The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-06-14
NO DAMAGES FOR DISEASE Important Decision by the Supreme Court. LANDLORD IS NOT LIABLE Parents of Child Who Contracted
 Scarlet Fever Sued.
 Justice Will Pass Upon Henry Wal ker's Case Before June Term Ad- fourns-No Release of Mo- bile Convicts.

TnOmaS lS flnney, n Tesluent Ot hidu- ison County. yesterday was denied the right to collect damages from his land- lord, Walter R. Steele, on the grounds
 of his child having contracted scarlet
 fever from germs left by a former oc-
 cupant of a house. The Supreme Court affirmed decision of the lower courts in the case.
 In the Madison Circuit Court. the
 case had been decided against the plaintiff on evidence produced by the owner of the house, that between the occupancies of the two families, in both of which scarlet fever made it's appearance, the residence had been thoroughly fumigated.
 Before Finney had entered the house belonging to Steele, another family had occupied the premises. A small child ! in this family had had the scarlet fever. Sometime after the first fam fly had left tse premises, Finney rent ed the house, and child of his was also stricken with the disease. The suit was brought against the house owner. charging that the second case of fever had resulted as the result of negligence on his part. At the trial in the county court 1t was shown that the house had been fumigated and the case was decided in favor of the de- fendant. In the opinion handed down by the Supreme Court yesterday. Jus tice Simpson affirmed tho decision in | the original trial.
 A Case From Cuilman. Another opinion which has been awaiting with considerable interest | was that handed down by Justice Ty- son yesterday, in an appeal in the case | of F. A Gillispie ct als. vs. T. M. Gibbs ct als from the Cullman County Chan cery Court. The contention was over | the right of the mayor and aldermen | of the town of Hanceville, to rent a school building for a City Hall, paying | for 1t from sum of money raised by | tax levy and destined for street and other improvement In their charge | in the lower court, the plaintiffs &C., l cused the defendants of renting the ! building for the sole object of helping the school In which the town held no | interest, rather than from any need I of structure as a City Hall l Previous to the action of the alder
 men in occupying the building. the charge stated. an attempt had been
 made to appropriate portion of the money raised on the tax levy to tho school. This had been prevented by the plaintiffs securing an injunction against 1t. Thereupon. 1t was charged. | the aldermen, in order to attain their object, rented the building for term | of five years, paying for its use a
 rental of $50 a year for five years. the
 money being paid in advance. | In the trial before the lower court. | the original bill and the injunctions | against the aldermen were dismissed. | The opinion of the Supreme Court Jus tice yesterday afidmed the decision 1 of the Cullman County tribunal. List of the Decisions. Following is the list of cases in which opinions were handed down yes- | terday:
 weakley. c. J.
 Harvey Hughes vs The State of Ala
 bama, appeal from Houston Circuit
 Court. affirmed.
 F. A. Gillispie ct al. vs T. M. Gibbs. ct al, appeal from Cullman Chancery court, affirmed.
 Sloss-Shefield Steel and Iron Com pany. vs. Sol Smith. appeal from Br-
 mingham City Court, appeal dismiss ed.
 Thomas L. Finney vs. Walter R. Steele. appeal from Madison Circuit
 Court, affirmed.
 Julia Greer, ct al vs. T. S. Herren, appeal from Tallapoosa Probate Court. reversed and rendered.
 Anderson, J.
 Gus King vs. Southern Railway Com pdHyb dppSdl ITOIl nam Clly Court, affirmed.
 Joseph Huggins vs. Southern Rail-
 way Company. appeal from Bessemer
 City Court. reversed and remanded.
 The arguments in the appeal of
 Henry Walker. thrice convicted and
 sentenced to death for the murder of
 Mrs. Maggie Dickerson, of Cordova,
 Walker County, March 5, 1903, will be
 heard in the Supreme Court today.
 Through a misunderstanding The Ad-
 vertiser stated yesterday that no de- cision will be reached in this case un-
 til the November term of the court.
 It Is required. however. that all pre- ferred criminal cases introduced In the Supreme Court must be decided before
 the end of the term in which they are introduced. A decision will be rem dered in the Walker case therefore,
 before June 30. on which date the Court is to adjourn.
 Walker has been tried three times for the murder of Mrs. Dickerson. In the two previous trials, the sentence of execution imposed by the lower tri- bunal has been reversed by the Su- preme Court and the case remanded. This time the case has been submitted on its merits, and will be finally de- cided.
 Mobile Convict Case.
 Another case in which there will
 II. AGf No t.,fv