The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1889-05-14
MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT.
Some Very Important Decisions Rem
dered by That Tribunal.
.f.fn A. m.

Some Very Important Decisions hen-
dered by That Tribunal.
Special Dispatch TO Tho Appeal.
JACKSON, Miss, May l3.-Tho supreme
Court today rendered decisions in the fol-
lowing cases:
by Cooper, j.:
George Vanderberg VS.. the State, convict
cd in Warren Circuit Court OF "burglarious
larceny" Reversed and remanded.
H., w. Burks ct al. vs.. Parmelia Burks 'et
al, from Chickasaw Chancery Court. Al
frmed.
John r. Hardic ct al vs., NJ. Bulger ct
al, from Harrison Chanccry Court. Az
| frmed.
Steve Allen W.. the State, convicted in
Lafayette Circuit Court Of murder Affirmed
and Wednesday, the 10Th day of June next,
fixed for the execution
Mississippi Il Tennessee Railroad Company
vs. Emma |. Harrison, from Grenada Cir
cult Court Reversed aud remanded.
by Arnold. Q. j.:
w. A. Monaghan VS.. the State, convicted In
Lee Circuit Court Of selling whisky TO n
minor; reversed and remain ded. In this case
the proof shows that the minor purchasing
the whisky was acting rs the agent Of an
adult, and so stated when the purchase was
made, and paid Cor same with the money Of
the party for whom the purchase was made
that the minor did not use or drink any OF
the whisky, but delivered same 10 the party
for whom purchased. The court below
decided that this was q sale To the minor In
the meaningof tho law. This court decides
that the law forbidding the sale To minors
| cannot be construed to prohibit the mere
delivery 20 a minor, he acting in the capacity
Of agent for an adult
Elijah sykes, minority next frien1 vs.. the
Georgia Pacific Railway Company, suit for
| damages Tor personal injury: affirmed.
Noah l., Davis vs.. Iunius Hart from
Lowudcs Chancery Court: affirmed.
jacob WestbrOOk, Jr, minor. by next
friend ". Mobile & Ohio Railroad Company,
suit Tor damages for personal injuries, from
, Clay Circuit Court reversed, demurrer u
second aud third pleas sustained and cause
renanded for new trial.
u. Z. Ricketts, ct al. W. y. G. koon, from
, Carroll Circuit Court, first district; affirmed
by Campbell, J.
III Pearson. vs.. the State, convicted IL
second Districtof Pamela Circuit Court; re
yer.cd and rcInAnded. Pearson represented
a house In Memphis aud took Orders fol
: whisky and delivered same Ia Memphis To
I, common carrier, To be delivered 70 purchase
in Panola County, where the Mississippi
local option law sin force The court says
, | The sale Of whisky was complete at Mem
phis. upon delivery 10 the express company
aud the fact that the payment for II was ro
ccivcd there lid not make the appellan
guilty Of selling IN that county. The poin
| h. where was delivery NADER II the sello
: was To deliver The whisky In Pamela County
before any right accrucd " him To claim pa.
b. for IT, the sale was not &hplotc until dc
o livery at the place OF It, destination, but
Q the delivery was IN Memphis 10 the carrie
" AZ the agent OF the buyer the sale was thei
q complete, and tha law Of Mississippi was no
o violated delivery 10 the carrier In ia
Q usual coure Of trade Ia deemed by law prim
. flcic q delivery 20 the conslgncc.n
Allen pcyton ct al vs. George III. Gallo
wny from Iowdos Chnnccry Court nj
: hrmcd. q. r. Bramc W. Mary Moore ct al
from CLAY Chanccry Court; affirmed.
II j. L. Dunlin W. Board Of Supervisors {
o Clay County. from Circuit Court OF sal
. county; affirmed.
! VIM. Ryan 4 Sons W. Robert Paine, r,
/ cciycr from Monroe Chancery Court; r
o ycrscd and rcmanded.
q Vim. l.. Wright vs. J. u. Carlton ct nj
. from First District Pamela Chanocry Couf
reversed and decree hero for appellee.
Fl w. II. Wall ct al. ". w. w. Dickens, az
- minisimtor, ct al, from First District II
uula Chauccry Court affirmed.
IA The Court then proceeded with the dock
i for the Second District.
a. The Court adopted the following rule
A ! That uttOfnCys-atlnw, who have not bee
=, | admitted 10 practice courts. shall not !
permitted 60 argue orally or file briefs I
any paper In any cause That the clcI
= shall not lilo with the paper OF any oaus
,l any paper after the cause has been argue
M or submitted. except when permission b
p. hr,n given by the Court provided th
briefs may be hlcd during the day Of q
submission Of thc cause.