Morse v. Newton Street R. Co.
| Decision Date | 26 February 1913 |
| Citation | 100 N.E. 1007,213 Mass. 595 |
| Parties | MORSE v. NEWTON ST. RY. CO. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Edwd. Carr, of Boston, for plaintiff.
Pitt F Drew, of Boston, for defendant.
The plaintiff seeks to recover compensation for personal injuries received by her by being crowded off a car of the defendant upon which she was a passenger, on an August evening, by the sudden rushing upon it of a large number of persons. She was traveling from Waltham to Boston, and although the car usually went through to Boston, on that day the defendant had changed its schedule, and passengers were required to change at a public square in Watertown which was made the end of the line for the time being. This square was the terminus of lines of street cars from Boston, Needham and parts of Newton. It was the week of a Grand Army Encampment in Boston and a river carnival advertised by the defendant was being held that night in Waltham. On this account the defendant was running many extra cars. There was evidence tending to show that an unusually large crowd was in the square, which began to gather about 7 o'clock, and which was continually changing as people brought on other lines of street cars waited to be taken away on those of the defendant; that between 8 and 9:30 o'clock, as the open car on which the plaintiff was riding with a few passengers came into the square, and as she was rising from her seat, there was a crowd estimated at 400 or 500 'all around and close up to the cars.' People rushed into this car before it came to a stop, and began to turn over the seats, and pushed the plaintiff from the car. There were no guard rails on either side of the car, and people boarded it from both sides. They were pushing and crowding and rushing on to the car, and it might have been found that this course of conduct had been going on since 7 o'clock that evening. There was one policeman on duty at the square, but no employé of the defendant except its motorman and conductor, neither of whom made any effort to protect its passengers or to restrain the crowd. This narration might have been found to be correct in substance, although there was ample evidence tending to show that the people were entirely orderly.
This was enough to make it a question for the jury, whether the defendant did all that it ought to have done in the performance of its duty to guard its...
To continue reading
Request your trial