
    City of Natchez v. Catharine H. S. Shields.
    Municipality. Defective street. LiabiMty. Notice.
    
    A municipality is liable for an injury suffered by the occupant of a carriag-e because of defects in its street of which it had due notice.
    From the circuit court of Adams county.
    Hon. W. P. Cassedy, Judge.
    The facts are stated in the opinion.
    
      Mayes dc Harris, for appellant.
    It was error in the court below to admit testimony in respect to the general condition of the street railway track, and in respect to specific instances of defects in the track in other places than that of the accident; and also to give instructions to the jury turning upon that sort of testimony. The question in this case is specific; that is to say, was or was not the plaintiff injured by a certain defect in the street ? If so, was the city chargeable with knowledge of the existence of that particular defect and under obligation to repair it ? The plaintiff was not injured by the general condition of the railway track, nor was she injured by the particular defects at other places than the scene of the accident. The question before the court was not one of habit. It was not one of continuous negligence. But the question was specific and single. See Richards v. Osleosh, 81 Wis., 226; DuBois v. Kmgston, 102 N. Y., 219; Golli/ns v. Dorchester, 6 Cush., 396; Phillips v. Willow, 70 Wis., 6; Matthews v. Gedar Rapids, 80 la., 459; Kidder v. Dunstable, 11 Gray, 342; Parleer v. Publishing Go., 69 Me., 173; Elliot on Roads and Streets, 463, 646; Hencleley v. Barnstable, 109 Mass., 126; Railway Go. v. Gilbert, 46 Mich., 176; McGuire v. Railway, 115 Mass., 239.
    
      
      Martvn c§ Cornier and W. T. Martin, for appellee.
    The reporter does not find a brief for appellee on file.
   Stockdale, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

At the November, 1896, term of the Adams county circuit court, judgment was rendered in this case for plaintiff in the sum of $1,500, on the verdict of a jury, a motion for a new trial overruled, and defendant appealed here.

Miss Catharine H. S. Shields sued by her next friend, J. Surget Shields, the city of Natchez for injuries received by her and inflicted upon her person as the result of the negligence of the city in allowing a street railroad to be and remain out of repair and in an unsafe condition. The record show's that in April, 1896, the appellee, a young lady in her fourteenth year, was riding into the city of Natchez in her mother’s carriage, and, when crossing one of the street railways of appellant, one of the rails of the railway caught in the w'heel of the carriage and suddenly and abruptly precipitated Miss Shields forward against and upon the iron guard around the back of the front seat of the carriage, by which she was injured so severely that she suffered agonizing pain for a week or ten days, and was confined to her bed for five or six weeks, and still suffers pain occasionally. It is abundantly established by the proof that the railroad track was defective and out of repair. The very rail that caused the accident, and consequent injury to the young lady, had been loose for weeks, and while it had been spiked down once or twice, it was a fiat piece of iron laid on timbers which would not hold the spikes, and the city authorities had knowledge of the condition of this road and track. The mayor of the city himself testified that frequent complaints had been made to him of the bad condition of the track, and he had ordered the proper officer to look after it and see that it was repaired and the defects remedied. We have no fault to find with the verdict, and do not find in the record any reason to disturb the finding of the jury. The judgment of the court below is affirmed.  