The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-08-18
rate >Jnpreme
Court Occasions

se 01s0tOEtS
e>~-o-~~~-~-~o-~-o-o-o-oo
Mental anguish as ground for damages
for failure to deliver a telegram has been
recently considered by the supreme court
~ ~ tnolana IN the case ,of Western Union
e nelfrap ca Co TVS vs. Ferguson, so North
subscribed to the so-called Texas Doe
trIne' holding that compensatory dam
ages could be recovered by the addressee
~ aIeitdl suier1ng caused by failure to
proiiIptly oellYer a message relating to
D u SeIIl IdIIiIy matters. In an opinion by
66aKer j., the case of Reese VS.. elegraph
VII rs al IND 2s4 "a Northeastern i63 in
IN indiana, is expressly overruied. and re.
Covery on ground of mental anguish alone
IS Genled This question is fully consider
= A1ieS WHich will be found in IL G.
A. g.. o. 10 = C. A. 26O' and Is G. c.
N Inc circuit circuit court of appeals for the
If All Iit On mas held that under the act
LOT LOT the territory of Hawaii, suits in adj
nIiLa;y pending in the courts of the re-
1917 Wnen the act took effect must be
continued to final Judgment in such
courts, and are not appeaIable to tfhe cir
80 49,! So1fI OF appeals, but can only be
TTEfVlewed a by the supreme court of the
ca maeen 4tates. Ihis point was held in the
los Federal 113. Vs. ihliiu'
Ut 1T has been held in case of Territory v.
by the supreme court of New NTaIina
Inat the law prescribing death as the
Penalty Tor assault upon a railroad train
o 49, n+b imIene 10 commit murder, robbery
~ ~ o'neg 1eIonv, does not prescribe a
cruel ana unusual punishment within the
T4eSanlng OF the eighth amendment to the
S UHiteo states Ia constitution. The court
So ,o,,o no provision of the constitution
designed fn
latIVe right to determine upon the AIDE
quaGy OF the punishment but is merely
0PP440opIe 10 the modes of punishment.
"A change of venue was asked for 4,
me e case OF State v.f7,Grinstead. GA Pa
INC E1ac, ~, on account of the prejudice of
t the }}u t against the defendant, because
the latter was himself preiudiced in feel
ing towards the judge, and had Violently
opposed MIN in a political Campaign
ana had published libelous newspaper ar
f eictes calculated nc to arouse the judges
feelings of resentment and prejudice. The
attack was renewed after the election
IN winch the judge was successful and
was one of the factors in a SUBSEQUENT
t tomsest IN the state senate. 1t was de-
termined, however, by a divided court.
that the motion was properly denied
where the judge filed in court a stare
ment dlsavoWing all feelings of prejudice
against the defendant
In the case of Tiedy vs. Erie Railroad
Company, 40 Atlantic Reporter 4e7, the
plaintiff, who was riding from Newark
70 20 New YORK was arrested for refusing
to pay. cash for his passage after the
conouctor had refused to accept his
ticket marked New York to Newark. y
;lIn court holds that he is entitled to
honor such tickets, and that he might
reasonably and honestly believe that the
ticket so written was a lawful payment
on ms 1are, and that having this belief,
tIa =
himself to the arrest sanctioned by the
statute.
An interesting point was brought be-
lore the court of appeals of Texas in the
case of Krugel VS.. Trinity Genet srV
company, 90 Southwestern Reporter. 652
Where the plaintiff sues for damages be-
cause the cemetery company permitted
thlrd party to bury his wife and child
IN the lot sold to the plaintiff. The court
says 9a 81 enat put one similar case has come
TO To-, ms nQtlce, and this holds that the in
jury TO the feelings of the plaintiff may
well be taken into consideration, In
fortunately the decision of the Texas
case gees off on the question of limita-
tohS' ana the question of damages for
cided. 40 i-o' ue-
bo Ihe IS, supreme Up court of the United States
n n ruled IN the case of Simon VS..
Craft, q Supreme Court Reporter s9s
that person is not deprived of his i iIC'
ePty without due process of law by be-
lug aoluoged lunatic in his absence,
Nwnere the sheriff has served a notice to
nave the person present, if consistent
with MS health and safety, and a certifi
cate OF practicing physician is pro
duced by the sheriff at the trial showing
that in the opinion of the nhvsician 3
Wouid not be safe to produce the al
legged lunatic.
The, The charge of burgiarizing an old
mouse IN Which corn was stored the
doors of which were closed by rocks.
SUCKS afd etc, and the windows gone, is
hel0 not to be sustained in the case
OF Beason VS.. State. So Southwestern Re-
porter, $685. The court holds that. under
Inc circumstances it is possible that fine
corn may nave been stolen and still no
burglary committed.
Being asked for a further explanation
as TO the term reasonable doubt" the
court, in the case of Lenert We Statn
6S Southwestern Reporter, 564. delivered
itself as follows: '"T understand thar
you desire an additional charge upon the
meaning e$nig, of the words reasonable
doubt. Upon receiving an affirmative
answer from the jury the court told
them verbally that the two words were
WORDS IN commonr~use, and the Jury
c cort undyerstand them as easily as the
oIIuIti ana mat the court had a reason
ape ooupt as to whether he could charge
them as to their meaning.
Is VI NEW 4OTk ndu reCentlV
before them case entitled Mason va.
west, 70 New York Supplement, ATS. in
Volvlng an action to recover damages
when resulted from a horse becoming
frightened from an automobile, and held
mat the use of streets must be extended
10 meet the modern innovations of rapid
locomotion. The machine in question
was of crude and unusual construction,
ana gave forth loud noise which could
be heard for two blocks. Notwithstand-
ing this, the court awarded damages only
because of the negligence of the owner
OF the automobile.
The court of errors and appeals of
New Jersey has recently decided that
the old common-law rule that the crimi-
nal prosecution must have been termin-
ated before a civil action can be brought
for damages does not obtain in that
state. In this case which is entitled
McLain VS.. Edgar. 4S Atlantic, &C., the
court holds that the necessity for this
rule does not exist with us as 1t did
formerly in England, where it was the
duty of every one against whose prop
erty a crime had been committed to
prosecute the guilty one to conviction,
put that in this country an action can