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
40
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
"Heisthelastpersontobefitforthejob."hasallthefollowingpossiblemeaningsEXCEPT
Allbut______goingtoSpainforinthissummervacation.
Mostworthwhilecareersrequiresomekindofspecializedtraining.Ideally,therefore,thechoiceofa(n)【C1】______shouldbema
Mostworthwhilecareersrequiresomekindofspecializedtraining.Ideally,therefore,thechoiceofa(n)【C1】______shouldbema
OnSundaysmyfatheralwaysworethatdullgrayapron—theonewiththeracecarsalloverit.Theritualbeganafterbreakfastw
Inmyneighborhoodintheearly1980s,wespentthesummerplayingkickball.Ourfrontlawnswereaconstant.Wetooktheirsoft
Shereallywantedtosaysomethingatthemeeting,buteventually______fromit.
Facingtheboardofdirectors,hedidn’tdeny______breakingtheagreement.
ThecoldandrainyweatherinParishasnotstoppedJoeSchaeffer,anAmericantouristfromMilwaukee,Wisconsin,fromvisiting
Whenaskedto______theageoftheantique,youneedtohaveaspecialknowledgeofthehistory.
随机试题
对某患者进行口腔检查时,发现其某颗指数牙的龈上牙石覆盖面积为牙面的1/3~2/3。根据简化牙石指数,应记为
气体灭菌法常用的气体有
无业人员赵某(男,23岁)、钱某(男,26岁)与原某国有银行分行记账员陈某(男,16岁)合谋抢银行的钱。1998年3月,陈某之父虚报陈已满18岁,将其安排到某银行工作,该分行规定陈某与其他工作人员轮流为银行提取现金。同年12月20日(陈某当时实际上仅15岁
《支付结算办法》是由( )发布的。
甲公司20×8年度对于购入的生产设备应计提的减值准备为( )万元。甲公司20×7年度产生的可抵扣暂时性差异为( )万元。
丰田生产方式的核心是()。
Access提供的参数查询可在执行时显示一个对话框以提示用户输入信息,要想形成参数查询,只要将一般查询准则中用下列()括起要显示的提示信息即可。
WhatisPeggyreadingnewspapersfor?
ItwasClark’sfirstvisittoLondonUndergroundRailway.Against【C1】______adviceofhisfriends,hedecidedtogothereafter
Howdowegetmorepeopletoincreasetheirconsumptionofiron-richfoods?Manynutritionists【C1】______theincreaseofanumber
最新回复
(
0
)