The St. Louis Republic., 1904-02-17
ST. Louis Court of Appeals Sus
tains Judgment Against Cred
itor Who Harrassed Debtor.
HUSBANDS LEGAL LIABILITY.
United States Supreme Court
Mandate ReveEses Appellate
FeciSion-Othrr
Case.


The St Louis Appellate Court Yesterday
| directed that 4 judgment obtained by
f,bar,ps e cooper ar,inst David r
g, e->,. ,,,,,,l;,s,,. .,,,.o ., i,,d;,;,i
Se!oc iof matlc'ous abuse Oh Juuici'i
| process be sustained provided Cooper will
rar,it s17. ,a,v;,c the indpr,a,, s,a9
s.. -, - ,ooa -,
Seyoc, merchant. on June 10. 1889. op-
tanned Judgment for sl4.o0 against Cooper.
who ,.ns i. ,,,ac,,,io on,,,o,.,, at 1.,r,i
VINO was 'hech;lhic, en'p'oyeo at ti''hi'i-
bal, Mo-, by the Hannlbal ana ST. Joseph
| Railroad Company since acquired by the
I t,,r,ir,,or p,iIrn,a con,n,r,
a., '''ls ,Ia,.i ,ol is'.'i o'u Coiipi-',. mp, ,,
! III, ~ tisfied Ccoper who had n wife and
| fo,,,. o,i,,,.o,, a,,;,,,a, o,.,,,,,,,,;,,,, ia
e,iiio'sn' 'iaiiteu eAiip,,on' '''"
showed that he owned less than 500 worth
! OF propertv 'Tte. .eyar,Ition wac rendered
,,i -, -, -, -, -
! iae'ei"'' i''iies anu 'ie '''4i' 'ii tp'Hi''hH
WIS garnisled. and Cooper was dis
CHARGED The Sta was ordered to be re-
-, - 49,. -. -,
case was tried was ordered - assess
damages for loss of time Presiding Judge
| -, ~ - Va '',"e
nia'iu wrote 'he opinion ior 'he Appellate
Court and Associate Judges Goode and
Reybur-p oon.urrc5
49,, .->.,,,,
HUSBANDS hfsfoNsibiLil l.
The legal responsibility of a man to pro-
vide for ,he needs of his wife were ey-
=, 80 -, 49,
pidiHeu ~ 'uus'e Hooue III an opiti-'h ~
vsrsins 4 judgment against J. 5; Briscoe
H. H.. iaroi ot II, Joii'isoi LOT WATCH "'usI
Johnson kept a general merchandise
store in Angola and Briscoe, Il farmer
worth ABOUT si.eV or s'.uoe, dtai i,iti Viii
incjudiT1t- the vafcb in question Rriscoc
nnif fnr th. fynnds .xcentinc those which
he claimed he did not authorize his wife
10 buy
Judge GooIle saws that n man ought to
hove IN wl l1 ,lpbf =
be will incur. if he is providing for his
family according to his means. 1t is not
that wives OF persons of his fortune and
station have watches That fact. he says
by no means determines that he has been
50 remiss in not providing one for his wife
that she may get it on his credit as IL
Thing of necessity.
Under the facts in the case Judge Goode
is OF the opinion that the power of a wife
to pledge her husbands credit must rest
upon an agency, either expressed or i'm
piled.
means of the parties their condition in
life and the >,revious conduct of the hus
band with reference to the wife's pur-
chases in his name. enter. the Judge says,
ing ing mon the measure of authority she
has received, or appears to have received,
from him.
The case was remanded for a new trial
i'm accor,jance with the views expressed in
the opinion, Judges Bland and Reyburn
concurred.
FEDERAL CooRf foLiNH.
A mandate from the supreme Sourt VI
the United States was Iecei'eu uAs
py John II. Murphy cieiA VI lhe
of Appeals, directing that reversal De
entered in a repleyin suit begun by the
late Congressman Charles +, Pearce for
goods shipped to him from Japan in 1895.
The goods consisted of bric-a-brac and
other articles which Mr. Pearce bought
while travelling
The goods reached ST. Louis over the
Wabash road, which paid S264.3l to a con-
meeting line for charges. The Wabash
Company refused to deliver the goods
less the charges were paid. Pearce re
fused to pay the charges on the ground
that they had been advanced without his
knowledge. He won in the Circuit Court
and in the Court of Appeals.
Judge II. W. Bond. who was then a
member of the Appellate bench, dissented
and the case was taken to the United
States Supreme Court on a writ of error.
II deyeIoped that a Federal statute was
inynivsd
mr. I@,;ta5 St.taa c,,prar,a ro,r, nv
Inc oHitto S,ates ouprene 1ourt or
GERS !hat une Waoash CoilpaI! %IecoVet %
from the executors OF Pearce the amount
of the charges and the costs of the ap-