Where  an  electric  car  burst  into  flames,  the  company  must
explain  the  cause  of  the  fire.  Proof  that  a  fuse  blew  out  will
not  exempt  them  from  the  imputation  of  negligence,  since
there  is  usually  only  a  flash  of  light  when  a  fuse  blows  ^
out.^*^  A  fuse  burning  out  raises  no  presumption  of  negli-
gence, but  where  there  is  evidence  of  a  more  serious  defect,
negligence  is  for  the  jury.^*^^  Where  a  passenger  became
frightened  at  the  flash  of  the  controller,  and  jumped  from
the  car,  and  there  was  evidence  that  the  flashing  was  of  an
unusual  character,  that  the  controller  was  out  of  order,
which  could  easily  have  been  discovered,  and  the  car  had
not  been  inspected  before  it  left  the  station,  it  was  held
that  negligence  was  properly  submitted  to  the  jury,  and
that  the  jury  might  have  imputed  negligence  to  the  com-
pany from  the  fact  that  the  motorman,  after  the  flashing
began,  allowed  the  car  to  continue  on  its  course  until  the
fuse  burned  out.^^^  Where  an  inspector  was  examining  a
controller  which  was  out  of  order,  and  the  car  suddenly  start-
ed forward,  and  struck  a  railroad  train,  it  was  held  that  the

240Geddes  v.  Metropolitan  R.  Co.,  103  Mass.  391;  Archer  v.  Ft.
Wayne  &  E.  Ry.  Co.,  87  Mich.  101;  Klnkade  v.  Atlantic  Ave.  R.  Co.,
9  Misc.  Rep.  (N.  Y.)  273;  Anderson  v.  City  &  Suburban  Ry.  Co.
(Or.)  71  Pac.  659;  Sandford  v.  Hestonville,  M.  &  F.  P.  R.  Co.,
136  Pa.  84;  McCaw  v.  Union  Traction  Co.  (Pa.)  54  Atl.  893.
241  Poulsen  V.  Nassau  Electric  R.  Co.,  18  App.  Div.  (N.  Y.)  221.
2"aCassady  v.   Old  Colony   St.  Ry.   Co.    (Mass.)    68  N.  E.  10.
