At the trial the plaintiff requested the following rulings:—
“6. When the duty of exercising the highest degree of care is incumbent upon the defendant, any failure upon the part of its servants to exercise that degree of care is gross negligence.
“7. The term ‘gross’ in the allegation gross negligence, when used with reference to the degree of care required and not fulfilled, is merely an expletive, when the degree of care required is the very highest.
“8. There are no degrees of negligence.”
The plaintiff excepted to the refusal of the judge to give the rulings requested, and to such parts of the charge as were in conflict with them. The defendant had a verdict, and the case is here on these exceptions.
Loring, J.... The judge was right in refusing to give the sixth ruling asked for. A failure to exercise the highest degree of care is slight negligence.
3. The seventh ruling requested was wrong. The term “gross negligence” in a case where the degree of care due is the highest degree of care means that there has been a gross failure to exercise that degree of care.[[80]]
4. There are degrees of care in cases under R. L. c. 111, § 267, by force of that act.[[81]]
Exceptions overruled.