首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
A century ago in the United States, when an individual brought suit against a company, public opinion tended to protect that com
A century ago in the United States, when an individual brought suit against a company, public opinion tended to protect that com
admin
2014-01-07
45
问题
A century ago in the United States, when an individual brought suit against a company, public opinion tended to protect that company. But perhaps this phenomenon was most striking in the case of the railroads. Nearly half of all negligence(过失)cases decided through 1896 involved railroads. And the railroads usually won.
Most of the cases were decided in state courts, when the railroads had the climate of the times on their sides. Government supported the railroad industry; the progress railroads represented was not to be slowed down by requiring them often to pay damages to those unlucky enough to be hurt working for them.
Court decisions always went against railroad workers. A Mr. Farwell, an engineer, lost his right hand when a switchman’s negligence ran his engine off the track. The court reasoned, that since Farwell had taken the job of an engineer voluntarily at good pay, he had accepted the risk. Therefore the accident, though avoidable had the switchmen acted carefully, was a "pure accident". In effect a railroad could never be held responsible for injury to one employee caused by the mistake of another.
In one case where a Pennsylvania Railroad worker had started a fire at a warehouse and the fire had spread several blocks, causing widespread damage, a jury found the company responsible for all the damage. But the court overturned the jury’s decision because it argued that the railroad’s negligence was the immediate cause of damage only to the nearest buildings. Beyond them the connection was too remote to consider.
As the century wore on, public sentiment began to turn against the railroads—against their economic and political power and high fares as well as against their callousness(无情)toward individuals.
What does the passage mainly discuss?
选项
A、Railroad oppressing individuals in the US.
B、History of the US railroads.
C、Railroad workers’ working rights.
D、Law cases concerning the railroads.
答案
D
解析
本文主要介绍的是美国法院在铁路公司伤害案中的裁决,因此D是最佳答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/mfFK777K
0
专业英语四级
相关试题推荐
Asweallknow,sleepdeprivationcanleadtoexhaustion-fueledmistakesintheworkplace,whethertheybeasimpletypoinaqu
TheUniversityofSouthernCaliforniahasthelargestnumberofinternationalstudentssince
Chinesee-commercecompanyAlibabaGroupplanstotakeitsHongKong-listedunitprivate,twosourcesfamiliarwiththematters
BilingualeducationiscontroversialintheUnitedStates.【C1】______,agrowingbodyofresearchshowsthat【C2】______speakingtw
Thestrikeistoprotestagainst
Fromheat-hazeandsummersmogtooutsizehailstonesandflashfloods:moretopsyturvyweatherisontheway,Britain’sforecast
Weallhaveoffensivebreathatonetimeoranother.Inmosteasesoffensivebreathemanatesfrombacteriainthemouth,althoug
Whenonespouseisdepressed,amarriageisdepressed.Thisillnesserodesemotionalandsexualintimacyandmakesarelationshi
RuthHandlerinventedsomethingin1959whichbecamesoquintessentiallyAmericanastobeincludedintheofficial"America’s
Municipalbansonsmokinginrestaurantsandbarsarehighlycontroversial,buthistoryshowstheycanalsobehighlyeffective.
随机试题
甲某在公共汽车上捡到乙某丢失的提包,内有4万元现金,另有存折、汇票等重要物品,乙某在本市日报上刊登的招领广告,称将重奖捡到其提包并归还者,甲某见报后,与乙某联系,要求乙某支付2万元才交还提包,乙某嫌甲某要价太高,只同意支付1000元,甲某因此拒不交出提包。
[*]
"Tomorrowwe’llseetheGoldenGateBridge."saidPeter."I’veneverseenagoldenbridgebefore."Peter’sfathersmiled,butsa
国际放射学界公认:当照片上的半影模糊值<0.2mm时,人眼观察影像毫无模糊感,当半影模糊值>0.2mm时,开始有模糊感,故0.2mm是模糊阈值。已知某焦点大小为0.6,则其允许的最大放大倍数为
下列药物中可诱发支气管哮喘的是
药品批发企业按规定建立的药品销售记录应
下列关于职能制组织形式的说法正确的有()。
设计方案评价方法中的多指标对比法的优点是()。
主体认识活动包含选择、建构等成分,这里的选择和建构是指()
讨论下列函数的连续性,并画出函数的图形:
最新回复
(
0
)