davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
Illinois Staats-zeitung., 1894-10-01

: M~Gee1neines@ ufieben erre9t bie8erOfz
fentLibung zines S6reibenS bes Setretdrs
Der r2onoon 8atnterS Grdoe Society" all
bic 8aronin Surbett< Goutts un0 oes Nnt1
tpOrti6retbens Der 8aronin. Ser Sefretdr
Der 8%eretntgung ber2lnitrei9er mabt ndm7
LID in ieiner !3uibrift bet 8aronin Gorz
nitric Oariiber, OaB ite IN 8roofftel6 Die
Staue Ourb bic Stoutnebte babe a%nitret7
6en Lalien, itatt l1ntonarbeiter an5uiteGen.
Sn ibrem Nntportibreiben tpeiit Die 8as
ronin suerit aaf bic Tbatiacbe bin, Dap
8rOoffielO @igentbum ibres 0atte1l lei
unb ipridt iib bann III iebr i8a rfen 8or1
ten itber rem 1lnertrd9lt3en 9rufanS, ben
bic Nnitrei9erzltniOn aussuiiben perinebe.
Sin berartiser 9rud tpiir6e ieoem Nrbetter
bic M0gGicbfeit nebmsn, aus etgener &raft
it9 DoripdrtS 81 b%rtngen, a1Beroem tpdre IS
Elm @ineriff iii oaS sSebem 6uiteDetoe Jtebt
Der peri0nIidben 6retbeit.
Die Yreiie rtintnt aa9emett Pdttct tur
bic 8aronin ulb peiit barauf bin, wteotel
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10
684S.
The Kansas City & Pacific Railroad Company
vs. William Ryan.
Error from Miami County.
REVERSED.
SYLLABUS.
BY THE COURT.
HORTON. C. J.

1. Between the railroad company and its
employees. the railroad company Is required to
exercise reasonable and ordinary care and dill
igence, and only such, in furnishing to its en-
plOyes reasonably safe machinery and instru-
mentalities for the operation OF its road. A.
T. & S. F. Rid. Co. V. Wagner, 80 X. 66O.
O. 1t does not necessarily follow that the
special inspection given by manufacturer,
or in repair shop by the expert iron workers
therein employed to discover any latent or
concealed defect in tool or instrument for
use like lifting jack, before the same is sent
out for sale, or use, is demanded by railroad
companies, bridge-builders, hOuse-raisers or
other persons using such u tool in their work.
but, Of course, 8 railroad company and every
other person is liable for injuries to their en-
ployes from a defect In their tools and other
appliances used in their work, when such de-
feet Is visible or known, or might have been
known by the exercise OF reasonable and ordi-
nary care and diligence.
8. If a railroad company purchases an ordi-
nary tool or implement, like lifting jack, of
well known and reliable dealerin such tools,
and at the time Of the purchase there Is a lat
ent or concealed defect therein, consisting of
a defec i've weld of the foot attached to the
Jack, which is not visible yet If after use
thereof by the railroad company, such jack, on
account of its cogs being worn or broken, is
sent In for repairs to the railroad shops of the
company, and If in repairing the jack, it was,
or ought to have been the practice at the shops,
DeIOre Che JACK Is sent out again fOr use, 10 eX-
anime and inspect all its parts to ascertain Ii
any other defects exist necessary to be re-
paired, and any reasonable examination or in
spection by the iron workers at the shops
would have disclosed the defective weld of the
foot OF the Jack; then the railroad company Is
negligent in sending out from its own repair
shops the jack for use In defective condition,
even II the defect is not visible.
4. Where an important special finding OF the
jury, which would of itself be sufficient to sus-
tOf ~ Il IL
ported by any evidence and such special find
Ing Is the probable support for other important
and material findings, and the verdict is against
the great preponderance of the evidence, it is
clear that the case was unfairly tried and that
a new trial should be granted.
Johnston, j. concurring.
Allen, J. dissenting.
true copy.
Attest: G. ]. BROWN,
[sEALl Clerk Supreme Court.
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10

was duly allowed and ordered to be paid by
lected to make a complete entry of the allow
anCe and order Of payment. After payment had
been made and another probate judge had sue
ceeded to the Office it was discovered that no
entry had been made Of the order. Upon mo-
tion a RuRc pro tunc order was made authoriz-
ing the entry of the allowance and order for
payment which had been made by the former
probate judge. Held That there was power in
the court to correct the records so that they
should speak the truth.
2. The evidence examined and found to be
sufficient to sustain the finding and judgment
of the court.
All the justices cOncurring.
A true copy.
Attest: c. j. BROWN,
[sEALl Clerk Supreme Court.
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10

nit the plea to be Withdrawn, and to allow
plea Of not guilty entered. II the court abuses
its discretion, error may be assigned therefor.
2 Where defendant, being an intelligent
person and the owner Of q drug store, was
charged with an offense under the prohibitory
liquor law punishable by a fine Of not less than
$100 or more than $500, or by imprlsonment In
the county Jail not less than thirty days or
more than six months, and was represented In
court by able counsel; and upon arraignment
plead guilty and was sentenced to pay $500
fine and the costs, and also to be committed to
the county jail until the fine and costs were
paid and the next day presented his motion
to the court to retract his plea OF guilty upon
the ground of the misconduct Of the prosecut-
ing attorney in inducing him to enter plea
of guilty under the belief that he would be
sentenced to pay q fine Of 800 only, and upon
the hearing OF the motion 1t was shown that
no definite promise was made by the county
attorney to the defendant or his attorneys, or
to anyone for him. and that such attorney did
not urge the defendant or his attorneys to
enter plea Of guilty, but that from an inter
view between the county attorney and one or
two of the friends Of the defendant 1t was un-
derstoOd by them and so communicated to the
defendant that II he plead guilty he would be
sentenced to pay fine of 800 only. Held, The
refusal to permit the defendant to withdraw
his plea was not an abuse Of sound discretion
of the trial court.
All the justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest: C.J. BROWN,
[sEALl Clerk Supreme Court.
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10
In re II. w. Lewis.
Original proceeding in habeas corpus.
PETITIONER REMANDED.


SYLLABUS. BY THE COURT. JOHNSTON, J.
/. Under the fifth subdivision Of section 254
Of the civil code q receiver may be appointed
at the suit of stockholder where the business
and affairs of o corporation have been so mis-
managed that 1t has become insolvent, and
where it is made to appear that all the officers
and directors Of the same have conspired to-
gether to divert its business to another com.
pany, dissipate its funds, and fraudulently
absorb and apply its assets to the individual
benefit Of such officers
2 In such q case the property and assets of
the corporation may be placed in the hands of
a receiver to be preserved and rightfully ap-
piled under the supervision of the court, and
1t may be restored to the officers when there
has been change of management or when it
is deemed by the court to be prudent and safe
to restore the property and affairs of the cor
poration to its duly constituted officers.
All the justices coneurring.
A true copy.
Attest: C.. J. BROWN,
[sEAL Clerk Supreme Court.
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10
AFFIRMED.
SYLLABUS.
BY THE COURT.

SYLLABUS. BY THE COURT. JOHNSTON, J.
The board of railroad commissioners in pur-
suance Of chapter 1874 of the laws of 1887, upon
the application of railroad company granted
1t the right to cross the roads of two other
railway companies and prescribed the terms
and manner of crossing, and also fixed the
compensation to be paid by the crossing COM
pany No appeal was taken from the order.
At the end Of about four months, and before
the crossing was made, the companies over
whose roads the crossing was allowed applied
to the board Of railroad commissioners for q
rehearing Of the case and to set aside the order
allowing the crossing to be made. The cross
ing company objected to the consideration Of
the application, claiming that the board had
no power to grant o re-hearing. The objection
was overruled and the board was proceeding
to re-hear the case when an action for injunc-
tion was begun against the board alone to en-
join 1t from further hearing the application.
Held, That the railroad commissioners are
only nominal parties, that the railroad COM
panies who are invoking the action of the
board and whose rights will be seriously af-
fected by the action which the board may
take are necessary parties, and that no injunc-
tion should be allowed until they are brought
into court and given opportunity to be heard.
All the justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest: G. J. BROWN,
[sEAL Clerk Supreme Court
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10
AFFIRMED.
BY THE COURT.
HORTON, c. J
SYLLABUS.

SYLLABUS. By THE UOUhT. HOkION, Z. J
Where jury are correctly instructed by the
trial court upon all the law questions involved
in the case and the court in addition gives a
slightly contradictory instruction which
clearly appears from the special findings Of the
Jury not to have misled them. Such addi-
tional instruction will not, under the circum-
stances, entitle the defeated party to new
trial.
All the justices concurring.
true copy. ,,.
Attest: Z. BROWN,
TsEAL1 Clerk Supreme Court
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10
The First National Bank of Cobleskill New
York, VS.. David Emmitt

The First National Bank OF Cobleskill, New
York, VS.. David Emmitt
Error from Saline County.
REVERSED.
SYLLABUS. BY THE COURT. JOHNSTON, ].
1. The plaintiff, being in possession of ne
gOtisble note, properly indOrsed, it will be
presumed that he owns and acquired the note
in good faith, for full value in the usual course
OF business, before maturity, without notice
of any circumstance that would impeach its
validity and where the defendant who Is the
maker Of the note, claims that the plaintiff
does not so hold it, it deVolves upon him to
prove his claim.
q The evidence examined and held to be
insufficient to sustain the finding that the
holder was not an innocent purchaser Of the
note in suit.
All the justices concurring
A true copy.
Attest: c.. BROWN,
[sEALl Clerk Supreme Court
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10
G. ]. BROWN,
Clerk Supreme Court.
$500.
NJ. A. Pounds VS.. A. X. Rogers, Treasurer of
Shawnee County, et al.
$500.
Original Proceeding in Mandamus.
WRIT REFUSED.


WRIT REFUSED.
SYLLABUS. Blythe COURT. HORTON, C. j.
/. All matters relating to the sale and con-
veyance of land for taxes under any prior stat
ute shall be fully completed according to the
laws under which they iginated, the same
as IL such laws remained in force. Parg 70lO
Gen. Stat 1889; section 155; chap. 81 laws Of
1876 section 14S, Ch. 107, Gen. Stat 1868
a The sale Of land for delinquent taxes, un-
der the statute constitutes q contract between
the purchaser and the state-the terms of
which are found in the law then in force.
3. On September /, 1893, the owner rendered
to the county treasurer the amount for which
the land was sold, with interest at the rate Of
tweney-tour per cent. from the date of sale to
the 18th day OF May, 1898, the day on which
chapter 1l0, OF the laws OF 1898 reducing the
interest payable on redemption, to fifteen per
cent?, went into effect, and interest from May
49, 1S93 to Sept /. 1898, at the rate Of fifteen per
cent; also the amount of half tax OF 1892 raid
by the purchaser June u, 1898, with interest
from the latter date to the time OF tender, at
the rate of fifteen per cent. Held, That the ten
redeem said land the amount for which the
land was bid of, and all the subsequent taxes,
paid by the purchaser thereon, with interest
at the rate of twenty-four per cent per annum
on the taxes and charges from the date Of sale,
and the same interest on all subsequent taxes
so paid by the purchaser from the date of pay
ment must be paid or rendered.
All the justices concurring
A true copy.
Attest: T.. j. BROWN,
lsEALl Clerk Supreme Court.
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10

Pruessner ana Lizzie PruesSner
Error from the Circuit Court Of Shawnee
County.
REVERSED.
1. The courts, in the due administration of
Justice, will not enforce contract in violation
Of law, or permit plalnttR to recover upon
transaction against public policy. even 1.-THE
inValidity Of the contract or transaction be not
specially pleaded.
q Where a mortgage, residing in this state,
owns and has In his possession note for $l70O,
secured by mortgage upon real estate, In this
state, and pretends to transfer by merely en-
dorsing his name thereon, but without actually
delivering the same, such note and mortgage
to his father In another state, without any de-
mand being made upon him to do 80, to secure
$4,000 and interest for prior borrowed money,
but really for the purpose of evading the pay
ment of taxes Justly due to the state; Held,
That in an action brought In the name OF the
father to recover upon tho note and mortgage,
the mortgagee, on account OF his acts In eVad-
Ing the payment OF taxes and thereby defraud-
Ing the revenues OF the state, cannot have any
recovery In the name OF his father or other
wise on any part OF the note or mortgage be-
longing to him; Held, also. That II the father
did not have any knowledge Of such alleged
transfer, and his name Is used to collect such
note and mortgage without his consent,or II he
merely accepted the note and mortgage as
pdrticeps CrimiRis to defraud the revenue laws,
no recovery OF any amount thereon can be had
in his name.
3. Where husband and wife jointly con-
yey homestead in exchange for other real es-
tate to be occupied by them as a new home
stead upon which there Is prior
mortgage, and the husband, with the consent
OF the wife, takes the conveyance OF such real
estate In his own name, and expressly assumes
the payment of the mortgage thereon, the wife
cannot, in an action to fOreclOse the mortgage,
defend against II upon the ground that the
real estate so purchased is u homestead, and
therefore that the prior mortgage thereon at
the date of the exchange Is null and void.
4. Where higher rate OF interest Is eX-
pressly reserved to be paid after maturity,
such amount is recoverable, IL not prohibited
by statute.
s. Where judgment is rendered upon two
different notes. and for the foreclosure OF two
different mortgages given to secure the same,
one in favor Of the plaintiff, and one In favor
Of co defendant, and the judgment on the
note and the foreclosure Of the mortgage in
favor OF the plaintiff are erroneous for want of
sufficient evidence. 1t Is error for the trial
court to provide that in the decree that upon
the sale Of the real estate all OF the costs in
volYed in the case, including the costs taxed
upon the erroneous judgment, shall be first
paid from the proceeds OF such sale.
All the justices concurring.
true copy.
Attest: G. j. BROWN,
[sEALl Clerk Supreme Court.
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10
REVERSED.
SYLLABUS.
BY THE COURT. JoHNsT

/. Greenwood V. Butler, SO Kas. followed.
,. Where land is advertised to be sold for
cash in pursuance of judgement Of fore
closure, and the sheriff accepts q certified
check as cash, which Is afterward paid, the
acceptance of the certified check for cash is
not Of itself a sufficient reason to defeat the
sale.
3. Where a judgment under which land has
been sold Is held to be erroneous and is re-
yersed, and it appears that the land was bid
for and in behalf of the Judgment creditor,
and that the purchase was actually made for
such judgment creditor, the purchaser Is not
entitled to the protection provided for in sec
tion i67 of the civil code. The reversal Of the
judgment defeats the title of the purchaser
and the sale should be set aside.
All the justices concurring.
true copy
Attest: G. j. BROWN,
[sEALl Clerk Supreme Court
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10
SYLLABUS.

l. ruling quashing the summons and set
ting aside the service made upon the defend
ant is final order which is renewable in the
supreme court.
q Such ruling is not available as error
where more than one year has interVened be-
tween the making of the order and the COM
mencement OF proceedings in error.
3. An action against railroad company for
injury to property upon the road or line OF the
company may be brought in any county
through or into which the road passes; and
when rightly brought the summons may be
issued to any other county OF the state and
there served upon the president Of the COM
pany.
All the justices concurring.
true copy.
Attest: G. J. BROWN,
SEAL Clerk Supreme Court.
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10

The Union Terminal Railroad Company vs..
the Board of Railroad Commissioners Of the
State Of Kansas.
Error from Shawnee County.
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10

st. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co. VS.. Eliz-
abeth Hurst and Alfred Hurst

st. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co. vs. Eliz-
abeth Hurst and Alfred Hurst
Error from Cowley County.
REVERSED.
SYLLABUS. BY THE COURT. HORTON c. j.
l. An appeal from the judgment OF justice
OF the peace Is complete upon the filing and
approval Of the appeal bond or undertaking
within ten days from the rendition Of the
judgment.
q The successor OF justice Of the peace has
the power under the direction OF tn district
court to supply omissions In transcript Of his
predecessor, and for that purpose may file with
the clerk of the district court a new and COM
pleted transcript from the official records in
his possession.
8 Where an appeal bond filed and approved
by justice Of the peace Is insufficient in form
or amount, the party appealing should be
given an opportunity by the district court
where the appeal Is pending, to change or re-
new the bond before the case Is dismissed for
q defect therein.
All the justices concurring.
Attest: G. ]. BROWN,
[sEALl Clerk Supreme Court
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10
6974.
| Newton Kreamer and David J. Matter vs.
| Sarah Kreamer.

Newton Kreamer and David ]. Matter vs.
Sarah Kreamer.
Error from Jewell County
AFFIRMED.
SYLLABUS. BY THE COURT. JOHNSTON, j.
Where an executor whoi is a residuary legatee
executes bond to pay all the debts and
legacies of the testator, he and the sureties
become absolutely liable to the extent of the
penalty of the bond for all debts and legaees,
regardless Of the amount or value Of the assets
OF the estate and where q specific legacy Is
not paid when due, the legatee may, without
obtaining an order Of allowance by the pro-
bate court, and upon demand and refusal Of
payment, maintain an action for the recovery
OF such legacy against the obligors Of the
bond.
All the justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest: c. BROWN,
lsEALJ Clerk Supreme Court
6976.
Martin Brooks and James Brooks, heirs OF Cal
vim X Brooks, deceased, vs.. Silas n. Brooks,
administrator OF the estate of Calvin
Brooks, deceased
Error from Rocks County.
AFFIRMED.
SYLLABUS. By THE CoURT. JOHNSTON, ].
!. The claim Of . creditor against an estate
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10

$780,
The State Of Kansas VS.. L. r, Yates.
Appeal from Brown County,
AFFIRMED.
SYLLABUS. BY THE COURT. HORTON, c. J.
l. The rule Is that where q defendant has
pleaded guilty In criminal cause and sem
tenee has been passed upon him, II is within
the sound discretion OF the Trial court to per-
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10

B2O4
The Board Of County Commissioners OF the
County of Graham VS.. B. Van Slyck, Jerome
Shoup and William Wells.
Error from Graham County.
AFFIRMED.
SYLLABUS. Blythe COURT JOHNSTON, ].
l. Under the general statute relating to fees
and salaries county clerks are entitled to no
more compensation than the salaries fixed by
law; and all fees received by them for official
eFvices should be accounted for and deducted
rom each quarterly allowance Of salary.
cause OF sction for fees not accounted
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10

Joseph L, Sheldon and Lizzie S. Sheldon vs.
Simon Pruessner, Lewis M. Motter, Henry S.
Pruessner and Lizzie Pruessner.
Error from Shawnee County.
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10
$3.50.

Arkansas, Kansas & Colorado Railway Com
pany.
Error from Ford County.
REVERSED.
SYLLABUS. BY THE COURT. JOHNSTON. ].
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10

d.
sc. BigelOw VS.. D. wygal, etal.
Error from Miami County.
The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1894-01-10
S746.

Joseph L. Sheldon and Lizze S. Sheldon ys.
Simon Pruessner Lewis NJ. Motter, Henry S.
Pruessner and Lizzie Pruessner.
Error from the Circuit Court OF Shawnee
County.
REVERSED.
New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-07-25

We have mentioned that the interests Of the
Republican party at the last election suppose |
20 be looked after by Dennis shea. He is an ndo-
lent plausible gentleman. weighing some 90 pounds.
and until lately holding lucrative position as
Deputy Collector OF Customs. He is an enhnsi-
! as,lc advocate OF the Committee OF Thirty reor-
ganlzatlon schemes: one OF the first 10 see its
| Advantages and has been extremely active In pro-
noting Il In his district Mr. Shea is no novice in
| politics lie has had charge o. this district for many
wears The entire responsibility Of It's management
was assumed by him At the last election. Other Re-
pubcans tried - divide the OF the district
with him. but he woull not tolerate any Interference
! Ills sway must Zoe and absolute. BY careful
| and systematic management; OF primaries by the
practice OF the closest Of close corporations meth
DDS he perpetuatei himself and his followers In
power and suppressed or dsrsgarled all opPosI-
ton As Illustrating his management OF the dis
,rict II IL stated that a number Of known Tammany
men were his nomination, appointed NJ Repub-
lican marshas a, the last Presidential election
against the circumstances OF many party workers.
As a natural result Of these methods Mr. Shea was
supreme The responsibility for the showing OF No
vember 1893 rests solely upon him and his organza-
ton.
The Republican election inspectors for the III Dis
trlct were selected by Mr. Shea and. II Is said APP
proved by Mr. Brooknel. OF the County Commit
toe They were ell at their stations on Election
Day and remained at work every hour. But Mr.
shea was not his post that day. For a short
time he ut the polls and then disappeared
During the most important part Of the voting he
was found with some other Republican leaders In
a beer saloon NJ No. Is East Broadway. The cleo
ton returns already given sufficiently complete the
story and may explain both the cause and conse
Quence Of his actions.
so outrageous the frauds In this district that
II aroused citizens everywhere. The Republicans OF
the ward exasperated and alarmed. Under
Thomas Harrington the Indignation against
Shea was aroused and became formidable. To bring
the matter to the attention OF the County Com
mittee Mr. Harrington sought admission there. but
at Shea's direction was elected Complaint was,
however. laid before that committee and Mr.. Iiar-
rington and others appeared before sub-commit-
tee 10 support their charges In the end Mr.. Shea
was requested to appear before the famous nvesti-
eating committee and that the end of the
matter. Evidently the leadership OF Mr.. Shea met
with the committees approval for the members OF
that committee recognizing him and his
iieutennnts as the only Republican organizers OF
the Id District
But the violations OF the law. undlscoverable by
the Committee OF Thirty. had aroused general con-