The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1901-03-11
TROUTMAN LOSES.
Supreme Court Decides the De Bots
siere Case.

siere Case.
Thirty-nine cases were decided by the
supreme court in decisions handed down
late Saturday afternoon. One of the
most important cases was the one in
volving the title of the De Boissiere Odd
Fellows home property at Silkville- The
title given the trustees was confirmed in
the opinion written by Justice Pollock
The decision of the court of last resort is
sustained by Justices Pollock, Smith,
Greene, Cunningham and Ellis and af-
firms the judgment of the court below.
Chief Justice DOSter and Justice Johns
ton dissenting from the opinion divides
the bench and gives the plaintiff some
hope for a rehearing.
Ten years ago De BoissieTa, a French
man, started a cooperative colony in
Franklin county for the purpose of silk
culture, investing a large sum of money.
The venture was not a success and be-
fore he died he decided his property to
the grand lodge of Odd Fellows of Kan
sas for an orphans home. He selected
five trustees to carry out the purpose of
his gift. The Odd Fellows found the
maintenance of the home too much of a
burden to be attempted, coupled with
the fact that they could not get entire
control of the institution and drew out
Corinne Martinelli, born NaletOn De
BOiSSiere, and heir of the legatee, brought
suit to recover possession of the proper
ty. The suit was assigned 70 James A
Troutman, of this city, with the interest
in the property, which is valued at about
500, coo.
The litigation has lasted some years,
the lawyers employed on either side
making a trip to Paris to take deposit
lions.
The opinion OF the court, briefly stated,
is that "a general finding Of fact based
on oral testimony is conclusive upon
supreme court, and absolute conveyance
of property for the purpose of providing
home for the orphans of Odd Fellows
creates a legal public trust on charity:
the rule of law against the creation Of
perpetuities has no application to a pub
lie trust or charity, and where 1t is inn
possible to carry out the scheme Of the
donor in executing a trust the trust
property does not revert to the heir OF
the donor, but a court Of equity viii
compel the execution of the trust along
the lines Of the general plan of the
Donor
Among the decisions rendered by the
supreme court is one holding that a PER
son who may be sentenced to the penl-
tertiary for life is not civilly dead, ana
that he OF she may dispose OF property
as other persons. The case is one in
which the lawful heirs of Amelia New
of Greenwood county, convicted OF com |
plicity in the murder OF her husband, |
Joseph New, and sentenced to life inn |
prisonment, sought to set aside a deed |
conveying her property to other per-
sons
The court is divided on the question, |
but the majority holds that while the /
woman is civilly dead there is possi-
bility of a pardon SO long as her natural
life may last, and that therefore she
continues to control her own property, !
and it is not subject tothe law of descent
and distribution. The property, there +
fore belongs to J. A. Smith, to whom 4
the woman decided it before she went to-
the penitentiary. The opinion is written
by Justice w. r. Smith. Chief Justice
Doster and Associate Justice Pollock
The supreme court also gave opinions
in three libel cases against Pool Grin
stead, the Doniphan county editor They
were appeals by the state from the court
OF appeals. The court Of appeals dis
missed the cases. The supreme court
today dismissed one Of the cases on ac~
count of defect in the certificate to the
transcript. In another case the judg-
ment OF the district court, conVietings
was affirmed. The third case.
was decided in favor of GrlnStead, and.
the case remanded for retrIal consistent.
with the Judgment of the SUPREME court.
will have to serve a term in
jail on one conviction
Decisions were handed down as fol-
~" DosTER, G. J. #
B. H Campbell ct al. VS.. George H.
Grimes Error from Clark county. At
A. z. & S. F. Riy. Co. VS.. J. IA. Huck-
ebridge. Error from Greenw God county
Reversed. (Doster G. j., dissenting
rom first and second para graphs of
syllabus and corresponding portion Of 81
opinion. Ellis, justice, and Cunningham,
Justice, dissenting from second para +,
yraph of syllabus and corresponding FL
portion of opinion.) ;
J. H Ellis VS.. Frank Whitaker ct al.
Error from Cherokee county Reversed
State ~Grinstead- Error from court
II appeals. Affirmed. Johnston, JUS
ice. and Smith, justice dissenting. Dos
er. chief justice, Green. justice. and
Pollock, JUSTICE dissenting from first
paragraph of syllabus and corresponding =
portion of opinion Dosters chief justice, {
dissenting from third paragraph of syl- I
abus and corresponding portion Of opin-
on Cunningham, Justice, dissenting
rom fourth paragraph Of syllabus and
portion Of opinion.)
state vs.. Frank Wayne. Appeal from
,edgwick county. Affirmed.
The City of Leavenworth VS.. the Leav- i
nworth City & Fort Leavenworth
Water Co. Original proceedings in 7
aandamua PLAINTIFFS writ allowed. I