> The interesting question is: Why were trains supposedly fatal to the law of deodands whereas ships were not? I would flip it around and say why is it necessa

> The interesting question is: Why were trains supposedly fatal to the law of deodands whereas ships were not? I would flip it around and say why is it necessary for ships and not for trains. Train owners are typically easily accessible by the courts in which their trains operate. Ship owners much less so. If a ship owner has a potentially large liability in some jurisdiction, they may arrange to never do business in that jurisdiction again, but a train owner doesn't generally have that option. Especially in older days when the rail owner and the train owner were almost always the same. You can't just pack up your rails and go away when your trains cause a problem.