In his
petition the plaintiff in error (also plaintiff in the lower
court) avers: That on or about January 29, 1892, in company
with James T. Haile, his ward, he took passage on the
passenger train of the defendant company, at Dallas, Tex
and paid fare, and provided tickets, for himself and his
brother, to Baton Rouge, La., in consideration of which fare
the said company contracted and bound itself to convey them
safely, and without delay and harm, to such destination.
'That this trip was undertaken under directions of a
physician, who advised that rest, quiet, and change of scene
would restore to full vigor of mind and body the said James
T. Haile, who had for some time previous been suffering from
an attack of grippe, and was at this time, and in consequence
thereof, greatly depressed, mentally and physically, and in
an intense nervous condition. That the greater part of said
journey had been accomplished in safety, and without any bad
effect upon the said James T. Haile, until on the next day
January 30, 1892, about 8 a. m., when near the town of
Robeline, La., the said train was suddenly, and without
warning, precipitated through a burning bridge, and was
completely wrecked, and immediately after caught fire and was
destroyed. That the shock from the accident was so great that
it hurled said James T. Haile from his seat to the floor
where he lay utterly helpless and prostrated by the shock
and unable to move. The train having in the mean time caught
fire, petitioner was forced to carry his brother out of the
car, and, on account of the marshy condition of the
surrounding country, and his nervous and prostrated
condition, to place him on the roadbed, where he was in full
view of the burning wreck, and in the midst of the wounded
and dying, whose cries and lamentations, added to his already
intense nervous state, caused by the accident itself, threw
him into a state of excitement, so that petitioner, and those
around him, were unable to control or quiet him. That his
nervous state became greatly worse during the several hours
they were forced to wait on the scene of the wreck for
conveyance to the town of Robeline, where they were to wait
for the relief train to be sent out by the railroad company.
After a further delay of some hours, the relief train
arrived, consisting, as petitioner afterwards found, of what
is known as an 'emigrant
coach,' drawn by a freight engine. The coach was
overcrowded with passengers from the wrecked train. The seats
and other accommodations were of the crudest kind, entailing
great discomfort and inconvenience upon the passengers, and
especially upon petitioner's ward, who, in his exhausted,
excited, and overwrought state of mind and body, was forced
to use same. That the hardships, together with the constant
and sudden jerkings and stoppings of the train, caused by the
engine used not being properly constructed for such purposes,
or because it was improperly handled, kept petitioner's
ward and the passengers in constant fear and excitement; and
finally, on entering the company's yard in Algiers, La.,
the train on which was petitioner and his ward was suddenly
and violently run into from the rear by a switch engine,
through the negligence of defendant's employes. The shock
was so violent as to knock petitioner's ward off the
seat, to the car floor, and caused great excitement among the
passengers, who feared another accident had befallen them.
Now, petitioner alleges that since this time his ward has
become rapidly worse, as a result of the shock, excitement,
and hardship he suffered from the said accident, and he is
now insane, and confined in a bettering house, with little or
no hope of recovery; and he has therefore been interdicted,
and petitioner duly appointed his curator. Petitioner
therefore alleges and charges that the present state of his
ward's mind was causd and brought about by the injuries
and sufferings he underwent on account of the accidents and
hardships aforesaid; and he alleges that the said accidents
and injuries were caused by the negligence of the defendant
company, its employes and agents, for the reason that, by the
exercise of due care and caution in the management of its
road and the selection of agents, the said accidents could
have been avoided. That the said road employed no track
walkers to guard against such accidents, and to see that the
road was in proper condition, and safe for travelers on the
company's trains, as it was in duty bound to do. And by
reason of the fact that this section of the road was made up
of wooden trestlework, which needed constant vigilance and
care to keep it in safe condition, the burning of this bridge
for hours before the accident was evidence of gross
negligence on the part of the company. That the train to
which the accident happened was running at a rate of speed
that was dangerous and...
