The Baltimore County union. [volume] (Towsontown, Md.) 1865-1909, 1884-11-29
Exemption of a Physicians Prop.
erfy from Debt.

erty from Debt.
A New Hampshire physician was I'M
fortunate enough to fall into debt and
have judgment entered against him.
The creditors naturally tried to obtain
payment by issuing execution, and
among the articles levied on by the
sheriff were the physicians wagon and
harness. The New Hampshire law says
that such articles as are stools CT
PERSONS occupation" cannot be seized
AID sold under an execution. The
physician maintained that his wagon
and harness came under this designa-
ton, and tried to recover them from
the sheriff. The court, in deciding the
question. which is an important one,
does not settle the particular case, but
refers it to jury. The legal principles
involved are of interest. and we quote
from the decision as follows:
1.-The court cannot say, as a matter
of law, that wagon or harness is a
tool Of physicians calling, and SO
exemp. to all physicians; nor can they
say that it is not such a tool. The
most that can be said, as matter of
law, is that it may be tool of his pro-
fession if, in the particular case, it is
reasonably necessary for him to use it
as tool. If it should appear that his
practice was confined to his Office, or
that he was physician or surgeon in
hospital, attending to no cases outside
of the institution, or that he was
surgeon on shipboard, or that he went
on foot or horseback, or on the cars,
to visit his patients, wagon and har-
ness would not be exempt under our
statue, because they would be Of no
use to him as tools in his practice.
They might be of use to him in other
respects, as in going to church, or in
carrying his children to school, or in
visiting friends, or as means ofrecrea-
ton and pleasure; but these uses are
manifestly not within the legitimate
scope of the technical duty of physi-
clan. Not coming within the strict
definition of the term tools, and not be-
ing reasonably necessary as tools for
him in his practice of his profession,
they would not be tools within the
meaning of the statue, and so would
not be exempt as such. But if it should
be found that the physician claiming
the exemption could not practice his
profession with reasonable success with
out team with which to visit his pa
tents; that he was located in country
town, for example, where it was neceS-
sary for him to ride large part of the
time in order to accomplish anything
professionally, a wagon and harness
might properly be found to be reason
ably necessary for him as tools of his
occupation. But the finding would be
one of fact, so far as the reasonablenesS
of the use is concerned; and it could
not be said that these articles are exempt
to every physician, or to physicians
generally, but only to the debtor in the
particular case. If there is any doubt
whether an article claimed to be exempt
from attachment is tool under the
statute, the question should be submit
Young woman rom tne-eo"''''
was suing her ex sweetheart ior DleAc III
sc nr1m;Se. and the lawyers were' d'
O Dsrpi, making all sorts of inqnlsltiVe IN
terrogatories. o,bat the
defendant frequently sat very Close 10
you?" 49,. r.rlv with a hec.
r eyes, sir, was the iePiJ'
tic flush.
: elbow close" ox,os al
"Close enough, SOS one cheer was d
the sittin' we needed.
' "And you say he put his arms ar0uH
d your
$ ..W NI, did you say, thena''
: 81 said he put both arms arounu me-
6 "Then what?
~ "He Rugged me. -
every hard ,hotI can
e, nurtv near hollerin' right out"
o y; "Why didn't you hollerF
he mCause." n ovnl;ci
" "That's no reason Dc oNp'O
nlease Because what"
dc cause was afeard he'd stop; !,
The court fell off the bench, ana y :
Ye - h az carried out and put under the
ne ne drant for the purpose of resuscltatlOn