[Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material]

Middlesex. Indictment, in five counts, under the Gen. Sts. c. 63, § 98, [*] and the St. of 1871, c. 352, + to recover, for the use of the widow and children of Charles Keniston, a fine, by reason of the loss of his life, from being run over on May 7, 1874, by an engine and train of cars of the defendant, at a place in Somerville where the defendant railroad crosses Park Street, so called, at grade.

The first count was as follows:

"The jurors for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, on their oath, present that the Fitchburg Railroad Company, a corporation duly and legally established in this Commonwealth, and duly authorized and empowered to propel engines and cars, by the power of steam, along, over and upon the railroad hereinafter described, was on the seventh day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-four, as it still is, the owner of a certain railroad leading and extending from Boston; in the county of Suffolk, in this Commonwealth, to and through the city of Somerville, in this said county of Middlesex, and further, and was then in full occupation, possession and use of said railroad, and was a common carrier, over, along and upon said railroad, of passengers and merchandise, and that said corporation, being such owner, and in such possession, use and occupation of said railroad, did on said seventh day of May, at Somerville aforesaid, by its servants and agents, they being there to direct it and being then and there engaged in the business of said corporation, and while said servants and agents then and there were legally engaged in the business of said corporation, run, propel and drive by the power of steam, a certain locomotive engine over, along and upon said railroad, and that by reason of the unfitness and gross negligence and carelessness of said servants and agents, while engaged in said business as aforesaid, said engine was then and there run, propelled and driven as aforesaid, rashly and without watch, care or foresight, and with great, unusual, unreasonable and improper speed, and that the said engine then and there was, by reason of such unfitness and gross negligence and carelessness of said servants while engaged in the business of said corporation, as aforesaid, driven at, against and upon the body of one Charles Keniston, of said Somerville, he, said Keniston, being then and there in the exercise of due diligence, and not then being in or upon any car or vehicle of said corporation, and not then being a passenger of said corporation, and not then being in the employment of said corporation; and that said engine did then and there, while being driven as aforesaid by said agents and servants of said corporation, violently strike Charles Keniston, and did then and thereby inflict divers wounds, bruises and injuries in and upon the head, body and limbs of him said Keniston, of which said bruises, wounds and injuries said Keniston then and there instantly died. And so the jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid, do say that on said seventh day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-four, by reason of the unfitness and gross negligence and carelessness of said servants and agents of said corporation while engaged in its business as aforesaid, the life of said Charles Keniston, he said Keniston not then and there being a passenger of said corporation nor in its employment, and then and there being in the exercise of due diligence, was lost, in the manner and form aforesaid, whereby said Fitchburg Railroad Company has become liable to a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars nor less than five hundred dollars, to be recovered by indictment and to be paid to the executor or administrator of said Charles Keniston, for the use of the widow and children of said Charles Keniston; and that Eliza Keniston, of said Somerville, widow of said Charles Keniston, has been duly appointed, and now is, the administratrix of the goods and estate of said Charles Keniston, and that said Charles Keniston had at the said time of his decease two lawfully begotten children, both of whom are now living. Against the peace of said Commonwealth, and contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided."

The second count was as follows:

"And the jurors aforesaid, for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on their oath aforesaid, do further present that the Fitchburg Railroad Company, a corporation duly and legally established in this Commonwealth, and duly authorized and empowered to propel engines and cars, by the power of steam, along over and upon the railroad hereinafter described, was on the seventh day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-four, and still is, the owner of a certain railroad leading and extending from Boston, in the county of Suffolk, in this Commonwealth, to and through the city of Somerville, in this said county of Middlesex, and further, and was then in full occupation, possession and use of said railroad, and was a common carrier over, along and upon said railroad, of passengers and merchandise, and that said railroad, in its line and course in and through said Somerville, then crossed and intersected, and now does, a certain public highway, called and commonly known as Park Street, at the same level with said highway, and that then and there said Charles Keniston, of said Somerville, was travelling upon, along and over said highway at the point whereat said railroad then and there crossed and intersected the said highway as aforesaid, and was in the lawful use and occupation of said highway and of said portion thereof where said railroad and said highway then and there crossed, and was then and there in the exercise of due diligence, and that said corporation did then and there, by its servants and agents, they being thereto directed and being then and there engaged in the business of said corporation, run, drive and propel, by the power of steam, a certain locomotive engine along, over and upon said railroad, and over, across and upon said highway at said point where said railroad then and there intersected said highway, and did, by reason of the unfitness and gross negligence and carelessness of its said servants and agents while being then and there engaged in the business of said corporation as aforesaid, then and there run, propel and drive said engine rashly, carelessly and negligently, and without watch, care or foresight, and at a great, unusual and improper speed, and did then and there, by reason of said unfitness and gross negligence and carelessness of said servants and agents while engaged in the business of said corporation as aforesaid, suddenly drive, run and propel said engine at, against and upon the body of said Charles Keniston, while the said Charles Keniston was travelling upon said highway as aforesaid, he being then and there in the exercise of due diligence, and not then and there being in or upon any vehicle of said corporation, and not being then a passenger of said corporation, and not being then and there in the employment of said corporation, and that said engine, being so driven as aforesaid, did, by reason of said unfitness and gross negligence and carelessness of said servants and agents, suddenly and violently strike him said Keniston, and did then and there and thereby inflict divers bruises, wounds and injuries in and upon the head, body and limbs of him said Keniston, of which said bruises, wounds and injuries he said Keniston then and there instantly died. And so the jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid, do say that on said seventh day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-four, by reason of the unfitness and gross negligence and carelessness of said servants and agents of said corporation, while engaged in its business as aforesaid, the life of said Charles Keniston, he said Keniston not then and there being a passenger of said corporation, nor in its employment, and then and there being in the exercise of due diligence, was lost, in the manner and form aforesaid, whereby said Fitchburg Railroad Company has become liable to a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars nor less...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Commonwealth v. Dyer
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 2 Enero 1923
    ...as concerns verdicts and judgments, the same as if the trial had been had upon separate indictments for each charge. Commonwealth v. Fitchburg Railroad, 120 Mass. 372, 380. [49] The defendants each were sentenced by a single sentence on all the counts and the execution of the several senten......
  • Commonwealth v. Dyer
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 30 Diciembre 1922
    ... ... v. Fish, 210 Mass. 563 ... The case is to be treated with ... respect to the two groups of counts, so far as concerns ... verdicts and judgments, the ... [243 Mass. 510] ... same as if the trial had been had upon separate indictments ... for each charge. Commonwealth v. Fitchburg ... ...
  • Com. v. Burke
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 27 Febrero 1961
    ...receive separate verdicts in respect to the different offences and enter separate judgments thereon. It was said in Commonwealth v. Fitchburg R. R., 120 Mass. 372, 380, that 'It has long been the practice in this Commonwealth to charge several misdemeanors in different counts of the same in......
  • Com. v. Lowrey
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 5 Enero 1893
    ...if not necessarily including them. Therefore, the defendants suffered no wrong in being acquitted on the third count. See Com. v. Fitchburg R. Co., 120 Mass. 372, 381; Com. v. Boston & Maine R.R., 133 Mass. 383, Com. v. Nichols, 134 Mass. 531, 536; Hawker v. People, 75 N.Y. 487. Exceptions ......
  • 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