The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1904-06-26

void a deed for the land by their
common ancestor, for want OF mental
capacity, which proceeding was m
STUFFED by their co-tenant, suing
alone. Such Judgment is not one IN
rem, but affects only the title OF the
parties thereto, and not the title of
the co-tenants who did not join in the
proceeding TO declare the deed Vold
Where there is an appear TO the
judge in partition proceeding from
the Judgment of the clerk sustaining
a demurrer, the Judgment of the
judge overruling the demurrer is not
q final judgment.
Range Co., appellant. v. CampCn.
From PainlicO.. Reversed.
No license tax can be levied by
State upon goods which have been
sold ana imported into it from an
other State for delivery until the
goods have been mingled with and
form part of the property IN the
State to which they have been inn
ported; and even when thus mingled
they are still protected against any
discriminating tax laid upon them as
imports.
If a tax does not fetter commerce
although it may remotely affect 1t, II
may be levied by the State, even if
the goods have come from another
State. A tax laid directly Oh imported
goods as property, in like manner
and by the same rule as upon other
property produced in the State, is
valid, if the levy is made after the
goods have reached their destination
and are at rest in the State. For the
purpose of direct taxation or taxation
that does not restrict the right OF m
terstate traffic, imported goods are re-
garded as a part of the general mass
e in a Stale & thew
have reached their final destination
and are at rest within the State.
The right of importation which is
protected against hostile State legis-
lation includes the right to sell the
goods in the original packages after
they nave arrived in the State, and
not until such a sale is made do they
cease to be articles of Interstate COM
merce, and become a part of the gen.
eral mass of property in the State.
The doctrine that a State cannot
directly prohibit the importation into
it's territory of goods from another
State, applies to an indirect prohibi-
ton by means of a license tax ex-
acted of the importer.
Sales by an importer of goods
brought into the State from another
State and sold in the original pack
ages are exempted from a license
tax.
A license tax cannot be imposed on
an importer who sells ranges by Il
sample carried from place to place
and then delivers the ranges in the
unbroken packages from a ware
house where the goods were shipped
into the State after the orders We're
taken.
Roper Lumber Co. V. Elizabeth Ium-
Der Co. From Camden. Modified
and affirmed.
Chapter 243, laws 1889, amending
section 1922 of The Code, in reference
to forfeiture of swamp lands for
tional. Paris V. Cedar Co., 1873 n. c.,
ATS.
Trespass being an offense against
the possession, an action therefore
may be maintained by ona not hold
ing the fee.
1t is within the power of the court
to submit such issues as are necessary
to properly present the facts of the
case to the jury, Notwithstanding any
agreement of}eounsel.
Kelly V. johnson. From Cumberland.
Error.
Where, in an action for specific
performance Of a bond to make title,
an interpleader alleged that before
the defendant executed the bond TO
convey the land, the interpleader,
under a contract by defendant to
convey him 100 acres thereof upon
payment Of $500, went into posses
sion of the 100 acres which was sur
veyed by defendant and has remained
in possession thereof to the knowl-
edge of plaintiff when plaintiff re-
ceived defendants bond to make title;
that the interpleader has made inn
nrOVamGntS Ht a cost of $500 and
holds receipts for $9S from defendant
as payments on the purchase price
and is ready and willing to pay
balance upon receipts of deed from
defendant; held error to sustain
PLAINTIFFS demurrer to said plea.
Held further, that the plaintiffs
demurrer having admitted that he re-
ceived the bond to make title knowl-
edge of interpleader's equity, the
plaintiffs equitable title is subject
thereto and when plaintiff acquires
legal title his right of custer be sub
ject to reimbursement to the inter-
pleader. But as it appears from the
pleadings and bonds that the plain
tiff is entitled to a deed with full
covenant of warranty, plaintiff may
hold the balance due defendant on
purchase price until it is ascertained
what amount he must pay inter
pleader to secure possession of the
land.
Osborn, appellant, V. Leach ct al.
From GliiifOrd. New trial.
A publication that a director of q
State institution bought mules there
for at $27 per head more than they
were worth and horses at double their
actual value and received IS commits
sion for each mule bought and his
travelling expenses and several hun
dred dollars for his time, when he
was entitled to only 81 per day, is
held to be libelous per Sc (Ramsey
V. Cheek, 100 N. c., 270) and the
burden is upon defendant to prove
the truth of the charges or matter
in mitigation or excuse.
Chapter $751; laws 1901, which pro-
vides that before A1y proceeding shall
be brought against q newspaper for
publication of a libel the plaintiff
SHALL five. days before instituting
proceeding, serve written notice on
defendant specifying the articles, etc,
and ii 1T shall appear upon the trial
that the article was published in gooo
faith and it's falSity was due to an
honest mistake and there were rea-
sonable grounds for believing that the
statements were true. and that with
in ten days after service of notice by
fIA.A lEas Il AZ