The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-05-15
AS TO FREE HOLDERS
The Decision of Judge Woody in the
Merrick-JacksOn Case.
EXPLANATION OF THE CASE
Old Mother CIeim's Trouble to Be
Renewed q gain at This erm-
The stolen Valise-Other
Court business.


contest has been the subject of consid-
cradle comment this week, and there
seems to be some misunderstanding OF I
the conditions that existed and that in
fluenced the decision.
To a Standard reporter to-day Judge
Woody said: THE statute provides
that a free holder shall mean an estate
of inheritance in fee of an estate for
life This is denominated a free hold.
The statute as to the election OF city
officers says that a man to be eligible
to the office of alderman must be free
holder and a taxpayer and resident
of his ward for a year. The decision
of the courts and the opinion of the
best law writer's is that when man
enters into a contract to purchase an
estate, that is, when one party agrees
to sell and another agrees to buy, the
moment the contract Is signed, the
buyer becomes the equitable owner OF
the property; that he holds the equit-
able title and the seller holds the legal
title: that the equitable title Is subject
to inheritance and that the moment
/ he signs the contract for the purchaSe,
| he has such equitable interest That can
/ be inherited by his heirs, and upon his
| death his equitable title descends to his
heirs. In this case i hold this: That
was a contract for the purchase OF
property, and being a contract Tor pur-
chase, and having been assigned 10
Jackson and two other parties JOINTLY
and prior to the election. that at the
data Of the election jackson owned an
EQUITABLE undivided one--third interest
in the lots mentioned in the certihcate
of purchase. And as Such NE nau an
equitable free hold in the SAID prop
erty, II being an estate OF inheritance,
and he was therefore eligible to be
elected to the Office of alderman as
free holder There is a difference be-
tween such a contract for purchase
and a bond for a deed, and the latter
would not be subject to the same con
struction as the former. The one Is
mutual and the other Is not. In the
latter there is nothing compulsory as TO
the purchase of the property and In the
former there is.
In the district court to-day the coun-
~ attorney made application TO as
miss the case of the state against MARY
Glenn but the court overruled the ap-
nlication and the case will probably be
brought up at this term of court. rms
,s the case which was tried once and
for which Mrs. Glenn spent some Time
in the state pen. The supreme court
finally ordered a new trial and the case
will be heard again. The tact undt
pohbv Burns is dead and the absence
of other witnesses who testified TOT uhe
state at the first trial make II doubtful
IL as strong a case can be made agalnsl
the defendant as at the former trlai.
{ In the suit of II. b. Campbell VS..
J. H. Pussy, the default OF the oeleho,
T ant was entered and judgment toupe
for the plaintiff in the sum OF SIb.0V.
e In the case of the First Natlonai
2 hank VS.. Pussy q Blair the defendants
] were granted leave to amend their an
swer. ,.
In the case of Boughton VS.. RANKIN,
I taken under advisement yesterday, the
I motion of defendant TO file an AMENDED
cd nlalnIlIl
K excepted. This case was afterward SCI
I for hearing Tuesday, May 10, at S:SO
a. m. r,,.
In the case of the state VS.. Frank
Murray. charged with grand larceny
c. II. Hall, attorney for the detendan.
q made a motion TO suppress lhe uePOSi
, ton of Fred Pfeifer.
l. Pfeifer is the man whose valise the
u defendant is charged with taking. Inc
, motion was supported by Mr. mars al
y ddavit. The county attorney presehte'
C counter affidavits of himself, Judg'
Landers and Stenographer WOODY Ih'
matter was taken under Amusement
and nending a decision the county at
torney was allowed to withdraw tn
l., deposition and add certincate 10 con
AZ form with the facts.
Ia William Williams and John Kessle
or were in court this morning with tnel
IS attorneys and demanded separat
ST trials on DOln VI tiiS Sh"' g. 80
N them. The cases were set TOT "ed
1t nesday, May 20. -
10 George Thompson and William How
al ard entered pleas of not guilty in IN
as case against them for burglary IN IN
es first degree and the trial was set 10
cy Tuesday, May 20, at a. m.
ne The following cases were set tor trla
~ Clifford VS. Merirck, May Is; Butler VI
West Iron Mountain company an
others. two cases, May % and %; VIII
sor VS.. Eninger May %; Higgins v
Prescott. MAY IS; Illinois Glass con
n many US. Garden City Liquor & Bo
he fling company, May 10; Higgins V
PUSSY. May 81; contest of the VIII
es Emma Hodgson, May 20
nd Judge Woody made an order in Il
estate of c. p. Higgins confirming u
lip sale of real estate to a. j. Gibson.
lie, Charles w. PaItten this afternoon o.
clared his intention OF pecoining cI'
zen of the United States. Inc ca
IS a somewhat peculiar one as the app
can, for citizenship was born in IN
ial country. He afterward removed
lay canada and became a British suoJet
ay, re has now come to Montana to 7
te- side and wishes to become what he w
mo i'm the first place-an American cItizs
ST. Judge Logan this afternoon gave y
TO decision in the case Of the state again
by. Io,ofasso,. T'r.ipp. charged with defrau
ion inc John Rankin, his landlord. Il
ark dHclsion gives the professor light pc
on o,tv & and costs. This was MADE
un- I,s6t in consideration of the fact IN
lis ~ hoard bill has been secured a
an that the professor is not Thought 10
a malicious fellow, but VINO mas
ded lowed his good sense to get away Ir'
- him for a time.
and -