Page:The unhallowed harvest (1917).djvu/19

14 the friction brake on it the engineer could have controlled it, and the only rational conclusion is that, instead of doing so, he carelessly let it drop with resultant consequences to this plaintiff which are not to be visited on the employer. This is one of those regrettable industrial accidents for which, in the present state of our laws, there appears to be no remedy in the way of compensation for injuries received.

"While the plaintiff is not charged with any contributory negligence, and while he has our undoubted sympathy, we cannot permit him to recover against a party that clearly has not been at fault. You will, therefore, in the case of John Bradley against the Malleson Manufacturing Company, render a verdict in favor of the defendant. It will not be necessary for you to leave the box. Mr. Gaylord," to the prothonotary of the court, "you will please take the verdict of the jury."

But before the prothonotary could get to his feet, Juror No. 7, sitting first in the front row, arose and addressed the court.

"Do I understand your Honor to say," he inquired, "that the jury has no right to decide whether or not Mr. Bradley is entitled to damages?"

"No right whatever," replied the judge. "In this case the law governs that question, and the law is exclusively for the court."

"But," persisted the juror, "it seems to me that the jury ought to decide, as a matter of fact, whether this company is responsible for Mr. Bradley's injuries."

The judge responded somewhat tartly:

"We have already explained to you that, in our opinion, the plaintiff has not made out a prima facie case. If we are in error he has his remedy by appeal." And he gathered up the papers lying in front of him as though he had made an end of the matter.

But Juror No. 7 was not yet satisfied.

"It takes time and costs money to appeal," he said.