The Humourous Story of Farmer Bumpkin's Lawsuit

Nonfiction, Religion & Spirituality, New Age, History, Fiction & Literature
Cover of the book The Humourous Story of Farmer Bumpkin's Lawsuit by Richard Harris, Library of Alexandria
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: Richard Harris ISBN: 9781613103500
Publisher: Library of Alexandria Publication: July 29, 2009
Imprint: Library of Alexandria Language: English
Author: Richard Harris
ISBN: 9781613103500
Publisher: Library of Alexandria
Publication: July 29, 2009
Imprint: Library of Alexandria
Language: English
Considering the enormous interest which the Public have in “a more efficient and speedy administration of justice,” I am not surprised that a Second Edition of “Mr. Bumpkins Lawsuit” should be called for so soon after the publication of the first. If any proof were wanting that I had not overstated the evils attendant on the present system, it would be found in the case of Smitherman v. The South Eastern Railway Company, which came before the House of Lords recently; and judgment in which was delivered on the 16th of July, 1883. The facts of the case were extremely simple, and were as follow:—A man of the name of Smitherman was killed on a level crossing of the South Eastern Railway Company at East Farleigh, in December, 1878. His widow, on behalf of herself and four children, brought an action against the Company on the ground of negligence on the part of the defendants. The case in due course was tried at the Maidstone Assizes, and the plaintiff obtained a verdict for £400 for herself and £125 for each of the children. A rule for a new trial was granted by the Divisional Court: the rule for the new trial was discharged by the Court of Appeal. The Lords reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal, and ordered a new trial. New trial took place at Guildhall, City of London, before Mr. Baron Pollock; jury again found for the plaintiff, with £700 agreed damages: Company thereby saving £200. Once more rule for new trial granted by Divisional Court: once more rule discharged by Court of Appeal: once more House of Lords reverse decision of Court of Appeal, and order second new trial. So that after more than four years of harassing litigation, this poor widow and her children are left in the same position that they were in immediately after the accident—except that they are so much the worse as being liable for an amount of costs which need not be calculated. The case was tried by competent judges and special juries; and yet, by the subtleties of the doctrine of contributory negligence, questions of such extreme nicety are raised that a third jury are required to give an opinion upon the same state of facts upon which two juries have already decided in favour of the plaintiff and her children. Such is the power placed by our complicated, bewildering, and inartistic mode of procedure, in the hands of a rich Company. No one can call in question the wisdom or the learning of the House of Lords: it is above criticism, and beyond censure; but the House of Lords itself works upon the basis of our system of Procedure, and as that is neither beyond criticism nor censure, I unhesitatingly ask, Can Old Fogeyism and Pettifoggism Further go? Lamb Building, Temple
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Considering the enormous interest which the Public have in “a more efficient and speedy administration of justice,” I am not surprised that a Second Edition of “Mr. Bumpkins Lawsuit” should be called for so soon after the publication of the first. If any proof were wanting that I had not overstated the evils attendant on the present system, it would be found in the case of Smitherman v. The South Eastern Railway Company, which came before the House of Lords recently; and judgment in which was delivered on the 16th of July, 1883. The facts of the case were extremely simple, and were as follow:—A man of the name of Smitherman was killed on a level crossing of the South Eastern Railway Company at East Farleigh, in December, 1878. His widow, on behalf of herself and four children, brought an action against the Company on the ground of negligence on the part of the defendants. The case in due course was tried at the Maidstone Assizes, and the plaintiff obtained a verdict for £400 for herself and £125 for each of the children. A rule for a new trial was granted by the Divisional Court: the rule for the new trial was discharged by the Court of Appeal. The Lords reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal, and ordered a new trial. New trial took place at Guildhall, City of London, before Mr. Baron Pollock; jury again found for the plaintiff, with £700 agreed damages: Company thereby saving £200. Once more rule for new trial granted by Divisional Court: once more rule discharged by Court of Appeal: once more House of Lords reverse decision of Court of Appeal, and order second new trial. So that after more than four years of harassing litigation, this poor widow and her children are left in the same position that they were in immediately after the accident—except that they are so much the worse as being liable for an amount of costs which need not be calculated. The case was tried by competent judges and special juries; and yet, by the subtleties of the doctrine of contributory negligence, questions of such extreme nicety are raised that a third jury are required to give an opinion upon the same state of facts upon which two juries have already decided in favour of the plaintiff and her children. Such is the power placed by our complicated, bewildering, and inartistic mode of procedure, in the hands of a rich Company. No one can call in question the wisdom or the learning of the House of Lords: it is above criticism, and beyond censure; but the House of Lords itself works upon the basis of our system of Procedure, and as that is neither beyond criticism nor censure, I unhesitatingly ask, Can Old Fogeyism and Pettifoggism Further go? Lamb Building, Temple

More books from Library of Alexandria

Cover of the book The History of the Last Trial by Jury for Atheism in England a Fragment of Autobiography Submitted for the Perusal of Her Majesty's Attorney-General and the British Clergy by Richard Harris
Cover of the book Trial of The Witnesses of The Resurrection of Jesus by Richard Harris
Cover of the book Mysterious Psychic Forces: An Account of The Author's investigations in Psychical Research Together with Those of Other European Savants by Richard Harris
Cover of the book The Youth of the Great Elector by Richard Harris
Cover of the book The Freedmen's Book by Richard Harris
Cover of the book The Mother of Washington and Her Times by Richard Harris
Cover of the book On Something by Richard Harris
Cover of the book A Narrative of Some of the Lord's Dealings with George Müller Written by Himself (Complete) by Richard Harris
Cover of the book The Belief in Immortality and the Worship of the Dead: the Belief Among the Aborigines of Australia, the Torres Straits Islands, New Guinea and Melanesia (Complete) by Richard Harris
Cover of the book Walks in Rome by Richard Harris
Cover of the book Über die Vulkane im Monde, Was heißt: sich im Denken orientieren? Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung? Von der Macht des Gemüts, durch den bloßen Vorsatz seiner krankhaften Gefühle Meister zu sein, Träume eines Geistersehers, erläutert durch T by Richard Harris
Cover of the book The Memoirs of Charles-Lewis, Baron De Pollnitz (Complete) Being the Observations He Made in His Late Travels From Prussia Thro' Germany, Italy, France, Flanders, Holland, England In Letters by Richard Harris
Cover of the book To Alaska for Gold: The Fortune Hunters of the Yukon by Richard Harris
Cover of the book Davenport Dunn: A Man of Our Day (Complete) by Richard Harris
Cover of the book Sadi's Scroll of Wisdom by Richard Harris
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy