ART. 67] NEGLIGENCE CAUSING DEATH. 1535

For a suit against a physician for causing the death of a patient by an
alleged unauthorized and unskillful operation, see State, use Janney, v.
Housekeeper, 70 Md. 168.

A suit under this section can not be maintained against a board of county
school commissioners. Weddle v. School Commissioners, 94 Md. 342.

Where a sheriff is charged with permitting a lynching, his bond can not
be sued under this section. Cocking v. Wade, 87 Md. 529.

Generally.

The right of action under this section and section 2 distinguished from,
and compared with, that of the personal representative of the deceased
under article 93, section 104. The history and purpose of the two enactments,
traced. They are entirely separate, independent and exclusive of each other.
This section created a new cause of action which the deceased never had.
Construction of Lord Campbell's Act from which this section was taken.
Stewart v. United, etc., Co., 104 Md. 333; Droneburg v. Harris, 108 Md. 608.

As to the similarity of this section to Lord Campbell's Act. see also. Tucker
v. State, use Johnson, 89 Md. 475; B. & O. R. R. Co. v. State, use Hauer, 60
Md. 466; Philadelphia, etc., R. R. Co. v. State, use Bitzer, 58 Md. 398; State,
use Alien, v. Pittsburg, etc., R. R. Co., 45 Md. 47.

While the burden in the beginning is on the plaintiff to show a prima
facie wrongful killing, if the defendant alleges justification or excuse, the
burden is on him to prove it. Tucker v. State, use Johnson, 89 Md. 489.
(See dissenting opinion also for discussion of burden of proof).

This section has no application where the injury occurs outside of Mary-
land, although the deceased is a citizen of this state. State, use Alien, v.
Pittsburg, etc.. R. R. Co., 45 Md. 45; Dronenburg v. Harris, 108 Md. 608.

Where a sheriff is charged with permitting a lynching, his bond can not
be sued under this section. The cause of action depends entirely upon this
article and it must be prosecuted iu the manner herein prescribed only. It
can not be converted into an ear contractu action, as it has no reference to
a contract, or a bond, or any responsibility arising therefrom. Cocking v.
Wade, 87 Md. 545 (concurring opinion).

The narr. need not allege that the defendant's negligence was such that
if death had not ensued, the deceased would have been entitled to recover.
Philadelphia, etc., R. R. Co. v. State, use Bitzer, 58 Md. 399.

The declaration may be amended by adding the state as legal plaintiff
(so as to conform to the titling and summons). B. & O. R. R. Co. v. State,
use Alllson, 62 Md. 481.

An action by the husband for the death of his wife, abates on the death
of the husband or of the defendant. There is no contractual relation
between the state and the defendant. Harvey v. B. & O. R. R. Co.. 70
Md. 324.

For a variance between the proof, and declaration and particular, see B.
& O. R. R. Co. v. State, use Woodward, 41 Md. 297.

Both the deceased and the equitable plaintiff, must have been free from
contributory negligence. State, use Coughlan, v. B. & O. R. R. Co, 24 Md.
107; B. & 6. R. R. Co. v. State, use Fryer, 30 Md. 52.

For cases under this section involving contributory negligence, see State,
use Price, v. Cumberland, etc., R. R, Co., 87 Md. 186; B. & O. R. R. Co. v.
State, use Chambers. 81 Md. 371; State, use Hnrtlove. v. Fox, 79 Md. 521;
B. & O. R. R. Co. v. State, use Strunz, 79 Md. 335 (involving the imputing
of negligence to the plaintiff) : Baltimore, etc., Turnpike Co. v. State, use
Grimes, 71 Md. 580: B. & O. R. R. Co. v. State, use Mahone, 63 Md. 148;
Pennsylvania R. R. Co. v. State, use McGirr, 61 Md. 108; B. & O. R. R. Co.
v. State, use Hauer, 60 Md. 449; Philadelphia, etc., R. R. Co. v. State, use Bitzer.
58 Md. 397; State, use Bacon, v. Baltimore, etc.. R. R. Co., 58 Md. 482;
State, use Hameliu, v. Malster, 57 Md. 287; Baltimore, etc., R. R. Co., v.
State, use Stansbury. 54 Md. 648; Northern Central R. R. Co. v. State, use
Burns, 54 Md. 113; Cumberland, etc., R. R. Co. v. State, use Moran, 44 Md.
283; B. & O. R. R. Co. v. State, use Woodward, 41 Md. 299; Cumberland,
etc., R. R. Co. v. State, use Fazeubaker. 37 Md. 156; B. & O. R. R. Co. v.
State, use Dougherty, 36 Md. 366; B. & O. R. R. Co. v. State, use Trainer,
33 Md. 542; Northern Central R. R. Co. v. State, use Geis, 31 Md. 357; B. &
O. R. R. Co. v. State, use Fryer, 30 Md. 47; B. & O. R. R. Co. v. State, use