8 negligently derailed coming across the street at full speed toward where he is standing, and becoming frightened runs for safety and falls, receiving an injury, he is entitled to recover from the owner of the car therefor. Again, an impending collision will excuse one in jumping from a vehicle or train, or in remaining therein when the safer course would have been to jump. So, it has been held that a locomotive engineer, killed by remaining upon his engine when a collision was imminent, and taking measures to stop his train, is not chargeable with contributory negligence as matter of law, although he might have escaped injury by leaving his post. Upon the same principle it has been held that there may be a recovery where an infant of tender age, under great fear and excitement, and apprehensive of being carried away and beyond his destination, attempts to get off at a railway station while the train is slowly moving past it, and in doing so falls under the train and is injured. And a recovery was held to be proper where it appeared that the plaintiff while walking along a city sidewalk saw a trunk pitched at him from the defendant's delivery wagon, and in endeavoring to escape from the trunk without looking fell over an obstruction placed upon the sidewalk by the defendant.10 Proximate Cause of Injury 113. Plaintiff's Negligence as Cause of Injury.-To defeat a recovery under the common law rule the plaintiff's negligence must have co-operated with the negligence of the defendant and contributed to produce the injury complained of. As it is expressed, the plain 6. Tuttle v. Atlantic City R. Co., 66 N. J. L. 327, 49 Atl. 450, 88 A. S. R. 491, 54 L.R.A. 582. 7. Central R. Co. v. Crosby, 74 Ga. 737, 58 Am. Rep. 463; Lund v. Tyngsboro, 11 Cush. (Mass.) 563, 59 Am. Dec. 159. 8. Pennsylvania Co. v. Roney, 89 Ind. 453, 46 Am. Rep. 173; Harris v. Clinton Tp., 64 Mich. 447, 31 N. W. 425, 8 A. S. R. 842; Cottrill v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 47 Wis. 634, 3 N. W. 376, 32 Am. Rep. 796. 9. Hemmingway v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 72 Wis. 42, 37 N. W. 804, 7 A. S. R. 823. 10. Vallo v. United States Exp. Co., 147 Pa. St. 404, 23 Atl. 594, 30 A. S. R. 741, 14 L.R.A. 743. 11. North Birmingham St. R. Co. v. Calderwood, 89 Ala. 247, 7 So. 360, 18 A. S. R. 105; 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; Isbell v. New York, etc., R. Co., 27 Conn. 393, 71 Am. Dec. 78; Smithwick v. Hall, etc., Co., 59 Conn. 261, 21 Atl. 924, 21 A. S. R. 104, 12 L.R.A. 279; Lafayette, etc., R. Co. v. Huffman, 28 Ind. 287, 92 Am. Dec. 318; Kinyon v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 118 Ia. 349, 92 N. W. 40, 96 A. S. R. 382; Cline v. Crescent City R. Co., 43 La. Ann. 327, 9 So. 122, 26 A. S. R. 187; Irwin v. Sprigg, 6 Gill. (Md.) 200, 46 Am. Dec. 667; Northern Cent. R. Co. v. State, 29 Md. 420, 96 Am. Dec. 545; Murphy v. Deane, 101 Mass. 455, 3 Am. Rep. 390; Black v. New York, etc., R. Co., 193 Mass. 448, 79 N. E. 797, 9 Ann. Cas. 485, 7 L.R.A. (N.S.) 148; Vicksburg, etc., R. Co. v. Patton, 31 Miss. 156, 66 Am. Dec. 552; tiff's negligence must have entered into and formed part of the efficient cause of the injury.12 If it operated only remotely 18 and not proximately to cause the damage, the plaintiff is not barred of redress.14 And, hence, a recovery should be allowed if it appears that the plaintiff's negligent act or omission was prior in time to,15 and not mutual with, the acts of the defendant.16 And so, as it is expressed, if the plaintiff's acts merely created the condition under which the injury was received, it is proper to permit him to recover.17 So, also, acts of the plaintiff which were merely in aggravation of the injury inflicted by the defendant will not constitute a bar to a recovery,18 though they may be proven for the purpose of reducing the damages. 19 It has been held not to be a defense in an action against a defendant for negligently permitting noxious gases generated in his business to escape upon the adjoining premises of the Oates v. Metropolitan St. R. Co., 168 12. Oates v. Metropolitan St. R. Co., 168 Mo. 535, 68 S. W. 906, 58 L.R.A. 447. 13. Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Marbury Lumber Co., 125 Ala. 237, 28 So. 438, 50 L.R.A. 620; Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Collins, 2 Duv. (Ky.) 114, 87 Am. Dec. 486; Northern Cent. R. Co. v. State, 29 Md. 420, 96 Am. Dec. 545; Adams v. Wiggins Ferry Co., 27 Mo. 95, 72 Am. Dec. 247; Morrissey v. Wiggins Ferry Co., 43 Mo. 380, 97 Am. Dec. 402; Pickett v. Wilmington, etc., R. Co., 117 N. C. 616, 23 S. E. 264, 53 A. S. R. 611, 30 L.R.A. 257; Kerwhacker v. Cleveland, etc., R. Co., 3 Ohio St. 172, 62 Am, Dec. 246; Trow v. Vermont Cent. R. Co., 24 Vt. 487, 58 Am. Dec. 191. Note: 35 Am. Dec. 104. 327, 94 Pac. 432, 125 A. S. R. 161, 15 Note: 7 L.R.A. 678. 15. Isbell v. New York, etc., R. Co., 27 Conn. 393, 71 Am. Dec. 78; Menger v. Laur, 55 N. J. L. 205, 26 Atl. 180, 20 L.R.A. 61; Kilpatrick v. Grand Trunk R. Co., 72 Vt. 263, 47 Atl. 827, 82 A. S. R. 939. 16. Kilpatrick v. Grand Trunk R. Co., 72 Vt. 263, 47 Atl. 827, 82 A. S. R. 939. 17. Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Marbury Lumber Co., 125 Ala. 237, 28 Atl. 438, 50 L.R.A. 620; Fox v. Oakland Consol. St. Ry., 118 Cal. 55, 50 Pac. 25, 62 A. S. R. 216; Black v. New York, etc., R. Co., 193 Mass. 448, 79 N. E. 797, 9 Ann. Cas. 485, 7 L.R.A. (N.S.) 148; Adams v. Wiggins Ferry Co., 27 Mo. 95, 72 Am. Dec. 247; Menger v. Laur, 55 N. J. L. 205, 26 Atl. 180, 20 L.R.A. 61; Clark v. Wilmington, etc., R. Co., 109 N. C. 430, 14 S. E. 43, 14 L.R.A. 749. 18. Brown v. Illius, 27 Conn. 84, 71 Am. Dec. 49; Galveston, etc., R. Co. v. Zantzinger, 92 Tex. 365, 48 S. W. 563, 71 A. S. R. 859, 44 L.R.A. 553; Wilmot v. Howard, 39 Vt. 447, 94 Am. Dec. 338. 14. Smithwick v. Hall, etc., Co., 59 Conn. 261, 21 Atl. 924, 21 A. S. R. 19. Galveston, etc., R. Co. v. Zant104, 12 L.R.A. 279 and note; Nehring zinger, 92 Tex. 365, 48 S. W. 563, 71 v. Connecticut Co., 86 Conn. 109, 84 A. S. R. 859, 44 L.R.A. 553; Wilmot Atl. 301, 524, 45 L.R.A. (N.S.) 896; v. Howard, 39 Vt. 447, 94 Am. Dec. Pilmer v. Boise Traction Co., 14 Idaho 338. plaintiff that the latter, by the negligent management of his own business, generated other noxious odors which contributed to the injury complained of, unless it appears that the odors from the defendant's premises acquired their noxious character from the commixture or combined chemical effect of the different exhalations generated by the operations of the two parties. 20 Again, if it appears that the injury would have occurred nevertheless, although the plaintiff had not been guilty of the fault charged against him, a recovery should be allowed. In other words, in order to defeat his action the plaintiff's conduct must have contributed to the injury in such a way that if he had not been at fault he would have escaped injury entirely. Although it may be shown that the defendant did not exercise care, yet no recovery will be allowed against him if it further appears that the injury would have been avoided if the person injured had exercised care on his part.s 114. Doctrine of Discovered Peril or "Last Clear Chance."-The proposition has been formulated in a great many opinions that the negligence of a plaintiff will not bar him of recovery if it is shown that the defendant might, by the exercise of reasonable care and prudence, have avoided the consequences of the plaintiff's negligence.* 20. Brown v. Illius, 27 Conn. 84, 71 Am. Dec. 49. 1. Richmond, etc., R. Co. v. Anderson, 31 Grat. (Va.) 812, 31 Am. Rep. 750; Carrico v. West Virginia Cent., etc., R. Co., 39 W. Va. 86, 19 S. E. 571, 24 L.R.A. 50. 2. New Jersey Exp. Co. v. Nichols, 33 N. J. L. 434, 97 Am. Dec. 722; Virginia Midland R. Co. v. White, 84 Va. 498, 5 S. E. 573, 10 A. S. R. 874. point by Harris v. Plant, 31 Ala. 639; Fox v. Oakland Consol. St. Ry., 118 Cal. 55, 50 Pac. 25, 62 A. S. R. 216; Indianapolis, etc., R. Co. v. McClure, 26 Ind. 370, 89 Am. Dec. 467; Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Collins, 2 Duv. (Ky.) 114, 87 Am. Dec. 486; Butler v. Rockland, etc., St. Ry., 99 Me. 149, 58 Atl. 775, 105 A. S. R. 267; Northern Cent. R. Co. v. State, 31 Md. 357, 100 Am. Dec. 69; Fonda v. St. Paul City R. Co., 71 Minn. 438, 74 N. W. 166, 70 A. S. R. 341; O'Flaherty v. Union R. Co., 45 Mo. 70, 100 Am. Dec. 343; Brown v. Hannibal, etc., R. Co., 50 Mo. 461, 11 Am. Rep. 420; Deans v. Wilmington, etc., R. Co., 107 N. C. 686, 12 S. E. 77, 22 A. S. R. 902; Smith v. Norfolk, etc., R. Co., 114 N. C. 728, 19 S. E. 863, 923, 25 L.R.A. 287; Kerwhacker v. Cleveland, etc., R. Co., 3 Ohio St. 172, 62 Am. Dec. 246; Cincinnati, etc., R. Co. v. Kassen, 49 Ohio St. 230, 31 N. E. 282, 16 L.R.A. 674; Vizacchero v. Rhode Island Co., 26 R. I. 392, 59 Atl. 105, 69 L.R.A. 188; Trow v. Vermont Cent. R. Co., 24 Vt. 487, 58 Am. Dec. 191; Virginia Midland R. Co. v. White, 84 Va. 498, 5 S. E. 573, 10 A. S. R. 874; 3. Evans v. Adams Exp. Co., 122 Ind. 362, 23 N. E. 1039, 7 L.R.A. 678; Dyerson v. Union Pac. R. Co., 74 Kan. 528, 87 Pac. 680, 11 Ann. Cas. 207, 7 L.R.A. (N.S.) 132; Warren v. Fitchburg R. Co., 8 Allen (Mass.) 227, 85 Am. Dec. 700; Hollenback v. Dingwell, 16 Mont. 335, 40 Pac. 863, 50 A. S. R. 502; Beatty v. Gilmore, 16 Pa. St. 463, 55 Am. Dec. 514; Washburn v. Tracy, 2 D. Chip. (Vt.) 128, 15 Am. Dec. 661; Butterfield v. Forrester, 11 East 60, 10 Rev. Rep. 433, 19 Eng. Rul. Cas. 189. 4. Inland, etc., Coasting Co. v. Tolson, 139 U. S. 551, 11 S. Ct. 653, 35 U. S. (L. ed.) 270; Owners of Steamboat Farmer v. McCraw, 26 Ala. 189, 62 Am. Dec. 718, overruled on another This proposition has been referred to sometimes as the doctrine of "last clear chance," sometimes as the humanitarian doctrine, and occasionally as the rule of Davies v. Mann. As it usually is expressed, a person who has the last clear chance or opportunity of avoiding an accident, notwithstanding the negligence of his opponent, is considered in law solely responsible for such accident. The supreme court of the United States thus lays down the doctrine of contributory negligence as modified by that of the last clear chance: "Although the defendant's negligence may have been the primary cause of the injury complained of, yet an action for such injury cannot be maintained if the proximate and immediate cause of the injury can be traced to the want of ordinary care and caution in the person injured, subject to this qualification, which has grown up in recent years: That the contributory negligence of the party injured will not defeat the action if it be shown that the defendant might, by the exercise Creel v. Charleston Natural Gas Co., 51 W. Va. 129, 41 S. E. 174, 90 A. S. R. 772; Deputy v. Kimmell, 73 W. Va. 595, 80 S. E. 919, 51 L.R.A. (N.S.) 989; Butterfield v. Forrester, 11 East 60, 10 Rev. Rep. 433, 19 Eng. Rul. Cas. 189; Davies v. Mann, 10 M. & W. 546, 12 L. J. Ex. 10, 6 Jur. 954, 19 Eng. Rul. Cas. 190. L.R.A. (N.S.) 957 and note; Markowitz v. Metropolitan St. R. Co., 186 Mo. 350, 85 S. W. 351, 69 L.R.A. 389; Yergy v. Helena Light, etc., Co., 39 Mont. 213, 102 Pac. 310, 18 Ann. Cas. 1201; Pickett v. Wilmington, etc., R. Co., 117 N. C. 616, 23 S. E. 264, 53 A. S. R. 611, 30 L.R.A. 257; Bogan v. Carolina Cent. R. Co., 129 N. C. 154, 39 S. E. 808, 55 L.R.A. 418 and note; Drown v. Northern Ohio Traction Co., 76 Ohio St. 234, 81 N. E. 326, 113 A. S. R. 844, 10 L.R.A. (N.S.) 421; Southern R. Co. v. Bailey, 110 Va. 833, 67 S. E. 365, 27 L.R.A.(N.S.) 379. Note: Ann. Cas. 1914D 115. Ordinarily the case should be submitted to the jury. Morrissey v. Wiggins Ferry Co., 43 Mo. 380, 97 Am. Dec. 402; O'Flaherty v. Union R. Co., 45 Mo. 70, 100 Am. Dec. 343; Rider v. Syracuse Rapid Transit R. Co., 171 N. Y. 139, 63 N. E. 836, 58 L.R.A. 125. 5. Morris, etc., Dredging Co. v. Nelson, 134 Fed. 161, 67 C. C. A. 67, 69 L.R.A. 293; Little Rock Ry., etc., Co. v. Billings, 173 Fed. 903, 98 C. C. A. 467, 19 Ann. Cas. 1173, 31 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1031 and note; Chesapeake, etc., R. Co. v. Hawkins, 174 Fed. 597, 98 C. C. A. 443, 26 L.R.A. (N.S.) 309 and note; Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Young, 153 Ala. 232, 45 So. 238, 16 L.R.A.(N.S.) 301; Harrington v. Los Angeles R. Co., 140 Cal. 514, 74 Pac. 15, 98 A. S. R. 85, 63 L.R.A. 238; Nehring v. Connecticut Co., 86 Conn. 109, 84 Atl. 301, 524, 45 L.R.A. (N.S.) 896 and note; Pilmer v. Boise Traction Co., 14 Idaho 327, 94 Pac. 6. Morris, etc., Dredging Co. v. Nel432, 125 A. S. R. 161, 15 L.R.A. son, 134 Fed. 161, 67 C. C. A. 67, 69 (N.S.) 254; Smith v. Rexbury, 24 L.R.A. 293; Harrington v. Los AnIdaho 176, 132 Pac. 1153, Ann. Cas. geles R. Co., 140 Cal. 514, 74 Pac. 15, 1915B 276; Wabash R. Co. v. Tippe- 98 A. S. R. 85, 63 L.R.A. 238; Pilmer canoe Loan, etc., Co., 178 Ind. 113, 98 v. Boise Traction Co., 14 Idaho 327, N. E. 64, 38 L.R.A.(N.S.) 1167; Brug- 94 Pac. 432, 125 A. S. R. 161, 15 geman v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 147 Ia. 187, 123 N. W. 1007, Ann. Cas. 1912B 876 and note; Bourrett v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 152 Ia. 579, 132 N. W. 973, 36 L.R.A. (N.S.) 254; Thompson v. Salt Lake Rapid-Transit Co., 16 Utah 281, 52 Pac. 92, 67 A. S. R. 621, 40 L.R.A. 172. of reasonable care and prudence, have avoided the consequences of the injured party's negligence.” 7 The doctrine really means, however, that even though a person's own acts may have placed him in a position of peril, yet if another acts or omits to act with knowledge of the peril, and an injury results, the injured person is entitled to recover.s 115. Cases to Which Doctrine Applies.-The leading case of this class is Davies v. Mann, in which it appeared that the defendant's horses and wagon-the driver at the time being some distance behind the horses-ran against and killed an ass, which had been left in the highway fettered in the forefeet, and thus unable to get out of the way of the defendant's wagon, which was going at a "smartish" pace (meaning too rapidly) along the road. It was held that the jury were properly directed that although it was an illegal act on the part of the plaintiff so to put the animal on the highway, the plaintiff was entitled to recover.9 In modern times, however, the doctrine has been applied chiefly to cases of injury to persons on railroad tracks, 10 and to collisions between railroad cars and vehicles 7. Grand Trunk R. Co. v. Ives, 144 U. S. 408, 12 S. Ct. 679, 36 U. S. (L. ed.) 485. Note: 55 L.R.A. 425 et seq. 8. Chunn v. Washington City, etc., Ry., 207 U. S. 302, 28 S. Ct. 63, 52 U. S. (L. ed.) 219; Green v. Los Angeles Terminal R. Co., 143 Cal. 31, 76 Pac. 719, 101 A. S. R. 68; Tully v. Philadelphia, etc., R. Co., 2 Penn. (Del.) 537, 47 Atl. 1019, 82 A. S. R. 425; Star Brewery Co. v. Hauck, 222 III. 348, 78 N. E. 827, 113 A. S. R. 420; Pennsylvania Co. v. Sinclair, 62 Ind. 301, 30 Am. Rep. 185 and note; Becker v. Louisville, etc., R. Co., 110 Ky. 474, 61 S. W. 997, 96 A. S. R. 459, 53 L.R.A. 267; Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Harrod, 155 Ky. 755, 159 S. W. 685, 47 L.R.A.(N.S.) 918; Sullivan v. Vicksburg, etc., R. Co., 39 La. Ann. 800, 2 So. 586, 4 A. S. R. 239; Navailles v. Dielmann, 124 La. 421, 50 So. 449, 134 A. S. R. 508; Hammers v. Colorado Southern, etc., R. Co., 128 La. 648, 55 So. 4, 34 L.R.A. (N.S.) 685; Kellny v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 101 Mo. 67, 13 S. W. 806, 8 L.R.A. 783 and note; Neary v. Northern Pae. R. Co., 37 Mont. 461, 97 Pac. 944, 19 L.R.A. (N.S.) 446; Brotherton v. Manhattan Beach Imp. Co., 48 Neb. 563, 67 N. W. 479, 58 A. S. R. 709, 33 L.R.A. 598; Cincinnati, etc., R. Co. v. Note: Ann. Cas. 1912B 889. If the defendant knew that the plaintiff was intoxicated a recovery may be had. Ann. Cas. 1914D 115 note; 19 Ann. Cas. 1179 note. 9. Davies v. Mann, 10 M. & W. 546, 12 L. J. Exch. 10, 6 Jur. 954, 19 Eng. Rul. Cas. 190. Note: 55 L.R.A. 418. 10. Little Rock, R., etc., Co. v. Billings, 173 Fed. 903, 98 C. C. A. 467, 19 Ann. Cas. 1173, 31 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1031 and note; Bruggeman v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 147 Ia. 187, 123 N. W. 1007, Ann. Cas. 1912B 876 and note; Becker v. Louisville, etc., R. Co., 110 Ky. 474, 61 S. W. 997, 96 A. S. R. 459, 53 L.R.A. 267; Hammers v. Colorado Southern, etc., R. Co., 128 La. 648, 55 So. 4, 34 L.R.A.(N.S.) 685; Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. McLeod, 78 Miss. 334, 29 So. 76, 84 A. S. R. 630, 52 L.R.A. 954; Brown v. Hannibal, etc., R. Co., 50 Mo. 461, 11 Am. Rep. 420; Bogan v. Carolina Cent. R. Co., 129 N. C. 154, 39 S. E. 808, 55 L.R.A. 418 and note; Thomp |