The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-01-31
THE SUPREME COURT
ACTION ON NUMBER or APPLicA-
 TT0Ns FOR REHEARiNG
Tn. Justices Handed Down Four Ovlnions and Heard Submission of several Cnses From the
 Eighth Division.


 Forty rulings on application for re- hearing and four decisions were hand cd down by the Alabama Supreme Court yesterday. Of the total rehear' ings only seven altered the opinions that had already been handed town.
 The case of most prominence that took a new turn by ruling of tho re- hearing docket yesterday was that Of George Griffin against. w. NJ Drenneii. ct, al, which was many months ago appealed from the Birmingham ~ity Court. The effect of the re-hearing is to uphold the general act of the las Legislature approved February 25. 90S, fixing the salaries of the mayors of all cities with population exceed ing 35,000 at s2,500 annually.
 The case grew out of an effort of the plaintiff MT. Griffin of Birmingham to have the payment of a salary of sSi- 500 to ex-Mayor W. M. Drennen, ot Birmingham, stopped The board og mayor and aldermen of Birminghaai had voted to raise the salary of the mayor from $500 to. $3,60o about two years ago. There was from the begin ming a great deal of doubt as to thc authority of the aldermanic body to make the salary increase. The dispute gradualiy grew until it was reflected in the last mayoralty campaign when George B. Ward, the present mayor, was elected. He insisted when he was installed in office in accepting only tae statutory limit of $2.so0. This amount and this amount only he is receiving now and has not received more since he has been in office.
 The original opinion of the Supreme Court in the case was somewhat favorable to the assailants of the general act on the argument of certain demurrers. By yesterdays ruling 1t is claimed there is no room for doubt that the mayor of Birmingham can receive only s2,50O annually for his services.
 The Supreme Court also denied tha application of John W. A. Sanford. of Montgomery. to have the revocation Of his legal license expunged from tho record of that tribunal. MT. Sanford several weeks ago made an extensive argument for his contentious but the Justices held that the bench could not take cognizance of the matter as there is statute which is self-operative in instances where lawyers surrender their licenses as did MT. Sanford.
 The opinions of yesterday were as follows:
 Tyson. J.
 Alabama Great Southern Railroad Company vs. Quarels < Couturie; ap- peal from Greene circuit court affirm ed.
 DowdelI, J.
 Sloss-s Sheffield Steel &. Iron Company vs. J. M. Strange; appeal from Frank lin circuit court, affirmed
 Sampson, J.
 First National Bank of Montgomery vs Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Mary- land. appeal from Montgomery city court. affirmed.
 Anderson. J.
 Cleveland School Furniture Co.,, vs City of Greenville; appeal from Butler circuit court. affirmed
 The court ruled on applications for rehearing as follows:
 ". E. Flemming vs. A. J Leverett appeal from Pike Circuit Court; applI- cation overruled.
 George W. Peach as assignee vs. E c, Grubbs, appeal from Barbour Chan. cery Court; application overruled.
 Henry Johnson vs. State of Alabama appeal from Chiffon Circuit Court; ap. plication overruled
 Lou Robertson, administratrix, vs F N. Robertson, ct al, appeal from Fay. cite Chancery Court; application over. ruled.
 Sloss-Shefield Steel and Iron Com. pany vs. Samuel M Hutchinson, appea from Birmingham City Court; applica. tion overruled.
 Birmingham Railway, Light an6 Power Company vs Ella P. Moore, ap. peal from Birmingham City Court; ap. plication granted, Judgment of affirm. ance set aside and judgment of tho court below reversed and cause re. manded.
 w. L. Murdock Brokerage Company vs. R. E. Collins, appeal from Jeffer. son Circuit Court; application granted and cause reversed and rendered.
 Allen P. Howison, ct al, vs. William Baird. appeal from Jefferson ChancerS Court; application overuled.
 James F. Hawkins vs. Louisville ant Nashville Railroad Company, appea from Birmingham City Court; applica tion overruled.
 E. W. Williams, administrator, vs Central of Georgia Railway. appea from Birmingham City Court; applica tion overruled.
 Southern Railway Company vs. How ard Bradford. administrator, appea from Birmingham City Court; applica ton overuled.
 Mayor and Aldermen of Birmingham vs. Mary J Mccormack, appeal iron Jefferson ChanceTy Court; application overruled.
 R. l.. Hardeman vs. M. NJ. Gwin, ap peal from Bessemer City Court. appli' cation granted. judgment of reversa set aside and judgment of the Cit! Court is affirmed.
 II. K. Gresham vs NJ. C.. Ragsdale