Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1906-04-17
{lmportant Decisions3
MARRIAGE OF EPILEPTICS

MARRIAGE OF EPII4EPIlCS.
The plaintiff filed a bill for divorce
and alleged among other things that
she had been induced to marry the de-
PENDANT thru his false and fraudulent
representations that he was not an
epileptic. No argument was submitted
on behalf of the defendant, but the
court, for reasons of public policy, ex-
amined the considerations which he
might have used and urged. 1t is held
that the right to marry is one which
can be exercised under such reason
able conditions only as the legislature
may impose; that judicial notice will
be taken that epilepsy Is a disease
which frequently descends to the Off
spring in some grave form of nervous
trouble; and that the prohibition by
the legislature of marriage of such per-
sons cannot be pronounced intrinsical-
ly unreasonable by the courts, the re-
striction being made equally applicable
to all persons of class regarded by
the legislature as one requiring special
legislation either for their protection or
the protection Of the community at
large. The court held that the act pro-
viding that "No man or woman, either
Of whom is epileptic, shall intermarry,
or live together as husband and wife,
when the woman is under As years of
age" does not contravene the consti-
tutional provision guaranteeing equal
ity in the rights of liberty and the pur-
suit Of happiness.-Gould VS.. Gould, 81
Atk. Rep. 6O4 (Conn).
LAUNDRY.
In the case of In re Troy Steam
Laundering Co., 132 Fed. Rep. 266, it
was held that a steam laundry, the
principal business of which is the
washing. starching, ironing, and pol
ishing of collars, cuffs, ETC., for ~
| facturers before they are put o.l the
market is a corporation engaged prin-
: cipally in manufacturing within the
meaning of the bankruptcy act. The
court said: 1.-THE court does not hold
that all laundering is manufactured, or
| that all laundrymen are manufacturers
but that, when laundering is done as a
necessary or essential part of manu-
| featuring, the firm, individual, or cor
| poration who does such laundering is
engaged in manufacturing within the
J intent and meaning of the bankruptcy
| act.''
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION.
In the case of Herman VS.. Northern
Securities Co. 1872 Fed. Rep. 1854, the
case, the denial of a preliminary in
junction would, on the assumption
that the complainant will ultimately
prevail, result in greater detriment to
him than would, on the contrary as
sumption, be sustained by the defend
ant thru its allowance, the injunction
usually should be. Where the sole
object for which an injunction is
| sought is the preservation Of fund
| in controversy or the maintenance OF
! the status quo until the question Of
right between the parties can be de-
cided upon final hearing, the injunction
may properly be allowed, altho there
| be serious doubt of the complainants
ultimate success. And the considera-
ton that no appeal lies from decree
DENYING such an injunction, while of nc
weight where it appears that the COM
p,ainant must ultimately fail, yet is
1 often of controlling Importance Where
there is room for reasonable DOUBT az
| to the final result.
PLURAL WIVES IN UTAH.
The supreme court in Utah has held
| that a plural wife does not acquire the
status of a lawful wife, and is withou,
the pale of the law of inheritance as 70
any property which her husband mas
ACQUIRED, either before or after nef
marriage to him. Such wife acquires
no dover right in the husbands prop
erty: but she may accept gift of his
property and may acquire title to his
real estate by adverse possession
founded on gift.
Raleigh VS.. Wells, 81 Pac. Rep. 9os.