The evening herald. [volume] (Shenandoah, Pa.) 1891-1966, 1894-07-19
LANDLORD
AND TENANT.
Anthony TObak Wins His Suit
Against Edward Early.
A MUSTY OLD LAW LIVES
Although it Was Passed Before the
Declaration Of Independence Was
Adopted it is as Effective as Ever.

Justices William II. Shoemaker and c.
w. Dengler sat in the Office of S. G. M.
Hollupeter, Esq, yesterday afternoon
with jury of twelve freeholders to hear
final arguments in the case of Anthony
Tobak against Edward Early for the pos
session of the saloon at the corner of
Lloyd street and Market alley. The jury
men were William Krick, James Grant,
NJ. II. Kehler David Faust, Andrew Hill
debrandt, r. A. Davenport, +. j. PortZ
A. b. Lamb, William kimmel, M. p.
Fowler and j. w. Johnson.
The jury decided in favor of Tobak,
awarding him possession of the premises
and $3.50 damages in addition to the COSTS
The cases cited in the proceedings and
the discussions by counsel for the respec-
tive parties on the law and evidence were
of more than ordinary interest,
1t appears that on the first day of June,
1898, Martin Purcell the then owner of
the property, executed a bill of sale to
Early which he sold to him the license
and good will of the saloon and in which
he agreed to give Early upon the transfer
of the license, yearly lease at SlS per
month, and in pursuance of this agreement
on the 5th day of the same month Pur-
cell did give to Early a lease to the
premises, which specified the rental
y
The apparent conflict between the con-
dition in the agreement to lease yearly
and the ten months letting in the lease
was one of the bones of contention.
Early's counsel claimed that the agree
ment was not only part of the lease out
was the basis of it and that when Tobak
purchased the Purcell property and took
an assignment of the bill of sale and the
lease he would bound be by the conditions
of the agreement, which called for a
yearly letting to Early. Under the agree
ment, Early's year would have expired
on June 3, 1894, and under the lease on
A pril ., 1894. But after April 5th and up
to July 5th Early continued to pay his reg
ular rent and his counsel claimed ia ad.
| dition that the acceptance of this rent by
| Tabok created a new tenance between
him and Early and destroyed the pro
| ceedings Tabok instituted
Counsel for TobaB, Mr. Hollopeter,
urged that there could be nothing else
for the jury to accept and consider than
| the lease dated June 5tb, 1898, which eX
pressly gave to early possession of the
premises for ten months. He also main
/ tanned that the proceedings instituted
under the act of 1112, although very un-
\ usual and seldom resorted TO- were reg
| ular and in conformity to law, and the
| jury evidently agreed with him, for now
| the Sheritf's duty is to collect the DANA
| ges awarded and Tobak is entitled to pos
session of the premises.
The Act of 1172, under which these pro
ceedings were instituted is, it will be OBJ
| served from the date, older than the
| Declaration Of Independence 1t provides
that if tenant shall remain in possession
of property after his term has expired, and
| without the consent of the landlord, the
landlord may first treat him as tres
passer and summarily eject him from the
| premises, taking care, of course, that he
shall commit no breach of the peace in
doing so or, secondly the landlord may
appeal to any two Justices of the Peace
within the county, make his complaint
and direct that said Justices shall issue
their warrant to the Sheriff and command
him to summon twelve freeholders tC
meet with the Justices and hear and de
| termine the rights of the respective parties
in controversy. And if the jury shall
find that the landlord is entitled to posses
sion the Justices shall issue process anC
the Sheriff shall forthwith execute the
same and place the landlord in possession
of the property, and that is the situation
of the much talked-of Tobak- Early CASE
up to date