Weekly hawk-eye and telegraph. [volume] (Burlington, Iowa) 1855-1857, 1855-08-08
i,s.B the Aka fSGssss.
sss4ssssrs1n1vKEr, 1afH =

:
Louis 1--WE 6ailx srscaried one or ssett ips
seaessp "a she besfsek Of unkEnwn sgses fsafsI
do snxsI. Il sarKr nuniter Of in4assss ssssts
bten head al this peint aad at every esky 90
the river. over Tho bodies of unknown d y,
found drowned. Tae question nafuFasls
arises. ssrhy ia II lhaf 50 many men ssssse. ~
their death ii this wss2 Most of them are
clothed. and ret nothing can be found by
which q ressonable number OF them can be
indeni!fed. Why is il thar the time. place
and circumstances Of their drowning are so
seldom recordeds a St. Louis paper esti-
masss the number of bedies found At that
point alone q. 80 TO 40 zach month. Say 1t
| is SIS, aud tha, viii make the number OF one
year 4aD II these men ARE for the NEST part
!! drowned at DO ats above. then there - no
good reason why the number found At ST..
! Louis should be very much greater than al
other single points. True. the large number
of people crossing the river at st. Ions, and
| the large number Of boats Always in port
would furnish reason why bodies floating 10
| the river at that point should be more fre-
qnentiy discovered, and the eddy near the
| city is more likely to throw them ashorn; but
I If one third of the number drowned in The
Mississippi from St. Louis to the head Of
navigation on that river, and on the aiissou-
ri, are picked ZIP at ST. Louis, then the az
preea,e number found yearly will equal i, 26u
: "a rauch LARGER number than are killed or
drowned By steamboat disasters
There is fearful mystery involved in THIS
subiect-a mystery that requires scFusiniz-
1 ing public Investigation. We have been in
formed by passengers on the river boats that
! it is 50 common thiDgto observe human bod
| les floating in the river, that Such discoveries
/ are rarey subjects of remarks, and they arc
almost universally left to float on.S
The st. Louis Intelligencer publishes the
following incident in this connection, which
/ will doubtless serve as an index to point out
/ the causes Of much OF this destruction Of hu-
man life:
A circumstances which occurred few
nights since, under our, own observation, sug-
gested to US solution of this mystery; but
| a solution too horrid almost for belief. The
night was dark, and we were walking IN
retired part of the leyce, and whose neigh
| borhood does not bear the best reputation in
the world, when We saw two men come out OF
! low sailor boarding house, 10 ring some
thing heavy upon their shoulders. They
walked stealthily and cautiously, and as they
passed by US, and between us and gas lamp
| at little distance, We could see without be-
ing seen, and from the appearance of the
object they were carrying, we took it to be u
drunken man. Our superstition at first vas,
that they were couple of boatmen, taking
to their craft drunken man.
From motives of curiosity alone. as we
saw they were taking direction where no
boats were lying, we followed them. What
ever their burden was, they threw it into the
river. We thought then, and think still, that
it was drunken man. The fact that the
neghborhood whence these men came, is fill
ed BY low sailor boarding houses, kept by the
most depravcd and vicious specimens of hu-
mainly, and that the bodies found in the riv-
err are most exclusively those of the boatmen,
and that these only stop at such places when
they have been paid off by the boats, and are
consequently flush of money, the conclusion
is almost irrcsistib!y forced upon us, that
these unfortunate men are first made drunk,
and while 10 that state robbed, and then
thrown into the river and drowned.
The idca is u horrid one, but one which we
believe is often realized in the locality to
which we ailude, and where we believe that,
ut any day, fifty men could be found who
would take a human life for ten cents. This
place has been cankrr spot upon our city
for years, it is the resort and safe abode OF
the most corrupt and daring rogues, and no
outside citizen dare walk its precinc un-
| guarded after nightfall.
There is reason to believe that in connee
ton with very many Of these bodies found
as above described, there il an unwritten
! tale of drunkenness robbery and murder,
which will never be disclosed.
| Supreme Court of Iowa, June Term A. D. 1856
John Pierson, Vs. John S. David ct. al APP
peal from Des Mones County. Reversed. Bill
to enforce vendors lieu against certain lard
therein described, alleging that complainant
was seized, possessed of and had an equitable in
terest in certain claim or claims on the public
lands, on which be had made valuable improve
ments, and to which he lad a pre-emption right
that he entered into contract in writing for
the sale of his interes: in said premises, W Tia
one Wilson, which agreement was recorded in
| the proper Recorders ofire-that Wilson fail
| ed to comply with SAID contract-that Wilson
with intent to delraii CON lainant, sold Iart
of the premises to Dav d individually, and the
balance to David and enc James Cameron (who
has since deceased, and whose IRIS are m de
parties def Ddants,) jointly, that David and
Cameron had notice Of the contract and lis non
performance on the part Of Wilson. ard COM
bined with him to defraud comp ainant-hat
David and Cameron, by virtue Of complainantS
pre- emp..oa right. entered said premises and OBJ
tanned patent therefor-that they promised to
pay and discharge the lien-and that David
and the heirs of Cameron, and A D. Green,
| who purchased the interest of one of the heirs
with notice, are in possession of, and claim the
said premises. The defendants demurred o the
! petition, which was sustained and the bill dis
missed. Held.
| 1. That The complainant at the time Of ma
king the contract, owned such an estate, end
sold such an interest IN The land described in the
petition, entitled him 10 enforce his lien as
A vendor thereof, against such lands when pur-
chased from the United States.
That the defendants having purchased with
notice of the rights of the >compla nant, took
the propert. subject TO those rights.
emption light
8. That " neither the complainant could, or
could not have had prescription right to more
than one tract of said premises, the allegation
of the bill, that upon the strength of
comp 'ainant's p.e-empion right David and
Cameron were allowed and enabled to enter
said premises, (Which allegation is admitted by
| the demurer) he stops the defendants from de-
nying complainants title.
| 4. That the sale of claim or Improvement
on the public lands. is not Illegal, and that by
such sale, complainant did not forfeit his pre-
| 5. That although David purchased part Of
the premises al one time, and David and Came
| ron another portion a, another time, and al
| though their titles as TO different parcels might
be distinct, yet as the defendants all derive
| their titles from common source are all charg-
ed with combination and fraud, and are all in
terested in the subject matter of the suit, Iii re
was no msjoirder of parties.
8 Thus the rule is ow established, that
where, upon the case stated in the bili, the COM
plainant by reason of lapse time, and laches on
his parts not entitled to relief, the defendant
may demur.
I. That in this case, the bill does not show
that six years had elapsed from the time of the
maturing Of the demand, 10 the bringing Of the
snit; and that it is only where the true time is
| raised by the bill, that demurrer will reach
the objection.
9. That il was necessary for complainant to
aver in his bill, that the purchase money could
| no, be re lz.d from Wilson, with whom the
| contract was originally made.
9. That the design of Sections 1904 g. 1895,
| and 206S, was to place the vendor and vendee
of real estate in the same position so far as re-
lated 10 the remedy, as the mortgsgor and
MORTGAGE in cases of express mortgages
10. That as, under the law, the mortgage
could proceed at once against the mortgage.!
premises. without exhausting or resorting to
the personal property Of the morigagor, or
ayerring bis insolvency, SO the vendor of real
1