Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1879-10-19
SUPREME COURT OPINIONS.
Reported for the Chronicle, by L. Til 1
man, Jr.

What is.-It is dedication of land to
the use of the public for streets and
avenues, when the land is laid off into
lots by Commissioners appointed for
the purpose, and the lots sold not only |
according te the plan on paper, but |
with the corners of the lots and line |
of the streets and avenues designated |
by large wooden stubs driven into the |
ground, with the numbers OF the lots |
cut thereon, which stubs were in place |
on the day of sale and for years after |
wards, and the purchasers went into
possession with full knowledge and |
continued to recognize the public case
ment; and a municipal corporation
created shortly after the sale 80 as to
include the land with such lots,
streets, lanes and alleys" takes the
land covered by the streets in trust for
the public.
Sims VS.. Mayor and Aldermen of
Chattanooga.
Corporstion-Right to remove OBJ.
structioas from streets not barred
The statute of limitation will not run
against the right of municipal cor
poration to remove distractions from
its public streets.
Idem.
Laches -Estopped.-Tbec continuous
enclosure Of strip of public street
by the owner of two lots for eight or
ten years with recognition or the
| public easement, and subsequent
occupation by purchasers under him
| for twelve or fifteen years, Including
the period from the 9Th of May. 1861.
| to the 1st of January, 1857, when the
statutes of Limitation were suspended,
| ia not sufficient to work an equitable
estoppel on the city by laches to re-
| move the obstruction, it appearing
that the street was little used and
never worked on until within seven
or eight years before action taken.
Idem.
l. Ignorance of LaW-Non-resident,
"A citizen of another State, who is
party to suit in this State and ap-
pears by counsel from it's inception,
can not claim an election in the
| mode of trial, based upon bis lg-
norance of the law of this State.
Coulter vs.. Weed Sewing Machine
Company.
2. Jury Trial WaiUer.-Practice. =
Although q party to the suit brought
into the Circuit Court by appeal from
Justice enter of record a demand for
Jury trial, he may waive that right
by allowing the case to remain Oh
the non-jury docket, and failing to call
the attention Of the Court 10 mis- de-
mand at the proper time.
Idem.
| observation-disclosures tS-- Must tSsOl
Cause of action.-Tne Plaintiff eued q
city and water company for the loss Of
his house by fire, and averTed in his
declaration that the water company
owned the water-works, pipes, &c
and the city controlled a fire depart
ment, and was in duty bound to use
all means at command to extlnguIst
fires-that by contract with the city
the company undertook to furnish wa
ter to extinguish tires-.hat ire oC'
Cured near plaintiffs house, and e1
tended to and consumed it-that de
, fendests, at the time, had permit,
the pipes to get out of repair and be
come full of mud and gravel, whereby
= &c. Held: upon demurrer, that tn
D declaration showed no cause of action
J.. against either defendenG.
Foster VS. Lookout Water Co.
> 1. Constitutional LaW-Aet Mare
18, 1S75.-The act of March Is, 1875, en-
titled, IAN Act to enable old counties
= from which fractions have beed takel
r to form new counties, to appoint Ia
/. Assesso for said factions and to col
p lect taxes therein, is constitutional. .
Matthews vs. Blount Go. ct. al.
= 2. Tar CoHector-Duty of. -
). Under the act aforesaid, it is til
duty of the collector for the old count
to proceed and collect taxes in tn
faction included in the new county
q unless legal proceedings have been il
"a stituted to ascertain the amount &c
which the fraction ia liable to the oil
~ county under said act, and are penC
g ing and he cannot be injoined there
d from.
"a Idem.
8. Bonds. Issued by Count
Court, in payment of the counti'
subscription to build railroads, came
be declared void in a suit to whic
bondholders are not parties.
Idem.
Same County Court-Po,Oer Of.
" The County Court having issue
ID such bonds has no power to cal
b, eel them without paying Il
debt: and II it does so, and reissu
others in their stead, such reissuan'
is proper-the destruction of the fir
bonds leaving the matter in the san
condition as il they had not been
sued. Idem.
IL l. Execution, IN hands of officer, co
w stitutes order.-When an execute
lie is issued from court or justice, al
rs goes Sn5o the hands of an officer,
up constitutes an order upon him to eX
lg cute it as therein commanded and
return 1t to the court whence it
sued
2. Officers retura-Uhat constitu
Return of execution consists of t'
things: l. To take the paper back
the Office from which it issued an
2. To show by endorsement there
and signature, what hes been do
under it,
W, 8. Proceedings tGader returned e:
cation, Void.-An execution, issu
ay aad returned, has performed
Office and such an execution Ger
fed to another county Will not ST
port an execution j. ued by just
esI In the latter under s3073 of Code; a
proceedings thereunder are void. If i
intended that an execution from
Justice shall be used in anott
ooantv IL ahOnld not pO into the har