, 1900-02-28

ronlEe a certain hotel, and IL Is cur
rently reported that a boycott has been
established against such hotel, and
such report is the natural consequence
OF the acts and u%tterances Of the de-
PENDANTS, in an action for damages
brought by the hotel-keeper, the SUI
preme court of Louisiana, in the case
held that the existence OF the report
may be proved. In this case the plain
tiff, Webb, who was a hotel-keeper in
Mindon, La, alleged that the mer-
chants of hat place had b%oycotted his
hotel, refusing to buy from drummers
who pa~tronized his hotel, making their
action public throughout North Louisi-
ana, and that the result was that he
was forced to close his hotel for lack
Of patronage. He claimed as damages
$40, 900 for destruction OF business, $1O,-
900 for humiliation of himself and wife,
and 10000 as pInitory damages. A
judgment was rendered in his favor.
which the supreme court affirmed, af-
ter amendment.
Although it is a misdemeanor to la
Dor on Sunday in Iowa, the supreme
court of hat state, in the case of Tay-
lor VS.. Star Coal company. 81 n. w.
Rep. 252, holds that the fact that an
employe was working in a mine on that
day will not prevent him from recov-
ering damages for an injury sustained
by him through the negligence of an
operator of the mine.
A curious case was recently before
the supreme court of Maine (Clary vs..
Clary, "A All. Rep. 92D, in which the
defendant, being sick and out of work,
went to the house of his divorced wife
and induced her to nurse him on the
promise to remarry her. But the de-
PENDANT failed to keep his promise, and
subsequently married another woman.
His divorced wife thereupon rendered
a bill for her services as nurse and for
board furnished him, and brought suit
thereon. The jury gave her d verdict,
but the supreme court granted a new
trial on the ground that the evidence
showed that the plaintiff did not ex-
pect compensation for the board furn.
ished, but gave it on account Of the de-
PENDANTS promise to marry her.
The Swedish vessel Pedro, which
was captured by United States cruis-
err New York at the entrance of Hava-
ma harbor, during the Spanish-Ameri-
can war, vas recently held by the Uni.
ted States supreme court advance
sheets. p, 1881 to be a lawful prize. 1t
was argued that the Pedro was not
liable to capture and condemnation. be-
cause British subjects were the legal
owners of same. and the equitable
owners of the rest of the stock of the
corporation owning the vessel. But
the court said that the Pedro was own
ed by a corporation incorporated I'M
der the laws of Spain, had a Spanish
flag and a Spanish license. and was Of
ficered and manned by Spaniards. and
that she must, under such circumstan-
ces, be deemed a Spanish ship. JUS
tices White, Brewer, Spires, and Peck
ham dissenting.
Where the name of a candidate for
election for village trustee was Ira A
Kip, Jr., and four of the ballots read
respectively Ira A Kip" Il. Kip, Jr.,'
Ira l. Kip" and "Kipp," the supreme
1 court IF Nnu, Vnrca,y In tho oasn pe Wv
VS.. Weeks GA Att. Rep, 1857, held thai
these ballots were illegally counted fol-
Ira A. Kip. Jr.; and the court further
held that testimony to prove that nc
other person by the name Of Kip was
a candidate at the election, and that
no person named Kip other than said
Kip was a resident within the voting
district was inadmissible. In this
case the four ballots referred to were
counted, and the board of election Ger.
titled that Ira A Kip, Jr., had receiv.
ed 41O votes, and that John R. Weeks
his opponent, had received 400 votes
Ira A. Kipp thereupon because the in,
cumbent OF the office, Weeks then be.
gan an action at law against Kip
claiming that the four ballots should
not have been counted. The court held
that under the existing law the ques.
ton was whether the votes were &C.
tually voted, and not for whom they
were intended, and decided that from
an inspection Of the ballots they did
not have upon them the name of the
person for whom they were counted
and hence did not comply with the stat.
ute.
If a locomotive engineer blows the
whistle of the engine at a place nea O
creek where a person is watering his
horses, for the wanton purpose OF
frightening the horses, and thereby
causes injury to the one with the hors-
es; and 1t is proved that it was unusual
and not customary for the whistle tC
be blown at that place, the supreme
court of North Carolina in the case OF
Brendle VS.. Spencer ga S. E. Rep, 634)
holds that the railroad company is IL
able for damages. The jury found a
verdict for the plaintiff of $1,000 and
on appeal this was affirmed.
Where a health officer has authority
under statute, to permit a patient at
ficted with smallpox to remain in his
residence. il in his opinion 1t would