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
61
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://www.kaotiyun.com/show/mfFK777K
0
专业英语四级
相关试题推荐
Asweallknow,sleepdeprivationcanleadtoexhaustion-fueledmistakesintheworkplace,whethertheybeasimpletypoinaqu
Asweallknow,sleepdeprivationcanleadtoexhaustion-fueledmistakesintheworkplace,whethertheybeasimpletypoinaqu
HowmuchmoneyhasbeenprovidedtoAfghanistancitizens?
OnSundaysmyfatheralwaysworethatdullgrayapron—theonewiththeracecarsalloverit.Theritualbeganafterbreakfastw
Inmyneighborhoodintheearly1980s,wespentthesummerplayingkickball.Ourfrontlawnswereaconstant.Wetooktheirsoft
TheJobofaJournalistJournalistsworkinmanyareasoflife,findingandpresentinginformation./Theypresentthatinfo
Whenonespouseisdepressed,amarriageisdepressed.Thisillnesserodesemotionalandsexualintimacyandmakesarelationshi
Americansoftensaythatthereareonlytwothingsapersoncanbesureofinlife:deathandtaxes.Americansdonothaveacor
Municipalbansonsmokinginrestaurantsandbarsarehighlycontroversial,buthistoryshowstheycanalsobehighlyeffective.
随机试题
下列属于真核生物基因组结构中的中度重复序列的有
黏液脓血便伴里急后重可见于
男性20岁,患糖尿病1年,未正规治疗,2日来咳嗽,咳黄痰,发热,恶心,消瘦。血糖22mmol/L(396mg/dl),BUN11mmol/L(31mg/dl),血钾3.5mmol/L,血钠140mmol/L,尿糖(+++),蛋白(++),酮体(++),
A、已达到粉碎要求的粉末能及时排除B、已达到粉碎要求的粉末不能及时排除C、物料在低温时脆性增加D、粉碎的物料通过筛子或分级设备使粗颗粒重新返回到粉碎机E、两种以上物料同时粉碎自由粉碎是指()。
票据的金额和收款人名称可由出票人授权补记的票据是()。
甲公司为增值税一般纳税人。2019年12月1日,甲公司以赊销方式向乙公司销售一批成本为75万元的商品。开出的增值税专用发票上注明的价款为80万元,满足销售商品收入确认条件。合同约定乙公司有权在三个月内退货。2019年12月31日,甲公司尚未收到上述款项。根
授权委托书授权不明的,代理人应当对第三人承担民事责任,被代理人负连带责任。()
现在进机关工作的人员,绝大部分学历比较高,又经过层层竞选,但有些人在工作中却出现不能胜任的情况,影响工作效率,对此你怎么看?
Mostparent,Isuppose,havehadtheexperienceofreadingabedtimestorytotheir【C1】______andtheymusthave【C2】______howdif
ManiscalledinCreekthezoonphonantaortalkinganimal.Whatmakeshumanitydifferentfromtherestoftheanimalworldisi
最新回复
(
0
)