The Washington times., 1901-12-07
LATE LEGAL DECISIONS.

Simply because manufacturing con-
Germ employs nonunion workmen and is
hostile to labor organizations does not
justify a State furnishing board in re-
scinding contract for supplies which the
board had made with such company, holds
the Supreme Court Of Montana in the case
of State VS.. Toole e66 Pac. Rep, 1867. The
furnishing board, after making contract
for State supplies with a company which
was denomnated by the labor unions of
the United States as hostile to labor or
CARNATIONS. and was classed as a scab
company" Cancelled the contract when it
discovered the attitude OF the company
toward labor unions. and In defending a
writ of mandamus brought by the pm
pany to compel it to sign the contract the
board seriously argued that, even assum-
ing the regularity of the proceedings
precedent TO the letting of the contract
and the validity of the letting. they pos
sessed the right to cancel the contract
upon the ground named. The court held
that the board had no more right in this
respect than an individual and that it
was well established that the law would
not recognize such reasons as cause for
annulment of a contract by private per-
force is concerned, said the court, the
reason assigned might as well have been
that the directors OF the plainuf believed
in the dogma of infalhbility of the Pope.
and we're therefore unfriendly to Protes-
tants or in the doctrine of transubstan-
tiation and in auricular confessions
woman Lightweight years old as
signed bonds amounting to $4,000 TO the
church of which she was a member, on
condition that the church pay her for life
greater interest on the bonds than they
bore. and after her death keep in repair
her cemetery lot. Subsequent to the as
signment she filed bill in equity TO com
mel the church to return and reassign to
her the bonds on the ground that they
had been fraudulently obtained. The bill
was dismissed by the lower court aud
on appeal the Supreme Court sustained
he lower court, and held that there was
no evidence that she did not have per-
feet comprehension of her affairs. and
that courts would not annul donations
merely as being improvident. and such
as a wise man would rot have made or
a man of very nice honor accepted. tLong-
necker VS. Zion Evangelical Lutheran
Church 30 Atl. Rep. 244)
The right to punish a contempt 1annot
be taken away from the territorial
courts by the Legislature OF the Terri
tory and turned over to a serarate tri-
bunaI, nor can the Legislature cause the
matter to be submitted TO a trial by jury,
holds the Supreme Court of Oklahoma. in
The case OF Smith VS.. Speed tbt fac. Rep-,
SD. The power which existed in these
courts. holds the Supreme Court, OF com
pelling obedience to the law and TO the
process and authority of the court in
case in which the courts have jurisdiction.
and to fine and imprison for contempt
thereof Is inherent in the courts, neces-
sary for their preservation, and as much
The law of the land and due process OF
law as any other part Of the common law
or chancery Jurisdiction which has come
down TO us under the guarantee OF the
Constitution OF the United States referred
to. and by the organic act gives to the
Supreme and District courts OF this Terri
tory.
A husband took out benefit certificate
in favor of his second wife, which certih-
cate was for the benefit Of his widow
children. or dependents The husband and
wife both died the same night, from
poisonous gas which escaped from stove
in their bedroom. On the question as 70
what heirs were entitled to the beneht
certificate the Supreme Court OF New
York held that the proceeds of The policy
passed to the children of his first mar
rlage. and not TO the heirs OF his second
wife. as ii would be impossible. under the
tanccs. to determine whether the
wife survived her husband.
Under its power to regulate commerce
with the Indian tribes Congress had au-
thority TO pass an act declaring it to be
crime punishable by fine and imprson-
nent 10 sell spirituoas liquors to any
Indian to whom an allotment OF lands has
been made while the title thereto is held
in trust by the Government holds the
United States Circuit Court OF Appeals in
the case OF Farrell VS.. United States tll0
Fed Rep, gl2j. The court further held