Galena & Southern Wisconsin Railroad v. Haslam

Citations

• 73 Ill. 494

Syllabus

<p>1. Practice—examination of jurors as to competency. It is proper, on examination of a juror touching his qualifications, to ask him which way he will decide in case the evidence is equally balanced in a suit between a railroad company and an individual.</p> <p>3. Same—permitting jurors to examine land sought to he condemned. The statute makes it the duty of the court to permit the jury to go upon the land sought to be taken or damaged, in person; but at what time in the progress of the trial they shall go, is in the sound discretion of the court.</p> <p>3. Right of wat—who entitled to ham damages assessed. Where a party has conveyed land, but reserved in his deed the privilege of a water power, and the right to enter upon so much of the land as may be needful for an abutment on the bank, he has such interest in the land as may be affected by the construction of a railroad, and the railroad company can not appropriate the land to its own use without ascertaining, in the mode pointed out in the statute, what damage he will sustain.</p> <p>4. Evidence—opinion of witnesses. It is competent for witnesses to give their opinion as to the amount of damage occasioned to the owners of land by the construction of a railroad, and when they possess peculiar knowledge of the facts, such evidence is often valuable.</p>