The St. Louis Republic., 1904-12-28
st. Louis Court Of Appeals Orders
New Trial in Damage
Suit.
OWNER MAY RECLAIM LAND.
Medical College Faculty Is Up.
held in Refusing Diploma to
Studcnt-Other De
cisionS.

day reversed tho decision OF the Circuit
Court OF Pcmiscot COUNTY giving judg-
mont against J. T.. Franklin for 800 in
favor Of Alexander Appesstr for the
draining nf lake in Pemisrot county
entitled Pcmiscot Lake. and raInandeI the
case for a new trial.
fudge ReyuUru. vino wrote n. appel-
late courts opinion. said that the lake
was connected with the Mississippi River
two miles distant. by A bayou. and that
in time of high water the lake used TO
overflow IN. surrounding land and that
III" defendant was but lawfuI.y using snd
changing the surface Of his own property.
for which, properly and prudoutly J~r-
formed. 10 action would lie at the pain
TINS instance
Inc lake VAS ono ana oHe-hslf miles
vide and three miles long ard was formed
py the New Madrid earthquake o! 1911.
The parties to the suit owned portions
OF the lake. and AppIesato had established
fisheries. from which lie derived an an
nua! profit Of s25po. it V as stated. Frank
ing, desiring to reclaim the portion Of
mis- land covered by the lake .o- cultivs-
tion. under authority or IL contract with
Pemiscot County. drained the lake In. 100
- ''''I4.5 u Il cltcil. ".lCN connected
Win d ditch made by the county
Judge Seyburn SAID that the piaintife
MS entitled 10 recover suCn tiaraages
"hIy as were the proximate and natural
consequences OF the defendants act and
sAat tne plaintiffs right o: action was re
stIcted TO recover Tor damages conse-
qu"nt upon the tresDass manifested by the
testimony in the encroachmeHt OF ;ae
u,.usee"at upon his Land and the exca-
FatIOn OF his soil.
no Court ot appeals yesterday upheld
t'H iacI!tT "f the barnes Medical College
III refusing TO Issue q diploma TO OaUs
FORK.
The action Of the St. Louis Circuit Court
in Issuing = writ OF rnandamus 70 compel
the faculty 20 graduate York as OF the
lass of l:'t; was reversed.
York claimed 20 have fulfilled all the re-
graduation.
Judge Reyhu"n. who wrote the appelIa, ,e
courts oIlnioH. said that the constitution
OF the college gave the Board Of trustees
discretionary power OF graduating or with
holding degrees. and the righ: OF deter
mining What students should be gradual
ed from the institution. Associate Judges
B!anG and Goods cuncurTel
Other decisions were:
BY Judge Bland:
Ella Gates .co;fuan :, a. rlnn.i-. ". John
Cafes {! a.. .ssspnndeat. James c. Chic. ap-
cil,zeas Cos! Mining cosnsaay. r.spp-den,.
W -; Ef"afd Acperno,i- APPELLANT: city: st
Z, =. SousAer Iron Company. .reypoad.r.. rp
Lacle4s Power Company. aDfei!an; city: az
st&,s Life ,Lnsg-sne. Company. respondent.
ys Edward ". Schwsrzkopt. appellant. city;
d Z Rhode. appellant. vs.. 1oha F.. css.y.
respondent: Madison County. affirmed for taiI.
! HeEzcn. respondent: rs. Lizzie a. E.pzea.
appellant. Lawrence County; AFFIRMED .o- caii-
BY Judge G3ado:
!. Hugo Grimm. appellant. vs Alf..l.a Bar
EnS;2n. str:Hthee, etc. respondent, city: az
- u7dsErood TyPevGt:er Company. Appellant.
i.ebscca J. Isrs'. respondent. vs. John I.-ael,
sTTsi!sa;; r.. A.. ci,y: i, Affirmed.
-, Charles c7ardiU- resrcnd4n,. -. w... End
i.. H=Sats Amusement coint.aar. appellant: city;
n'qn IsppSIlant . ei,y reysr.sd and r.a,naded
Darlington. appellant: city; affirmed =
The following opinions were pas.ed
upon:
Charles Power vs.. .Tohn Dean: appea, dis
mss,d ms ,SF failure Of appellant 20 comply with
p IN 5., 5s E,,s q :: sai- @ g 5ssiss; sssss
motion ,.ae,..I. ioF rtsli.s rrsaissriHs eysrruled:
Egse1.' To;ign } t,os, 1Sf ,fehea,.ns o,er;pl.a
Frank S;srreit VS.. DelEnar Avenus and cray
ton R4iiwsy Conpany; motion for TehesrIas
,Ia 5sTg' nsdis.G nden IS s. ISa;s 7ra. Company
Ez,ata Company: motor. ,5r rehtss,rs sis En.i ,,.
talnsd ard FeheaI!as granted.
Edward a SenK vs. 81. Louis and Suburban
Railway Company: motion for reh-arlns over
Thomas =. Gri.- v. s.. 1oui. Merchants,
Bridge Terminal Railway Company; i'i Ii,5.ios To-
FeheartnS oFfiI..-i
Compan%: motion hor TehearinE overruied
In re pdfett & "a minor: hy next friend. -.
appe!art t" comply u!t ruis ~ ,bs. ae,,, d
Midland Publishing COMPANY We. Irnpl-Trs,.:
printing afstTacts u re"ord. ''i''' i'F
jacob B!e1 rs. ct. Louis Transit Corrpa----
motion I" transfer % supreme Court over
Peter Boyd vs s.. I-,1le Trans: c.opuan,..
apr~llsn nj allowed So trr printing ABSTRACTS
Jacob S.ommer4 v, s. InI, Trans.. Chm.
psny; appellant a!!Oxcd fss 10 tor printing ab-
Mary famine; ~. American storas. and
MovinE comgany; motion for COTS FOR printing
pany: appellant allowed s;i for printing a5-
s!lal Mitchell ys Chicago and Alton Railway
Company: appellant allowed $40 toT printing
Charles soniuisr. administrator. vs. Franklin
Esa!i ct a! motion for rshea.ins overrIied.
Cigar and Paper Company: motion .or rehear-
Phoenix pian!ns Mi Company ~s. F-,nJ,
Harrison e; al: motion for rsiearins over
W u. Stripping W. Charles Mcclure: motion
FOR rehcarinr overruIed.
St Louis Brewing Association. respondent.
- James Ksit"nbach ct ii. appellant: mo-
ton fcr r.leaEinz oveFruei.
Eugene Wells. ctc respondent. Missouri
tcr r.hearins 9ye-Tue! ana motion TO transfer
10 Sunrer" COURT overr13l-!.
Emma Gruebel. etc. respondent. - Wabash
for
hearing. ovsrT1ileI.
sedaiia National Eaa:;. respondent. =, Chs.
ton FOR reacarlrr ovrrrUlc,'
Angus, sonrlertieid RESPONDENT. vs. Sc. Louis
Transit Con:anH. appellant. motion FOR re-
aihert La!1bcrt. appellant. vs.. Maria r.-,-,o
I.a'nb.--. respondent: motion fo- -phesrfrr
Wiiiia,ii Holden. respondent v. 1r,vo,,,.,
hearing oy.-rIIed. 'o' re-
XIi,eTt conis,oek. RESP. rs Walter l.. Flower
Ggo,sr syT9Gasr s1b sE: 5ssE vs. St Louis Trans.
George Manewsi. pit.. Henri. H. Den.san
motion for T"heETiEs sustained and reheartry
ialne. Iiifr EickaIy. app v, Joi,n o'Rrien Boiler
iuErs;a Kupks. app - s.; Louis Trsn,,,
c3a:Pany; resp The APPEAL is disfn.ssed By ap:
c5%PaSy aF.a dismissed ps Sg spps'lahs TtIhiIs
oscar J. Ifu relT.. VS.. 81. Icrls Tran,..
Company. app. r:ot!on for r.he;lrinE ovs!e
ruled
Frank W. Let -. Andersen Gratz: motion
TO transfer To supreme Court overruled
Ordered that from and after January 1.
1905. the compensation of the marshal of
this court shall he fifteen hundred dollars
4i-sU per annuIn-
Her Idea of Racing.
Sportsman: Terrible soaking they had
in the Welter Handicap. Why. when the
Jockeys weighed in they were each allowed