Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1905-04-28
1~4@A4A~@@4@@1@@@9@@@9
g1mportant DecisionsS
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
pRoMISsORY NOTE.

PROMISSORY NOTE.
Defendant executed to plaintiff
promissory note, and the same not
having been paid. plaintiff instituted
suit The note matured more than six
years prior to the commencement OF
the suit, and defendant claimed that
the note was outIawed. Plaintiff
contended that the oobligation on the
note had been revived by a letter writ
ten by the defendant to plaintiffs at
torney. in which he says among other
things will pay as soon as / can"
ard in which. after offering to pay
500 in compromise he adds 1T is that
or wait until / get it," Held, that the
letter was a sufficient admission that
the debt is unpaid to revive the cause
of action. Cleland VS. Hostetter, 20
Pac sol On. Mex).
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.
Petitioner a farmer, was convicted of
a violation of a city ordinance of the
city of Boise. he having peddled beef
ON the streets in that city without pro-
curing a license. BY the terms OF the
ordinance in question: a farmer is pro-
hibited from selling the products of his
farm. with the exception of milk. fish
and game. without first taking out
license. Petitioner claimed that the
city had no authority to pass an ordl-
nance prohibiting farmer from SELL
ing the product of his own farm with
out license. Held, that beef from
slaughtered animals raised and
slaughtered on the farm is the product
of the farm and may be sold within
the corporate limits of cities in Idaho
without a license. Petitioners convic-
ton was set aside and he was dis
charged. Ex parte Snyder, % Pac.
S19 Gdaho).
MORTGAGE.
Plaintiff, having an option on land
which was about to expire, wished to
borrow money to enable him to take IT
up. Defendant refused to make loan,
taking a mortgage on the land as Sc
curity, but advanced the money, took
title to the land in his own name, ana
executed to plaintiff a bond for title.
Plaintiff afterwards rendered defend-
ant the amount of the loan with inter-
est, which defendant refused to ac-
cept, and plaintiff brought suit to have
the transaction declared mortgage,
and asking for leave to redeem on the
payment of the amount due. Held, thar
the transaction did not constitute a
mortgage emitting plaintiff to the
rights of redemption. Conner vs. Clapp,
70 Pac. 929 (Wash).
NEGLIGENCE.
Plaintiff, a child six years OF age,
went into defendants power house OF
his own volition. The engineer in
charge drove him and his older brother
from the engine room, whereupon they
went to the power room, where two
boys were operating the levers by
which the rock was raised from
quarry, where they talked to the boys,
who asked plaintiffs brother to re-
main and blow the whistle at the close
of the work Plaintiff while there was
injured and brought suit for damages.
Held. that, such minor employees having
no authority to invite strangers on
the premises, the invitation did not
render plaintiff and his brother licenses
on the premises, instead of trespass-
ers. and. plaintiff could not recover.
Curtis VS.. Stone Quarries, 70 Pac. 955
(Wash)
REAL ESTATE AGENTS.
PLAINTIFFS are real estate agents. De-
PENDANT, who was the owner OF lou
acres of land was solicited by plain
tiffs to place it in their hands for sale.
He wrote to them as follows:
II received your letter today. must
have $1,000 in cash. You can have
all you can get over and above that,
and I reserve the CROP"
Plaintiffs found purchaser for the
land, but did not notify the owner un-
til after he had sold it to another per-
son. Held, that the plaintiffs were not
entitled to commission for making
the sale. He1ling VS.. Darby, 70 Pac.
1913 (Kansas.)