The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-12-13

QIlence to hold that the endorsement by
them of such papers is invalid, especially
when Gas in this case) the paper endors-
ed by the wife is rendered as a collateral
in q written instrument containing not
only the written assent of the husband,
but his request that it be so used. Conn
mercial paper is sexless When by prop
er endorsement it is put into the currents
of trade, the taker of it before matu-
rity should regard it as courier with
out luggage and not be held to inquire
and scrutinize whether amy of the en-
dorsers We're or were not widows, wives
or spinters. = - Apart from the
constitutional rights Of married women
over their property being the same as
that of single women Except as to ICON
veyances' which refer to deeds and
nnortgages) the commercial law has new
er before held the taker of commercial
paper to scrutindZe the sex or marital
condition of endorseTs of such paper.
The endorsement by a married woman
payee of check stands on the same
footing as her endorsement when payee
of promissory mote, so far, certainly,
as emitting the holder to receive the
proceeds of the check or note, which is
the only matter at issue here"
TIIEOPHILUS WHITES CASE.
AT the petition of his attorney the
case of Thecphilus White, the fusion
oyster inspector, was set for a hearing
on Tuesday December 10. White has
brought action for nlandamus TO conn
pei the State Auditor to pass a warrant
and to force the State Treasurer to pay
the same for the salary to which he was
entitled under the act of 1897 The act
of 1899 reduced the salary of the office
and White has refused to accept
the salary fixed in the act of 1899. He
is represented by J. G. L. Harris. r..
H. Busbee appears for the Auditor and
Treasurer.
OPINIONS YESTERDAY.
Opinions were handed down as fol-
lows:
Alternately VS.. Manufacturing Com
pany from CASTOR, per curtain. affirmed.
Everett VS.. Spencer, from Swain, per
curia1n Judgment against defendant for
costs (the matter had previously been
settled by the parties.)
Mizell VS.. MCGOWAN, from Pitt, new
trial.
Life Association VS.. Thompson, Sec
rotary, from Wake, affirmed.
Quinn VS. Sexton, from Wake, af-
firmed.
Potts VS.. Duhn, from Mecklenburg,
modified and remanded.
State vs. Gatewood, from Union, APP
peal dismissed.
State vs. Griffin. from Union, affirmed.
State VS.. Hawkins, from Cleveland,
new trial.
Walton rs. Bristol, from Burke, re-
yersed.
Davis VS.. Rlevins, from Ashe, affirmed.
Herring VS.. Pugh, from Sampson ap-
peal dismissed.
Railroad VS.. King, from Gliilford, af-
irned.
Wilson vs.. Foster. from Burke, mo-
ton for certiorari allowed.
CASES ARGUED.
Cases from the Twelfth district were
argued as follows:
State vs.. Burton, by Attorney General
for the State: j. Il. Ray for defendant,
State vs.. Gentry, Attorney General for
the State; j. NJ Gu1ger, Jr., for de-.
PENDANT.
Delozier VS.. Bird, by Il. G. Fisher for
plaintiff: Davidson & Jones, A. NJ. Fry
and r. Il. Leatherwood for defendant.
Cansler VS.. Penland, by Shepherd 4
Busbee for plaintiff; simmons, Pou and
Ward for defendant.
Bank VS.. Bank, continued under order
for certiorari.
Bassett vs. Atwater, continued
Bennett VS.. Commissioners, argued hy
4. NJ. Fry for plaintiff; Il. @. Fisher for
defendant.
Turpin VS.. Cunningham, continued.
Russell vs.. Hill. argued by G. $. Fer
guson and J. II. Ray for plaintiff; Il. Il.
Leatherwood for defendant.