davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
The morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1899-1930, 1907-08-27

A corn crop OF 2,7O0ooo,ooo bushels
is predicted for this year. So bushels
of corn for each man, woman and child
in the United States is not so bad.
The morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1899-1930, 1907-08-27

Uncle Joe Cannon's boom, as far as
he knows anything about it. is marked
1908. Uncle Joe is too smart TO worry
now about next years crops
The morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1899-1930, 1907-08-27

MFR. Rockefeller would have continued
to be voiceless II the S2e,240,000 item
had been an addition TO the dividend in.
stead OF q fine
The morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1899-1930, 1907-08-27

Resting has been defined as a change
of work. and may also be described as
the supplement to vacation.
The morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1899-1930, 1907-08-27
o o 70 O o o o q o ESQ o Q
o EDITORIAL SALAD. G
99000000 90 100000 9

John d. Rockefeller must be delighted
with the telegraphers' strike, 1t Ill.
verts attention.
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25
Head Notes Of the Decisions
offhe Alabama Supreme Court

GARTH VS.. NORTH ALABAMA, TRAC-
TON COMPANY.
Action for Damaged for personal I'm
juries.--(Decided Nov. oath. 1906
AZ So. Rep. s27.)
1. Negligence; seton; pleading;
characterization of act; wilful or
wanton injury.--In an action against
street railway for injuries by collis-
ion with wagon. the complaint al
leging that the Company's servants.
while running a car. recklessly and
wantonly or Intentionally, ran It
against the wagon on which plaintiff
was driving. Is not subject to demurr-
err that 1t IL uncertain whether simple
negligence or wanton conduct IS rharg
ed, or that 1t joins dis1unctively in the
same count simple negligence and wan
ton conduct.
O. Appeal; harmless error; rulings
on demurrer.-Where the evidence
showed without conflict that there was
no defect in the car or its equipment,
II was harmless error to sustain q de-
INJURED to a count alleging Negligence
for failing to properly equip the car.
8. Trial; Instructions; Withdrawal of
evidence.--A charge that If plaintiff
was guilty of negligence proximately
to the injury, ne could not recover, I'M
less the company was guilty of subse-
quent negligence that proxirnately con-
tributed to the injury, was error, as It
pretermitted all reference to wilfulness
or wantonness on the part of the
Company's servant, as charged in the
complaint
4. Street railways; collisions; ac-
tions; defenses.-A plea as an answer to
o complaint for injuries received in
collision of the car. which sets up the
defense that plaintiff was guilty of
contributory negligence in that he was
riding In o covered wagon and at
tempted to cross the track in front
Of an approaching car without stop
ping. looking and listening for the Rp-
proach of the car. is not demurrablc.
for that it alleges that plaintiff did not
stop. look and listen, whereas tn, law
does not require him to listen in addi-
ton to stopping and looking. unless
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25

MOSES VS.. PHILADELPHIA MORT
GAGE AND TRUST co.
BIZ to foreclose mortgage. fDecid-
ed December 81. 1906. AZ So.
Rep. S6S.)
Mortgages: right of foreclosure -
The land conveyed In trust to secure
the bonds was encountered with
prior lien. and the mortgagor made a
money deposit with the trustee 70
protect the bondhoiders against the
Hen. The trustee invested the deposit
In some of the bonds secured by the
deed of trust. Afterwards the mort
gagor assigned the bonds so purchased
by the trustee. Held, the assignee of
the bonds became bondhoider with
all the rights pertaining thereto, sub
ject only to the equities OF the other
bondholders, arising out of the purpose
OF the deposit, and such assignee had
the right to have the trust q led fore
closed. the property sold, and after
the payment of the costs, prior en-
cumbrances. and the amount due on
the bonds held by other bondholders.
the proceeds applied TO the payment
of the bonds held by him. 5
Appeal from Montgomery City Court.
Heard before Hon. A. d. Sayre.
Reversed and remanded. opinion by
Simpson. J.
Tyson. C. j.. HARRISON and benson,
u :, concur.
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25

! the circumstances at the time and place
make stopping and looking Ineffective
which Is not shown by the plea.
q same: care required Of company
instruction.-A charge asserting that Il
was the duty of the motorman to keer
such control Of his car as to be able
TO bring It tn, a safe stop before strtk-
ing one in the act Of crossing tbs
track, was erroneous, because smpos-
Ing on the motornan the duty to stop
MS car without regard TO the sudden.
ness with which a person came on the
track.
8. Trial; instruction.; evidence to
sustain.-Where there was no evidence
that after the wagon was on the track
there was time to do anything which
could have checked the speed Of the
car Il was proper to refuse charge
that IL the motorman saw the danger
In time to avoid the injury by reduce
Ing the rate of speed, the plaintiff was
entitled to recover. because mislead-
ing.
7. Samoa charge which asserts
that party admitting the written
showing of an absent witness does not
admit thereby that the written chow
ing is true. Is properly refused as tend
ing to mislead the jury to believe that
they were not to consider the written
showing.
.. Same; assumption of fact--where
the evidence as to whether or not the
car came In contact with plaintiff, was
In conflict, 1t was proper to refuse an
instruction which assumed as q fact
that the car injured PLAINTIFF.
Samoa charge asserting that
the Company is seeking to escape liza
bilfty Tor injuries alleged to have been
negligently inflicted by setting I'D con-
tributory negligence, in that 1t as
sumes that there was liability on the
company which 1t was. attempting to
escape, was properly refused
10. Same.--It was error to charge
that there was no evidence of any will
full intent to injure plaintiff, where
under the evidence, 1t was for the Jury
TO say whether the motorman saw that
plaintiff was about to cross the track.
and whether his failure thereafter to
stop the car was willful or wanton.
II. Street Railways; collision; intu-
ries to traveller; contributory negli-
gence.-Where the traveller is guilty of
contributory negligence in ATTEMPTING
to cross the track, the company IS tia-
BILE only on proof showing either that
IT was guilty of willful or wanton con-
duct. or of negligence after discover
ing his peril.
IL. Trial; instruction: applicability
to pleadlng.-It is proper to refuse
an instruction which falls to follow the
description of the wilfulness charged
In the complaint.
Appeal from Morgan Circuit Court.
Heard before Hon. D. w. t5peake.
Reversed and Remanded. Opinion
by Simpson, j.
Tyson, c. J., HARRISON. and Ander-
son, j.. concur.
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25
EPPERsoN s. co. v. BLUTHENTHAI.
EFT AL.

Ell AL )
Bill to Restrain Unlawful Use OF Trade
Mark or Device and for Damages
and an Accounting.--tDec De-
. cember 90. 1906. az So. Rep. S63.)
/. Trade marks; right to protection.
When one has adopted trade mark
to identify his product and has, by his
skill and labor. created valuable mar
ket therefor. and induced public conf
dence in the superior quality of his
goods, is entitled to protection. so long
as he deals honestly with the public,
against those who attempt to nppro-
pirate his trade mark and use 1t on
other goods of the same class. without
right.
2. Same; suit to restrain infringe
ment; 5urisdiction.-The jurisdiction
of equity to restrain infringement of a
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25

trade mark is based on the right of
property in the complaint, and its
fraudulent invasion by another. Its
use Is the prevention of fraud on him
and the public, so the person invoking
equity's aid must himself be free from
fraud. A material Misrepresentation
as to the person manufacturing the ar
ticle or as TO the materials composing
1t, deprive such one of right of relief.
3. same.-Where the evidence show
ed that the contents OF the hotties. on
which was used the trade mark adopt
ed to Identify the whiskey manufac-
tured. bottled and sold by complainant
was greatly inferior TO what was IN
dicated by the labels and lettering.
and that such labels and lettering was
to induce the public to believe that
the quality of the whiskey was greatly
superior to what IL really was, equity
VIII leave the parties where II finds
them.
Appeal from Montgomery City Court.
Heard before Hon. A. d. Eayre.
Reversed and rendered. Opinion bv
Anderson, j.
Tyson, c. j., Dowdell and Mcclellan.
j.. concur.
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25
DuBOSE ". THE STATE.
Murder .--(Decided Dec. 10 1905.

Murder .--tDecided Dec. 10 1905. AZ
So. Rep, s62.)
/. Witnesses; cross examination:
bias Of witness 1t was irrelevant
and immaterial to ask State witness
on cross examination. IL deceased was
not the father of an illegitimate child
by the daughter of witness, in a pros.
ecution for murder.
o. Homicide; evidence: admissible
ity.-A witness testified that the shoe
handed to him at the time he was tes-
tifying, was fitted by him on the
tracks at the scene of the homicide,
and that they correspondent. IL was
shown by other evidence that on the
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25

that time. Held. that the injury oc-
CURED during the course of his en-
ployment- s.-l
.. Same; contributory negligence
An employee of a coal mine left the
mine by the usual and customarys way.
he was not guilty of contributory neg
ligence In going out by the route TAX
en-. though there was another way
through which he could have passed
in safety.
g. Same; assumption of risk.--An
employee going out Of a mine Mt an
earlier hour than usual on account Of
sickness, by the usual route Travelled.
assumes merely the ordinary risk incl
dent thereto, but does not assume the
risk of the masters negligence.
4. Trial; instruction: effect of evil
dence.--A charge that there is no evf-
dence of a defct in the defendants APP
pliances. and that under the evidence
plaintiffs injuries were due to an nc-
cident from which defendant is not re-
sponsible. invades the province of the
Jury and is properly refused.
s. Master and servant: injury to en-
ployee; contributory negligence; emer-
gency.-The rule being that IN case of
emergency and peril one Is not held to
that cool and deliberate exercise of
Judgment In conserving his safety that
circumstances. II cannot be said. rs a
matter of law, that an employee. who
was injured while going out of the
mine along a haulage way, by a car
which jumped the track, was guilty
Of contributory negligence in running
to "a turnout rather than to one Of
the "dog-holes" In the sides of the
wall. even II such turnout was o less
safe place.
9. Trial; instruction; incomplete re-
quest.-A charge which Is Incomplete
and unintelligible. is properly refus-
ed.
j, T. Master and servant; negligence;
proximate cause; evidence.-where the
evidence showed that latches in the
switch where the accident occurred
were unsafe on a slope, tnat they were
at the time loose and could be thrown
by a car passing over the switch SO
as to change the switch md deraif
trailing cars, and that Immediately nf-
ter the accident the latches were re-
paired. 1t was sufficient to authorize
the jury to infer that the derailment
causing the accident was the result of
a defect in the switch.
8. Appeal; harmless error; instruc-
tion.--It is not reversible error 20 give
a charge correctly stating the law.
though such charge be abstract or ar
gumentative.
3 Master and servant: injury to en-
ployee; negligence: evidence of know
ledge.-The evidence tending to show
that the condition OF TIE switch was
the same at all such times. IT was
competent to prove accidents or wrecks
at the same place shortly before the
injury as tending to show knowledge
of defect in the switch on the part
OF the master.
10. Trial; reception OF evidence;
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25
cisllan. H. concur.
SMITH VS.. CHAPMAN q co.

SASA12np SSp eoucuE
SMITH VS.. CHAPMAN q co.
Observation-Disclosures Dec. goth, 1905.
40 So. Rep. BID
Courts, terms, duration of TERM
A summons was issued and served ON
the defendant on october 9Th, return
able to the November term. The Nov.
ember term convened on the 7th of that
month, and on Tuesday following the
converting of the court, the plaintiff
not having demanded trial by jury, and
the defendant not appearing, a tudg-
ment by default was entered against
defendant. Held, that under the terms
Of the eat Nocal Acts 1903, D. 40,)
creating the county court of Geneya
county the case stood for trial and
was triable on the day the Judgment
for default was rendered
Appeal from Geneva County Court
Heard before Hon. e. F. Ellsberry.
Special Judge.
Affirmed. Opinion by Tyson, c. J.
HARRISON, Simpson and benson, IT,,
concur.
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25

Heard before Hon. J. c. Richardson.
Affirmed. Opinion by HARRISON. J.
Tyson. c. J., and Simpson and Dem
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25
ExPARTE RANDALL

ExPARTE RANDALL
Mandamus.--(Decided Dec. IS, 1905.
~ So. Rep, S70.)
1. Attorney and client; duty to c1i-
ent; acting for adverse party Where
the defendants attorney Is authorised
in writing by plaintiff to have cause
dismissed, and made such motion under
authority, 1t Is not representation
Of both parties by him.
3. Same: settlement by client--A
party has right to make any settle
ment or compromise he pleases with
the other party and to order q dis
missal of the suit II he be plaintiff.
whether he has employed counsel or
not. -
g.. Parties plaintiff; persons who
may sue; real party in interest The
party to whom payment can be legal
ly made, and who can legally discharge
the debtor. may bring the suit In his
nome, although II be for the use of
some other person to whom he Is bound
to pay the money. when collected.
4. Same.-Where II is shown that q
party was Informed OF the transfer of
the claim to him. and knew of the In
stitution of the suit In his name. and
did not disavow the trust. his accept
ance of the trust will be presumed.
s. Same.-Right to sue In name Of
another-The beneficial owner Of a
chose In action, or property. has tho
right to use the name Of the person
holding the legal title, in a suit to re-
cover the money or property. upon in
Identifying the holder of the legal title
against costs, and the owner of the
legal title has no right to dismiss q
suit so brought
s. same.-Party holding the legal
Is used as the party plaintiff by the
person having the beneficial interest
therein, has the right to be heard on
the question of fact as to whether the
beneficial interest is in the party who
claims II.
Original petition in Supreme Court.
Writ denied. Opinion by Simpson, J.
Tyson. C. j., and Dowdell and An
derson, u, concur.
FIELDER VS.. Upton.
Action for damages for personal inju-
ry by being run into by bicycle.
decided December 90, 1906. ~
So. Rep. $3.50
Municipal corporation; use of side
walks; personal injury IA person rid
ing a bicycle o. a sidewalk Is respon-
sible in damages to any pedestrian
who is injured thereby. while In the
proper exercise of his rights, al
though there ise no ordinance prohib-
iting the riding Of bicycles on the
sidewalk, and a complaint which al
leges that the plaintiff was injured by
being run into by the defendant who
was riding a bicycle on sidewalk in
the city is sufficient. without any
other allegation of negligence.
Appeal from Mobile Circuit Court.
Heard before Hon. Samuel B.
Browne.
Affirmed. Opinion by Simpson, J.
Tyson. J.'c., HARRISON and benson.
JJ.. concur,
SOUTHERN COAL a. COKE COMPANY
VS.. swINNEY, PRO ANIL :
Suit for Damages for Personal Injury
to Employe.-(Decided Jan. 18th,
1907 AZ So. Rep. S0s)
I. Master and servant; injury to
servant.-An employee In a coal mine
became sick from bad air and quit HIS
work before the end of the day. While
going out. he met the superintendent
of the mine. who stopped him to in
quire why he was quitting his work.
He was injured at this point and at
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25

TAYLOR VS. THE STATE.
Murder.--eDecided Jan. 17th.i 1907. 90
So. Rep e97)
Homicide; Indictment, allegation and
proof.--An Indictment charging that
the defendant committed homicide
by shooting the deceased with a pistol
Is supported by evidence that he shot
deceased with a shot gun.
Appeal from Tuscaloosa County
Court. -
Heard before Hon. H. B. Foster.
Affirmed. Opinion by Dowdell. J.
Tyson. C. J., and Anderson and Nc
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25
DELANY w. THE STATE.
Murder.-( Decided Dec. goth, 1906. I.

So. Rep. $50
/. Homicide; evidence; dying declar-
alton; preliminary proof; sufficiency.-
The defendant made a showing for an
absent witness to the effect that he
would be able to prove that such wit
ness was with the decedent Just be-
fore he died, and after decedent knew
he was going to die in short while,
he said to witness. that accused did
INTO shoot him, but thar some other
person did. Held, that the showing
fails sufficiently to show that the de-
cedent was impressed with the belief
that death was impending when the
declaration was made.
2. Criminal law; evidence; admissi-
bflity; f1ight.--The state not having
introduced any evidence tending TO
show flight on the part of the defen-
dant. 1t was incompetent for defen-
dant to introduce evidence tending to
show that just after the alleged shoot
ing, he was arrested at his own home
and that he made no effort to escape.
Appeal from Chambers Circuit Court.
Heard before Hon. s. l. Brewer.
Affirmed. Opinion by benson, J.
Tyson, C. j.. HARRISON and Simpson,
JJ., concur.
The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1907-04-25
cox VS.. THE srArE,

COX VS.. THE STATE.
Assault with Intent to Murder--(De-
cided Dec. 10th, 1906. AZ &c. Rep.
8l5.)
Criminal law; trial; instruction -
Then defendant had no right to have
the court admonish the jury on the
subject of following the charges given
by the court. hence, a change which
asserts that II the jury convict the
defendant without each and every one
OF them being satisfied beyond q rea-
sonable doubt of the defendants guilt,
then You will disregard the instructions
OF the court, was properly refused.
Appeal from Macon Circuit Court.
Heard before Hon. 8. L. Brewer.
Affirmed. Opinion by Simpson, J.
Tyson. G. j.. HARRISON and benson,
j., concur.
The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1907-02-02
Roosevelt Ready
With War Scare
For CaIifornianS

One week from today It is expected
President Roosevelt and the members
OF the San Francisco school board viii
meet in conference over the japanese
situation. Il is not too much 10 say
that ON the results OF the visit OF the
San Francisco school board may depend
the question whether peaceful relations
with Japan are 10 continue.
Word has been received here that the
San Francisco party will start for
Washington Sunday night. II VIII ar
rive here late next week, probably IN
time 70 hold a conference with the Pres
ident next Saturday Mayor Schmidt
himself viii head the party, and the en-
tire school board will come, accom-
panied by Assistant City Attorney John
Williams
Members Of the California delegation
say they believe that when the members
OF the school board arrive here and are
taken IN hand by the President they VIII
be disposed t0 yield. The President VIII
unquestionably impress on MS audience
that persistence IN the Unyitldiag course
California is pursuing means nothing
less than war.
II appears that the school board OF
san Francisco. ia adopting the resolu-
ton for the segregation Of Caucasian
and MongOlian school children. acted
under section l6d3 OF the Civil Code OF
California. /; states:
Trustees shan have power to exclude
children of filthy or vicious habits. or
children suffering from contagious or
Infectious diseases. ana also 10 estab-
hsh sucn schools Tor indian children
and Tor children of M0ngOlian or Chi
nese descent When such separate
schools are established. Indian. Chinese.
or M0ngoiian children must not be ad-
mitted 10 any other school
Declaring thar japanese are not Nom
golians' the President viii argue with
hls visitors thar they have made a grave
mistake in administering the law
The feeling Of uneasiness at the Can
itol has not diminished, and, more than
this, the Japanese question continues 10
be the absorbing topic OF discussion at
tie clubs as Well as in the clOakr0Oms.
Al such prominent establishments as the
metropolitan Club and the Army and
Navy Club. there is said by those that
attend 10 be an almost endless current
OF talk over the danger Of war.
The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1907-02-02

NEW YORK, Feb. HARRY
Thaw's attorneys are today ready TO
begin the presentation OF their case
to the jury which win decide HIS
fate. Final touches were given the
defense's plan of procedure at a
conference held between Thaw and
his attorneys in the Tombs last
night. This conference was attend
ed by Lawyers Hartridge. Peabody.
and O'Reilly.
The only question not settled was
who will make the opening state
ment To the jury for the defense.
This question viii be settled TODAY.
Lawyer Peabody was en- early visitor
at the Iombs today TO see his client
On leaving he declared h. had found
Thaw in excellent spirits and good
health. He would have been glad to
have the trial proceed today. and was
inpatient for Monday 70 arrive.
MIR. Peabody told or the conference
last night. and said:
If the people close thei- case at the
morning session on Monday as Mr.
Jerome intimated, We Will be ready TO
go on with the defense Immediately
after the recess"
Alr. Peabody denied a report printed in
local newspapers, purpOrting to have
been made by Lawyer Clifford w Hart
ridge. saying that ThaW would take the
stand fer himself. THAT is a bridge
We viii not cross until we arrive there"
lie explained. Anyway. IL IS too far
away TO consider Il now. '
Despite this statement the impression
is general that ThaW will be witness in
his own behalf. The defense. il is be-
lieved, is trying 10 make 1t appear that
Thaw VIII not take the stand, SO as
20 lure Dir, JeTome's forces 70 sleep on
the pointt- -. :
The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1907-02-02
GOES TO TRIAL
CONFIDENT Of
HIS ACQUITTAL
The fury

No. I-DEMING B. SMITH. re.
tired manufacturer.
No. 2-GEOR6E PFAFF, dealer
in hardware and ma.
chinery supplies.
No. 3-CHARLES II. FECKE,
of the Cunard Steamship
Line.
No. EOSCAR A. PINK, sales.
NO.5-HENRY c. HARVEY,
manager of piano
warehouse.
No. 6-HENRY c. BREARLFY.
advertising agent.
No. MALCOLM S. FRASER.
clothing salesman.
No. s-CHARLES d. NEWTON,
retired.
No. 9-WILBUR F. STEELE,
manufacturer OF gas fix
lures.
No. 10-J0HN :. DENNEE. trafie
agent Of the Southern
Railway.
No. 11-JOSEPH b. BOLTON. of
1lS7 Bolton road.
No. I2-BERNARD GERSTMAN.
New York manager for
the Girard WOOlen Mills.
The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1907-02-02

prOVements. is accurate, il business con-
tinues 10 increase, the writer add:
Personally. / believe that the attack
on nearly every class OF great corpora
tons in this broad lend are commencing
10 bear their legitimate and ineVita Bile
fruit, and that already we can begin 90
see the slowing down OF the wheels. and
that within eighteen months from this
time the chill which the commerce OF the
country viii have received will make
possible a very substantial reduction in
Mr. HllIs figures
Il hope that / have made il plain, 9"
he says in closing, that in my opin-
ion this condition has not come on
account of any law which has become
effective up 10 this time. The condition
il. however the result Of the manner
of doing things which have been done
and the fear of what may come"