The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-07-26

vt the midsummer session of the
superior court held yesterday in Phila-
delphia, decisions were handed down in
local cases, as follows:
Miller -. Interstate Casualty company. CON.
mon pleas. Lackawanna county, order directing
judgment for tho plaintiff for 500 affirmed.
Spring Brook Water company ". Kelley, treas.
uror, common pleas, IaCkawanna county; de.
cree affirmed.
In re impeachment j. =. Kelly. alderman,
Kelly appeal. common pleas. Lackawanna coun.
ty; order affirmed
In the first named case the plaintiff,
Constable j. S. Miller, sued the insur-
anCc company for s25 a week accident
benefits for a period of several months
that he was incapacitated by a broken
arm and other severe injuries inflicted
upon him by a man named Nichols.
whom he was attempting to dispossess
on landlords warrant. The company
does not insure police officers but the
plaintiff claims he was accepted upon
his representation that he dealt only
with civil business and never served
warrants in criminal cases. The COM
pany maintained that the agent who
made the exception in Mller's case did
so without authority, and as the policy
expressly states that its provisions can
not be amended in this manner, the
company could not he held liable. The
local court sustained the company, but
directed judgment for the plaintiff i'm
the sum which he paid for the policy.
The Superior court affirms this finding.
The question at issue in the case of
the Spring Brook Water company
against NJ. j. Kelley. county treasurer,
was the extent to which a water COM
pany could go in the matter of includ-
ing as part Of its watCrworks, land
used, or pretended To be used as a
water she'd
The company bought up practically
all the land slopinG towards its reser-
Noirs and their tributaries. 1t was as
sesScd for local taxes. but the company
refused to pay on the ground that the
land was necessary To the operation of
its waterwOrkS and consequently a part
of its capital stock, which, under the
law, is subject only to state taxes. The
county treasurer proceeded to sell the
land for the taxes, and the company
went into court to restrain them.
In one Of the most elaborate opinions
Judge Archibald ever wrote a decision
was rendered against the company.
Lands Immediately adjacent to the
reservoirs and palpably essential to
their maintenance should he free from
local taxes, but to say that all lands
that water company might seize and
choose TO label water shed" could be
held free from local tax was not to be
entertained for a moment. the Judge
ruled. He made a personal inspection
of the territory, spending "A number of
days in tramping over it's length and
breadth, and from the knowledge thus
gained and a study of the maps he
carefully set off what portion of the
land was essential and what part non
essential to the watcrworks.
lie then decreed that the company
should pay local taxes on the portion
excluded from participating in the
makeup of the waterworks. The Su-
perior court agrees with his finding.
In the Alderman Kelly case, an ap-
peal was taken from the decision of the
local court refusing him fees for serv-
ing subpoenas and the like, while he
was accomplishing his acquittal i'm
the Impeachment proceedings brought
against him two years ago by eX-Al-
derman &. NJ. DeLong.