Wakefield v. South B. R. Co.

• Decision Date: 12 May 1875
• Citation: 117 Mass. 544
• Parties: George H. Wakefield v. South Boston Railroad Company
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

117 Mass. 544

George H. Wakefield v. South Boston Railroad Company

Supreme Court of Massachusetts

May 12, 1875

Suffolk. Tort for an assault and battery by an agent of the defendant. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Pitman J., there was evidence tending to show that the plaintiff under the provisions of the St. of 1871, c. 381, § 36 purchased in East Boston a commutation ticket from the conductor of a Metropolitan car, in order to secure a passage on the horse-railroad cars to the defendant's stable in South Boston; that he rode on the Metropolitan car to the corner of Harrison Avenue and Beach Street, at which place the plaintiff exchanged cars, getting into a car upon which he saw the words "South Boston," and which, as it appeared in evidence, belonged to the Dorchester Street line of the defendant. The plaintiff gave up his ticket to the conductor of this car. On arriving at Dorchester Street the car stopped, and the plaintiff was informed by the conductor that the car would go no farther, it being short of the point to which plaintiff intended to go; the plaintiff asked the conductor if he could ride upon another car then going by, down to the company's stable, without paying another fare; to which the conductor replied that he could. Immediately the plaintiff left the car and got on the front platform of the car of the defendant's that was going farther. After riding a short distance, the conductor asked the plaintiff for his fare, to which plaintiff replied that he had paid one fare in the other car, and he would not pay another, as that conductor had told him he could ride on this car without paying another fare; upon which declaration the conductor put the plaintiff off the car.

Upon these facts the judge ruled as a matter of law, that "the conductor had a right to put him off, unless he paid another fare," giving instructions not objected to, as to the time and manner of so doing. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions.

Exceptions overruled.

D. B. Gove, for the plaintiff.

W. A. Munroe, for the defendant.

Colt J. Ames & Endicott, JJ., absent.

OPINION

Colt

The plaintiff's commutation check, which he received as a passenger in the car of the Metropolitan road from the conductor of that car, entitled him under the St. of 1871 c. 381, § 36, to a passage on the same day in any car run in the city by any other street railway ...