The Muscogee R.R. Co. v. Redd

• Citation: 54 Ga. 34
• Parties: The Muscogee Railroad Company, plaintiff in error. v. Soule Redd, executor, defendant in error.
• Decision Date: 31 January 1875
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

54 Ga. 34

The Muscogee Railroad Company, plaintiff in error. v. Soule Redd, executor, defendant in error.

Supreme Court of the State of Georgia

(Atlanta, January Term, 1875.)

Evidence. Common carriers. In pari delicto. Before William A. Little, Judge pro hac vice. Muscogee Superior Court. November Term, 1884.

Any further report of this case beyond what is contained in the decision and the head-notes, is deemed unnecessary. See report when before this court at a former term: 48th Georgia Reports, 102.

L. T. Downing; Peabody & Brannon, for plaintiff in error.

Henry L. Benning; M. H. Blandford, for defendant.

WARNER, Chief Justice.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff against the defendant to recover damages for the loss of a slave alleged to have been killed on the defendant's road by its negligence, in 1861. On the trial of the case, the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for $2,981 33. A motion was made for a new trial on the several grounds contained therein, which was overruled by the court, and the defendant excepted.

1, 2, 3. There was no error in admitting the testimony of the two Thweatts, in view of the pleadings in the record.

4. When this case was before us on a former occasion, as it appears from the report of it in 48th Georgia Reports, 102, Robert Thweatt testified that he paid Floyd's railroad fare to the defendant. On the last trial of the case, he testified that hedid not pay his fare, but only had a conversation with defendant\'s *conductor in relation to the payment of Floyd\'s fare. The evidence of Captain Chapman was introduced on the last trial, who stated that he applied to defendant for transportation for so many men, including servants, and obtained it. The question in the case is whether Floyd was on the defendant\'s train of cars as a passenger, or whether he was there as a servant of Thweatt, who was a member of the military organization being transported over defendant\'s road for the purpose specified in the record. If the slave-Floyd, was on the defendant\'s railroad train as a passenger at the time he was killed, then the defendant is liable; but if he was on the defendant\'s railroad train at the time he was killed as the servant of Thweatt, who was a member of the military organization for which transportation was obtained, and was included as a part of those for whom it was obtained, then the defendant, under the ruling of this court in this and similar cases, is not liable. This question, in view of the...