The Baltimore County union. [volume] (Towsontown, Md.) 1865-1909, 1900-01-13
Worthineton vallau Ath nistriot mr.

IL.
ID EfuDDing and clearing large tract of land
at the southeastern part of his 7O0-acre farm in
this valley. This is, perhaps taken as WHOLE
the pest equipped farm in Baltimore county
aEd Is a model OF neatness and convenience.
Inc owner has had only about six years ex
perience as farmer, but in that time he has
developed many new ideas that have proven
ofgreat advantage to him.
Mr.. Albert A. Fuss, who is also another
wldeawake farmer of this valley. is making
arrangements to commence the erection of
very large barn on his property. In thes spring
ne VIII clear up a tract of swamp land pur-
chased some time ago from the Montmorenci
estate.
Mr.. Elijah NJ Price for some time farm
foreman for Mr.. Charles A. Councilman, who
secured position as Waterman at the county
jail IN the late political shuttle. moved his
family to Towson this week He has been
succeeded by Joseph E. Parks, who, until
recently, was driver of the Towson chemical
engine, whose family will occupy the house
vacated by Mr. Price.
An ample supply of fine ice--as good as any
ever cut here-was secured last week.
! Mr.. Charles A. Councilman was among
those who attended the inauguration of Gov
ernor Smith this week. V. OBSERVER.
The Archer Divorce Case--The Hus-
| bands Answer to His Wife'S Billion
Tuesday last Mr.. Henry W. Archer, of BeIair,
as his own attorney, filed in the Circuit Court
for Baltimore city his answer to the suit for
separate support and maintenance instituted
against him by his wife, Mrs. Hannah Lee
Archer. 1t states that Mr.. Archer is and has
been all his life resident of Hartford county.
Mrs. Archer, it also stated, was resident of
| Hartford county when she married Mr.. Archer,
at Belair, on November 10TH 1887, and has
/ not changed her residence. She was not res
ident of Baltimore, it is alleged, when she
filed her bill. Under these facts, it is claimed,
the Baltimore court is without jurisdiction to
1 proceed in the case.
Mr. Archer claims that he left his wife No
HE has no DESIRE" the answer states, ito
make any charges rejecting in any way upon
his wifesexcept that the experience of his mar
ried life developed that between him and her
there was such an incompatbility of tempera.
ment and disposition as made it impossible for
them to live together in harmony and affec
ton, and after due reflection he became entire
/ ly satisfied that the only proper course for him
to pursue was to cease their living together
Accordingly he did withdraw himself from
her at the time named"
Before taking that step, the answer continues,
Mr.. Archer discussed the matter with his wife's
father and brother, Mr.. Ohio s. Lee and Mr.
John L. G. Lee Mr.. Archer also states that
before separating from his wife be offered to
make full and sufficient provision for her,
and after separating from her, and before she
instituted the suit, he paid her sum which
was full proportion of his income. He has
been and is, he states still ready and willing
to continue to make such payments, 80 as to
provide for her to the full extent Of his obi
CATION.
Since Mrs Archer filed her bill, the answer
asserts, Mr.. Archer has offered, through his
counsel, to pay her one-third OF his net income
from all sources. In order to facilitate such
settlement, he states, he has prepared and sub
mitted to her counsel a detailed statement of
his property, which he is willing to submit to
the court. Mr.. Archer also states that he will
submit to decree directing him to pay his
| wife one-third of his entire net income.
In conclusion the answer asserts that Mrs
| Archers allegations of cruelty on her hus-
bands part are altogether untrue and without
foundation.
Against the Telegraph Poles.-Mrs. Mar
garet S. Ridgely, of Hampton, Mr.. William
Wesley and wife of Sunnybrook, Jarrettsville
| turnpike and Mrs. Bridget Kane, of Bosley
posteffice, Dulany's Valley turnpike, through
Col. D. G. Mcintosh, attorney, have each filed
bill Of complaint against the Postal Tele-
graph and Cable Company. The plaintiffs
com plain that the defendant is planting poles,
to be used as telegraph poles, on the edge of
the turnpikes and along the line of their lands;
that planting these poles imposes an addition
al servitude on the land never contemplated in
! the grant Of privileges to the turnpike COM
! panies that the turnpike company has only
right Of way over the land it occupies, for
turnpike purposes and that the use of the land
for any other purpose at all would be in con-
j
ers. An injunction was asked restraining the
| company from proceeding with its work of
constructing its line by erecting these poles
and stringing wires on them along the land of
| the plaintiffs.
Isaac King, of Sunny brook, has also filed
bill of complaint by Col. D. G. Mcintosh
against the same defendant, asking that it be
restrained from erecting poles along the line
| of his property. He alleges that an agreement
which the defendant holds and under which
hesalaims right to 60 ahead with the work of
/ bsS<SSd, if it purports to grant to the COM
! pany Nany other right or privilege than the
| planting of few poles through an orchard;
that plaintiff at the time OF making this agree
ment supposed that it did grant that privilege,
but nothing else, but that defendant had de-
stroyed the value Of row of ornamental cedar
trees and has planted many more poles
Messrs. John W. Smith and William Fl.
Smith, well known farmers of the 10th dis
trict, through whose lands the Jarrettsville
turnpike passes, have also sued out injunctions
| against the same company.
Man Pardoned After Serving Out His
Sentence.A pardon has been received at
the County Clerks Office here for John T.
| Shipley, who was convicted of mansaughter
for the killing of Jared Wilson, at Phoenix.
Shipey was sentenced by Judge Burke to one
! years imprisonment in Jail, and served his
! term out one year ago. His pardon at this
time is claimed to have been granted for the
purpose of removing his political disabilities
| incurred by having been convicted of felony.
Before Shipley's term had expired an applica-
ton was made to Governor Lowndes for his
pardon, but as considerable opposition was
manifested, it was refused. Several Towson
lawyers have expressed the opinion that the
Governor cannot pardon person who has
already served out the full term Of his SEN
tence. Should Shipley register, it is stated
that the matter will be submitted to court by
an application for a writ of mandamus to re-
Ouira hat his name he stricken from the list
of voters.
Shipley had Wilson under arrest, and struck
him on the head with his espantoon, causing
a fracture of the skull, which resulted in the
latters death. His defense was that Wilson
was resisting arrest. Evidence was produced
at the trial alleging that there had been ill
feeling between the two men for some time
Circuit Court.-The December term of the
Circuit Court was resumed at Towson last
Monday and the following cases were disposed
of during the week: Thomas Smith, colored,
larceny; guilty, one year in penitentiary.
Francis Thomas, larceny; guilty, one year in
penitentiary. Luke Fitzhenry, larceny not
guilty. Elmer Bowen, larceny guilty mo-
ton in arrest of judgment filed. John Davis
assault with intent to kill; guilty of assault
and sentenced to the House OF Correction for
two months. William McCann, larceny
guilty, two years in the penitentiary. Robert
Ward, colored, larceny: guilty and one year
in the penitentiary. Maurice Sachs, sale of
goods without license; plea of not guilty con-
fessed by the State. Nathan Rosenthal, sale
of cattle and horses without license; tried be-
fore the Court and held sub curia. A. Adel
stein, sale of cattle and horses without IL
cense tried before the Court and held sub
curia Louis Katzen, sale of goods without
license not guilty. James Downey, Jr., and
]. Henry OgIe, Jr., colored, felonious assault
on Martha Morgan; not guilty. James w.
Bradley, sale of beer on Sunday and sale of
liquor on Sunday; plea of guilty confessed in
one case and fined $50 and costs; mol pros. in
other tease on payment of costs.
state VS.. Northern Central Railway
In the Court of Appeals on Wednesday Judge
Schumacher gave an opinion in the case OF the
State Vs. the Northern Central Railway Com
pany This appeal presents the question
whether so much of the act of $780, chapter16,
as granted to the Railroad Company an
exemption from taxation on the gross rev
enues from its property in Maryland beyond
the annual rate of one-half of one per cent.
was subject to repeal by subsequent legislation.
If it is determined that the act was subject to
repeal then the further question arises whether