The Washington times., 1901-10-05
LATE LEGAL DECISIONS.

/ ~'eeHeHt WAS at nlgn pitcn ne USED
strenuous efforts to bring the unredeemed
| 10 the mourners bench. He begged and
| impiored one neg.o TO go vp and be saved
| out the man remained obstinate, where
| upon the sxhorter slew him with an axe.
On his own confession the accused was
| guilty of murder, but the fury found hin,
| guilty of manslaughter and fixed his pun
| lsnment In the penitentiary at twenty
years. Ihe case was tried before Judge
| Robert Powell at Yazoo City Miss
In California laborer employed by GER
| tain mine owners to assist in the grading
of mill site on the public lands dug out
| Of the grade pocket of quartz gold of
the value of about $500 The mine owners
took the gold away from the laborer and
claimed 1t as belonging to them on two
| grounds: First. that they should be con-
| sfdered as having acquired title by occu-
pancy to the public lands. as they had en-
tered thereon for the purpose of grading
| for a mill site. Second, that under the
statute everything which the laborer ac-
quired by virtue of his employment be-
| longed to them as his employers. The
Supreme Court denied both of these con-
\ tentfons and held that the laborer was
entitled to recover the gold which he had
| found. The court said that the occupancy
claimed in this case was not with a view
| to acquire title &C tfie lard. but was only
| temporary and for the sole purpose of
| grading; and that the gold was not found
| by the laborer by virtue of his employ
| ment. since his employment was not to
| search for gold. but to excavate and
| throw away the earth removed in grading
| Burns VS.. Clark. Sc Pac., 12).
| The publisher of a newspaper who re-
ceives contributions, in response to solicit
tations in his paper. for the zrelief of
| families and dependent relatives of GER
| tain firemen who had been killed. be-
comes a voluntary trustee of the funds.
| charged with the duty of devoting them
| to the objects indicated In the solicita-
| tions. the Supreme Court holds. in the
| case of Hallinan VS.. Hearst (65 Pac.. IL.
Where railroad company places
| coaches for the reception of passengers
on a side track adjacent to a main track
intervening between 1t and the depot. and
with the conpany's aeduiescence passen-
| gers are passing to and fro from the
station to the coaches, the Supreme Court
| of Arkansas. in the case of St. Louis
| etc; Railroad Company vs. Tomlins9n
gence to back an engine at a rapid speed
along the main track. without any ef
| ficient lookout or warning OF its ap-
proach.
When the issue in controversy was
whether a crier had knocked off property
| without giving persons at the sale fair
| and reasonable opportunity to bid. the
| Supreme Court of Georgia, in the case of
i .
| holds that 1t was competent to show by
| one present that, but for the premature
| termination of the sale, he would have
| run the property up higher. A mere crier
| employed by an administrator, does not
control the sale. but Is simply the mouth
piece of the latter. and cannot. over his
| protest. complete the sale; certainly not
when there are present one or more per-
sons willing to bid higher II allowed an
| opportunity to do so.
| Personality Crrp6 hria ND Itry,,t ,tar
when used In building house upon land
becomes realty, and constitutes part of
| the land, the Supreme Court of Georgia
| holds, in the case of Guernsey vs. Phinizy
| t39 s. T.. Rep, 42). II the house is de-
stroyed by an accidental fire and the
| bricks and other debris fall upon the land,
| they still remain a part of the realty. IL
| the owner does nothing to show an in
| tention to sever them and convert them
again into personally. In such case the
| owner cannot remove them from the land
| after a sale Of the land to another nor
| hold the vendee accountable for them.
| Public property within the meaning of
that clause of the constitution which au-
| thorizes the General Assembly to exerapt
| from taxation "all public property is
| held by the Supreme Court of Georgia in
Board of Trustees VS.. Atlanta t39 S. E.
| Rep, 39) to embrace only such property
| as is owned by the State or some political
| division thereof. and title to which is
vested directly in the State or one of its
| subordinate political divisions or in some
! person holding exclusively for the bene-
| nit of the State, or a subordinate public
| corporation.
Ordinances passed by city in the exer-
else of its delegated legislative power are
| laws of the State. Judge Lochren, of the
| United States District Court Minnesota,
holds, in the case of Anoka Water Com
| pany, etc, VS.. City of Anoka G09 Fed.
| Rep, 5S1), within the meaning of the con-
| tract clause of the Federal Constitution
| and where they pGrport to repeal prior
| ordinances by which the city has entered
| into contract a suit by the other party
| 10 such contract to have them declared
| invalid as in violation of such clause in
! wolves question arising under the Con-
stitution of the United States and is with
in the jurisdiction of Federal court
| a contract contemplating that conyicts
should be employed in conducting a saw
mill owned by private citizen and oper-
| ated on his premises must be treated as
| contrary to public policy, and therefore
| not enforcible. the Supreme Court OF
| Georgia holds, in the case of Peniten-
/ tiary Company VS.. Rountree (59 s. T.
Rep, 5CS.)
| One who for the purpose of inducing
another to lend money to a third person
upon land as a security, represents 10
| the person from whom the loan is sought
| that the land offered as security belongs
| to the proposed borrower, and thus pro-
cures the loan, is held by the Supreme
Court of Georgia, in the case of Wright
/ VS.. McCord (39 5. E. Rep, 5lOl, In pro-
| ceeding by the latter to subject the land
| to his debt, to he estopped from there
! after denying that title to the same was
| in the borrower at the time the deed was
| executed, and asserting that title was at
| the time in himself.
A railroad company is not liable for
damages resulting from an assault and
| battery inflicted by the station agent
upon a person when it appears that the
| difficulty which gave rise to the beating
| arose out of a personal quarrel, the Su-
| preme Court of Georgia holds, in the case
| of Lynch VS.. Florida, etc. r. Co. t39 s T.
| Rep1. and that the agent, far re-
| lated to his participation therein, was
| acting upon his individual responsibility
| and not within the scope Of the business
of his agency as an enplo1s of the COM
pany.
| In an action of claim and delivery
against the State constable to recover
| whisky alleged to have been illegally
| seized where there was evidence that
plaintiff owned the whisky, and that he
| had procured it lawfully, and had it for
| lawful use, the Supreme Court of South
Carolina in the case of Rykard VS.. Dav-
enpcrt (59 5. L. Rep. S72), holds that II IS
error to grant a non-suit, as the CREDIBLE
| ity of plaintiffs evidence, and whether
| the whisky was contraband are questions
for the jury.
False representations. to be the bass of
| n prosecution for cheating and swinding,
must relate either to the past or thepres-
ent. the Supreme Court of Georgia holds,
| in he case of Dickerson VS.. State( (59 g
iraO or CT n