110 HISTORY OF THE GRANGE MOVEMENT. 



fore, if a gentleman is attacked by a scoundrel, unless 

 the victim gives a complete diagnosis of his condition to 

 the ruffian, he, and not the villian who struck him, is 

 responsible for consequences when his skull is broken. 

 To obtain the opinion of the Supreme Court of Massa- 

 chusetts upon this important point has taken twelve 

 months more, but I am happy to be able to state, that 

 at last one point is established by the Massachusetts 

 courts in favor of the rights of railroad passengers, 

 namely, that it is not necessary for a man to inform a 

 ruffianly aggressor what h^s. grandmother died of, nor to 

 describe his hereditary symptoms, even though it is the 

 employe* of a railroad corporation who comes to strike 

 him. 



" The case was of simple brutal assault in a public 

 railroad car. The witnesses for the plaintiff were 

 well-known merchants of Boston, who were members of 

 the Board of Trade, railroad directors, and steamboat 

 men, as well as others, including ladies. Their testi- 

 mony was clear and consistent throughout every trial. 

 Pitted against their testimony was that of the brake- 

 men, the baggage-men and the conductor, every one of 

 whom was in the employment of the road and a party 

 to the assault. Not a passenger who saw the outrage 

 committed in the car was brought forward by the road. 

 The testimony of the employe's was so absurd upon the 

 first trial, that the court was repeatedly interrupted 

 by laughter. No testimony of theirs upon any after 

 trial has been like that of the first, but was manufac- 

 tured to suit the theory of the railroad. It has been 

 privately admitted by the road that 'the facts were 

 with me, but the law/ meaning, I suppose, the judge's 

 rulings, '.was with them.' So simple a case would 



