Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1904-11-28

her servants to go to the crew and
demonstrate with them, and forbid
them to erect the fence there a1d de-
mand the removal thereof, which such
servant, plaintiff, did. The forernan,o OF
the crew, commanding them, directed
one of his men Ito go after the plain
tiff. whereupon plaintiff was SET upon
and beaten. Plaintiff brought suit for
damages against the defendant railroad
company. Held, that the assault was
not within the scope Of the authority of
the railroad company's employe, and
hence the railroad was not liable there
for.
waaler VS.. Great Northern Ry., 100
NV. 1897 Is. ID
HUSBAND AND WIFE.
The parties to this suit are husband
and wife. They were married about
thirteen years ago. In December 1901
they separated, and shortly afterwards,
defendant filed bill for divorce, which
upon a hearing was dismissed. They
own eighty acres Of land as joint own
ers; upon which in 1908. complainant
(the husband) had a crop of grapes.
Defendant undertook to harvest this
crop. Complainant instituted this suit
to enjoin such action. Defendant filed
a cross bill asking for an accounting
for her share of the proceeds from the
crops. Held, that the wife, as tenant
by the entirety with the husband, had
no such interest in the crops growing
on land so held as to enable her to file
such bill.
Morrill, VS.. Morrill,, IL d L N sos
(Mich.)
DEFECT IN CARS.
Plaintiff. doing business In Toledo
Ohio. purchased from a mirror COM
pany in Pennsylvania, carload Of
plate glass in boxes weighing from 500
to $500 pounds each. The glass was
consigned and shipped by the defen-
dant railroad company and arrived In
good condition. Plaintiff commenced
to unload the car and had removed one
case. In attempting to remove the Sec
ond, the iron roller upon which 1t was
being moved, plunged thru the bottom
Of the car. causing destruction OF the
contents of the case, weighing about
$500 pounds. There was evidence that
the car was suitable for shipping lum-
Der. coal or brick or anything that
would not be topheavy It was con-
coded that it was unfit FOR shipping
glass. The car was received August
IA by the mirror company loaded with
sand and was unloaded on the after
noon Of that day. 1t was loaded with
glass on the 18th or 10th. The custom
between the mirror company and the
defendant railroad company was that
the mirror company might take. any OF
it's cars which were consigned to that
company when unloaded without ask
ing permission and use them for ship
ping products of their own provided
they were suitable for their use. The
mirror company in furtherance OF this
custom kept inspectors whose duty it
was to select the cars for shipping
their products. Held that the consign-
or is the agent Of the consignee in the
shipment Of goods and his selection OF
an unsuitable car Is binding on the
consignee where defects in oars suit
able per Sc are 30 open as to be
discernible to the shipper.
Frohlich VS.. Pennsylvania Co. d. L.
N. sos (Mich.)
GRATUITOUS BA1LMENT.
Plaintiff was depositor in defen-
dant bank and her husband hired from
the bank safety deposit box for his
own use. Plaintiff gave her husband
package to place in the deposit box,
but the package was too large for the
box and he asked defendants cashier
IL he could take care Of the package
for him. The cashier took the package
and placed 1t in the vault. The vault
was robbed and the package and other
valuable personal property taken.
Plaintiff brought action 70 recover the
value OF the stolen package Held, a
gratu.tous bailnent, and that no such
degree Of negligence on the part. Of the