Summary

Ward Hunt Railroad Company v. Gladmon — Opinion of the Court

Thus, if a carriage be driven furiously through a crowded throughfare, and a person is run over, he would not be obliged to prove that he was cautious and attentive, and he might recover, though there were no witnesses of his actual conduct. The natural instinct of self-preservation would stand in the place of positive evidence, and the dangerous tendency of the defendant's conduct would create so strong a probability that the injury happened through his fault that no other evidence would be required.
Source: Wikisource

Ward Hunt Railroad Company v. Gladmon — Opinion of the Court

The rule of law in regard to the negligence of an adult, and the rule in regard to that of an infant of tender years is quite different. By the adult there must be given that care and attention for his own protection that is ordinarily exercised by persons of intelligence and discretion. If he fails to give it, his injury is the result of his own folly, and cannot be visited upon another. Of an infant of tender years less discretion is required, and the degree depends upon his age and knowledge.
Source: Wikisource

Ward Hunt Railroad Company v. Gladmon — Opinion of the Court

It is not contemplated by law, under the authority of their creation, that they occupy the thoroughfares of Washington and Georgetown, to the exclusion of an occupation, the right of the citizens of the cities to do so-an easement that belongs to all men, women, and children of all grades of intelligence and circumspection, from the lowest grade of description to the highest.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature