
    Henry Tozer, an Infant, Resp't, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, App'lt.
    
    
      (Court of Appeals,
    
    
      Filed April 26, 1887.)
    
    Appeal—General objection to evidence.
    Although the objection to the admission of evidence is general, it will be held sufficient on appeal if the evidence related to speculative and. conjectural possible future consequences which might be apprehended from an injury, and as to how long after the injury such consequences, might be developed.
    
      George C. Greene, for app’lt Myron H. Peck, Jr., for resp’t.
    
      
       See 6 N. Y. State Rep., 447.
    
   Prr Curiam.

In deciding upon the appeal in this case, it did not escape our attention that the objections to the admission of the evidence which we held to be imcompetent were general. That point was discussed in consultation, but we considered that the evidence was in its nature inadmissible, as it related to speculative and conjectural possible future consequences which might be apprehended from the injury, and how long after the injury such consequences might be developed. The course of the examination shows that the ground of the objections could not have-been misunderstood, and, if it had been specified, the objection could not have been obviated.

Motion denied, with costs.

All concur.  