Negligence—Street Railroad—Death of Passenger—Counts Charging Different Acts of Negligence.—In an action against a street railroad company to recover for the death of a passenger while alighting from a street-car, the plaintiffs may charge the negligence of the defendant in separate counts, as occurring in as many ways as they believed their evidence would show, and are entitled to recover if any one well-pleaded count is supported by sufficient evidence.

Id.—Injury While Attempting to Alight from Car—Standing on Platform or Steps.—An allegation in such a complaint that the passenger was injured while she was “attempting to alight” from the car is not to be construed as an admission that the passenger was actually and negligently in the act of alighting from a moving car. Fairly construed, the allegation means that the car had slowed down, was approaching the place where it usually stopped, and that the passenger had made preparations to alight, and was in readiness to alight, when and if it stopped. The fact that she had gone upon the platform for this purpose, or was upon the steps, was not in and of itself negligence in law.

Id.—Guardian ad Litem—Pleading Appointment.—In an action by minor plaintiffs, the overruling of a demurrer to the complaint for insufficiency in the allegations of the appointment of their guardian ad litem is without prejudice, where the facts of the due appointment and acceptance by the appointee were shown without contradiction upon the trial.

Id.—Evidence—Denial of' Nonsuit.—Under the evidence in this case, it was proper to deny the motion for nonsuit as to the cause of action which averred that after the car had slowed down and arrived at or near the place where it usually stopped to allow passengers to debark, and while the deceased was attempting to alight therefrom, the defendants’ agents and servants negligently caused the car to be suddenly and violently jerked and started forward.

Id.—Bes Gestae—Declarations of Conductor After Accident.—The declarations of the conductor of the car, made after the accident, in explanation as to how it occurred, are not part of the res gestae, and are inadmissible in evidence.

Id.—Judicial Notice — Tables of Life Expectancy.—Courts take judicial notice of the standard tables of life expectancy, and of the tables that are standard tables, and any such table satisfactory to the court may be introduced in evidence without foundation proof.

Id.—Impeachment of Witnesses—-Contradictory Written Statements.—Witnesses for the plaintiff in such action cannot be impeached by showing that they made contradictory statements in writing to a notary public, who took their statements at the instance of the defendant, unless a proper foundation for the impeaching questions is laid.

Id.—Contributory Negligence—Standing on Steps Preparatory to Alighting.—A passenger on a street-car has the right, in the sense that he is not guilty of contributory negligence per se in so doing, to be upon the steps of the car preparatory to debarking therefrom. It is for the jury to determine whether or not the passenger is guilty of contributory negligence in going upon the platform of the car or the steps thereof preparatory to alighting therefrom when the car stops.

Id.—Instructions—Starting to Leave Car Before it Stops.—In such action, where the court fully and correctly charged the jury on the subject of contributory negligence, an isolated instruction stating that “it is not contributory negligence as a matter of law for a passenger to start to leave a street-car before it comes to a full stop, but it is a question of fact for the jury to determine whether the act of the passenger in so doing constituted negligence,” cannot be deemed misleading.

Id.—Burden of Proving Contributory Negligence—Instructions.— Although the defendant is relieved from the burden of proving contributory negligence if the evidence of the plaintiff establishes it, an instruction that such burden is cast upon the defendant will not be deemed misleading, when the other instructions repeatedly informed the jury that no recovery could be had if they believed from all the evidence that the passenger had been guilty of such negligence.

Id.—Verdict not Excessive.—In this action by a husband and three minor children to recover for the death of his wife and the children’s mother, a verdict of eighteen thousand dollars cannot be held excessive.