The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1895-07-09
-FOUR NEW OPINIONS
The Supreme Court Decides Some In
pOrtant Matters.
BRETT, THE EX-CITY CLERK
Judgment OF the Lower Court At
flrmed in His Case - Appeals
From Cascade County-Great
Falls, Vogel Eft Al.
Special Dispatch to the STANDARD.

Special Dispatch TO the STANDARD.
Helena, July S.-Four opinions were
handed down by the supreme court
to-day.
State. respondent. VS.. Henry Brett.
appellant: from Lewis and Clarke
Brett. when assistant city clerk
of Helena. obtained by war
rants and other fraudulent
means over $4,000 of the citys
money. He was convicted OF forgery
and sentenced by Judge Blake to 10
years in the penItentiary. Brett pre-
yiously filed a motion to quash the in
formation. alleging that he had not
been legally committed. This motion
was overruled. The defendant then
filed a demurrer. the principal ground
of which was that the instrument
charged to be forgery was wholly void
in that the Indebtedness of the city of
Helena was far in excess OF the con-
stitutional limit and the instrument
could not then be subject 10 forgery.
The demurrer was overruled, and on
trial the defendant was not allowed
to introduce evidence relating to the
indebtedness of the city. In part, the
supreme court says. IL Is argued that
a prosecution by information. where
there has been no preliminary exami-
nation. is illegal and a violation of con-
stitutional rights. The court further
says that 1t is unable to see how the
proceeding authorized by the consti-
tuition any way interfered with the
administration OF the regular course
of law. The point that the city war
rant is not the subject of forgery Is
declared to be not well taken. Au-
thorities are cited to prove that war
rant in the condition of those forged
have value and are forgeable, The su-
preme court also sustains the action
of the lower court in not allowing 10
be introduced evidence relating to the
city debt. Judgment affirmed. Opin-
ion by Justice Hunt.
John W. Hopkins, respondent. VS..
Butte & Montana Commercial COM
pany. appellant; from Cascade. Plant
if recovered Judgment for s6l7 for
damages caused by defendant flood
ing his land while driving logs on Deep
creek. The defendant appealed from
the judgment and from an order deny
ing a new trial. The principal conten-
tion was that the evidence did not sus-
tain the verdict In that it was not
shown that the damages were occas-
ioned by the negligence of the defend
ant. which was engaged in driving
about 100000 feet Of logs down Deep
creek. The defendants defense was
that the damages were caused by rea-
son of an extraordinary freshet. and
not through its negligence. After re-
| viewing the evidence the court affirm
ed the judgment and order denying
the new trial opinion by De Witt
II. ii. Nelson, appellant, VS.. Nose
| Spears. respondent, from Cascade.
Plaintiff sued defendant in the district
court of Cascade county to recover 5000
claimed to be due for hay and other
personal property. A verdict was re-
turned for defendant for 5000. Plain
tiff moved for new trial. which was
denied. and from this order refusing
a new trial. an appeal was taken. Re-
versed and remanded for new trial.
Opinion by Pemberton. chief JUS
tice.
| Wilmer Atkinson ct al, appellants.
VS.. the city of Great Falls, Henry Vo-
gel ct al, respondents. from Cascade.
An action for an Injunction to restrain
the city Of Great Falls and Henry Vo-
| gel from carrying out a contract en-
tered into between them for the paw
| ing of a street. The contract price for
paving was $4,000. The main ground
upon which the injunction is sought is
that the carrying out of the contract
/ ka Ind
city beyond the constitutional limita-
ton of per centum of the taxable
property of the city. The complaint
alleges that the contract sought to be
enjoined is in violation OF the consti-
| tutional Limitation. The lower court
sustained a motion by sthe defendants
for a non-suit. The court says: 1T
| is possible that after a full examina-
| ton of the authorities bearing on ques-
| tions involved q determination could
be reached on the record. but as briefs
ard arguments are almost wholly di-
yertcd towards the slngle issue Of what
was the Indebtedness of the city at
| the date Of the contract and as il Is
| important that n decision on the mo-
tion for non-suit be made without de-
! lay. we prefer 10 reserve any decision
on legal questions until the facts are
more clearly before Us, and until argu-
ment may be had on such other points
as are probably Involved when the
facts are finally determined"
| The judgment Is reversed and the
cause remanded for new trial and the
district court is advised to issue a re-
straining order until The cause is finally
| determined. Opinion by Pemberton,
| chief justice.