Newspapers / The Charlotte Observer (Charlotte, … / June 8, 1908, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of The Charlotte Observer (Charlotte, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
CHARLOTTE DAILY OBSERVER, JUNE 8, 1SC3. .BUPBEME COUBT 0PU5I0KS Th Stipretne Court of North Carolina a just rendered decision which The Ooeerver deems important enough to lay before the public It la the common Im I region among the people that a general arent of a insurance company OSS a' right te give verbal perralssiona,fot- other insurance and has a right to wilM Wb- a ir lha conditions or tne pontic, haooena e'most every day that the hold er of the pel icy will meet an agent upon t H etreet or n to his office and ret verbal remission lor some change in the terms of the policy and t baa bees the . ireneral belief that thli vernal consent n the part M the agent would be binding, but the ferpreme Court in the case of W. P. Slack vs. Atlanta Borne Insurance r Company. Just decided, hold tnai since ' r the Legislature of North Carolina haa passed a atatute requiring the tneuranee companies to use what Is known aa a - "standard form of policy." an agent can no longer waive the term of the policy x.V by -word of mouth"! and that no waiver v or consent of the agent la vauo. or oina- : ing upon hie company unless It la enaors ed in writing on the policy. The caae went up to the . Supreme Court from " Aahevfile. "end the Atlanta Home Insur- a nee Comnanr " waa repreaented by Messrs, . Tillett A Guthrie, attorney of - hi citv. The oDinlon la aa follow! : Supreme Court of North Carolina, Feb ruary term, 1. o. o"""1' v yr. T. Black.: Appellant-va. The Atlanta Home Insurance Company. " Defendant insurance company through Its areata, at Aehevtlle. on December 20th, 1906, issued to plaintllt us policy - Insurance, against Jose or damage by , Are. to the amount of ll.MO. on certain property fully described therein. The pol icy was of the standard form, set out In , full In Revision 16). Section 4759-4760. , and contained the following proviaione: Thl entire polioy, unless otherwise pro . Tided by agreement endorsed hereon or dded hereto, shall be void if the insured bow haa or ehall hereafter make or pro ' cure any other contract of insurance. . whether valid or not, on property eover- ' ed in whole, or In part, by this policy." ' The policy contains thla further clauae: This policy Is made and accented to the foregoing stipulations and conditions, to gether with such other provisions, agree ' menta or eonditiona aa may be endorsed hereon or added hereto, and no officer. 1 agent or ether representative of this com - paoy shall have power to waive any pro ' vision or condition of thla policy except eueb as by the terms of this policy may ' be the subject of agreement enaorsea hereon or added hereto, and as to auch provisions and eonditiona no officer, gent or representative shall have such power or be deemed or held to have walv ; d auch provisions or eonditiona, unless " auch waiver, if any. shall be written up on or attached hereto, nor shall any pri Vllege or permission affecting the Insur- ance under this policy exist or no claim ed by the insured, untea so written or attached." All of which la contained In the "standard policy" prescribed in the atatute. On January 4th. I. another Dollcy waa Issued by the German Fire In enr&ne Company, on aaid property, for $508. On January th. 190S, the property covered by the policies waa destroyed by '. i- fire. It was conceded that no consent by - - defendant whs endorsed on the policy of December 29th, imo. to the Issuance of the doHct of January 4tb. IK. The property, a found by the Jury, waa worth $1,274. The following, among other Issues, waa submitted to the Jury: "Was there waiver by the defendant, of the condition In tht policy, aa to the additional lnaur anca Issued by the German Insurance ' Company T" Plaintiff Introduced parol : evidence for the purpose of showing walv or. bv defendant, of the condition In re- gard to the additional Insurance. His Honor, upon the conclusion of the evi dence, charged the Jury that there waa no evidence that the defendant waived the nrovlalon In the policy. In regard to tax ins; out additional Insurance In the Qtr man Insurance Company, and Instructed them to answer the Issue "No." Plaintiff excepted. Judgment waa renedered for defendant and plaintiff duly excepted ana appealed. Kebulon Weaver and H. B. Carter for plaintiff. . Tillett Guthrie for defendant ' Connor. J. The principle question pre- . . . . . . T , 1.1 . .J. eeniea is wnniwr 1 fmum-g miuibie. to show a waiver of the condl tlon, avoiding the policy, by reason of taking the additional Insurance January 4th. ISM. The condition, expressed! in tne policy, that other Insurance taken upon th policy, without the assent or tne in ' surer, would render the policy void. Is Valid, and. unless waived, will be en forced. Run va. Insurance Company, 08 N. C. Its. The language of the contract la explicit, and Incapable of mlsunder tandlng, leaving no room for construc- tlon. Assuming, for the purpose of the ; argument, that the sgent who Issued the policy, cornea within the definition of a ' general agent, with power to bind the company. In respect to the policy issued liy him, aa held la Grubba va. Insurance i Company. 1M N. C. 47J. the plaintiff l confronted with the express provision In the face of the policy, the form of which la prescribed by the statute, that no offi cer, agent or representative of the com pany, shall have power to waive any pro vision or condition, except such as. by the terms of the agreement. Is "endorsed hereon or added hereto," and as to these, t officer, agent, etc.. shall have such power or deemed or be held to have waived such condition unless the waiver, if any, shall be "written upon or attach ed hereto;" nor shall any privilege or permission exist or be claimed by the In- j sored, unless so written or attached. There can be no controversy regarding the 'meaning of these words. They are Inserted In the policy, not by the com pany or by the plaintiff, but by the stat ute. To fall to give them force and ef fect. Is to nullify the statute. They are not intended to restrict" the powers, ex ' press or Implied, of general or local agents, but to prescribe an Invariable rule at evidence, by which their conduct must bo proven to bind the company, rrlor to ' the enactment of the statute, much con troversy arose as to the reasonableness of conditions or provisions Inserted In policies. In many cases, by reason of the obscure language, manner and place, of Insertion and unfairness to the Insured. .. courts held them unreasonable and In valid. Th conduct and language of agents together with the extent ot their power, rendered the rights and duties of the company and the Insured uncer tain and Insecure. The courts for the pre- . yen tlon of fraud and Injustice, construed auch provisions most strongly against the insured, and, to prevent forfeitures . were industrious to find waivers. In the conduct and language of agents. This is ; apparent from the decided caaea In our own and the reports of other courts. To avoid these controversies, frequently re sulting In long and. to the Insured, ruin ous litigation, the Legislatures, of this snd other States, enacted the "standard pol icy, and forbade the use of any other. - The Lejrlwlaturs of this State, In 1W9. en acted a atatute eodtrylng the insurance law and adopting the "standard policy" prescribing the six of type .In which It hall be printed. . etc ' For Issuing any other form of policy, the company and Ha a rents are made Indictable. Heetion 7!1 4K3, Reviaai, The courts of other flutes, in which this form of policy la prescrihv 'd. have uniformly held that if terms and provisions are binding upon the com pany and the insured. The question pre sented upon this appeal was dVted in Quuilan vs. Insurance Company, X.K. T. Z. Adrewa. J., easing: .."No principle is better settled te tbe law, nor la there any founded on more obvious - Justice, than , that if a person, dealing with aa . agent, knows that he la acting under a trwribed and limited authority, and hi act is outsi4 of and transcends the au thority conferred, the principal la not -1 end It 1 Immaterial whether the t is a general or special one. be- ( ? a j rfacipsi may limit the author ity of one aa well aa the other." Befer rlng to the facta In' that case, he says: "The llraltatkma upon the authority of wore .written on the face of the policy." copying tbe language found la the "standard policy." Again he says; "When a policy permits an agent to ex ercise i a specified authority, hut pre scribe that, the company shall not be bound unless the execution of the power hall be evidenced, by a written endorse, ment on the policy, the condition la of the essence of the authority, and the consent or act of. the agent, not so endorsed, is void.'" Thla te manifestly correct state ment of the lew. The learned Justice pro ceeds to point .out the evils which . the enactment of the . standard policy waa intended to avoid, saying: 'The act pro viding for a uniform policy, known aa the atandard policy, and which makes lta i use compulsory upon insurance com panlea, marks a moot Important and use ful advance ln legislation, relating to contracts of Insurance" Moore vs. H. F. Insurance Company, 141 N. TV 21. In Bourgeois va. National Inaurance Com pany, M Wis. 04, Wlnslow. J., referrlcr to the enactment requiring the use of the standard policy, gays: "The act Is broad and sweeping In lta terra and scope, - It brings order out of chaos. Prior to Its passage, there were as many contracts aa there were companies of the policies. issued by the various Insurance com panies were almost Infinite In number. new clsusea and conditions were being constantly Inserted, generally ingenious ly worded and obscurely Inserted. To meet thla condition, the act under con sideration waa passed. That It la a long step in th right direction, cannot be doubted. The condition here broken wae one of the conditions of the standard policy- It is claimed that It was waived. not In printing or writing, but by mere word of mouth. Can this be successfully maintained VU so, then this part of th law Is at onoe emasculated." In Parker vs. Rochester German Insurance Com pany, 16J Mass. 47. discussing an alleged waiver of a condition In a standard policy. adopted by the Oeneral Assembly. It la said: "There Is nothing to show that th agent had any authority to vary the standard form; but If they had. It would seem probable that they could only do so by inserting provision or attaching slips in in manner prescribed by the atatute." in Anderson vs. Insurance Company, 2 I R. A. (Minn.) 0. while the case was disposed of upon other grounds, th chief justice states clearly the principle which should govern the eourta. In dealing with th statutory atandard policy. "But In respect to the power of the parties to In sert th provision and conditions that are contained in th standard policy, and th binding effect of them, th act la conclusive; for It would be absurd to aay that, while the same statute compels the use of a. partleular condition, the parties cannot or ahall not bind themselves by ltt but It may be negatory." "The condi tion of the standard policy cannot be waived, except aa provided therein and written or printed on' the face of the policy." 11 Am. Eng. Kne. 3. citing a large number of caaea. Th decisions appear to be uniform upon the point. In Assurance Company va. Building Asso ciation. 1S2 IT. 8. 20. an exhaustive de scription, wltn a review of the authori ties, Is made by Mr. Justice 8 hi roe If the enforcement of thla provision works In justice, the Legislature may change th law. Aa It Is written, it Is our province to enforce II. W have avoided any dis cussion of the extent and character of the authority of the agenla of defendant. or what conduct will or will not operate as a waiver. We ronfln our decision to the language of the statutory policy. holding, with his honor, that there waa a breach of the condition. In regard to sub sequent Insurance, and that th waiver can be shown only In the manner con tracted between th parties, as prescribed by th statute. Th Legislature haa, as a matter of publlo policy, restricted the freedom of eontraot and compelled the tul Mutilation. , Actlonabla.-'Whll dead bodies are not recognised at common law aa property, they are quasi property and a wrongful mutilation thereof la actionable.- - .. . . Dead Bodies, Mutilation, Negligence, Wilfulness, - Wantonness. Non-suit, De fense, Coronor. When It appeared from the evidence, that after plaintiff vlnte Ut was killed by defendant, his body waa permitted by it to remain upon or near the track for twenty-on hours and run over and mutilated by a 'number, of defendant's trains, scattering fragments thereof up and down th track for miles. there was - sufficient evidence of wilful. unlawful- wanton or negligent mutilation. of the body for the Jury to consider in award damages1, and the ' court . below erred "to sustaining a motion as of non suit upon the evidence. The - defense of th company that it was awaiting tne ac tion of a coroner is Ineffectual. t. Railroads. Dead Bodies,, Mutilation, Evidence. Liability. Employes, Ratifiea tion. When It is shown In evldencejhat the deed body of plaintiff's Intestate was permitted by th defendant to remain up on or near lta track, and to be mutilated by a number of its train running over K for a number of hours, th defense that such u not the fault of the railroad eomnanv. Taut of the employes, " of defendant's negligence, ; v. 1 The question of appropriate issues la such ease discussed, and proper issue suggested. A , H, 'X. PhiUio et aL vs. John J. Little. i. Mortgager and Mortgagee Purchaser ot. Mortgaged Goods. Possessory Action Inadequate Value ef Mortgaged Goods, inaoeq.uaie, 4 uogment of Ownership. Costs. In a suit brought by mortgagee for the possession of certain goods em braced la their chattel mortgage, against the defendants, who had subsequently oougni tnetn from -the mortgagor,.' when it is ronna mat tne plaintiffs, mortgagees, were owner and entitled te possession. and that the goods "Would not bring the mortgage debt; held.' t It was not error in th court below to render Judgment that plaintiffs, mortgagees, ; recover the goods embraced in this mortgage. Instead of for the possession and sale of the goods; I. In the absence of .tender of Judgment by 'defendant, Revtsal 860, the plaintiff should recover their costs of the action. - - -, ; Jalle H. Cox, Admrx vs. High Point, B. A. and 8. Railroad Co. 1. -Railroads, , Negligence, ' Evidence, Scintilla, Question for Jury When th facts are established in an action to re- available, when the employes, who par- I cover damages for the negligent killing tlclpated therein, were retained in iu we i DJf tna j0fendant railroad company of ployment. Such vra a ratincauon. I plaintiffs Intestate. Ihst the car upon Dead Bodies, Mutilation. Damages. wnlcn plaintiff s intestate was usually Mental Annilsh When the rignia Ol oui emnloverl was derailed owing to the tin- legally entitled to th custody of a deadlimjna condition of the tract, together body are violated by mutilation thereof. Wtn tn other circumstantial evidence lha nan inlnred mav. In an,' action for I that he waa therann at the time in aues- ls mages, recover for tbe mental suffering tB; that he ws well and left home for caused thereby, which is the proximate the usual purpose of the trip and return - and natural consekuenees of tne wrongiu led home on the afternoon of tne same net. I day sick, nervous and looking as If some- T. Railroads. Dead Bodies, Memai An- i thing had ha onened: and when, from the ruish. Maaure ot. Damage. Evidence, testimony of his attending physician, it Incompetent. Hearing of Death. In appeared that immediately thereafter he mhim riamaa-ea . aaralnst defendant had auch avmotome. and bruise a to in railroad company lor the wrongful muU-aicste the conditions from which his taiinn nt tha dead body of plaintiff' Inte- death afterwards resulted. It was error state, th Jury should be cautioned to tn th court below to sustain defendants carefully dissociate' the grief thbreby motion for Judgment as of non-suit upon caused from that occasioned to tha widow the evidence It being more than a ecln- upon learning of the death or me nus- tills, and sufficient to take in case to band, when the action is for oroi w in jury. raainnad bv the mutilation alone. L Railroads. Dead Bodies, rreparauoo, for BurlaL Duty of Rallroaa. xne ue- fendant railroad company owed It as a I Annual Rcanlon Confederate Yeter duty to gather the body, and lis frag- ana, uirmtniriiam, Ala.. Juno , ment together, and prepare th same fori p-n. via ruonrd. Official burial .when th plaintiff's Intestate was I i Route Meokleubnrf killed by one of It trains, and a negll- camp. gent failure to do so was an Infringmeni l - for th above occasion th See upon the legal rights of the widow, for I board haa been selected as th of which an action for damages would lie. I flclai route of the Mecklenburg Camp . Same, Seeing the Remains. in an and they Invite all veterans, their action for damage arising from in i wive and families to join them on wmns-fut mutilation of a dead body, me i mis trip. They win leave Charlotte niainttrr. tha widow, cannot recover for on th night of June 8th, The rate grief occasioned by aeelng the mutilated from Charlotte for the round trip remain. I wm D" ncaeia on aaie June oin, j in ana sin, gooa to return leaving Birmingham a late aa mid night June zQtrt. r or further infor. matton regarding the trip, call en or add rest JAMES KEH. JR C. P. A. Seaboard. Charlotte.. N. C A. P. Ollbert and W. R. Kuker vs. How. srd Automatic Machine Co. et nl L Partnership, Prospective Patent, Money Advanced. Work Done, Condition Precedent Under a contract between the plaintiffs and defendants that in consid eration of monies to be advsnced by some and work to be done by others, upon a machine Invented by on of them and proposed to be patented, and. In the event of lta being patentable, the article to be manufactured or sold, with a specified division of profits, a partner ship was created ss an executed agreement, and a stipulation that the plaintiff were to erect or construct the machine, and make Durham certain advancements, was not In the Oastonla nature of a condition precedent -or eon- Greensboro current, but an obligation for breach of Hickory. . hlch. If not properly explained, the I Kaietgn . . . ANNUAL RETJNIOV COVFRhin- ATE VETERANS, BIItMfNG HAM, ALA.. JUNK tTU 11TU. 1908. The Southern Hallway annonneaa following round-trip rates for . the above occasion: ' - Charlotte I ts . ll.S tit , le.SS SO : COTTON' MlCEiimERY "ft" s Pickers . Eevolvinj -, Flat Cards' Railway Heads and Drawing' Frames :p " In Glnttlsj v Intermediate ' and ; Eoving Frarnes Spinning rranej Spoolers - j and , -tf.r- - Reels ( A. H, ' VJAGHDURN, Southern Anoni Southern Railway H. B. Followlnr achaauM nmra k. listed only as Information, and are not guaranteed. April lith. lHg; - 1: a. m,. No. to, deUy, for, Tashtog ton snd polnu North. Pullman drawing ui smpers to new lorK. Day coeoha :tt a. m., Ko. 9. dally, for Colambla, oavannaa and Jaekannvtiia. r im.-. drawing room sleepers te August and vine"" " ?y C0che I JO a. m.. Mo. a -n. - ffvinta. .V,.ta"2.f ft jlnr. for Waahtag, Charlott to Washington. . i ,m- ,'0- . diy. for Columbia .-l:,0.:.m-!...N- . dally except Bunder -.-"I?."v,",. Vaylorevtlle and loeJ Polnta Connaeta lon-Balem. and at a7m. tor' 7 :1I a. m . w , . (. u . . .' . Baitr, or Acania, Day coaches Charlott te Atlanta. Stop at principal polnta en rout. , w: a, to.. No. M. dalh Ullman drawl: t end MPhmor ngton. Dining car nn .T "v, "".'r. ror waaiimg iTZm . 1, fuumaa drawing UT COaChe tO Waahlnrlnn Tllni . serve. 10:66 notuioKe and local oolnta. for v7iBsto counterclaim. 1 Partnerahln. Termination. At TVllt. parties to contract In the exact language Purpose of Patent, Bale of Patent, 11 OS nlalntlffa ennld ha held neraonallv rasnon- I OoldsborO. , . . , 11.11 sible, either as an Hem of charge In tak- Approximately low rate from other lne a Dartnershlp account, or by way of P0'1""- - t 1 In ... r w b a 1 .w n . L w 'un o lii. in ana 8th; good returning leave Blrmlna. nam inionisni June ZUln prescribed. While a contract of Insurance may be made In parol, the statute will enter Inte and prescribe Its forms, that Is, parol contract will be construed to be for a standard policy. If listening to th suggestion of "hard cases," said to be the "aulrk sands of th taw." w nullify the statute, w not only make a new and different contract for th parties, but make th taw of none effect. Tha notice that the plaintiff Intended to get other Insurance In the future. Is not notice of existing Insurance at the time the polioy Issued. The distinction Is narked and radical. We do not think that It can be said that the agent of th company was acting aa the agent of the plaintiff. Thla would make confusion worse confounded. Vpon a careful review of the entire rec ord, we find no error. Th Judgment must be affirmed. Breach of Contract, Damages. When it appear that a partnership . had been formed for th definite purpose of having patented a certain device, for the purpose of ahuHn, In 4Um nrAflti tha naetnrhln could not be terminated at the will of Ml"" RAND KXCTTRSION CHAR Fer further Information anolv ta any ageni tsoutnern Hallway. K. I VBRNON, Traveling Passenger Agent. either partner; and this being established between the plaintiffs and defendants, th latter, without Just cans and lawful ex. euse, and In breach of the partnership WEDNESDAY 17TH. 1908, VIA SEA- uu air i,irK rt, ine Seaboard will nnerata lta grand excursion on June 17th, leaving I A. misers vs. N. 8. Matthewson 1. Contracts Breacn or. Im- V"" general rule, but Is to be regarded aa a cyances, Bights of Vendee, Timber, ooniiB. utn it. nnrnoa. sereement. havlne- nrnfltahlv AtmnammA nl I Charlotte 1:80 a. m.. nrrivlnar Wllmin-. "... uuui a.av p. in. leaving wnnilntrton Friday a. m. Fare for tha rmmrf trt II This will give you two afternoons and nigma at tne neacn, which is more at tractive mis season than ever before all enutnu avail tnemscives of this oppor .miiij iu iiih an owing at so small a tlnuance, Termlnatlon.-A partnership for ""' ror P"mcul."r,.." mI' hllle the accomplishment ot eertaln definite ob- r.?nnl.Ln" w,,.n :,nl" trln on Jects, but not expreasly specifying any jun. 17tn. Far, for tll'e ro)md' tr) " time for lis continuance. Is not a part- Chester will be 13. For further hinrm.. nersnip at win wimin me meaning or tne 1 1'"" can on or aoaress n. uai ria. t. y. A. the device, and refused to account An actionable wrong la don for which plain tiffs could reoover their portion of the profits as 'established by th partnershi agreement. 1. Partnership, Definite Purpose. Con vevsnces. Preventing Cutting. Damages. The de fendar.t in purchasing a tract of timber for the purpose ot preventing me plain tiff from fulfilling hl contract with de fendant' vepdor to cut it Into lumber. Is within his legal rights, snd cannot ne subject to an action for damages on ac count of the profits plaintiff was thereby prevented from making, though the plain tiff was upon the land with his saw milt at the time of thfc purchase, engaged In sswing the lumber. (Hopkins vs. Roys tar. 70 N. C. A01; Jones vs. Stanley, 70 N. C cited and distinguished. f. Rama. An executory contract to saw timber int-t lumber Is in the natur of an emplovnu-nt, and carries with It no In terest In the timber, auch ss a covenant te run with the land. Therefore, for a breach ot such contract, an action for damages will not lis against a vendee hi bought . with knowledge, cut only gainst the vendor. I. Injunctions. Timber, Agents and Em ployes. An Injunction against n, his sgents and employes, from cutting cer tain timber. Is operative against B, who claimed the right to cut It under a con tract with 8, upon whose title th eon tract was made. 4. Evidence. Actionable Wrong, Facts. Mere Calling Conduct Unlawful. When th recovery In an action depends upon th question of defendant's unlawful In terference with plaintiff's legal right. It will have to be established. The mere calling the defendant's conduct unlawful does not so extabllsh It. partnership to continue until Its purpose Is accomplished, or tha Impracticability I thereof Is demonstrated. D. D. Wagner vs. Atlantlo Coast Line Railroad Company. 1. Railroads, Negligence. Passenger, In vitation to Alight, Platform, Warnings, Contributory Negligence. It Is prima facie negligence for a passenger to volun tarily ride on the platform of a rapidly moving train; and while he haa th right to presume that th next stop mad af ter a station la called Is at that station. th defendant Is not liable In damage for his stepping from th train on a dark night under suoh circumstances, whereby Raleigh. N. d. JAMK8 KRR, JR., C. P. A., Charlotte, N. C. REDUCED RATES VIA SEABOARD ACCOUNT SPECIAL OCCASIONS. BIRMINGHAM, AUA.-Account ot Con federate Veterans" Reunion, June th. 11th, tickets will be sold June th, 7th and Ith, with final return limit June loth, round trip rates from Charlotte MM, Durham $11.96, Maxton 110 M Raleigh 111.05, Wadesboro 19 (0, Shelby .30, Lincolnton 8.M. Weldon tt3 94 Wllmlagton tll.SO. Stop overs will hi allowed at Athena, Atlanta, Cedar town, and Boyden Springs, and low round trip aide trip will be sold to various points ot Interest in th vicin ity of Birmingham. . th Injury was Incurred, when, by being CENVER, COL. Account of Democratic oa the platform, he was prevented from National Convention July 7th. 'selling hearing th conductor call out that th "''" .1 - ""wgea win station had not yet been reached, and for CHARLOTTE. N. C.-Aecount of Demo- N.-",!?- N.ni "" Nw Tort aad "W Urleana Lmli-j 'r leeplng cars. Observation and club cars. New York tO New Orleans. nr. .In. avoora slseper. New Tork te Atlanta. Solid ruimiaii train. Dining car service. P. m.. NO. 11 ilallv A ,1.... and local point. 4:00 D. m.. No. Iff Am 11. i v anu mem poime ' i : p. m.. No. 41. dalty. except Ounday, ana local nointa. : p m.. No, n. daily, for Columbia and local points. &f2zJi Irt "und-T, vine. Kn-oxvui. .n5 Cha?tVnoS,..r A"1 7: p. m.. No. , daily, for Rlshmond and local polnta. Handles Pullman aleep- r;.-0?"?. ? t0 JVMWt-. J Char lotte to Richmond. p. m.. No. if, daily. New Yor!t and New Orlean. Umlud for Washington and points North. Drawing room sleeper. observation and dub cart to New fork. Dining ear service. Solid Pullman train. po,.n3t.PBonulbN0- fe$iVrS ...per. New TorkUtomN.wTOi flS? tnond to Birmingham. Charlott to At lanu. Day coachea Washington. te New Orleans. Dining ear .ervloe. Ucket offlceNoR South Tryon'.lreeV Vioe Pre., and Gen. Mgr. , . Washington, D. C ' g. H. HARDWICK, P. T U Charlotte, N. a sP T A ITT" XV -aaa. t .If it f Skasf kNd la 1 feftiziEfTH tarn OFOSIC 4. T". , W -if . . CTARLOTTK, V. C A tag Grade CtOeg fot Beautiful suburban , oea- tlon, tv acrea campoa, overtoeklng tbe city! fine building! unlveretty du eated, ezpericnoed , teach rt, . , v- A, B. Xer Coane ea level with the beat eel lego tor meat elective degree coimea. BnccUItteat ' Maala, AH gad Expreaaion 6chooU. ; Ahni Te provide ' broad aad liberal culture for reung woman. ' - Illustrated catalogue eat free en applteatleB. CHAS. B. KXKa, FraatdcBt. "I '.: Capital Btock 9S0.000.M " BFECIAL STJMMER SESSIOIf ; . . BIG REDUCTION to all wh eater la Mar and June. A liberal die- count en either a single or combined course. Position fuerantood backed by written contract. Write for handsome catalogue. It la tree. Ad area. , mEWS BTJoXrTESS COZXKGD, '"' Charlott V. Vot ReJelKb, W. Q, Hattie C. Kylea va. Southern Railway Company. 1. Judgment, Non-suit, Kvldence, How Considered, Questions lor Jury. In con sideration of the question a of non-suit upon the evidom', the courts will accept the evidence In the most favorable light to the plaintiff, end If there I any evi dence, or If different minds csn draw dif ferent conclusions. It Is the duty of th trial Judg to submit th ease to th Jury. 2. Dead Bodies, Unlawful Mutilation. Widow, Right of Art1cn.-When a widow Is living with-her husband at th time of his death, .he has. nothing else appear ing, a right; of action, superior to that of the next of kin, for the unlawful mutila tion ef the remalna ot her deceased hus band 1 Dead Bodies, Quasi Property, Wrong- the passengers to keep their eeata.. 2. Same, Evidenoe, Instructions. When there is evidence that th plaintiff was negligent In his voluntarily riding upon th platform of defendant's train, and on that oecount he could not have heard the warning ef the conductor for pas sengers' to "keep their seats,' etc., and With great care, by a new process, produce flavorings of rare excellence, i - 1 :'a. C. H. OATTtfL T P. A., Ralaigh, K. a JAMES KER, JR., CP. A.. Charlotte, N. C. emtio State Convention June ftth-nn, selling datea and limits will be an nounced later. Excellent double dally service to Charlotte, - leave Raleigh I 10 a, m.. 4:16 o. m.. arrive Charim,. . n . ., .a C :aw a. m. ana ii;u p. m. ir sufficient number to Justify sleeper from Raleigh to Charlotte will be run on night train of June 23rd, Write undersigned for in consequence he stepped from th train CHICAGO. ILL.-Aecount National Re. on a dark night, and was mjurad, u wa publican Convention, rates will he error in th court t below to omit thla announced later, direct doubt daily Phase In his Instructions to th Jury in I ervlcyla.B,'"br Ll,J3jr v, Atlan- hls charge upon the llabllltl. arising r ,Stlon rJgardlng ratea. viousiy been eaued, ana tne rigni or plaintiff to act upon the assumption that the next stop wa hi destination S. flame Aa Instruction - baaed upon the evidence aa to defendant' having placed the notices In the car warning passengers from riding on th platform. Revlsal. 2C2S, which leave out an inde pendent defenae,- that by ae doing th plaintiff wa prevented from hearing a warning called out In the coach. Is er roneous. . : t Evidence, Burden of Proof, Admls slons. Instructions, Isaacs. While - the nuroen or tne issue is upon in oeienaam setting vp contributory negligence ss a defense. It waa error in the court below to so Instruct the Jury when plaintiff evidence eatabllahe negligence on his part. The auction becomes one of proxi mate cause alone, when tbeTt la evtdeoc Charlotte, N. C, May XI d, I0. National Republican Convention, Chicago, III., Juno 18 th, 10. Southern Railway - aanouncea the following round-trip rates for . the above occasion: : Ooldsboro... . i..,.,. .127.10 Selma,i', ai, t, 2C.4B Raleigh., ... . ,.. 25. U Durham,.., 24.70 Greensboro..- .;,... 24.10 High Point..,. ... ..... 24.60 Ballsbury. . . ,34.50 Charlotte.. .... ..... 26.11 Hickory.... 24. E0 Ashevllle.. ... .... ... ... 22.90 Approximately low ratea from other points. " Putlmaa berth rate from Raleigh tC.OO; Durham . 00: Oreensboro 15. SO; Salisbury fS.OOz Aahevllle t4.se. . - Ticket will he sold June 1 1th to llth, Inclusive, good- to leave Chicago returning not later than June loth, l0t. - , ' The Southern Railway has been elected as th official rout for the delegates, via Aahevllle, Knoxrllle and Harrlman Junction, la connec tion wiyi the C. 1L A D. from Cincin nati to Chicago. Through Pullman car to be handled on train 111. leav ing . Raleigh at I a. m. Saturday, June lath. Thla'traln leave Oreens boro at t;2S a, m. sam date. Those desiring Pullman reierv.Uon will pleas notify me. i . U VERNOW, X. J. A. - I . . ; Charlotte, N. a , SEABOARD These arrivals And dADsa Tl llfaia a a. a the time and connection with other opmpanlea, are gi,n only as tarerSl! tirtn tinti are nn rtiaeesif..A . "" Direct line to the prinolpei cltle North. cast, eouin ana hduiuvhi ci..... I.liln, s(Yt ln.ll l iih in, r. . - m, vvai auojeoc M change without notice. Tickets for passsee en aft -- ... old by thl company and accepted by tha paasenger with th underetandlng tha! this company will not be responsible til failure to run Its trains on scKSJ S'!,0 or for any such delay as mav hi i.-Ti. to their operation. Care is exerc sed tl give correct time of connecting Unes but this company ia not responaioli for eSI rors or omission. ,w Trains leave Charlotte as follow' eto. u, oau. at t w a. ni for Vf os roe. Hamletand Wltmlngten, eonoecttiie atMonrp. With for AtlaiHarBlrafng! ham andthe bouthweet; with ib wr Jftal. oigh, Wsldon and Portsmouth, vltit Mat Haml.t jor Raleigh, Riehmonl VtLhi in g ton. New Tork. No. 123. dally, at 0:60 a. m.. for Lin colnton. Shelby and Ruthertordton with, out change. , , . .w"a No. 44, dally, at (:00 p. m., for Monroe Hamlet, Wilmington and all IcKrapoint!: connecting at Hamlet with it v-r Coum. hie. Savannah and an Florida points, and No. M for Rslefgh. Richmond. Washington and New York. "'0' No. IK. dally. 7:00 p, m.. for Monnta connecting with 41 for Atlanta.' ham and th Southwest with train it t Hamlet ,. for f Richmond, Washington and New , Tork. With U at Monro. fo, HalelgN .Pontsmo uth and Norfolk. Through sleeper on th It train from thar fott. N. a. to Portsmouth, Va.. dally. Trains arrive In Charlott as foiiowst No. US, 0:00 a. m., daily, from pout North enq ouin. Presbyterian College for Vomen CIHARLOTTE, N. C.' - ; The 51st session of this old and well established school, will begin September 3d, 1908. ; Without making loud claims we point to tha work of one-half century. For catalogue address KEY. J. E. BRIDQES, President : tmrtmrrrtHHti H4 1 M twgTtUlTi Jj No. 4S. daiiv, 12 M nv. from Wllmlng. ton and all local polnta. it!, dally. 7:00 p. m.. from Rntv... fordton, enniuji unwnuiB. ana v et 14, W. Hallway points. . . . No. . 1130 P- m., dally, from Wllmlng. -m tiamlat and - Monroe; alaa fenm point Kt. North and Southwest, con necting st Hamlet and Monroe. Connections are meae at rtamlet with through train for polnta North. Bcuth nd South west, which ate composed ef VestlDUie ua j .-uasun uoi.Fii roni mmitli and Atlanta, and Washington an Jackaonville, nd sleeping car betweia jersey VlWi Diinimiuini w, niyail. , , ' AmerlaM us more leo than any other people. ' -.The Importane of ft pur Ice cannot b J overestimated. For pur. Ice and be.t quality Coal, 'phono y ; Standard Ice & FaelQomp'y f and Jenser City Jacksonville. Cai . u r- ah an inrouin trains. fur information. - time-tables, reserta- iinn. or Seaboard deaertetlve Iltoralnra apply to ticket, asenta or aonreaa: PP JAM KER. JR. C Tf. JL, tS Selwyn Hotel. Charlotte. N. C NORrOLK 4k WESTEMf RAILTTAT .' Schedule In effect Mar lTth. 1901. 10: am Lv Charlotte, 8o. Ry, Ar :Wpm I WpmLv W inston. N. W.Ar t:00pm T:SpmAr itoenoae, Vw 1:10 am fVinnect at Roeaoke via Bhana4w Vaiiey Route for Hagerstown, end all Plnt In Pennsylvania and Stw Tork. ullman sleeper, Roanok gad PtuUedefe lorougu w.ci , viiariviia noanog. dditlonal train 4eaves Winston 7.J0 a. m daily exceDt aunoar. U you ar thinking ef talcing a trt yi. want qtinisunns, cheanest rates. -r liable and correct information, as te route, train achedules, th most Oonv fortable and quickest, way. Writ and tbe Information is yours for the asking. W ama nl Ail . t . Sav. Paae A W, B. BSVILT Oen'l Pas. AgeaC ClTDElt lTSW UAXAQVMJSSTt " ' . GBLVSYN - ETIROPlCAIf AKD AMETUCAif. European, fl.lB pr day and pp. American, tt.00 par Cap u( . Caf epen dg-y and night , . Prlceo reaeonable.. ' V ' - "odern and Lunrlant Hotel fa tho Oerollnae. 184) EXEGAJTT ROOMS. fft PRIVATE BATHS. ' Located la tho hrt ef charlotte, convenient to . railroad atatlom, street car and tha attain aad ahoppinf eentre. Ctr to high, class commercial and tourist trade to t iV h0t dl,,,,r 9:1. 'Ifftala evsry evnlneT : EDOAB B, MOORb' . . V . iipr4eto WARM; DAYS AND TIRESOME NIGHTS make the' traveling man slad to tret where good things to eat, comfortable !eds and , genial hospitality are to Ve found all this is awaiting you at -- . . ' MOTEL. QLIZ&; IT 1 - vAjnettoaa and Eeropeaa. L'-:-':: ; i aat Step Beyond th Radon, Grcoufcoro, V O, V" Avaueaa, , -
The Charlotte Observer (Charlotte, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
June 8, 1908, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75