This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1892 edition. Excerpt: ...was then being constructed, fell upon him as he was passing under the archway, and greatly crushed, hurt, wounded, injured and damaged him, etc. At the trial there was verdict for the plaintifi, leave being reserved to defendant to move to enter a nonsuit if the court should be of opinion that the action would not lie. A rule mlsi having been obtained, it was held, substantially, that in an action for negligence there is no distinction between injuries arising from the careless and unskillful management of an animal or other personal chattels, and an injury resulting from the negligent management of real property, unless, perhaps, where the act complained of is such as to amount to a nuisance; therefore, where a company empowered to make a railroad, contracted under seal with others to make and complete a portion of the line, and it was agreed that the work should be done by the contractors, and that the company should have a general right of watching the progress, and, if the contractors employed incompetent workmen, of dismissing them, and during the progress of the works the workmen, through negligence, caused the death of a person passing along the public highway, the company is not liable in an action for the death of such person, under the Statute.' 260. Injuries--Cr0ssing Railroad Track-Negligence and Contributory Ncgligence.--An important case came before the court of Maryland the second time, for injuries received by plaintifi in attempting to cross the railroad track, being unable to extricate himself from his dangerous and perilous position. This was a question of negligence on the part of the defendant, and of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintifi, the facts of the case being somewhat uncertain. The...