Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1888-02-23
SUPREME COURT RULINGS.


lice Law-GovernOr Martin and Grant
County.
TOPEKA, Kan, Feb. I3-May %, 1885.
Giants, hotel clerk at Wichita, brought
suit in the district court of Harvey County
against the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe
Railroad Company, alleging that May 10,
1855, he purchased ticket at the COM
| pany's office in Newton emitting him to a
/ hrst-class passage from Newton to Pea
body and that when the train was about
three miles from Newton the conductor
and trainmen forcibly elected him, perma-
uently injuring him. He claimed $4,000
damages The railroad company in ITS
answer alleged that the plaintiff attempted
to ride on the fast passenger train tound
eastward, which according 10 the rules
end regulations OF the company, which
were known TO Giants and the travelling
public generally, did not stop at Peabody
and that che conductor put him of the
train, using no unnecessary force, because
he refused 10 pay fare to the station be.
yond Peabody (Florence) at which the
train would stop, and further because
when the conductor informed HIM that the
train would not stop ut Peabody he insisted
upon riding upon the train and behaved in
such manner as TO justify the conductor
in ejecting him. The trial was had at the
February term OF the district court of
Harvey County in 1886 and the jury
awarded Giants 81, 600 damages.
The railroad company appealed to the
Supreme Court, which tribunal decided
Saturday that railroad company might
adopt regulation that one OF its through
or fast trains running regularly on its road
should only stop at certain designated stC-
tions or places; that IL was the duty OF a
person about to take passage on railroad
train to inform himself when, where and
how he could go, or stop, according TO the
regulations Of the railroad company; that
when a person purchased railroad ticket
for a designated station upon a rSilroad
without making any inquiries or ascertain
ing what train stopped at the station TO
which he desired TO go, and subsequently,
took his seat upon a car of train which,
according to the regulations Of the COM
pany, did not stop at the station for which
he had the ticket, and such person refused
to pay his fare, on demand of the conduct
or TO the next station at which the ira \
was 10 STOP, and also refused to leave the
train when requested so tO do by the con-
ductOr after lie had stopped the train at a
suitable place for that purpose, such per-
son was a trespasser upon the train and
might be elected. The Judgment was
therefore reversed and the cause remanded
for a new trial.
ANOTHER JUDGMENT REVERSED.
TOPEKA. Kan, Feb. 13.-The Supreme
Court has reversed the jude ment of the
district court and ordered new trial lnthe
ase of LeaHder Finley VS., the Missouri Pa
cific Railway Company which was brought
in Brown County in 1885 and a Judgment Of
$3.50 awarded the plaintiff for damages
caused by conErnunicat ing the Texas fever
TO plaintiffs cattle by reason OF diseased
animals shipped by the railroad company.
which were thrown from the track by an
accident near the plaintiffs premises. The
Court, in it's opinion, holds that when a
railway company, Transporting through
this State. upon Il train of cars, cattle dis
eased with the Texas, splenic or Spanish
fever, has It's train wrecked within the
Stale, so asito make it necessary to unload
the cattle, and thereupon is notified that
the cattle are from Texas and VIII spread
disease among Gomesticated cattle il per-
mitted to run at large or If driven upon the
public highway, it should corral the.cattle
at near the wreck, or otherwise prevent
them from running at large or getting upon
the public highway until reloaded. If
however, it drives the cattle. after receiv-
ing notice of THEM diseased conditIOa4 upon
the public highway, it does so at ITS own
peril, and is liable under the statute for
the damages arising by the communication
of the diseases OR fever 10 domestic cattle
from the cattle so diseased, provided, the
owners of the domestic cattle are nodguil- |
ty of contributory negligence.
THE METROPOLITAN POLICE LAW
Topeka, Kan, Feb. 13.-The Supreme
Court Saturday rendered its opinion de-
claring the Metropolitan Police bill constl-
tutional. This WAS in the case brought up
from Leavenwnrth. The opinion is a
lengthy one, covering all possible grounds.
and declares the right OF the Legislature
10 regulate police government of cities,
which are creatunes Of the State, ezercis-
ing municipal fiLnstions under legislative
authority. Il IS, set forth that the execu-
tive depart ment has not in any manner
been granted Legislative functions, it
has not been given power to change or sus-
pend one word, OF Ahe law creatinga metro
politan police:
In the case from Wyandotte asking for
to- compel the City Council to
pay the police, the court decides that the |
police salaries are just debts OF the city
and may be collected the same as other |
lebts IN the court. Hence it Is unneces- |
sary to exercise the extraordinary func- |
lions of a mandamus by the Supreme Court
This decision Yeafirms the onstItu tionality |
Of the Metropolitan Police bill
CURIOUS CASE.
TOPEKA, Kan, Feb. 13.-Some time since |
Judge Guthrie granted an injunction re- |
the Governor from organizing |
Grant County. The Supreme Court Setur-
lay dissolved that injunction holding that |
.he Governors Offices were purely mlHiste-
rial and mandatory. There was some law
n this case, hat little common sense. AS |
s conceded, there could be no penalty at
,ached to the Governor for disobeying the |
orders of Judge Guthrie, who might fine OF
mpris0n him for contempt. but the Gov |
srnor could 50 quickly and so often pardon
himself as to make any judge a very weary
man. 1t is understood that there will be
another junction asked for immediate4T.
~
GlOyer'a Rim.
WASHINGTON, Feb l3-CongressInan
jlover's bill subjectiHg telegraph compa-
hes 10 regulation by the Interstate Com
nerce Commission, the same as railroad
: ,mpanies, is stuck in the Conmerce Com
nIttoo tn which il was rafarred The |