Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1906-02-24
slmportant Decisions!
CONTEMPT OF COURT.

v
criticised District Judge Purnell in APP
North Carolina railroad. Judge Pur-
nell committed him for contempt of
court. On habeas corpus he was dis
charged by Judge Pritclard, who held
that section 725 of the United States
revised statutes was the exclusive
source of power to punish for con-
tempt, and that under it the court
had no power to punish a newspaper
publisher for contempt consisting OF
an editorial criticising the official con-
duct and integrity of the court The
court said: That newspapers some
times engage in unwarranted criticism
Of the courts cannot be denied. In
some instances they construe the lib
erty Of the press as a license to author
lie them to engage in a wholesale
abuse of the court, but these instances
are rare, and do not warrant depar-
ture from the well-settled principles
of the law as declared by congress and
construed by the courts. If judges
charged with the administration of the
law are not to be criticised on account
of their official conduct, the liberty Of
tllc PiSSS 10 ioStu, anu llC IJS HIS VI
individuals imperied. While all the
citizens should entertain the respect
for the courts of the land, it does not
follow that editors and public speak
ers are to refrain from legitimate cri
ticism of the acts of any tribunal. -
Cuyler Atlantic, etc. r. CO., 131
Fed. Rep. 95 IN. C)
NEGLIGENCE.
Plaintiff, While driving toward a
railroad crossing at a point seventy
feet from the crossing heard the whis-
tie of an approaching train and saw
the steam rising over the embankment
which concealed the train from view.
He thought the engine was about
eighty rods from the crossing and
whipped UP his team to cross ahead
of the train without waiting to see
where the train really was. When his
horses stepped upon the track he
discovered that the engine was push
ing train of flat cars and the first
car was upon him. Plaintiff was ia
mliar with the crossing, and knew the
defendant was running gravel trains
over that portion of the road, and that
the gravel train when returning was
pushed by an engine. Held. That the
plaintiff was guilty Of contributary
negligence in not stopping for the pur-
pose of ascertaining the exact situation
before attempting to cross and that
verdict should have been directed for
the defendant.
Storrs VS.. Grand Trunk r. r. Co..
D. L. N. Vol. IL, page 1853, (Mich.)
DIVORCE.
The defendant having been sentence
ed for term of not less than three
and one-half years, nor more than four
and one-half years, his wife brought
action for divorce. By statute in
the state of Vermont sentence to con-
finement at hard labor in the state
prison for three years or more is made
ground for divorce The defense
set up was that since the defendant
was entitled to have deducted from his
sentence five days every month when
no charges Of misconduct were sustain
ed against him, he was, consequently,
not sentenced to confinement for three
years or more. The court held that
this contention was not sound, and
that the right to divorce on this
ground was not dependent upon the
CO1luuCl VI ll1C Pe1lIJ NAiAAS SoAiAAAiSA -
prison. The court said: "Under the
statute in question, the term Of the
sentence fixed by the court, and actual
confinement at the time of the trial,
controls the authority Of the court in
decreeing a divorce.
sargood VS.. sargood, 81 Atk. Rep.
472 (Vt.)
CANCELLATION OF LIFE 1NsUR-
ANCE.
Complainant filed bill in chancery
praying for the cancellation and sur
render Of a policy of insurance on the
ground that the policy had been OBJ
tanned by means Of false and fraudu-
lent representations made at the time
the policy was issued. Held That
a court of equity had no jurisdiction
to entertain such bill, for the reason
that the company had plain and ade-
quate defense at law to suit upon
the policy.
Des Moines Life. ms. Co. VS.. seifert
II N. E. Rep. $40 (1llo