122 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



suit. The principle surely conforms to the basis of computation appli- 

 cable to the loss to society at large. 



Damages cannot be given as a solatium. It is assumed that the 

 bereavement of a party can not be soothed by an application of the coin 

 of the realm, and the higher courts scrutinize the work of juries in 

 order to eliminate the results of passion upon the part of the members 

 thereof. Sympathy for the destitute orphan can have no part in the 

 award of damages. This principle, also, conforms to the requirements 

 in estimating the loss to society. 



Nothing can be allowed for the injury to the deceased nor for 

 physical nor mental suffering. Again appears a conformation to the 

 conditions demanded by the social state. The loss of a mill operative 

 in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is indirectly felt by the inhab- 

 itants of the State of Delaware, yet such loss is not greater by reason 

 of the physical disfigurement of said operative nor the mental sufferings 

 which he may have been obliged to undergo in the process. 



Insurance of the life of the deceased is no mitigation of damages; 

 this rule of the courts is absolute. It is considered that if the deceased 

 was sufficiently productive to enable him to pay his annual insurance 

 premiums, it is clearly in testimony of his thrift and an element in 

 favor of his greater usefulness, therefore his greater value to the com- 

 munity. Here conditions in the estimation of loss to society are still 

 further met. It matters little to the great mass of individuals whether 

 that money, the measure of value, is put into circulation via the 

 insurance companies or by the individual. 



Standard mortuary tables are admitted in evidence, in awarding 

 damages for wrongful death. Such tables apply to the whole com- 

 munity even more clearly than to the deceased. Whatever a man's 

 station in society, his value is dependent upon, and modified by, 

 his life expectancy. If this be short, the guarantee of his continued 

 usefulness is less assuring than that of a man with the prospect of a 

 longer life. 



The whole matter, therefore, naturally and finally goes back to a 

 question of fact for the jury or court, and wherever an accidental death 

 has been effected, the deceased is measured by his productiveness. This 

 productiveness is directly enjoyed by his family, his employer and his 

 associates, and through them, sooner or later in an equal degree by 

 society at large. Therefore the measure of pecuniary loss to said family 

 becomes a measure of damage to society. It is reasonable to believe 

 then, that awards by courts of law for death are a safe and trustworthy 

 estimate of the pecuniary value of the life of the deceased. There are, 

 of course, exceptions ; justice has ever been perverted ; but the great mass 

 of cases taken together, forms a reasonable basis of estimation of the 

 value of human life. 



