Stanley v. Southern R. Co

Decision Date13 November 1912
Citation160 N.C. 323,76 S.E. 221
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesSTANLEY. v. SOUTHERN R. CO.
1. Carriers (§ 284*)—Protection of Passenger—Special Officers—Excursions.

A railroad under Rev. 1905, §§ 2005, 2006 (Revisal 1908, § 3757b), had the right to swear in officers to take charge of an excursion train, and was bound to have enough officers on board to preserve order.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Carriers, Cent. Dig. 1125, 1127-1135, 1173, 1222; Dec. Dig. § 284.*]

2. Carriers (§ 320*)—Questions for Jury— Evidence.

In an action by a passenger for injuries received at the hands of other passengers, evidence held sufficient to take the question of defendant's negligence in not having a more efficient force in charge of its train to the jury.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Carriers, Cent. Dig. §§ 1118, 1126. 1149, 1153, 1160, 1167, 1179, 1190, 1217, 1233, 1244, 1248, 1315-1325; Dec. Dig. § 320.*]

S. Carriers (§ 320*)—Mixed Trains—Contributory Negligence.

In an action by a passenger for injuries received at the hands of colored passengers, whether plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence in going to the platform of a colored coach to help out a friend who was being brutally beaten by the negroes held, under the evidence, for the jury.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Carriers, Cent. Dig. §§ 1118. 1126, 1149, 1153, 1160, 1167, 1179, 1190, 1217, 1233, 1244, 1248, 1315-1325; Dec. Dig. § 320.*]

Brown, J., dissenting.

Appeal from Superior Court, Guilford County; Whedbee, Judge.

Action by R. T. Stanley against the Southern Railroad Company. From a judgment of nonsuit, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

John A. Barringer, of Greensboro, for appellant.

Wilson & Ferguson, of Greensboro, for appellee.

CLARK, C. J. The plaintiff was a white passenger on a mixed excursion train from Greensboro to Norfolk and return in August, 1910. There were 12 or 14 cars in the train. The colored passengers were in the forward cars and the white passengers in the rear cars. On the return, just before the train arrived at Franklin, Va., the plaintiff, who was riding in the second white car behind the rear colored car, being unable to get a seat, went forward to find a friend, Luther Edmundson, and, as he got to the front door of the front white passenger car, he saw eight or ten negroes, in a drunken condition, just inside the rear colored coach in front of him trying to take a bottle of whisky from Luther Proctor, another white man whom he knew. According to his evidence, the negroes had knocked Proctor down, and were beating him over the head. They were cursing, and in a boisterous condition. The plaintiff was standing in the door of the white car next the colored coach when he saw the negroes beating Proctor over the head, and having him down on the floor. Knowing Proctor, he stepped across the platform, and caught Proctor by the arm, and attempted to help him up. When he did so, the negroes began to curse him, and one of them struck him over the head, and staggered him to the platform. Proctor got loose from them, and the plaintiff then undertook to leave the negroes, and get back to the white car, and, as he got back to the door of the white car, one of the negroes shot him through the body. He testified that he took hold of Proctor, and pulled him out from under the negroes to keep them from killing him. There were no officers in sight at the time, nor any on the train. The defendant had no one aboard except an engineer and fireman on the engine, a flagman, who rode in the rear coach, his proper place, a conductor, and a trainmaster. There were 14 coaches on the train. Pistols were being fired by the people in the colored car, who were rowdy and boisterous. The conductor, when asked why he did not keep order, said he had no authority to arrest them.

Under Rev. 1905, §§ 2605, 2606 (Revis-al 1908, § 3757b), the railroad had the right

to swear in officers at Greensboro to take charge of the excursion train. It certainly was the duty of the defendant to have a sufficient number of officers in possession of the train to preserve order. This was not done, and, indeed, it may be said even as a matter of law that two men, the conductor and trainmaster, were not force enough to preserve order in a mixed excursion train of 14 coaches, especially as part of them were white and part colored, and there was drinking and rowdyism which might reasonably have been anticipated.

The evidence, which must be taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, shows that the negroes were drinking in Norfolk; that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Wesley v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 7910SC733
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • August 5, 1980
    ...(1918); Mills v. R.R., 172 N.C. 266, 90 S.E. 221 (1916); Pruett v. R.R., 164 N.C. 3, 80 S.E. 65 (1913); Stanley v. R.R., 160 N.C. 323, 76 S.E. 221 (1912) (Brown, J. dissenting opinion); Seawell v. R.R., 132 N.C. 856, 44 S.E. 610 (1903). In fact, many of these cases also espouse, in part, th......
  • Brown v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • March 26, 1913
    ... ... part of the conductor and employés, for which the defendant ... is responsible (Stanley v. Railroad, 160 N.C. --, ... 76 S.E. 221, Berry v. Railroad, 155 N.C. 287, 71 ... S.E. 322, and Hutchinson v. Railroad, 140 N.C. 123, ... 52 S.E ... ...
  • Pride v. Piedmont & N. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • November 27, 1918
    ... ... Stanley v. Railroad, 160 N.C. 323, 76 S.E ... 221, and Mills v. Railroad, 172 N.C. 266, 90 S.E ... 221, and is correctly stated in brief of counsel for ... ...
  • Mills v. Atl. Coast Line R. R
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • October 18, 1916
    ... ... Stanley v. Railroad, 160 N. C. 323, 76 S. E. 221; Carpenter v. Railroad, 124 N. Y. 53, 26 N. E. 277, 11 L. R. A. 759, 21 Am. St. Rep. 644; Kuhlen v ... ...
  • 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