it must necessarily have reference to the rights of each, and neither
can be compelled to surrender its property or change its road
further than is reasonably necessary. State v. St. Paul, etc., R. Co.
(Minn.). 168.
Construction over crossing. Where, in mandamus proceedings to com-
pel the restoration of a street crossing, the court found that the
plan proposed by the relator was suitable, and the return to the
supreme court fails to disclose the evidence upon which such find--
ing is based, it will be presumed that the evidence was sufficient.
State v. St. Paul, etc., R. Co. (Minn.). 168.
Contributory negligence. Where bridge lies in the only practical route
for traveller he is not guilty of negligence contributing to injuries
caused by defects in such bridge although he attempted to cross in
the knowledge of such defects. Gulf C. & S. F. R. Co. v. Gascamp
(Tex.). 6.
Defective construction. Continuing nuisance. Where the erection of
a bridge causing overflows is a continuing nuisance in consequence of
which a recovery is limited to damages accrued, a judgment in one
action is not a bar to a second action. Omaha, etc., R. Co. v.
Standen (Neb.). 179.
Defective construction. In an action for the overflow of a stream
caused by the improper construction of a bridge a judgment in a
former suit is no bar to a recovery for injuries subsequently sus-
tained. Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Schaffer (Ill.). 174.
Defective construction. Overflow. Where a bridge is so constructed as.
to form an unlawful obstruction, and cause an overflow of the river,
no right of action accrues to the land owner until he sustains an
actual injury caused by such obstruction. Omaha, etc., R. Co. v.
Standen (Neb.).
Embankment. Where an embankment as an approach to a bridge
across a creek is constructed, the company must leave a sufficient.
opening for the water flowing along the creek, so as to prevent in-
jury to adjacent lands, but is not bound to provide against damages.
caused by extraordinary floods. Gulf, etc., R. Co. v. Pool (Tex.)..
187.
Federal question. The fact that a State court decided in an action for
damages sustained by vessels in navigating a river, that a bridge
had not been built as required by Congress, rendered the railroad
company liable, irrespective of the question of improper construc-
tion, does not present a federal question. Hannibal & St. Jo. R. Co.
v. Missouri R. Packet Co. (U. S.). 157.
Interstate commerce. Bridge company incorporated for purpose of con-
structing bridge across river which forms a boundary line between
two States, held, a common carrier within meaning of interstate
commerce act, and as such is entitled to facilities from other roads
for exchange of traffic. Kentucky & I. Bridge Co. v. Louisville &
N. R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 630.
Measurement of span. Under act of Congress authorizing construction
of bridge across Missouri river. "with spans not less than 160 feet
in length," etc., the distance of the spans must be obtained by meas-
uring along a line between the piers drawn perpendicularly to the
faces of the piers and the current of the river. Hannibal & St. Jo.
R. Co. v. Missouri R. Packet Co. (U. S.). 157.
Overflow. Measure of damages. In an action for injuries to crops
through an overflow caused by a bridge embankment, the measure
of damages is the market value of the crops at the time they were
destroyed and the injuries to the land. Gulf, etc., R. Co. v. Pool
(Tex.). 187.
Overflow. Parol evidence to explain judgment. In an action for the
overflow of land, caused by the defective construction of a bridge,
where the judgment in a former suit, offered in evidence as a bar,
does not show the true state of matters, parol evidence may be
given in explanation. Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Schaffer (III.). 174.
CARRIERS. See BAGGAGE; EXPRESS COMpanies; Interstate CommercE;
PASSENGER.
CHILDREN. See PARENT AND CHILD.
Assessment of damages in causing death of minor children. 93 n.
Contributory negligence. If minor, killed while playing on turn-table,
had no knowledge that it was unsafe to do so, it cannot be said that
he was guilty of contributory negligence. Union Pac. R. Co. v. Dun-
den (Kan.). 88.
Damages. Instruction that plaintiff, who was a minor and living with
his mother, would be entitled to recover for diminished capacity to
labor, held, not a ground for reversal, where there is no complaint
that the verdict was not excessive. Houston, etc., R. Co. v. Boozer
(Tex.). 63.
Death. Value of services. Court commits no error in refusing to re-
quire the jury to itemize the value of the probable future services
of the intestate minor to his next of kin. Union Pac. R. Co. v.
Dunden (Kan.). 88.
Trespassers. Children trespassing on railroad track. 87 n.
Turn-table, injury to children playing upon. 93 n.
CLASSIFICATION. See INTERSTATE COMMERce.
COMMISSIONERS. See RAILROAD COMMISSIONERS.
Eminent domain. By the insertion of the words “or damaged" in the
Nebraska constitution, a right to recover for injuries to property
was conferred, although no property has been taken. Omaha, etc.,
R. Co. v. Standen (Neb.). 179.
Fares. Regulation by statute. Statute limiting maximum fare for car-
riage of passengers held not a taking of property without due pro-
cess of law, although yearly income will be greatly reduced. Dow
v. Biedlman (U. S.). 322.
Fares. Statute dividing railroads into classes according to length of
roads, and fixing different limit for passenger fares for each class,
held not to deny equal protection of the laws. Dow v. Biediman
(U. S.). 322.
Interstate commerce act. Impairing obligation of contracts. Fact that
interstate commerce act incidentally affects contracts existing at
the time of its enactment, does not bring it within prohibition
against laws which impair the obligation of contracts. Kentucky &
I. Bridge Co. (1. S. C. C.). 630.
Presumption of negligence. Statute which declares that, in all cases
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Continued.
where passengers are injured, the presumption shall be against com-
pany, does not abridge privileges and immunities of a citizen.
Augusta & S. R. Co. v. Randall (Ga.). 439.
CONSTRUCTION. See Contract; Mechanic's Lien; Officer.
CONTRACT. See TICKETS.
Construction contracts; interpretation. 126 n.
Construction. Delay. Provision in construction contract that, in the
event of the contractors falling to employ a sufficient force, com-
pany's engineer might employ such number of workmen as would
be necessary and charge their wages to the contractors, construed..
Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Donnegan (Ind.). 116.
Construction. Incompetency of engineers. Where, owing to negligence
and incompetency of company's engineers, statements of work done
are incorrect, contractors are entitled to recover what is due them
notwithstanding engineers' estimates. Louisville, etc., R. Co. v.
Donnegan (Ind.). 116.
Construction. Mistake of engineer. Although by a construction con-
tract it is stipulated that the contractors are to be paid for the
lineal feet of piling used, the contractor will be entitled to recover
for the loss occasioned by the mistake of the engineer in ordering
the piling. Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Donnegan (Ind.). 116..
Construction. Stipulation that engineers of company should make
final and conclusive estimates does not deprive contractors of the
right to resort to the courts for redress of wrong and recovery of
dues. Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Donnegan (Ind.). 116.
Construction. Time required. Where the question of time required to
complete the work is material, the testimony of railway-builders as
to the length of time in which it could be completed is competent.
Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Donnegan (Ind.). 116.
Construction. Where a contract specifies that the contractor is to re-
ceive a certain sum per mile for stone" hauled by wagon "the com-
pany is not bound to pay for the transportation of stone otherwise.
Campbell v. Cincinnati Southern R. Co. (Ky.). 113.
Death of joint contractor. Under Indiana Code, the whole right in a
joint contract vests in the survivors, and such survivors may main-
tain an action thereon without joining the representatives of the
deceased. Indiana, etc., R. Co. v. Adamson (Ind.). 127.
Estimates of engineers in construction contracts. 127 n.
Modification. A written contract entered into by railway trustees
cannot be modified by the construction engineer, nor can he contract
verbally with the contractor with reference thereto. Campbell v.
Cincinnati Southern R. Co. (Ky.). 113
President of a company has no power, by virtue of his office, to bind the
company by a contract for the construction of its road when the
same is already under contract by the board of directors. Templi-
son v. Chicago, etc., R. Co. (Iowa). 107.
President. Power of the president to bind the corporation.
Special policeman. Where a company agrees to pay two thirds of the
salary of a specal policeman, and for some time pays its proportion
of his salary directly to him, such officer may maintain an action
against the company for arrears of salary, and need not sue the city.
Porter v. Richmond & D. R. Co. (N. C.) 137.
Stone culvert. Obligations of company agreeing with party conveying
and for right of way to construct an embankment along river and
maintain a stone culvert so constructed as to permit the escape of
overflow water. Indiana, etc., R. Co. v. Adamson (Ind.). 127.
Supplies for boarding-train. In an action for money had and received,
it appeared that plaintiff entered into a contract by which defend-
ant's roadmaster was to furnish supplies for a boarding-train. Held,
under the circumstances, that plaintiff was estopped from claiming
money paid for supplies shipped after the roadmaster was super-
seded, upon such roadmaster's order. Hereford v. Southern Pac.
R. Co. (Tex.). 133.
CONTRACTOR. See CONTRACT.
NEGLIGENCE. See NEGLIGENCE, CONTRIBUTORY;
PARENT AND CHILD; TRESPASSERS.
CONVEYANCE. See CONTRACT.
CROPS. See SURFACE WATER.
Acquiescence in crossing at place not a highway crossing.
Bridge over crossing. Where, in mandamus proceedings to compel the
restoration of a street-crossing, the court found that the plan pro-
posed by the relator was suitable, and the return to the supreme
court fails to disclose the evidence upon which such finding is
based, it will be presumed that the evidence was sufficient. State
v. St. Paul, etc., R. Co. (Minn.). 168.
Bridge. Public conveyance. Where a plan, in mandamus proceedings
to compel a railroad company to restore a street-crossing, includes a
bridge over the tracks of two companies, it must necessarily have
reference to the rights of each, and neither can be compelled to sur-
render its property or change its road further than is reasonably
necessary. State v. St. Paul, etc.. R. Co. (Minn.). 168.
Deaf person crossing track. 39 n.
Double track. Person who started to cross double-track railroad im-
mediately after passage of one train, without looking for approach
of another, held, guilty of contributory negligence. Allerton v.
Boston & M. R. Co. (Mass.). 563.
Muffled ears, crossing track with. 39 n.
Pleading. Variance. Recovery cannot be had, under statute conferring
right of action where person is injured at crossing and employees
neglected to give signal, when counts are founded upon other
Statutory provisions. Allerton v. Boston & M. R. Co. (Mass.). 563.
Question for jury. Where there is evidence to show that no lookout
was kept, and it is not claimed that any warning was given, ques-
tion whether plaintiff, a minor, used due care in crossing track or
whether accident was caused by defendant's negligence, is for the
jury. Houston, etc., R. Co. v. Boozer (Tex.). 63.
Speed. An ordinance limiting the rate of speed in passing over cross-
ings does not imply that this rate may not be exceeded between
crossings. Central R. & B. Co. v. Smith (Ga.). 1.
CULVERT. See SURFACE Water.
Alteration of drains. If a railroad alters an accustomed drain, the sub-
stituted outlet must be sufficient to provide for ordinary raintalls,
but need not be constructed in view of extraordinary occurrences.
Philadelphia, etc., R. Co. v. Davis (Md.). 143.
Contract for construction. Obligation imposed upon company under
contract with party conveying right of way to construct embank-
ment along a river and maintain a stone culvert so constructed as to
permit the escape of overflow water. Indiana, etc., R. Co. v. Ad-
amson (Ind.). 127.
Duty to construct. Where a railroad constructs an embankment, it is
bound to provide culverts so as to allow the escape of waters
through them in times of high water as well as low. Ohio & M.
R. Co. v. Washter (Ill.). 194.
Insufficient culvert. Declarations of section-master concerning suffi-
ciency of culvert, not falling within the scope of his duties, are in-
admissible in action for overflow. Waldrop v. Greenville, etc., R.
Co. (S. Car.).
Liability for damages. A railroad, by the payment of compensation for
injuries caused by the construction of its roadbed, does not escape
liability for damages caused by the construction of an insufficient
culvert. Ohio & M. R. Co. v. Washter (Ill.). 194.
Owner of land. In an action for flooding lands in consequence of the
stopping up of a culvert, the complaint is insufficient where some of
the acts charged are alleged to have occurred since plaintiff became
the owner of the land. Terre Haute & I. R. Co. v. McCoy (Ind.).
DAMAGES. See BRIDGE; DEATH; SURFACE WATER; Water.
Evidence of damages. In an action for injuries to crops caused by de-
fective culvert a nonsuit is properly granted if plaintiff fails to intro-
duce evidence as to the amount of his loss, and an averment in the
answer that the plaintiff had agreed to take $5 in satisfaction is not
sufficient to send case to the jury. Waldrop v. Greenville, etc., R.
Co. (S. Car.). 204.
Excessive damages for causing death of minor. 93 n.
Excessive damages for personal injuries. 456 n.
Excessive. $12,000 held not excessive where manager of telegraph com-
pany received injuries necessitating amputation of arm, impairing
his efficiency as an operator, and putting him to an expense of
$2000. Dougherty v. Missouri R. Co. (Mo.). 488.
$6933 held not excessive for injuries received by passenger.
Houston & T. C. R. Co. v. Lee (Tex.). 452.
Excessive. $5000 held not excessive for the death of a brick mason who
left a widow and a number of children. Virginia Midland R. Co. v.
White (Va.). 22.
Excessive. $4.5co, verdict for, in favor of parent for injuries to child ten
years of age held excessive, child's services not being worth more
than $1100. Hurt v. St. Louis, etc., R. Co. (Mo.). 422.
Excessive. $3000 for causing death of minor eleven years old, and who
left a poor father, having a wife and three children, is not so exces-
sive as to require a reversal. Union Pac. R. Co. v. Dunden (Kan).
88.
Excessive. $500 held not excessive where passenger was wrongfully
expelled on dark night and compelled to walk over railroad bridge
|