
    Francis J. Barry, Appellant, v. Union Traction Company.
    
      Negligence — Street railways — Alighting from street car — Nonsuit.
    In an action against a street railway company to recover damages for personal injuries, a nonsuit is properly entered where the plaintiff testifies-that at the time of the accident he was a passenger on one of defendant’s, cars; that he stood with one foot oh the lower step and one on the platform of the car, with articles in both hands, and that while in this position, crowded between two men, he fell from the car while it was passing in its mere ordinary motion. .
    Argued Jan. 19, 1900.
    Appeal, No. 344, Jan. T., 1899, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., March T., 1898, No. 251, refusing to take off nonsuit.
    Before Green, C. J., Mitchell, Dean, Pell, Brown and Mestrezat, J J.
    Affirmed.
    Trespass for personal injuries. Before Biddle, P. J.
    At the trial it appeared that plaintiff was injured on November 21, 1896, while a passenger on one of defendant’s cars.
    The plaintiff described the accident as follows:
    
      February 5, 1900:
    “ A. After the car left Fifth street going down Lehigh avenue, I said, ‘ Stop at Fourth street, please,’ and he stopped and I was attempting to get off one side, and there was a lady getting off and two men on the other, and I stepped to the lower step and I said, ‘ Please let me off,’ and they would not move — Q. Two men on the lower step ? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you said to them, ‘Let me off?’ A. Yes, sir, after the conductor stopped the car. While I was trying to push through these two men the conductor started the car, and it was a short square, and we were down near Orianna street, and he seen the position I was in and he said, ‘ Did you want to get off at Fourth street ? ’ and I said, ‘ Yes, stop at Third street now.’ And when we were going across Third street the jolt of the car threw me right out.”
    He also further testified that he'had articles in both hands, and that the car was going in its ordinary motion.
    The court entered a compulsory nonsuit -which it subsequently refused to take off. Plaintiff appealed.
    
      Error assigned was the refusal of the court to take off the nonsuit.
    
      A. S. Ashbridge, Jr., for appellant,
    cited, Fairmount & Arch Street Pass. Ry. Co. v. Stutler, 54 Pa. 375; Lynch v. Pitts-burg Traction Co., 153 Pa. 102.
    
      William Henry Lex and Thomas Leaming, for appellee,
    were not heard.
   Per Curiam,

The plaintiff did not get off the car at Fourth street, and it was not there that the accident occurred for which this action was brought. He says that he had articles in both hands, and that he stood with one foot on the lower step and one on the platform while passing from Fourth street to Third street, and that, while in this position, and crowded between two men, he fell from the car while it was passing in its mere ordinary motion. He was asked, “ Q„ The car proceeding in the usual way and jolting as it went over Third street ? A, Yes, sir. Q. It was the usual progress of the car as it crossed another street, over a railroad track? A. Yes, sir, a jolt.” Of course there was no proof of any negligence in this on the part of the defendant, and the court very properly entered a compulsory nonsuit.

Judgment affirmed.  