pile of furnace ashes which have for months been cold and devoid of danger, cannot make an excavation therein and fill it with hot ashes, leaving no traces of the change, without either giving proper notice thereof or answering in damages if children of tender years, in attempting to go upon the ash pile, as usual, get into the hot ashes and are injured.19 Similarly it has been held that a corporation is liable to a child who sustains injury by falling into a steam pit which it maintains under a wooden pathway which the public is accustomed to use, where it permits a hole to remain in the covering, large enough for persons to fall through and obscured from general observation by the steam emerging through the cracks.20 And a peril to which children of extreme youth are exposed may be ground for recovery, when with those of more advanced years a nonsuit would be proper. Thus, where a child four years old fell into a street gutter containing hot water which had flowed from the defendant's plant, and was painfully burned, the court held the defendant to be liable on proof that the water and steam attracted the curiosity of the children of the vicinity, and that the defendant's watchman at the gutter left his post before the accident happened to the child. The location of the offending instrumentality, however, is of paramount importance in determining liability in this class of cases. It has been held that one who maintains an ash dump on his own property remote from a thoroughfare is not liable for injuries to a child, aged only three years, who strays from adjoining property through a broken fence and is burned in the hot ashes, where he has no reason to anticipate the presence of a child there, although he takes no precautions to prevent such accidents.* 85. Waters.-Ponds, pools, lakes, streams, and other waters embody perils that are deemed to be obvious to children of the tenderest years; and as a general proposition no liability attaches to the proprietor by reason of death resulting therefrom 6 to children who 19. Penso v. McCormick, 125 Ind. 116, 25 N. E. 156, 21 A. S. R. 211, 9 L.R.A. 313. 20. Brinilson v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 144 Wis. 614, 129 N. W. 661, 32 L.R.A. (N.S.) 359. 1. Mergenthaler v. Kirby, 79 Md. 182, 28 Atl. 1065, 45 A. S. R. 371. See supra, par. 77. 2. Palermo v. Orleans Ice Mfg. Co., 130 La. 833, 58 So. 589, 40 L.R.A. (N.S.) 671. City Distilling Co., 90 Mo. 284, 1 S. 5. Schmidt v. Kansas City Distilling Co., 90 Mo. 284, 1 S. W. 865, 2 S. W. 417, 59 Am. Rep. 16. 6. Brinkley Car Co. v. Cooper, 60 Ark. 545, 31 S. W. 154, 46 A. S. R. 216; Sullivan v. Huidekoper, 27 App. Cas. (D. C.) 154, 7 Ann. Cas. 196 and note, 5 L.R.A. (N.S.) 263; Heimann v. Kinnare, 190 Ill. 156, 60 N. E. 215, 83 A. S. R. 123, 52 L.R.A. 652; Schauf 3. See supra, par. 75. v. Paducah, 106 Ky. 228, 50 S. W. 4. Fitzmaurice v. Connecticut R., 42, 90 A. S. R. 220; Stendal v. etc., Co., 78 Conn. 406, 62 Atl. 620, Boyd, 73 Minn. 53, 75 N. W. 735, 72 112 A. S. R. 159, 3 L.R.A. (N.S.) 149. A. S. R. 597, 42 L.R.A. 288; ThompTo like effect see Schmidt v. Kansas son v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 105 Miss. have come upon the land to bathe, skate, or play. In a recent case the court said: "That a pond of water is attractive to boys for the purposes of play, swimming, and fishing no one will deny. But its being an attractive agency is not sufficient to subject the owner to liability. It must be an agency such as is likely, or will probably, result in injury to those attracted to it. That many boys every year lose their lives by drowning is a matter of common knowledge. But the number of deaths in comparison to the total number of boys that visit ponds, lakes, or streams for purposes of play, swimming, and fishing is comparatively small. It would be extending the doctrine too far to hold that a pond of water is an attractive nuisance, and therefore comes within the turntable cases." 10 Accordingly, a right of recovery has been denied in the case of children eleven,11 ten, 12 nine,13 eight,14 seven,15 six,16 and even five years of age.17 Although, a property owner may know of the habit of children to visit waters upon his premises, he is as a rule under no obligation 122 A. S. R. 503, 11 Ann. Cas. 981, 19 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1136; Cooper v. Overton, 102 Tenn. 211, 52 S. W. 183, 73 A. S. R. 864, 45 L.R.A. 591. 10. Barnhart v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 89 Wash. 304, 154 Pac. 441, L.R.A. 1916D 443. 11. Peters v. Bowman, 115 Cal. 345, 47 Pac. 113, 598, 56 A. S. R. 106. 636, 63 So. 185, 47 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1101 and note; Schmidt v. Kansas City Distilling Co., 90 Mo. 284, 1 S. W. 865, 2 S. W. 417, 59 Am. Rep. 16 and note; Moran v. Pullman Palace Car Co., 134 Mo. 611, 36 S. W. 659, 56 A. S. R. 543, 33 L.R.A. 755; Arnold v. St. Louis, 152 Mo. 173, 53 S. W. 900, 75 A. S. R. 447, 48 L.R.A. 291; Wheeling, etc., R. Co. v. Harvey, 77 Ohio St. 235, 83 N. E. 66, 122 A. S. R. 503, 11 Ann. Cas. 981 and note, 19 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1136; Shawnee v. Cheek, 41 Okia. 227, 137 Pac. 724, Ann. Cas. 1915C 290; Riggle v. Lens, 71 Ore. 125, 142 Pac. 13. Rome v. Cheney, 114 Ga. 194, 39 346, Ann. Cas. 1916C 1083 and note, S. E. 933, 55 L.R.A. 221; Thompson L.R.A. 1915A 150; Gillespie v. Me- v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 105 Miss. 636, Gowen, 100 Pa. St. 144, 45 Am. Rep. 63 So. 185, 47 L.R.Á. (N.S.) 1101; 365; Bottum v. Hawks, 84 Vt. 370, 79 Atl. 858, Ann. Cas. 1913A 1025 and Moran v. Pullman Palace Car Co., 134 Mo. 641, 36 S. W. 659, 56 A. S. R. note, 35 L.R.A. (N.S.) 440. 543, 33 L.R.A. 755. Notes: 49 A. S. R. 423; 54 L.R.A. 284; 19 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1145 et seq.; Ann. Cas. 1915C 289. 7. Moran v. Pullman Palace Car Co., 134 Mo. 641, 36 S. W. 659, 56 A. S. R. 543, 33 L.R.A. 755. 8. Arnold v. St. Louis, 152 Mo. 173, 53 S. W. 900, 75 A. S. R. 447, 48 L.R.A. 291. 9. Thompson v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 105 Miss. 636, 63 So. 185, 47 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1101; Wheeling, etc., R. Co. v. Harvey, 77 Ohio St. 235, 83 N. E. 66, R. C. L. Vol. XX.-7. 97 12. Sullivan v. Huidekoper, 27 App. Cas. (D. C.) 154, 7 Ann. Cas. 196, 5 L.R.A. (N.S.) 263; Cooper v. Overton, 102 Tenn. 211, 52 S. W. 183, 73 A. S. R. 864, 45 L.R.A. 591. 14. Gillespie v. McGowen, 100 Pa. St. 144, 45 Am. Rep. 365; Barnhart v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 89 Wash. 304, 154 Pac. 441, L.R.A.1916D 443. 15. Schauf v. Paducah, 106 Ky. 228, 50 S. W. 42, 90 A. S. R. 220. 16. Brinkley Car Co. v. Cooper, 60 Ark. 545, 31 S. W. 154, 46 A. S. R. 216. 17. Stendal v. Boyd, 73 Minn. 53, 75 N. W. 735, 72 A. S. R. 597, 42 L.R.A. 288. to erect barriers or take other measures to prevent them being injured thereby.18 According to some of the decisions, if a pond or pool is in close proximity to the highway, a recovery may be had for the drowning of a young child who has fallen therein; 19 but the weight of authority appears to hold to the contrary,20 except where the facts bring the case within the rule respecting pitfalls adjacent to highways. And there would seem to be no room to doubt but what a pond on an unfenced city lot, formed by surface water on account. of the damming up of a natural drain therefor, by the dumping of trash and dirt into it by city authorities, without the knowledge of the owner, who did not know of the existence of the pond, will not render him liable for the drowning of a boy while playing on the pond. In the case of wells, cisterns, conduits, sluices, and the like, it is very plain that the rules above stated have only a limited application, if any at all. The danger from such places differs from that embodied by ordinary ponds and pools, inasmuch as the peril of the former often is concealed or not to be appreciated by the childish mind. Consequently, while a drowning in a pond does not, ordinarily, give rise to a right of action, it not infrequently has been held that the drowning of a child in a well, cistern, or the like, constitutes a ground for recovery.3 And it has been held that where a conduit that easily can be guarded is permitted to remain unprotected with knowledge that children resort to it, a recovery is properly allowed. But recent cases hold that the owner of a mill race about which children are accustomed to play because of its attractive character is not bound to protect it to prevent accidents to the 18. Thompson v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 105 Miss. 636, 63 So. 185, 47 L.R.A.(N.S.) 1101; Moran v. Pullman Palace Car Co., 134 Mo. 641, 56 A. S. R. 543, 33 L.R.A. 755; Cooper v. Overton, 102 Tenn. 211, 73 A. S. R. 864, 45 L.R.A. 591. Notes: 7 Ann. Cas. 200; 11 Ann. Cas. 991. 19. Pekin v. McMahon, 154 Ill. 141, 39 N. E. 484, 45 A. S. R. 114, 27 L.R.A. 206; Price v. Atchison Water Co., 58 Kan. 551, 50 Pac. 450, 62 A. S. R. 625; Franks v. Southern Cotton Oil Co., 78 S. C. 10, 58 S. E. 960, 12 L.R.A. (N.S.) 468. Notes: 11 Ann. Cas. 991; Ann. Cas. 1915C 288. 20. Peters v. Bowman, 115 Cal. 345, 47 Pac. 113, 598, 56 A. S. R. 106; Stendal v. Boyd, 73 Minn. 53, 75 N. W. 735, 72 A. S. R. 597, 42 L.R.A. 288; Klix v. Nieman, 68 Wis. 271, 32 N. W. 223, 60 Am. Rep. 854. 1. Klix v. Nieman, 68 Wis. 271, 32 See N. W. 223, 60 Am. Rep. 854. supra, par. 62. 2. Cooper v. Overton, 102 Tenn. 211, 52 S. W. 183, 73 A. S. R. 864, 45 L.R.A. 591. 3. Coeur d'Alene Lumber Co. v. Thompson, 215 Fed. 8, 131 C. C. A. 316, L.R.A.1915A 731; Starling v. Selma Cotton Mills, 168 N. C. 229, 84 S. E. 388, L.R.A.1915D 850. See Savannah, etc., R. Co. v. Beavers, 113 Ga. 398, 39 S. E. 82, 54 L.R.A. 314. Notes: 19 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1144; Ann. Cas. 1915C 290. 4. Brown v. Salt Lake City, 33 Utah 222, 93 Pac. 570, 126 A. S. R. 828, 14 Ann. Cas. 1004, 14 L.R.A. (N.S.) 619. children, and therefore is not liable for the death of a child who falls into it and is drowned.5 86. Excavations.-Like waters, pits and excavations on land embody no dangers that are not readily apparent to everyone, even very young children. For this reason the proprietor is under no obligation, as a rule, to fence or otherwise guard such places," and he will not be liable for injuries to children who may have fallen therein." Nor is the landowner liable for injuries sustained by earth falling into excavations as a result of the embankment being undermined by children. Where, however, excavations are made in the highway, guards or barriers must be erected to protect passers from injury.9 VI. NEGLIGENCE AS DEFENSE TO ACTION Generally 87. Contributory Negligence as Defense at Common Law.-According to the rule of the common law, there can be no recovery for injuries where it appears that the person injured was guilty of contributory negligence, 10 or in other words where the injury was the 5. Riggle v. Lens, 71 Ore. 125, 142 Pac. 346, Ann. Cas. 1916C 1083, L.R.A. 1915A 150; Bottum v. Hawks, 84 Vt. 370, 79 Atl. 858, Ann. Cas. 1913A 1025, 35 L.R.A. (N.S.) 440. See also Rome v. Cheney, 114 Ga. 194, 39 S. E. 933, 55 L.R.A. 221. 6. Savannah, etc., R. Co. v. Beavers, 113 Ga. 398, 39 S. E. 82, 54 L.R.A. 314. 7. Savannah, etc., R. Co. v. Beavers, 113 Ga. 398, 39 S. E. 82, 54 L.R.A. 314. Notes: 54 L.R.A. 284; 19 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1152 et seq.; Ann. Cas. 1915C 288. 8. Note: 19 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1153. 9. Note: Ann. Cas. 1915C 288. HIGHWAYS, vol. 13, pp. 421, 424. See 10. Looney v. Metropolitan R. Co., 200 U. S. 480, 26 S. Ct. 303, 50 U. S. (L. ed.) 564; Tennessee Coal, etc., R. Co. v. Bridges, 144 Ala. 229, 39 So. 902, 113 A. S. R. 35; Kline v. Central Pac. R. Co., 37 Cal. 400, 99 Am. Dec. 282; New York, etc., Min. Syndicate Co. v. Rogers, 11 Colo. 6, 16 Pac. 719, 7 A. S. R. 198; Victor Coal Co. v. Muir, 20 Colo. 320, 38 Pac. 378, 46 A. S. R. 299, 26 L.R.A. 435; Birge v. Garnder, 19 Conn. 507, 50 Am. Dec. 261; Smith wick v. Hall, etc., Co., 59 Conn. 261, 21 Atl. 924, 21 A. S. R. 104, 12 L.R.A. 279; Florida Southern R. Co. v. Hirst, 30 Fla. 1, 11 So. 506, 32 A. S. R. 17, 16 L.R.A. 631; Peoria Bridge Ass'n v. Loomis, 20 Ill. 235, 71 Am. Dec. 263; Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Dewey, 26 Ill. 255, 79 Am. Dec. 374; Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Buckner, 28 Ill. 299, 81 Am. Dec. 282; Sandwich v. Dolan, 133 III. 177, 24 N. E. 526, 23 A. S. R. 598; Lafayette, etc., R. Co. v. Huffman, 28 Ind. 287, 92 Am. Dec. 318; Evans v. Adams Exp. Co., 122 Ind. 362, 23 N. E. 1039, 7 L.R.A. 678 and note; Kinyon v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 118 Ia. 349, 92 N. W. 40, 96 A. S. R. 382; Dyerson v. Union Pac. R. Co., 74 Kan. 528, 87 Pac. 680, 11 Ann. Cas. 207, 7 L.R.A. (N.S.) 132; Fleytas v. Pontchartrain R. Co., 18 La. 339, 36 Am. Dec. 658; Factors, etc., Ins. Co. v. Werlein. 42 La. Ann. 1046, 8 So. 435, 11 L.R.A. 361; Cline v. Crescent City R. Co., 43 La. Ann. 327, 9 So. 122, 26 A. S. R. 187; Buechner v. New Orleans, 112 La. 599, 36 So. 603, 104 A. S. R. 455, 66 L.R.A. 334; Johnson v. Whitefield, 18 Me. 286, 36 Am. Dec. 721; Kennard v. Burton, 25 Me. 39, 43 Am. Dec. 249; Baltimore, etc., R. result of the united,11 mutual,12 concurring,13 and contemporaneous 14 zinger, 92 Tex. 365, 48 S. W. 563, 71 Notes: 91 Am. Dec. 464; 4 L.R.A. 439; 12 L.R.A. 279; Ann. Cas. 1913C 570; 19 Eng. Rul. Cas. 202. Co. v. Breinig, 25 Md. 378, 90 Am. Dec. 49; Northern Cent. R. Co. v. State, 31 Md. 357, 100 Am. Dec. 69; Smith v. Smith, 2 Pick. (Mass.) 621, 13 Am. Dec. 464; Heland v. Lowell, 3 Allen (Mass.) 407, 81 Am. Dec. 670; Parker v. Adams, 12 Metc. (Mass.) 415, 46 Am. Dec. 694; Simmons v. New Bedford, etc., Steamboat Co., 97 Mass. 361, 93 Am. Dec. 99; Gaynor v. Old Colony, etc., R. Co., 100 Mass. 208, 97 Am. Dec. 96; Murphy v. Deane, 101 Mass. 455, 3 Am. Rep. 390; Gordon v. Cummings, 152 Mass. 513, 25 N. E. 978, 23 A. S. R. 846, 9 L.R.A. 640 and note; Brown v. Gilchrist, 80 Mich. 56. 45 N. W. 82, 20 A. S. R. 496; Carroll v. Minnesota Val. R. Co., 13 Minn. 30, 97 Am. Dec. 221; Griggs v. Fleckenstein, 14 Minn. 81, 100 Am. Dec. 199; Elgrem v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 102 Minn. 41, 112 N. W. 1067, 12 L.R.A. (N.S.) 754; Settle v. St. Louis, etc., R. Co., 127 Mo. 336, 30 S. W. 125, 48 A. S. R. 633; Hollenback v. Dingwell, 16 Mont. 335, 40 Pac. 863, 50 A. S. R. 502; Smith v. Irwin, 51 N. J. L. 507, 18 Atl. 852, 14 A. S. R. 699; Menger v. Laur, 55 N. J. L. 205, 26 Atl. 180, 20 L.R.A. 61; Bush v. Brainard, 1 Cow. (N. Y.) 78, 13 Am. Dec. 513; Chapman v. New Haven R. Co., 19 N. Y. 341, 75 Am. Dec. 344; Johnson v. Hudson River R. Co., 20 N. Y. 65, 75 Am. Dec. 375; Beisiegel v. New York Cent. R. Co., 34 N. Y. 622, 90 Am. Dec. 741; Kerwhacker v. Cleveland, etc., R. Co., 3 Ohio St. 172, 62 Am. Dec. 246; Gentzkow v. Portland R. Co., 54 Ore. 114, 102 Pac. 614, 135 A. S. R. 821; Little Schuylkill Nav. R., etc., Co. v. Norton, 24 Pa. St. 465, 64 Am. Dec. 672; North Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Heileman, 49 Pa. St. 60, 88 Am. Dec. 482; Monongahela City v. Fischer, 111 Pa. St. 9, 2 Atl. 87, 56 Am. Rep. 241; Delaware, etc., R. Co. v. Cadow. 120 Pa. St. 559, 14 Atl. 450, 6 A. S. R. 730; New York, etc., R. Co. v. Enches, 127 Pa. St. 316, 17 Atl. 991, 14 A. S. R. 848, 4 L.R.A. 432; Freer v. Cameron, 4 Rich. L. (S. C.) 228, 55 Am. Dec. 14. Evans v. Adams Exp. Co., 122 663; Galveston, etc., R. Co. v. Zant- Ind. 362, 23 N. E. 1039, 7 L.R.A. 678; 11. Evans v. Adams Exp. Co., 122 Ind. 362, 23 N. E. 1039, 7 L.R.A. 678; Drown v. Northern Ohio Traction Co., 76 Ohio St. 234, 81 N. E. 326, 118 A. S. R. 844, 10 L.R.A. (N.S.) 421. 12. Beatty v. Gilmore, 16 Pa. St. 463, 55 Am. Dec. 514; McCully v. Clarke, 40 Pa. St. 399, 80 Am. Dec. 584; Heil v. Glanding, 42 Pa. St. 493, 82 Am. Dec. 537; Trow v. Vermont Cent. R. Co., 24 Vt. 487, 58 Am. Dec. 191. 13. Buechner v. New Orleans, 112 La. 599, 36 So. 603, 104 A. S. R. 455, 66 L.R.A. 334; Northern Cent. R. Co. v. State, 31 Md. 357, 100 Am. Dec. 69; Spillane v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 135 Mo. 414, 37 S. W. 198, 58 A. S. R. 580; Simpson v. Hand, 6 Whart. (Pa.) 311, 36 Am. Dec. 231; Gulf, etc., R. Co. v. McWhirter, 77 Tex. 356, 14 S. W. 26, 19 A. S. R. 755; Galveston, etc., R. Co. v. Zantzinger, 92 Tex. 365, 48 S. W. 563, 71 A. S. R. 859, 44 L.R.A. 553. |