The Nezperce herald. (Nezperce, Idaho) 1900-1957, 1904-08-18
JUDICIAL oecIsIona


The sdyisability OF documentary evil
6ence tending TO establish the guilt Of
an accused OF the offense charged IL
held, IN Adams VS.. New York. advance
sheets u. s. 1903. .. 372. TO be affected
by the fact that II was in violation Of
the constitutional prohibition against
unrea sonable searches and seizures.
The constitutional guaranty Of reiig-
lous freedom Is held. In People VS..
Pierson IN. ~. CD l.. Il. A 1877. not TO
be violated by a statute requiring the
furnishing OF medical attendance 10
minors. where the constitution pro
yides that liberty OF conscience shall
not Justify practices inconsistent with
the safety OF the state.
The right 10 interrogate witness as
10 his belief In a Supreme Being who
would punish him for false swearing.
for the purpose OF affecting his cred
iblllty. is denied ia Brink VS.. stratton
N. ~. 90 l.. X. A. 1872. where the
constitution provides that no person
shall be incompetent 20 be a witness on
account OF his religious belief, and abb
rogates all disqualification from civil
rights because OF such belief.
A stipulation In a railway pass that
the company shall not be liable 10 the
user under any circumstances. whefh-
er OF negligence OF agents or otherwise,
for any injury 10 the person" is held in
Northern Pacific Railway Company va
Adams. Advance Sheets u. 5. 1903. y.
s0s. 20 violate no rule Of public policy
and 20 relieve the company from liabil-
fly for personal injuries resulting from
the ordinary negligence OF its employees
10 one riding on the pass with knowl-
edge OF It's conditions.
A promise by a conductor 10 assist a
female pa ssenger who is partially blind.
Ia alighting from the train NJ her des-
tina ton. Is held. in Southern Railway
VS.. Hobbs GA. 60 l. r. A
IS. not 20 amount 10 an undertaking
on the part OF the conductor 10 enter
the ear In which the passenger is rid
Ing. assume charge OF her bundles and
escort her from her seat down the aisle
and out upon the platform. unless the
passenger is 80 helpless as 10 require
Ihis extraordinary attention and the 1
conductor has notice that such is the
,ase
The right 20 cross examine hand
writing experts In order 10 prove their 4
ability is sustained Ia Hoag vs.. Wright
y. ~. q l.. II. A. l63. and IL Is beld
% be error 10 strike out an admission
By such an expert that be had been
mistaken AS 10 signatures which be had
Pronounced genuine. although the trial
ndge might. IN bis discretion. have e1-
.luded an effort 20 secure such sdmis-
don In the FIRST instance. The other
on examination OF witness
IS TO handwriting by comparison are
,oilaied and reviewed in a note 10 this
,ssse.
A combination prohibited by the act
q Congress OF July ?. 1890. is held. In
". W. Montague a. Co. VS.. Lowry &C..
/. A.. 9th c.. s3. L. X. A. IS affirmed
Idrance sheets L. s. 1903. p. 307. 10
.e constituted by an association TO
mite all acceptable desiers- engaged
a certain business In certain city
nd within 200 miles therefrom and all
American manufacturers Of their sup
lies. the rules OF which exclude I'M Z
cceptabie persons from membership
nd prohibit their purchasing supplies
Z less than list prices. which are more
han double what members OF the assc-
lat1on pay.