An Index-digest of Decisions Under the Federal Safety Appliance Acts: Act of March 2, 1893, 27 Stat. L., 531, as Amended by Act of April 1, 1896, 29 Stat. L., 85, and Act of March 2, 1903, 32 Stat. L., 943; Together with Relevant Excerpts from Other Cases in which the Acts Have Been ConstruedOtis Beall Kent |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
Act applies Act of Congress actions under Act alleged amended Appendix assumption of risk Atchison Atlantic Rep automatic couplers automatically by impact Baltimore & O. R. brakes Chicago Junction Circuit Court Circuit Judges clevis pin common carrier coupling and uncoupling Court of Appeals criminal D. J. charging jury defective car defective condition DEVANTER District of California District of Iowa District of Ohio District of Pennsylvania drawbars duty Eastern Division Eighth Circuit employees ENDS OF CARS engaged in interstate engine fact February 24 grab-iron or handhold GROSSCUP inoperative inspection interstate cars interstate commerce Interstate Commerce Commission June June 16 lever liable locomotive March March 17 moving interstate traffic Northern District November November 27 penalty plaintiff rail railroad company railway company reasonable repair point Safety Appliance Act SANBORN Southern Pacific Southern Pacific Co statute Supreme Court testified testimony United States attorney unlawful verdict violation Western District witnesses
Popular passages
Page 229 - Automatic •1 ~ couplers. eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, it shall be unlawful for any such common carrier to haul or permit to be hauled or used on its line any car used in moving interstate traffic not equipped with couplers coupling automatically by impact, and which can be uncoupled without the necessity of men going between the ends of the cars.
Page 231 - An Act to promote the safety of employees and travelers upon railroads by compelling common carriers engaged in interstate commerce to equip their cars with automatic couplers and continuous brakes and their locomotives with driving-wheel brakes, and for other purposes," approved March second, eighteen hundred and ninety-three, and amended April first, eighteen hundred and ninety-six.
Page 94 - ... such violation, to be recovered in a suit or suits to be brought by the United States district attorney in the district court of the United States having jurisdiction in the locality where such violation shall have been committed...
Page 231 - SEC. 8. That any employee of any such common carrier who may be injured by any locomotive, car, or train in use contrary to the provision of this act shall not be deemed thereby to have assumed the risk thereby occasioned, although continuing in the employment of such carrier after the unlawful use of such locomotive, car, or train had been brought to his knowledge.
Page 229 - ... any cars not equipped sufficiently, in accordance with the first section of this act, with such power or train brakes as will work and readily interchange with the brakes in use on its own cars, as required by this act.
Page 157 - The primary object of the act was to. promote the public welfare by securing the safety of employees and travelers; and it was in that aspect remedial; while for violations a penalty of $100, recoverable in a civil action, was provided for, and in that aspect it was penal. But the design to give relief was more dominant than to inflict punishment, and the act might well be...
Page 142 - ... the provisions and requirements hereof and of said Acts relating to train brakes, automatic couplers, grab irons, and the height of drawbars shall be held to apply to all trains, locomotives, tenders, cars, and similar vehicles used on any railroad engaged in interstate commerce...
Page 68 - The transportation of passengers or property wholly by railroad, or partly by railroad and partly by water when both are used under a common control, management, or arrangement for a continuous carriage or shipment...
Page 54 - Appeals, which limits the second section to merely providing automatic couplers, does not give due effect to the words "coupling automatically by impact, and which can be uncoupled without the necessity of men going between the cars," and cannot be sustained. We dismiss as without merit the suggestion, which has been made, that the words "without the necessity of men going between the ends of the cars," which are the test of compliance with section two, apply only to the act of uncoupling.
Page 23 - Apart from the notion of contract rather shadowy as applied to this broad form of the latter conception, the practical difference of the two ideas is in the degree of their proximity to the particular harm. The preliminary conduct of getting into the dangerous employment or relation is said to be accompanied by assumption of the risk, the act more immediately leading to a specific accident is called negligence, but the difference between the two is one of degree rather than of kind...