davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1906-09-05
That Accounts for a.

That Accounts tof w.
I have quit euhnol, Il haFiuH
clasoa a fsw days ago atrinEiuwn
Team cor
Good Grounds fer Divorce
OAK otAs
The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1906-09-05

prof Mason Warbufton. having
fornAtten hIH lufehteY, mulfefrd AN
nhHirartpd Dear. dear aud vent
around Ia the back daor Ia the
kltehen he found slim. young per
son Juggling ffanileallY at "a huge
kettle, tbs contents pf when
ahawod unmistahablo aigus OF boil
Ing over
THE prAS ~ cfaapad the stu
alton and tta ketlta simult 4neouHlY
and transferred the latter tu the
Kitchen table Then he RnHnd With
interest az the winsume person r.
utr so,er "a him. Ills sister Celia
had said aha cxisaoed Il uew arrival
aud clearly nhe had referred 10 this
nee cook he foltsit incumbent "a
welcome her 10 the household
"Ny good siri." he began
kits. alr. she said
And . very nice name ! trust
You Will like your situation
ffer flnesf WAS burned aud he
aandBEad Il up with a strip of his
handkerchief There Waa NJ hurry
about luncheon. he told her
lie passed on. aud Misa Rather
inc Fafauhar sank tnin "a chair aud
laughed until she cried There she
was found By her hoateHa. Mru cez
lla Hartman. to whom she related
the loke 81 the tail. pleasant l0oh
ing gentleman who had mistaken
her for a eook
IT AS Mason. said Mfn. Hart
man. and II he miatooa you for the
eoah yon must be- the eoah
& think not. Eetorfed KITTY.
sFar one fhing. ! cannot cook
That mAhoa no difference. III
Itry so stand Il. aud Maaou never
knows shat he's eating. anyway
"Bm Why. persisted Kitty.
should ! b. Yauf efsak
@necauae. said Mrs. Hartman.
sYan aru tbs only Woman Nho has
made Mason sit 40 ami take notice
| 10 attended 20 your burned fnggr.
and YET I had an arm IN = sling fuf
two weeks and b. never noticed @
have had some - tho pfsttissf
eifiz Ia the World here 90 tiait me
hut 10 uould not BE- iured from hia
den
The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1906-09-05

So Kitty waa the cook. with the
help % Celia The professor forgot
ali about thn iatchkey. and formed
the habit ~ catering the house hf
tho back dnof ttr aes elupai n aud
drn afreah - industry that led him
81 cary coal aud split the wps1d iie
praised the culinary accomplish
NESTS u the hes cook iie gave
Kite books 90 read. aud tnid MS
sister. ia confidence. that. consider
lag hwf lack ~ advantages. ahs Haa
= remarkably intelligent Young
koman The professor spent Whole
essaines assisting ber Ia her
atuaics
Fof q time Kitty gave Celia = fuil
record Il the DAYS happenlags
Thsa she sfnw atfanseiy uncom
muuieaur. Mfa Hartman Nas
aRstnsufssl over tbs sHninE ~ the
lohr Az lasi she thoaeht abe under
aiood
Pfuf Mason Wafhnrten had Just
proposed 80 hts sisters cook ShylY
she confessed that she was act the
fnnk NJ ait but his sisters friend
ila interrupted 90 say that Nas
mere detail Hui shs persisted that
u 49, al . conspiracy % make him
iIka hnf So having deceived him.
she could not marre him.
9 Would goa mind fclilnE me be
bald. jest uhcu Yuu eesan ir4tns
to make me uafuf
Thn che fiFat nisht Shen Yun
came osll into the Kitchen. after din
Huf
Thea. said the profenaar. ''fog
heHan tae iasq - abpuid luase
-zlasas aexen haufs ~ that time !
aaa 80 IND 81 make ven carr Tor
.rne nll Ynn a~fef iitiia Kitty.
Aesr ~ iuv~ Al first aishfT-
Really ~ said kitty ~oh.
asalif %
awhsn / lifted The kettle OF the
stove aud Fnu thanked me. said
The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1906-09-05

Que thing ne Kin
allus De happy fer
terlaY yisgidds =
gunei
The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1906-09-05

A Word from Josh Wise.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30

denied liability for the debt of ., third person when he made the note anu that he gave the note for the acconnt of such third person. evidence was sad- nnissible to bhcw when he first denied liability, and that he gave the note for his 1own account. ---~-
 H. Trial: directing verdict; con- fffctine evidence Where the evidence was conflicting, the general chArgeffor defendant was properly refused.
 12. Bills and notes. actions. evi- dence--A note sued on is prfma fAcfe evidence of consideration therefor. and the burden is on defendant to show there was no consideration
 13 Same; considerations; previous debt.-An antecedent debt of the niak- CT Is suficient consideration for a note.
 14. Frauds, statute of; collateral or original undertaking .--Wheres' defen- dant agreed to see that the account of a third person was paid. and piaintin with his consent charged 1t to him and extended no credit to the third person. defendant was liable.
 Is. Bills and notecj provision for attorneys fee.--A provision in d note for an attorneys fee, not stating the amount. means reasonable attor- ney's fee.
 Appeal from Bessemer City Court.
 Heard before Hon. William Jackson.
 Rehearing denied April 3, 1908.
 Affirmed. opinion by Simpson, J.
 Tyson, Dowdeh and Anderson U concur
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30
CENTRAL OF GEORGIA RY CO,
 TURNER. Et, ii

TURNER. E5s t.i Action for Injury to Animal-(Decid
 January 10. 19o6.C GAO. So. Rep
 355)
 |. Railroads; injury to animals: ev- idenee; jury question.-Jt being shown that defendants passenger train killed plaintiff's COW at or near pudhc cross ing by striking her and knocking her from the track, thus making out a prina facie case for pIaintiff, the fact that defendants engineer testified that a proper lookout was being kept: that the train was properly ran; that it was equipped with all modern and requisite appliances for operating and stopping 1t; that the animal approached the track suddenly and so close that the train could not be stopped, and that he did all that could be done by a skillful engineer to stop before striking her, did not entitle the defendant to the affirrn- ative charge. as 1t was question for the jury to determine. from all the evil dence.
 2 Sane; instructions Charges which require finding for defendant, but fail to hypothesize the fact that the engineer was keeping a proper look out are properly refused. in an action againt railroad for neglig entity kill ing animals,
 Appeal from Barbour Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. A. A. EvanssS *Re- hearing denied April 8, 1396..
 Affirmed. Opinion by Tyson, J. F
 Dowdell, Simpson and Anderson, JJ., concur.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30
Head-Notes @ the Decisions
 Of Alabama Supreme Court
OF GEORGIA RAILWAY i,

CENTRAL OF GEORGIA RAILWAY
 vs. BRISTER.
 Action for Injury to Stock. Decided
 April 3, 1906.) GAO So. Rep. 512.)
 l. Railroads; killing stock; evil dence; instructions-The evidence for the defendants tending to show tho facts hypothesized in the charge, an instruction that If the jury find from the evidence that the train was prop erly equipped and was being properly run. and that the engineer was keep ing a proper look out, ard that the horse cane suddenly upon the track and so close in front of tue train that the accident could not be avoided. and that the engineer discovered the horse as soon as it could have been discov- cred, and did everything that could have been done by a skiliful engineer to avoid the accident. thea the jury must find Tor the defendant" is a cor rect statement of the law, and it's re- fusal was error.
 2. Same--An instruction If the ju- ry believe from the evidence that the horse in question came suddenly upon the track and so close in front of the train tha, the accident could not be avoided, then your verdict must be for the defendant" is faulty in failing to hypothesize the proper management and equipment of the train and that the engineer was keeping a proper look out (Overruling L. & N. R. R., Go. vs Brinkerhoff. 119 Ala. SOP: "A So Rep. ss2)
 Appeal from Bullock circuit court.
 Heard before Hon A. A. Evans
 Reversed and remanded. Opinion by Weakley. C. J.
 All the justices concur.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30
C. w ZIMMERMAN MANUFACTURE ING COMPANY vs. WILSON,
 

Bill to Enjoin Administrator from Pay ing to Heirs Proceeds of a Sale,
 and to Require Heirs to Account for Breach of Contract of Life Tenant. (Decided April 8. 1908. )
 GAO So. Rep. 515.)
 l. Life estates; acts of life tenant; Injury to remainder; waste.-The life tenant cannot commit waste or author ize it's commission. nor can she, by conveyance, impair the remainder. 2. Sales; remedy of buyer from life tenant; lien on money paid.-Neither the purchaser from the life tenant, nor
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30
JEFFERSON, COUNTY SAVINGS BANK
 vs. MILLER.

Bill to Quiet Title Decided April 3.
 19o6.) GAO So. Rep. 513)
 l. Judgments: certificates of: reg istratfon: validity. - Under Section 1920. Code 1896, certificate of judg- ment recorded in the office of judge of probate. which fails to state who was the owner of the judgment. is in- valid.
 2. Execution; right of; time of reg istration of judgment.-Under Sec tions 1920-1921-1922. as amended by General Acts 1903. p. 273, a judgment filed for registration more than a year after it's rendition, will support a lien on which execution may be issued to enforce same.
 3. Same; original Judgment; certifi- cate.-Executinns always issue upon original judgments. and the effect of the registration statutes is not to give
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30
coKER V. STATE.

Murder.-Decided April 8. 1sos.---t4o So. Rep. 516).
 1. Indictment and Inforn1ation; Rec ords; Grand Jury Venire; Tfme-The indictment was returned at. a regular term of the court. but the original grand jury venire that returned the indictment was not set out in the rec ord, nor was the organization of the grand jury shown. An adjourned term was ordered during this regular term and at the adjourned term, on motion of the solicitor, the records and min utes were amended so as to set out the original grand jury venire and so as to show the organization of the grand jury venire and so as to show the organization of the grand Jury. Held: Properly made, and motion to quash the indictment because of fail- ure of minutes to show things properly denied. 4s. :.
 a. Criminal Law; Estoppei to Allege Error.--where a juror was instructed by the court to stand aside because of a discrepancy in his name and the name drawn from the hat. to which action of the court the defendant ob- jected and excepted. whereupon the court recalled the juror and qualified him, and the State challenged him. Held: Defendant had nothing of which to complain.
 B. Jury; Competency of Juror.-It is proper for the court to set aside a juror drawn to try capital case who states, upon examination, that he would not hang man on circumstancial evil dence. s.'s | t..s !.
 A. Witnesses; Impeachment; Predi- cate; Proof of Inconsistent Statements. Proof of contradictory statements are inadmissible to fmpeach a wit ness In the absence of a proper predi- cate. ~ te Appeal from Monroe Circuit Court
 Heard before Hon. J. T, Lacklands
 Affirmed. Opinion by Anderson, J.
 weakley, c. J., Tyson and simpson, u, concur. s
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30

new Judgment but to create a lien. and preserve 10 the holder the right tn nave execution, at any time within life or the lien, on the original Judgment
 I. statutes; affecting mode of pro- cedure; construction.-Statu which do not affect the right, but only the mode of enforcing the right, apply i'd causes arising before their enaetment as well as after.
 Appeal from Jefferson chancery Court
 Heard before Hon. A. H. Benners
 Affirmed. Opinion by Simpson. I.
 Weakley c. J., Tyson and Anderson JJ.. concur. sLoss ct al, V STEINER BROS et al Bill Tor Assignor of Judgment to Re
 deem Lands sold hereunder. fDe-
 .cfded Feb IT. 1so6'') GAO So. Rep.
 SID
 Execution Sale; Redemption; Act Ion; Necessary Parties The assignee of q judgment is a necessary party plaintih to a suit to compel redempt- ion of certain property of the Judgment debtor sold under execution.
 2. Judgment; Assignments; Right of Assignee.-The assignee of a Judgment does not take by such assignment the personal right or privilege of redempt- ion conferred by the statute on the Judgment creditor to compel redempt- ion of property of the Judgment debtor sold under execution
 Execution; Sale; Redemption.-The | owner of judgment, having assigned | 1t to another, cannot maintain a bill to compel redemption of certain prop erty of the judgment debtor sold under execution.
 Appeal from Jefferson Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. A H. Benners. sRehearing denied April 8, 1906 Affirmed. Opinion by Tyson, J.. Haralson, DowdeI, Simpson and Den son, JJ.. concur.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30
TIsHoMINGo SAVINGS INSTITUTION
 vs JOHNSON MERRITT & co.

TISHoMINGO SAVINGS INSTITUTION vs. JOHNSON, NESBITT & co.
 Trial of Right of Property.-lDecided June 30, 1905.) GAO So. Rep, 503. l. Carriers; bill of lading signature of agent; jury question.-It being a question of intention whether the sig nature to paper purporting to be a | bill of lading was that of such person individually or as agent of the car rier. it was question to be determined | by the jury. | 2. Same; transfer of bill of ladine as security; title to goods.-Where. the agent purchased cotton for his princi- pals and gave the seller bill of lac- | ing to the cotton with draft attached who endorsed 1t to the bank and re- ceived credit on his account for the amount of the draft, the bank became | the owner of the bill of lading and the goods therein described. | 8. Same; wrongful delivery;s eonver- | sion; reD.edy,-Where bill of lafing was endorsed and delivered to a hank with | a draft attached, delivery of the goods | called for in bill of lading by the car | rier to another than the bank, was q
 conversion, entitling the bank to main
 tain trover for the value of the goods or detinue for their recovery in specie | against the party to whom wrongful | delivery was made.
 l 4. Election of remedies.-The inter position by the bank of claim to the goods in a suit against the seller oi | the cotton, begun by attachment. is an election to pursue the remedy of de- | tinue. -. 5. Attachment; statutes of attaching creditor; rights as against prior claim ant An attaching creditor Is not :N | bona fide purchaser for value as against | a third pers on having title to the goods and IS immaterial whether such at | tachine creditor had notice or not oi claimants rights before attachment Appeal from Morgan Circuit Court: Heard before Hon. O. Kyle. sRe- hearing denied April 3, 1906. -4 Reversed and remanded. Opinion hy Mcclellan, C. J.
 Tyson. simpson and Anderson, U :. concur.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30

FIRST NATIONAL BANK W. FlDEL1-
 TY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY.
 Suit on bond of suretyship. Decided
 January 30. 1906. GAO. So. Rep.
 l. Principal and surety; building contractors bond; discharge of sure ty; improper payments-The contract between the contractor and owenr be- ing made a part of the contract of suretyship between the surety and the owner for the faithful performance of the contract of building; and the build ing contract providing that payments should be made to the contractor only upon estimates and certificates of the architect out of which certain per centages were to be reserved until the comple etion of the contract, a payment by the owner to the builder of these reserved percentages. and larger payment than was authorized by the certificates and estimates of the archi- tect without the consent of the sure- ty, was such a change of the contract of suretyship as discharged the surety.
 2 Contracts; provisions; conditions. The provisions in a contract or building which was made part of a contract of suretyship for its faithful performance, that a certain percentage for certain purpose should be re- served out of all estimates and certih- cates of the architect until the build ing was completed. and that pay ments should be made to the contrac- tor only upon estimates and certin- cates of the architect. were not mere provisions to secure a completion or the building contract, but were condl- tions of the contract. (Dowdell, J'' dissents.)
 g. Principal and surety; contractor bond, suretys bond; construction - Where the obligation of the surety was stated "a be to secure the owner against certain mechanic, material men and other lines of like character. ana hold it harmless against all sucn de- mands, and 10 release it from the ne cessity of inquiring in such matters' and from the payment of such claims. such provision did not operate as waiver by the surety of so much oi
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30

his assignee has any lien upon the
 money paid for timber purchased of the
 life tenant. either in her, hands or tho hands of the children and heirs. that
 would authorize him to maintain bill
 against the heirs tc obtain a personal
 decree against them for breach of covenant by the life tenant
 3. Descent and distribution: debts of
 intestate: liability of heirs.--A claim
 for damages for breach of covenant of
 life tenant will not lie against the
 heirs. but must be presented in due course of administration, and remedy
 sought against the property of dece- dent
 Same; actions. eauity--A court of chancery cannot by a species of eduft- able attachment. or garnishment. or Injunction against the administrator. l seize and hold money coming to the
 heirs from the fathers estate, where the complainant had no claim assert able in equity against the heirs for breach of contract to defend title made by the mother, the life tenant, in the sale of timber, to satisfy decree that complainant could not obtain.
 5. Estoppel; covenant or ancestor; liability of heirs.-The heirs claiming title independent ot the life tenant. cannot be estopped by the mere force of the covenant of their ancestor. Appeal from Clarke chancery Court. Heard before Hon Thomas H. Smith. Affirmed. Opinion by weakley, c. !. Tyson, Simpson and Anderson. JJ., concur asis
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30

THOMAS V. LIVINGSTON. Ell To Declare a Deed Mortgage and
 to Redeem. Decided April 8, 1so6t GAO So. Rep. 5o4.)
 Mortgages; Absolute Deed as Mort eege Jurisdiction of Eouity.-It one gives a deed to land and takes an agreement to have reconveyanees or the land on the payment of a sum cer- gin and pending payment, on the land. the rrantor Is entitled in equity to en- force a repayment of the rents against the grantee, having nc adeauate rem edy at law. Appeal from Autauga Chancery Court Heard before Hon W. ". Whiteslde. Reversed Opinion by weekley, c. J. Tyson, simpson and Anderson, JJs | concur.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30
GATES V. MORTON HARDWARE CO Action on ncte.-Decided February IT.,

GATES V. MORTON HARDWARE CO Action on note.-Decided February IT,
 1906. (40 So. Rep. 5o9.)
 1. Bills and notes; proof of execu- ton; necessity; denial under oath In suit on promissory note, where the only pleas were the general issue and that there was no consideration for the note. 1t was properly admitted in evidence over the objection that attesting witnesses were not called or their absence accounted for. in view of Code 1896. Section 1901. providing that a written instrument, the foun- dation of suit. purporting to be signed by the defendant, must be ad- mitted in evidence without proof of its execution, unless the execution is de- nied by verified plea.
 ? Appeal; harmless error; exclu- sion Of evidence.-Any error in sustain ing objections to questions to a wit ness was harmless. where he subse- quently answered them in substance.
 3. Principal and surety; existence Of relation; question for jury.-Wheth- CT certain facts make an obligation assumed by a party an original con tract or that of a surety is question of law
 4 Appeal; harmless error; admis- sion of evidence-Any error in over ruling defendants objection to ques- ton is harmless. where the answer Is favorable to him.
 5 Same.-Any error in overriding m objection to a question Is harmless, where it was not answered,
 6- Bills and notes; actions; evil dence.-In suit cn a note, testimony of third person as to whether he had ever offered to pay the payee for certain goods was admissible as tend ing 10 show whether he was to pay for the goods or was looking to the maker of the note to pay for them.
 Evidence, execution of note; ex- trinsic facts-In a suit on note. there vas no error in everything an objection to the question calling for conversation at the time the ncte was made.
 S. Appeal; harmless error; admts- sion of evidence.-Overruiing an ob- iAetion to a question Is harmless, where he witness answers that he does nos know
 g, Bills and notes, actions; evidence, In q suit on a note. evidence that an account for goods furnished to third person was never presented to him. hpt only to the maker of the note Vas admissible"
 lo same.-In suit on a note. where the maker testified that he had
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30

Casino today, 8 p. m. Let the chilT dren see the Pony Actors. '
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30

BALES EFT AL V. DAILY, EFT AL. Bill for partition after falling in of
 life estate.-Decided December 21,
 1905. ,(40 So. Rep 420l
 1. Statutes; repeal: effect of failure to codify; homestead.-under Acts 1s76-77, p. S2, the title to real estate of a decedent vested In the heirs sub ject to homestead exemption of the widow; and under said statute that vested only for the life of the widow, unless the estate was judicially ascer- tained to be insolvent And Section 2, Acts 1ss4-s5, p. IA having been left out of the codification of the laws In 1896, and not having been preserv- ed by other legislative action. was repealed. *',zs s'
 2. Constitutional law; retrospective operation of. statute homestead Where, under the statute in force at the death of intestate, the title to his real estate descended to the heirs, sub tect to a life estate in the widow, of the homestead, the Legislature cannot subsequently, pass an act by virtue of which the fee to the homestead Is ves- ted in the widow. (oyerruling DeAr- mond V. Whitaker 99 Ala, 252, so far as it conflicts herewith.)
 Appeal from Limestone Chancery Court
 Heard before Hon. W. H Simpson.
 Rehearing denied April 3, 1906.
 Affirmed. Opinion by Haralson, J
 Dowdell, Simpson and Denson. u. concur.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30
Don't let Worried Over the Price of Coal,
 Nor Worry Over the Servant Girl Question.

 meal h 
 
  be swhlch arem more ] J F
  of quarts a w.sss VIII sns.sscrs for itssf than ordinary
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30

Ranges solo on time if desired. Free connection to OUT mains if range is purchased from us. Call at our office. we will be glad to show our gas appliances.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-05-30
HAYES V. wooDHAM. ,an <TN11t1oS A,~rtJ q fanl

Detinue. CDecided Aprfi 5, l9o6. (40
 So. Rep. 511,)
 l. Exchange of Property; Recission of Contract; Effect--Where one receives a horse in exchange for a mule, and the horse Is represented to be sound but in fact his sight is defective, and upon discovering this fact such person innne- diately returns the horse and demands return of the mule. the contract of exchange was at an end, and he was entitled to maintain detinue for the mule.
 2. Same; offer of Recisicn; Disposi- ton of Property.--where one offers to rescind by making tender of the prop erty, for sufficient reason, and the other refuses to rescind or receive the property the one offering recission may abandon the property, but is not bound to do, SO, and if he does not, he Is considered the bailee of the other. and may use the property as such bailee
 Appeal from Marshall Circuit Court.
 Heard before Hon. James A Bilbro.
 Reversed and remanded. Opinion by Tyson, ].
 All the Justices concur.