The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-03-10
LATE LEGAL DECISIONS.
tCompiled Erpresslu for The Tmes.,

Complied Expressly for The Times
Criminal responsibility for a conspiracy
to cheat by Undertaking. seances'' OF o
protested medium is held by the Supreme
Court of Michigan in the case of the peo-
pie VS. Gilman (46 L. r. A. 2iSJ, to exist.
although 1t is contended tina. no crime was
committed. because it was an obvious hum
Dug. which, in the nature OF things. could
not deceive any rational being In this
case the defendant was convicted of con-
spiraey to defraud others by 'materiaIizing
seanees, In which he was assisted by
others Before the proceedings collection
OF VI would be taken up. and detective.
who was there for the purpose Of exp,sure
paid his dollar. succeeded in showing mo
imposture, and then began criminal pre-
ceedings.
The antitrust law has been recently up
held in the United States Circuit Court OF
the Northern district of California in the
case Of Lowry Tile. Mantel, and Crate As
sociation Fed Rep, SID, and the doc;r ne
OF the Addyston Pipe and Steel Company.
decided by the United States Supreme
Court, has been followed and applied. Is
the California case the court heli that ,
complaint alleging that members o. an
ASSOCIATION have conspired and combined
TO raise the prices OF tiles. manteIs ard
CRATES, to control the output and to regu-
late the prices thereof, with the intent to
monopolize the trade and commerce he
tween the other States and California in
regard thereto, as well as to fix arbitrarily
their prices, independently of their natural
market value. brings the case within ire
antitrust act of July 2. 1890 ZIG. stat,
zV9l, commonly known as the Sherman
antitrust act
suit for damages was brought against
the city of Williamsburg. Va. by per
son who was struck ana injured by n
bicycle That was being ridden upon a
sidewalk of one OF the streets The con-
tention OF the plaintiff was that the hi
cyciist was making an improper use OF
the street, and that the city was liable In
damages Tor the accident, because 1t had
failed to pass an ordinance forbidding BIZ
cycles to be ridden over the sidewalk. But
the Supreme Court of Appeals held that
the city was not liable, on the ground
that the legislative powers which it pos
sesses are discretionary. and that the
municipality is exempt from liability for
an injury resulting from the failure 10
exercise them. Jones VS. City Of Will
liamsburg, "a s. Fl. sS3.)
Where persons conspire together to re-
fuse to deal with a merchant and induce
others to do likewise and it does not sp-
pear that their interference with his bust
of their OWE. but that II was done Toaito
clousiy TO in1ure him, the Supreme Court
of Minnesota. in the case of SRI We PFC
duce Exchange Company ~, \ w psn
1871. held that the merchant aan raco,ar
damages if he has sustained material
financial injury.
ATTORNEYS must NOT refar in their ,r;a,.
to the elastic conscience'. ~ tba go
ing counsel or assert thar. he has e1-
bibited the .inRenious skiu Of an or+.,,t
dodger'' saws The Sunren,s CO.., ~
Florida in the case Of Sta4e VIC con fSe
So Rem. 1O1s .sIt is not comnIin,sn+ar,,
observed tho court 80 e,,nnos. ~. -
statements would divert the corr,.s a,ten-
he sJ;ohtast n pn a. issue. vi oe gwen
,n;,1ad :, sA'' anu 'neS snouiu oe
The English Court of .nnoa, IN .ho
.sse Of The Soptb African prs,ra-ia
King f25 6 11n no. raoon,t, deoi..o,
bat n contract mad ~ rahak
,ndar which an EngIisbr,sr - a,,,,to.,s,
" an EngIisb co,,1an,-1,, go ~ -.
,anv ae hrewer a., o,har,.ise w -
usiness carriod IN =, IaharoIh' - ,
y ny aoIan, On d. johannesburg ana
az. -, - 20 oe suaerneu Og tne
9" VI 'He So"'n African r'ePuoile.
Tnder q stotu,a 4, xo,.,o,,,. .,.
,eddIina u.itbo,,t - ceI
in Comnapy Y,as co,,,;o.aS - s.. 80
mr. the Snnrerno -Co,,rt ~ Un..,,at1 fov,
nnesI az W D. Si ~, ~ VI
r. So ~ .',.-. %, tna' Ou
,,t,,ta IN ,,,o.tio, -1,,,,;ua ,eS 49,
mr. a nad5,a-.. Iioa,,.l w. - e "5p.Iean
baractsr ava - &C 30 So, ~
,ar,a 900 r.a;ob. ;o:o,,t ras n.9
"a - - - -, M
III 1900 49,. neiu .n"t, as
ln,ro.tl,' NaHuoe eorLpiieu WIN uy
ne corporation But the court held that
corporation eouid De punished Tor ped
ling without license, on account OF
ales made py us Unlicensed agent.
tne nuso eoiiects anu Uses
ne "Ie money WIN her hnowleuge ana
onsenl, 'ne supreme Court OF Appeals OF
~ IssI gina, III the cdse ot hcSohVIhe vs.
Jam 70 Va .. n '9'
romlse OF repayment, as would be rhe
ise II they were strangers, nut presumes
idt the receipt ana use OF her money and
3 PiNPS y Vi Pt0'eeus, was Sit
.Ae- ~ Ne' =" hei nusu'hu' anu hot
'N'
The sunran,a court ~ Annao1s 90 W..
mia in Tho caso ~ ,ba Sr,,-hor NJ,
aIenhone and TaIegrsnb -ornnan,
dement's a. Va { p fs1, hoidS tbo. -
the dutv nf teIenbone cornanv ~ ,,so
binary care to nrnvide and l,,er ire noIes
A reasonably safe and sound condi+jor
r use by its employees and thew refused
disturb Judgment in favor of an en-
p purnose of hurting nm wires and WIZ
:. ..., -, =