Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1906-09-22

Mr. Searle refused to draw this warrant
because there was no specific appropria-
ton of the money by the state Legislature
He contended that after the money had
gone into the state treasury It could not be
paid out unless the legislature appropri-
ated It.
Cemetery Case Comes Back.
The former opinion of the court In the
case Of Jesse Lowe and others against the
Prospect Hill Cemetery association OF
Omaha is adhered to. The court is still
OF the opinion the cause should be re-
manded to the district court with the direc-
ton to allow further pleading and proof
IL necessary to ascertain whether or not
certain restrictions and regulations of the
right of sculpture can be made on a strip
of ground adjoining a cemetery so as to
prevent injury to the plaintiffs. and IL It
be found that the rights OF the plaintiffs
may be protected by proper regulations,
then that the court modify the injunctions
so as to allow burial to be made under
regulations and conditions subscribed in
its decree.
Workman Receivers Wages.
The judgment of the district court OF
Lancaster county Is affirmed in the case
Of Frank e. Wageman against Borden
Bros. and action to recover wages gar
nished and attorneys fees. The action lie
grounded on the act of 1889, entitled AN
act for the better protection OF the earn
ings of laborers, servants and other en-
ployes of corporations, firms or individuals
engaged in interstate business"
The plaintiff, an employee OF the Burling-
ton at the Havelock shops, alleged and
proved that the defendants claimed to
hold an account against him; that the de-
PENDANT assigned such account to some
person unknown to the plaintiff; that there
after suit was instituted thereon in
another state by party other than the
defendant. claiming to own the account;
/ that in said suit the exempt wages Of the
plaintiff were attached for the satisfaction
OF said account. The supreme court holds
that this is sufficient to. make a prima
facie case under the provisions of the
| statute. The amount of the claim against
the plaintiff for indebtedness was S211 IL The
| amount of wages garnished was 1921.
which amount, together with $40 attorneys
| fees. was given the plaintiff by judgment
in the lower court This judgment is af-
| f1rmed.
Supreme Court Proceedings.
The following attorneys were admitted
on recommendation OF the Bar commits
sion: Thomas E. Brady of Omaha, j. c.
SAVIOR OF Red Cloud, Everett H. Evans of
| North Platte. On motion of r. w. Sabin,
+. .. McGirr was admitted to practice.
| On motion of Roscoe Pound, w. G. Tramp
J ton was admitted to practice
Following are miscellaneous orders:
| Godfrey against Cunningham, stipulation
| allowed; cause continued to October 2
1905; In re application Of Mcintyre
duce Mcintyre in court October L. 1906
Moline, Milburn g. stoddard company
sssnH ya tt,a BossTk stipulation in re
against Mckinney, stipulation in re briefs
allowed; appellants given until Novemb ~
TO nle 6riefs; appeliees given until Janu-
against Bryant, stipulation in re briefs
allowed appellant given until November
given until February /, 1907, to serve and
/ file briefs; appellant given until February
! IS, 1907, to serve and file reply briefs
San hSsfs asnii nSd Duncan stipulation II
| October is, 1906, to serve and file briefs
| In re estate of Edmonson, motion of APP
peliant to fle additional transcript sus-
! tanned. Gathers against Moores, condi-
| tional order of revlvor entered Gathers
| against Moores, final order of revivor en-
| tered. Byron Reed company against Kla-
bundle, stipulation allowed; action revived
! in name of George w. Berge, executor
| Bachle against state, by agreement OF
! Railroad company against Fickenscher
| continued to October 16, 1906. Union Pa
citc Railroad company against Ficken-
scher, continued TO October 16, 1908. Union
| Pacific Railroad company against West
\ lund, continued to October 16, 1905. Union
Pacific Railroad company against FosbeTg
| continued to October 16, 1905 Union Pa
| cific Railroad company against Edmond
| son, continued to October 16, 1906. Union
Pacific railroad company against Murray
proceedings in error; dismissed on mo-
! ton of plaintiff in error. Edwards against
/ Chicago, Burlington g. Quincy Railway
company, appeal dismissed on motion OF
! appellant Lewis against Mcmillan. appeal
/ dismissed on motion of appellant Peter
| son against Peterson, stipulation granted
| appeal dismissed Avery Manufacturing
! company against Brewer. stipulation
granted; appeal dismissed. smith against
| Bartlett, by agreement cause advanced
| and set for hearing December 4, 1905. In
| re estate of Larson, on request of APP
! pelee cause continued TO October 2, 1906
Tattersall against Novels, leave given ap-
pellants and appeilees to nile typewriter
! memorandum briefs State against Iams
| stipulation allowed defendant allowed
until December l, 1906, to serve and hlC
briefs State ex rel. Spencer Lens com.
pany against Searle, argued and submit ted
| TO the court OF demurrer. Hoye against
! Diehls, continued TO October 2, 1908; do
| PENDANT allowed until October 2, 1906, L
serve and file briefs. State against Adams
| Lumber company, A. M Post appointeI
| as referee to report findings of fact and
| conclusions of law.
The following attorneys were appointed
as members OF the Bar commission:
w. b. Comstock. lincoln, secretary; w
| A. DeBord. Omaha; w. n. Robertson. Nor
wilcox. North Platte.
Following are rulings upon mIscellaneoui
motions:
lee for Judgment for costs continued 10