The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1902-05-27
PROCEEDINGS IN SUPREME COURT.
Cases Argued Yesterday Appeals OF Ena OF
Docket to be Called Tuesday.
CRpported by JOS. L. Seawell.)

Exported by JOS. l..
REIGER V. THE WORTH COMPANY, APP
~nellant. From Brunswick. No error
Representations by a vender that seed
advertised and sold by him, ana "hlcn
are inspected by the endee are soou
seed, constitute a warranty ana not iuele
words of affirmation.
FAIRCLOTH V. BORDEN, EXR., appel-
liant. From Wayne. Error.
A husband who, without objection from
the wife, receives the income from her
separate estate. is liable only for such
amount received during one year neHt
preceding action brought to recover such
income. Code Section 1887.
Where. in such case. the husband re-
ceipted for the income of the wife as
agent" the law does not imply there
from that the wife objected to his re-
ceiving her income.
MARKHAM, Sheriff, appellant V. CON
SERVATORY OF MUSIC. From Dur
ham. No error.
conservatory of music, which occa-
sionally admits the public, upon an ad-
mission fee, to entertainments by dis
tinguished specialists employed primari-
" for the instruction and benefit OF pu-
nils of the institution and not for prOht,
is not liable for the opera house tax
imposed by Schedule B, Section 80, Reve-
nue. Law 1901.
MORTON V. w. U. TELEGRAPH COM
PANY. (Both sides %appealed.) From
Onslow. Judgment for defendant.
An action for mental anguish does not
survive the death of the injured party.
AS one person cannot recover for
-. = 1I1C
band and wife cannot Join in the same
action to recover for mental anguish SUI
fered by them respectively.
McNEILL V. DURHAM & CHARLOTTE
RAILROAD COMPANY, appellant.
From Moore. New trial.
Where, in an action against a railroad
company to recover DANA ges for person
a! injuries caused by derailment Of a
car in which plaintiff was a passenger,
defendants superintendent testified to
the good character and competency of
the engineer in charge, it was error to
admit upon cross examination, as bear
ing upon the engineers competency, the
question as to how many wrecks had oc-
Cured when he was in charge and the
number Of people killed in such wrecks.
SMITH and WIFE, appellants V. W. &
w. Railroad Company, from Robson.
No error.
In an action against a railroad COM
pany to recover damages for the reck-
less, careless and negligent conduct of
the defendants conductor in carrying
plaintiff beyond the point called for by
her ticket, it appeared that the plaintiff
Ca woman suffered no bodily harm and
incurred no additional expense in reach
ing her home; that the conductor was
guilty of no rudeness and that he ex-
planned to the plaintiff that, by reason
of his inability to signal the engineer,
he was unable to stop the train ca long
freight at the point he had agreed to
put her off, it was held that the defend
ants motion to non-suit was properly
allowed.
Except in cases of negligence by a tele-
graph company in failing to deliver mes
sages concerning personal or domestic
affairs, the doctrine of mental anguish
applies only where there has been per
sonal injury.
ROSSER V. WESTERN UNION TELE-
GRAPH COMPANY, appellant. From
Moore. Affirmed.
Where, in an action against a tele-
graph company to recover damages for
mental anguish caused by failure to de-
liver a telegram announcing death of
plaintiffs father, the defendant request
ed the court to instruct the jury that
they should use great care to distin-
guish the suffering caused by the death
of plaintiffs father, and that caused by
plaintiff being unabIe to attend the fun
eral,' it was not error in giving such
Instructions, to omit the word great"
in connection with care"
Where it is shown that the message
was delivered to the defendant with
charges prepaid and was never received
by plaintiff, a prima facie case is made
against defendant and the burden is
upon it to show matter in excuse of its
failure.
ZACHARY, appellant v. PERRY and
WIFE. From Wayne. Affirmed.
Where husband and wife accepted a
draft from a contractor as a payment
upon the contract price of a house in
course Of erection upon the wife's land.
the draft being in payment of a debt due
by the contractor to a third party for
material used in erecting said house.
and after said acceptance the contractor
abandoned his contract and by reason
thereof the husband and wife ceased to
be indebted to him, it was held that the
party in whose favor the draft was
drawn had no lien against the wife's
separate estate, and that the draft and
its acceptance by the wife did not con-
%stitute a charge upon said estate.
Farthing V. Shields, 1G6 n. c.. 289; Loan
V. Black, 10 y. c. 1923.
COTTON MILLS, appellant V. TOWN OF
WAXHAW. From Union. Affirmed.
Cities and towns may be Incorporated
by act passed in the ordinary legislative
method.
The ratification of an Act by the pre-
siding officers of the two Houses of the