The morning times., 1896-05-06
LOWER COURT REVERSED
Attachment Suit Decided by the
Court of Appeals.
FIRST CASE OF ITS KIND
wilkins and Company Win an Impor
tant Suit-Not necessary to Provide
Gates ut Railroad Crossings Out
side the City Linits-Home for Des-
titute Women on Kalora ma Heights.

! Five important opinions were handed
down yesterday afternoon by the court of
appeals. and singularly enough, the de-
ciSion In each case was adverse to the
iudgm ent in the court below.
The decision in the case OF Wilkins &
Co.. produce dealers, against Joel Hiilmap
was in favor of the former. the appellants.
The appeal was from an order of Judge
Bradley quashing writ OF attachment
wilkins & Co. had a claim for S2,l93
and were granted an attachment on the
plea that the defendant had absconded.
1t was the first attachment suit ever
carried TO the court OF appeals and the
ruling Will beof much consequence in future
court practice.
The decision reached by a ma ajority
OF the court in the disposition OF the street
extension case. where IT was held tliaS
under the fifth constitutional amendment
Congress cannot compel the consideration
OF special benefits to remaining land as
set off against the actual value of the
part taken. was again reached by the court
or appeals where it directed the overrulng
OF motion for a reargument Of the Mary
land aud Washington Railway Company
against Louisa Hitler, and others. The
company was the appellant.
The case of william T Smith, an
engineer on tBe Baltimore & Ohio Railroad
against Walter II. Stoutenbergs, the suler-
intendent Of the workhouse, was decided in
the formers favor, and the court be,ow
was directed TO release him from custody
This was test case on babeas corpus
proceedings, TO try the legality OF fine for
NOT having gates or watchmen at suburban
railroad crossings.
Mr.. Smith was tried before Judge Kim
BAH In police court November z, last.
The information charged him with unlaw-
fully running his engine over street in
EckmgtOn in the daytime without having
the street guarded, as provided by the
legislative act for the District OF Columbia
August 23, 1871
ENGINEER WAS CONVICTED
he was convicted and sentenced 10 the
workhouse, but was permitted TO give
bail while his case was contested in the
courts above.
The contention of the District authorities
was that though the act referred only to
Washington and Georgetown the suburban.
crossings should also be taken into coz.
slderation under ii.
The contention is plausible only" said
the court. Considered by itself the section
might be given that construction. But the
act had general purpose and must lie
considered as q whole, in order I o Clet ermine
the application Of the second section tire
one III question:, as well as some OF the
other sections, there being seven in all
clear that the act was not intended to
operate outside tife limits Of the cities OF
Washington and Georgetown. Conse-
quentiy the police court had no more
jurisdiction than ii would have had if the
alleged offenSe had been committed outside
the boundaries of the District"
The Judgment of the court below in the
case OF isaiah Stevens, he'd for a sfmi-
lar offense, but the street crossings in this
case being in the city limits, is also
reversed and the release Of the defendant
ordered. In this instance it is held by TIE
court that the legislative act of August
23, 1871. is repealed by an act of Con
gress OF January 26. 1887, and the con-
tention OF the District under the former
regulation does not hold good.
INSTITUTION WILL BENEFIT.
A court below reached y decision re-
fusing to admit to probate the will OF
the late Mrs. Anna NJ. Maulsby, who died
July 80 1892, written instrument that
left $4,000 for the erection OF a home
for destitute women on Kalorama Heights
The court OF appeals reversed this judg-
ment. 1t was intended to have the home
conducted under the auspices of st. Johns
Vestry.
The instrument making the bequest was
addressed to Emma L. Breese and Char
lotte Rostwick, sisters Of the deceased tt
was Intended to make the institution
memorial to their mother.
In event OF the death of the sisters or
their refusal to carry out the directions OF
the bequest Ida CorSon and Louisa d.
Lovin were to serve as trustees One sis
ter died and the other-Eefused to act under
the instrument, and the two persons named
TOOK up the trust, part of the yestry of ST
Johns joining with them
When the case came ou for hearing in
| The courts the VIII was admitted. but
the testamentary request was excluded
Though st. Johns vestry might not have
legal interest in the subject matter of
the beque aiming instrument, the court of
appeals said yet it clearly has a parochial
interest.