The Advocate and news., 1899-03-01

| lgGhll NAGAA
In the Kansas Court OF Appeals, Southern
Department, Central Division
No. R4.
John Leech, plaintiff in error.
The Arkansas City Manufacturing COM
pany and W. M. Sleeth, defendants
In error.
Error from Cowley District Court.
AFFIRMED.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Milton, j.
Delivery Of possession under a mortgage
before rights have been acquired by others,
will cure any invalidity there may be In
the instrument arising from an insufficient
from II containing provision which makes
1t void except between the parties"
Opinion fled February II, 1899.
A true copy.
Attest: W. A. AYREs,
[Seal.l Clerk.
In the Kansas Court Of Appeals, Southern
Department, Central Division.
No. 77S.
The State Of Kansas, plaintiff in error.
VIM. Eldred, defendant in error.
Error from Mcpherson District Court.
AFFIRMED.
The opinion Of the court was delivered by
Milton, j.
/. The warrant under which defendant
was arrested, and which charged violations
of the prohibitory law by sale Of intoXic9nts
and by keeping g. nuisance, commanded the
seizure of articles other than those named
In the statute. Defendant gave bond and
afterwards moved to quash the warrant,
Held, that the warrant was not void.
2. While 1t is altogether improper for the
State to transform jurors into witnesses
by having them smell and taste alleged In
tOxlcants which were seized by the sheriff
at the time of defendants arrest, yet as the
defendant did not object to such conduct
on the part Of the prosecuting attorney
and Of the jury, Held, that the error was
waived.
3. Where the court in it's charge in
referring to the election made by the county
attorney as to particular sales substantially
ney in making the elections, but the in
structiOns as q whole are fair, Held, that
reversible error was not committed by the
use of said language.
4. One count of the information charged
that tha Olapa 1Fant NV tha defendant Wag a
common nuisance within each Of the three
statutory designations Of such nuisance
and the testimony tended to sustain the
charge along each Of the three particular
lines Held that the count was not bad as
charging several ofGenses. State " Schwei-
ter, 26 Kan 499.
5. An appellate court is averse to laying
down rules restricting the exercise on the
respect to persstently-dodging witness,
who in the opinion Of the court, Is purposely
trying to avoid disclosing facts within his
must appear to justify unfavorable criti-
clsn on the part OF reviewing court In
such case.
G. Omission of the words without food"
from the oath as administered by the clerk
OF the court to the bailim who was placed
in charge of the jury after the cause was
submitted, where there was no misconduct
respect TO any matter which was, or should
have been, stated in the oath, and where
no exception was taken to the form Of the
oath, until the filing Of the motion for new
trial. Held, to have been immaterial.
Opinion fled February II, 1899.
A true copy.
Attest: w. A. AYRES,
TSeai.j Clerk.
In the Kansas Court OF Appeals, Southern
Department, Central Division.
No. $50.
Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad
Company, plaintiff in error.
VS..
Board of County Commissioners Of Lyon
County, defendants in error