Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1905-02-13
ee~ee~o1oe~e~ ~n~~~@@ooecSs
{lmportant Decisions!
AA,i,1 nllNsrRIfCTION.

| Tcstntor directed that at the end OF
three years from his death has estate
be divided equally between his two
sons and. "if either or both should
die before the expiration of said three
years. or die leaving no heirs then the
portion that would go to him or them
is to 90 to my sisters The three
wears having elapsed and both of the
sons being alive. this suit was brought
FOR the purpose OF obtaining a con-
struction of the WILL Held. that the
two sons having survived the three
years. took an absolute title to testa-
tors land.
s,hronshire VS.. Gault, SO 8. w. 500
(ky.J
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS..
Plaintiff sued defendant, her hus-
band, for divorce, claiming that de-
PENDANT was guilty of cruelty and spec
flying several acts of same. She also
filed a motion for aimony but before
the final hearing on said notion she
became reconciled with her husband
and resumed her marital relations
with him. Afterwards the motion for
almony came on for hearing, and the
court made an order requiring defen-
dant to make certain provisions for
plaintiffs support. Defendant then
brought action to Vacate this order.
Held, that plaintiff. by voluntarily re-
Stunning matrimonial Capitalization with
defendant condoned the offense and
was not entitled to alimony.
E'ullhart VS.. E'ullhart, SO S. w. Sal
(Mo)
CRIMINAL, I,AW-MINORS
Defendant was convicted of selling
whisky to prosecutor in violation of
the local option law and appealed, ask
ing to be discharged on the ground
that he was a minor. The testimony
showed that he was sixteen years of
age Held, that his minority was no
defense, he having arrived at the age
of discretion.
Brown VS.. state, SO S. w. 37s
(Texas)
CONTRACTS-REP QUOTATION.
Plaintiff. as chairman Of commit
tee of citizens endeavoring to obtain
the removal of an educational insti-
tuition to a certain city, procured an
option on certain land, and Il contract
was entered into with defendant by
which he agreed, on condition that the
institution was located on the land, to
purchase Il certain lot in the addition;
the proceeds of the fund raised by the
sale of the lots to go to pay the nld
for the university. Shortly thereafter
and before anything had been done on
the faith of the agreement of defend
ant he asked to withdraw his contract
notifying the committee that he would
not be bound thereby. The committee
refused to accept his withdrawal and
went on and secured the university and
then offered to convey the lot to de-
PENDANT, which he refused to accept,
and the lot was sold at public auction,
and this action was brought against
defendant to recover the difference be-
tween the amount he agreed TO pay
for the lot and the amount which it
brought at auction. Held. that the Or
iginal agreement between defendant
and the committee by which he agreed
to purchase the lot was a valid ana
binding contract and defendant coulo
not withdraw from same, as he at
tempted. and therefore plaintiff was
entitled to recover. Ferguson VS.. Get
zendaner, S3. S. w, 374 CTexas>.
ASSAULT AND BATTERY
Defendant is the owner of three
story building on the top floor of when
is a dance hall. This hall was rent
ed to one r for the purpose OF giving
a dance. While the entertainment was
in progress. one N, while intoxicated,
pained admission to the hall, without
having paid the charge for ADMISSION.
r approached him and insisted that ne
should either pay or leave the hali. Tie
at first resisted, but finally II succeed
ed in inducing him to go on the OUT
side and closed the door of the hall.
He became disorderly, thereby attract
ing the attention of defendant, and Oh
ter some conversation in which N mace
several threats, defendant took him by
the arm and led him downstairs, WheI;
N stated that if defendant would come
down there ha would fix him. Defend
ant started back and someone remark
ed that N was getting some bricks,
and defendant secured an old musket
from a storeroom on the first toor
Just then plaintiff came running up
the stairs to go to the third floor to
attend the dance, and defendant, be-
lieving him to be N, the place being
dimly lighted, struck him with the
musket. Plaintiff brought this action
for damages. Held, that defendant
was excused from liability on the
ground of self defense and apparent
necessity. Crabtree VS.. Dawson, 80
S. w. 557 (Ky.)
Aaoniz.nq Burns.