CASES ARGUED AND DETERMINED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS. THE TOLEDO, PEORIA AND WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY V. JESSE HAMMETT. Opinion filed February 21, 1906. 1. TRIAL—when refusal to direct a verdict is proper. Refusal to direct a verdict for a railroad company in an action for personal injuries is proper, where there is evidence tending to show that the plaintiff was crossing the railroad tracks in a street, which was the usual and best way of reaching his post of duty as crossing flagman; that he was struck by a backing engine and car; that no whistle or bell was sounded; that no one was on the rear of the car, and that plaintiff, before stepping on the tracks, had noticed the car standing still but did not see that an engine was attached. 2. SAME what questions are for the jury. Whether the plaintiff's hearing was so defective that he could not have heard the whistle or bell had one been sounded, whether he was negligent in failing to look and listen, and whether the omission contributed to his injury, are questions of fact for the jury, where there is evidence tending to show that no bell or whistle was sounded and that plaintiff looked before or at the time he started to cross the tracks. 3. NEGLIGENCE-deaf person must be vigilant in the use of his other senses. One whose sense of sight or hearing is defective must, when placing himself in a position requiring the exercise of care for his own safety, be more vigilant in the use of his other senses, and his infirmity does not excuse him from exercising the same degree of care that an ordinarily prudent person in the possession of his natural faculties would have exercised under the circumstances. APPEAL from the Appellate Court for the Second District;-heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Peoria county; the Hon. N. E. WORTHINGTON, Judge, presiding. This was an action on the case, brought in the circuit court of Peoria county by appellee to recover damages from appellant for injuries received while crossing appellant's tracks at a street crossing in the city of Peoria. The cause was tried by a jury and a verdict was rendered for $1593.50, upon which judgment was rendered. On appeal to the Appellate Court the judgment of the trial court was affirmed, and a further appeal is prosecuted to this court to review the record and judgment of the Appellate Court. STEVENS & HORTON, for appellant. JOSEPH A. WEIL, and FRANK J. QUINN, (I. J. LEVINSON, of counsel,) for appellee. Mr. JUSTICE RICKS delivered the opinion of the court: The facts, briefly, as they appear from the record, disclose that appellee was employed as a watchman and stationed at the crossing of the appellant company's railroad at the intersection of Water and Walnut streets, in the city of Peoria. Water street runs parallel with appellant's railroad and Walnut street crosses it at right angles. Appellee held his position by appointment of the mayor of the city but was paid by the railroad company, and had been employed in the same capacity for about four years at the time of the injury complained of. On the morning of April 16, 1903, while on his way to work, he sought to pass over the crossing of said streets and said railroad in order to reach the "watchman's shanty," which was his post of duty. There are six tracks laid in Water street, running parallel, in a northerly and southerly direction. He approached from the west, crossed |