Penso

(after stating the facts as above). The ground of the action being that the plaintiff in error’s car approached the bridge, and the point where the deceased was crossing, at a high and unusual rate of speed, and was carelessly and negligently driven upon him, resulting in his death, we first look to see what, if any, evidence the record contains in support of those allegations.

There is very little real conflict in it upon any essential point involved *686 in the case. It shows without conflict that the bridge is approached from both ends by a trestle with a slight upgrade, and that between the points of commencement of the trestle, at the respective west and east ends, there are two curves, but that from the west end of the bridge proper (which, according to the evidence, is a drawbridge, enabling the water craft plying on the river to pass) the track is straight for from 250 to 300 feet westerly. The drawbridge was operated by a man in the tower house or engine room, over the turning gear in the center of the bridge. One G. M. Rogers was one of'the tower-men at the time in question, and he testified, among other things (his testimony being uncontradicted), that, including cars,…