Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1906-06-15
S%~VV3V339@9V0 8@00N'0@VVVV
Decisions!
ANT1-PEoNAGE LAW UPHELD.

In the case of Clyatt VS.. United
States, reported in 20 Sup CT. Rep. Az
! the supreme court of the United
| States, has held that the United
| States Rev Stat. secs. 1890, prohih-
| itng peonage in any state or territory
of the United States. is within the
| thirteenth amendment forbidding
slavery or involuntary servitude and
! authorizing congress to enforce the
prohibition by appropriate legislation.
| The court said: "a status or condi-
ton of compulsory service, based upon
the Indebtedness of the peon to the
master is peonage. The basal fact
is indebtedness. Peonage, however
created, is compulsory service-invol-
untary servitude The peon can re-
lease himself therefrom it is true, by
the payment of the debt. but other
wise the service is enforced. A clear
distinction exists between peonage and
the voluntary performance of labor or
rendering of services in payment of
debt. In the latter case the debtor.
tho constrained to pay his indebtedness
by labor or service, and subject like
any other contractor, to all action for
damages for breach of that contract.
can elect at any time to break 1t, and
no law or force compels performance
or a continuance of the service
WILL CONTESTS.
In the case of Safe Deposit and
Trust Company VS. Berry. SO Md. $50
Chief Justice McSherry in discussing
will contests on the ground of mental
incapacity and undue influence said:
The tendency to assail last wills and
testaments upon the ground of mental
incapacity, and by frivolous and in
conclusive evidence, chiefly of spec
ulative character. when the testator
has not disposed of his property In
way to suit disappointed and. often
distant and distasteful relations. has
grown to such alarming proportions in
late years that the courts should be
resolute in adhering to the old and
long settled principles of the law re-
specting the admissibility of evidence
allowing no relaxation or refined modi-
fication of them in this class of cases,
If last wills and testaments are to
be at all upheld by juries. 1t is no
uncommon thing to see testamentary
dispositions questioned. and 1T some
times happens that they are success
fully questioned, tho there never had
been suspicion Of the testator's ca
pacity during his lifetime, nor after
his death, until the contents of his
will became known, and the expecta-
lions of collateral kindred were de-
feated by it's provisions. These Kin
dred frequently think they ought to
have been the subjects of his bounty,
and because he thought differently
they conclude he was incapable of In
diligently thinking at ALL Because
what he did does not comport with
what they believe he should have done.
they assume he was mentally unsound.
and forthwith attack his VIII, tho they
never doubted his ability to make a
will until they discovered that he had
made one which ignored or dissatisfied
them. 1t Is time that such groundless
assaults should cease, and 1t is the
plain duty of the courts to give them
no encouragement or countenance.'
INDUCED CONFESSION.
In the case of State VS.. Nagel, 81
Att Rep. 1868, it was held that con-
LESSONS obtained from the defendant
while she was in the custody of an Of
ficer and on her way to Jail charged
with the crime of murder will not be
admissible where 1t appears that they
were induced by request or admor-
ition given in such language and UNI
der such circumstances that the pris-
oner might naturally have understood
it as recommending a confession. 1t
appears that previous to the making of
most of the statements constituting
the confession by the defendant, the
officer had tolG her that the truth,
whatever that might be, ought to be
told that it was always the best. eX
cept where it would be means of
conviction: and that even then he
should prefer it if it were his case. He
had also told her, during the CONVERSE
ton, that it was thought she bought |
the revolver that there was ampl,
proof that she bought 1t, and that hav- |
ing mentioned the place where she |
bought she might just as we'll, whether |
or not she bought it. The court held |
that where the request or admonition |
is given in such language and under |
such circumstances that the prisoner |
might naturally have understood it as
confession, the con-
fession induced thereby is inadmissable
In evidence.