davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1908-03-21
MOLINE

Will Lay SideWaIks.-Seventy blocks
of concrete sidewalk-about 40 blocks
in each of the seven wards of the city
will be laid this year The street
and alley committee has completed its
work OF compiling Il list TO be laid,
and an ordinance is now being drafted
for passage at the next meeting of the
whole meeting of the council was held
Thursday afternoon, and the aldermen
visited the coal sheds of Rufus Walker
4 Co, on Eleventh street, between
Third and Fourth avenues. Alderman
Fogelstrom had recommended that the
building be condemned as public
nuisance. No action was taken. The
report of the committee at the next
meeting of the council will be awaited
with interest. not only by the owners
of the sheds. but by those who have
coal sheds in other parts of the city.
South Moline Peoples Caucus.-Su-
pervisor John Weckel was renomina-
at the caucus of the peoples party of
South Moline Thursday evening The
caucus was presided over by Charles
King. and l.. 0. Jahns and Fred Hoesli
acted as clerks. The following ticket
was selected: Supervisor, John Week.
/ Ell: town clerk. Emil Lundahl; asses.
sor, l.. o. Jahns; collector. August
Bjorn; highway commissioner. George
, BASTARD: justice of the peace. Fred
, Hoesli. There was contest on two Of
tices-that of highway commissioner
, and collector. Thomas Oldfield was
contestant of George Bastard for com
, missioner, the latter winning by about
GO 10 "a. Against Mr. Bjorn for col
I lector were W. c. Wilson and Mr.
Scott of Ridgeview. The town com
/ mittee elected is composed of c. A
Larson. Charles King, William Oden
| dahl
Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1908-03-21
THE MARKETS.

Chicago, March 21.-Following are
The market quotations today:
Wheat.
May 95i4. 95ss, 9S1@, 81
July. 1914, S91s. SS1s. SSas.
September, SG7s. S67s, S5@s. sc.
May, 657s, G6as, G514. C5as.
July, CPS, 63h, 629s. G3.
September. 62h. G2&. 62, CPS,
Oats.
May, 545s, 545s. "a. 541s
July, 4S2s, 1885, AIS. AIS.
September. 3Sk, $3.50. 3SH. $SH
Pork.
May, 1910, 1852, 1910, 12.45.
July, 1887. 1890. 12.77. 1885.
Lard.
May. 80. 7s5, 7.S7, 7.95.
July. SIP, $50, $40, sly.
Ribs.
May. Csc, 6.S5. ESQ, 6.S5.
July. 7.15, 7.I5. 40. 7.15.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
LEGAL.


illusions of fact are filed, this court will
assume that every fact necessary to sup
port the judgment rendered was sus-
tanned by the evidence to the satisfaction
of the court if there is any substantial
evidence in the record tending to sustain
such facts.
g. A common carrier contracted with a
grain dealer to transport a large quantity
of grain from Omaha, Nebraska, to Tex
arkana, Texas, through Kansas City, Mis-
souri,, at a stipulated rate. The shipper
had an agent at Kansas City who paid
freight bills and collected for grain sold.
A large amount of grain was shipped I'M
der this rate. The agent at Kansas City
did not know what the freight contract
was, and paid the shipping bills as pre-
sented without question, supposing that
they were correct The bills. when
paid. were forwarded to the ship
sive This fact was not discov-
cred for some time and then the matter
was taken up by the shipper and the prin-
cipal traffic officers of the common car
rier. A part of the overcharges were re-
funded and, under promise that the whole
matter would be adjusted, the question
was postponed from time to time when
further payment by the carrier was re-
fused Held that the payment was not a
voluntary payment such as will bar a re-
covery of the overcharges unpaid.
All the Justices concurring.
true copy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE
[SeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
No. 15714.
John J. Delaney


John ]. Delaney
VS..
The Great Bend Implement Company, a
Corporation.
Error from Barton County.
REVERSED.
Syllabus. BY the Court. Porter, J.
1. In determining whether a petition
states a cause of action ex contractu or
ex delicto it must be considered In its en-
tirety but with special reference to its
prominent and leading allegations. Where
the averments make it doubtful whether
the action is on contract OF in tort every
intendment must be made in favor of
constituting 1t as an action on contract.
Railway Company VS.. Hutchings, Sealy &
Co.. Kan. followed.
2. Where promissory notes given in pay
ment of property sold under contract Of
warranty have passed out of the control
of the payee. the maker may elect to treat
them as valid obligations notwithstanding
they are non-negotiable, and his failure
to interpose his defense in a suit brought
against him by the holder of the notes
will not prevent him from maintaining an
action against the payee to recover dam
ages for breach of warranty.
All the Justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest. D. A. VALENTINE,
[SeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
E. E. Kelson.
Error from Ness County.

E. E. Kelson
Error from Ness County.
AFFIRMED.
syllabus. By the Court. Burch j.
A tax-deed holder in possession was de-
reated In an action of ejectment and was
given lien for taxes. At the date of the
judgment he did not live on the land and
had no claim for improvements. The land
owner did not satisfy the judgment lien
ana allowed the land to sell for taxes.
me lien holder purchased at the tax sale
and was given tax-sale certificate.
Without force. fraud or collision he then
moved on the land. took full possession
ana made lasting and valuable improve
ments Subsequently. the land owner re-
deemed from the Judgment and tax sale
and caused a writ of possession to issue
IN the ejectment suit. Held. the occupant
or the land is entitled to an injunction
against eviction until his claim for i'm
proVementS is ddtudicated and satisfied.
All the Justices concurring.
Except Porter, J., who did not sit, hav-
ing been of counsel.
A true copy.
Attest: d. A. VALENTINE,
ISeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
No. Is. 694.
W. w. White, ct al.
f. S. Smith

F. S. Smith
Error from Sumner County.
REVERSED.
Syllabus. BY the Court. Smith J.
/. Where in an action on a promissory
note the plaintiff attaches to his petition
a copy of the note sued and the de-
PENDANTS admit the execution thereof. they
cannot, on the introduction of evidence,
changed after it's execution. The adnnis-
sion is of the execution of the note in
the very form pleaded.
2. In such case If it be pleaded in de-
tense that the execution of the note was
procured through fraud by plaintiff, paroI
evidence is admissible to prove such de-
Tense; also, if pleaded that at the time
the note was signed and delivered by a
part of the defendants it was agreed that
it should be returned If a certain man or
number of men did not likewise obligate
Themselves and sign the note, it may be
proven by parol evidence.
All the Justices cOncurring.
A true copy -
Attest: d. A. VALENTINE,
TSeaI1 Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
SUPREME COURT SYLLABI.
No. Is. 203.
B. F. Buckles

NO. 10, Jl3.
B. f. Buckles
The Northeast Kansas Telephone Com
pany and F. M. Pearl.
Error from Brown County.
AFFIRMED.
syllabus. BY the Court. Benson,
From the unchallenged findings of a
referee 1t appears that the plaintiff firm
was paid in full for all services performed
by them as attorneys for the defendant;
should be Implied in favor of the plain
tiff's firm to pay them a retainer in addi-
t tlon TO the pay for their particular ser
vices extended: the latter finding was
stricken out by the district court on the
ground that it was not supported by the
evidence: Held. that this court cannot say
that the district court erred in the action
so taken.
All the Justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest: D. A VALENTINE,
LSeaLl Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
LEGAL.


of the act. The State V. Andrews. "a
2 Where the journals of the legislature
construed together, indicate that the title
| Of a bill was the same when adopted by
each branch OF the Iegl ;I as u ap
ton in favor of the accuracy of the en-
rolled bill is sustained
| ate Is passed thereby and, in due course;
is amended and passed by the House ana
| ments and the bill goes to a joint confer
| ence committee which agrees upon an
Senate which adopts the report by an aye
| and nay vote and by constitutional ma ma
5orityy the bill is legal fb PRs Pass ado ta
ed thereby for the session of 1908
era1 LECTION of 1865. to Section IL. Article
| 2, of the Constitution of Kansas Is not
| retroactive in effect.
All the justices concurring.
Attest: d. A. VALENTINE,
[SeaLl Clerk Supreme Court
No. 1925.
Harriet B. Taylor, Ann NJ Beckwith, G.
o. Taylor and E. j. Taylor.
E. H. Taylor.
Error from Norton County.
AFFIRMED
Syllabus. By the Court. Porter, ..
1. Where it is sought to enforce a p aroi
contract to convey lands, and possession
is relied upon as part performance the
rule that the possession must be exciusHl,Ne
is satisfied where it is shown that tne
possession was as exclusive as the terms
Of the contract would permit.
2. A parol contract was entered INTO p oS
tween parents and a son sixteen years ST. o.
age to the effect that the son was to con con,
tinue TO live with the parents on the 1arIn
port them so long as they lived, in consl 6e
TaiHp hS of T s5a land dh a th Death
suant to the agreement the son was
nIaced in possession of the land by the
parents and continued in the possession
until the fathers death NV, WHlf The oc age Of
thirty-forr The son devoted the entlre
rents and profits of the land Ian 20 me Of his
father. and after that to the support OF
his mother. He paid the taxes ana mace mace
lasting and valuable improvements 1iatd,Ss
on, and fully performed all the condltons
of the contract on his part IN an act ~
for partition brought by the nelrs OF 't ne
father Held that the son was ent1tleo "
a decree declaring him to be the Owls" tSa
of the land subject to the rights OF t the
mother to the use u ana heT life and sub
iect to the condition that ne S stH nd
do and perform all the conditloI rs +, 1ra
terms of the contract during her
me- E The duty is enjoined upon this court 16
+o refuse a reversal for errors wnlch ~
not affect the substantial rights or ttn
adverse PARTY. Code Civil PROF. Sec Inv
Cen. Stat. 1s0i, sec. 4574.) u4 .,d
f1din9s are made which are supported by
the evidence, the EXCLUSION OF III In bs
mt Trder hae error Where it is
uarent that if the excluded o. fsSect ed
been admitted it could not n ttNo+ az 0th
any - - different Judgment would have peeh
PROPER under the findings;
All the Justices concurrlhs'
4 A+t tpge eop'' D. A. VALENTINE.
EASeII' Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16

No. 15,713.
Dorothy Work.
VS..
The Fidelity Oil and Gas Company, ct al.
Error from Allen County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. BY the Court Smith J.
l. In granting equitable relief under a
contract a court should go only so far as
is just and equitable.
2. Neither a court of law nor of equity
will enforce an unconscionable contract.
All the Justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE
GSeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
D. A. VALENTINE,
Clerk Supreme Court.
No. IS. 693
Margaret D. Price and Gladys Price

Margaret D. Price and Gladys Price
VS..
J. T. BarnhiII
Error from Butler County
REVERSED.
Syllabus. By the Court. Mason, J.
1. That date named in a tax deed is
out of harmony with other recita1s does
not Justify assuming it to be the result
of clerical error. at least unless the date
named is an impossible one or is in direct
and irreconcilable conflict with some other
recital referring to the same matter.
2. A statement in a tax deed of a fact
showing that it was improperly issued is
fatal to its validity. although occurring
in the course of recital not required by
the statute.
3. A tax deed which recites that it is
based on a certificate issued for the pay
ment of the taxes of the year prior to
that in which the taxes accrued for which
the land was sold is vulnerable to an at
tack made on that account even after
having been Of record for more than five
years.
Mason, J., Porter. J., Graves, J., Benson,
J., concurring.
Burch. J.. Smith, J.. dissenting.
a true copy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
LSeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
No. 1915.
Carrie Edens

No. 1916.
Carrie EdenS
VS..
John J. Fletcher ct al
Error from Wyandotte County,
Court of Common Pleas.
REVERSED.
Syllabus BY the Court. Benson ]
1. An Acknowledgement by the plaintiff
of satisfaction against two of several de-
PENDANTS who are sued as joint wrong
doors will not release the others where
the instrument offered to show such re-
lease shows that it was not intended to
have such effect.
2. Where such acknowledgment of sat
isfaction contains an express reservation
of the right to proceed against the other
joint wrongdoers who are co-defendants
with those released. and other express
sions in the instrument are not inconsist-
ent with the retention of SUCH right, the
intention of the parties that the instrument
should not operate as a release of such CO.
defendants sufficiently appears.
All the Justices concurring
A true copy.
Attest: d. A. VALENTINE,
CSeal1 Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
No. 15.727.
The Kansas Natural Gas Company
VS..


c. c. Harris ct al
Error from Montgomery County.
REVERSED.
Sr11abus By the Court. Graves,
i Where the lessee. under an OIL a 4La
GAS lease. violates the PROVISIONS OF tne
fasassa SO that the lessor might declare the
instrument terminated but does IloI ~ Is SO,
and afterwards. the lessor ana IeS 49,
ar-rae that for a valuable coISlderdIoIiLi
f0 he given by the lessee, the lessor VII
accent the same as a full compliance wiz
the Conditions of the lease, and Sucn con-
Sideration is given and accepted as SUP
Mated the transaction VIII cOn 81 IL g
waiver of the prior violations oI CHt "a
and restore it to it's original validity anu
Vigor. ,zo- ~ , contract for
the rnrchase of the oil and gas IN anu
under certain real estate, commences 81 81
action to cancel an outstanding tease "
the land and the owner or tne Idiiu 10
made a marty to such action but no aAie-
cations in the pleadingS indicate that ne
has done or intends to do anything az
verse to the rights or interests OF Sne
plaintiff; and there is no eVldenGS PlS-
senfed which shows any such aclloh oI
intenf and it does not appear, Wnen tne
dacree is entered, that the plalntl1I tnen
has any subsiSting interest IN the prem
ises il is error to grant an 1nJuncuon IN IN
70 Icr Of the plaintiff and against such
land owner restraining him from 1nterIe 5
ing with the plaintiff in the use or tne
land for the purpose of exploring Tor gas
and oil.
4 A+t true copy D. A. VALENTINE,
TSeaI1 Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
No. 1850.
Union Pacific Railroad Company

No. 1850
Union Pacific Railroad Company
VS..
w. o. Beardwell
Error from Graham County.
REVERSED.
syllabus. By the Court. Mason, J.
1. In an action for damages resulting
from delay in the transportation of goods
by common carrier. where the petition
IN general terms alleges a shipment and
contains nothing to suggest a special con-
tract. it is not error to overrule motion
to require the plaintiff to amend by stat
ing whether he shipped under an oral or
a written contract
+ Assuming it to be the law that where
a railroad company has once accepted
goods subject to the ordinary liabilities of
a common carrier, such liabilities cannot
be lessened by an agreement subsequently
assented to by the shipper the rule can
have no application where the parties at
all times contemplated the making of a
written contract defining their obligations
with respect to the shipment.
All the justices concurring.
A true COPY.
Attest: D. A VALENTINE
1SeaLI Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
D. A. VALENTINE,
Clerk Supreme Court.
No. 15.715.
Rowland and Meyer


vs..
The Forest Park Creamery Company ct al
Error from Franklin County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. By the Court. Graves, J.
1. Section 2. art. II of the constitution
of this state is not self-executing, but
amounts to mere direction to the legis-
lature. and its provisions are Intellectual
until enforced by appropriate legislative
action. The liability Of stockholders
therein provided NAV be imposed. modifi-
ed. withdrawn at the will of the legis-
lature whenever vested rights are not
thereby affected iniuriously.
2. Where a statute imposing a double
liability upon stockholders has been re-
pea1ed. a creditor whose claim against the
corporation, originated after such repeal
has no vested right under the law re-
pealed. and could not be injured thereby
g. The Forest Park Creamery company,
a corporation, was Incorporated and its
stock issued while sections 1902 and 1916
Gen. Stat. 1901 were in force. On March
II. 1903. these sections were repealed by
chapter 1852. laws of 1903. Held. that a
creditor whose claim against the corpora
ton originated after such repeal, is not
entitled to the rights against stockholders
provided by the repealed sections.
All the justices cOncurring except Ben
son. J.. not sitting.
A true copy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
[Seal.1 Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
No. 1921.
The City of Paola


Margaret A. Wentz.
Error from Miami County
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. By the Court. Mason, J.
1. Assuming that the question whether
a shade tree growing in the street should
be removed is one to be determined by
the city officers. not subject to review by
the courts, yet in order for their deter
mination to be conclusive 1t must be made
fairly and in good faith: If made arbi-
trarily action under it may be enjoined as
an abuse of discretion.
2. The officers of city may not.
against the objection of the abutting
owner. remove a shade tree from the
street merely for the sake of enabling
them to place sidewalk in a position diff
ferent from that prescribed by ordinance.
g. The removal by officers of the city
of shade trees growing in the street may
be enioined where the only reason offer
ed to Justify such removal is insufficient
as a mater of law and no other purpose
is disclosed
Al the Justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
CSeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
No. 15,723.
William Stephens.

2 William SIephenS.
The Board of County Commissioners of
the County of Labette.
Error from Labette County.
REVERSED.
Syllabus By the Court. Smith, J.
! l. An enrolled statute imports absolute
verify and is conclusive evidence of the
passage of the act and of its validity, ur-
affirmatively. clearly, conclusively and
beyond all doubt that the act was not
passed regularly and legally, and this rule
asplies to the title as well as to the body
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
No. 1852.
Charles Z. Gibson


vs.
John r. Fields.
Error from Rawlins County.
AFFIRM ED.
Syllabus. BY the Court Smith, J.
l. While it IS recognized as the general
rule that the blowing and cultivation of
land. heretofore under cultivation, does
not constitute a permanent Improvement,
the breaking and reducing of wild lands
to cultivation does constitute such i'm
proYement.
2 Upon the adjudication of the counter
claims where one IN possession of lands
under a tax deed has been de-
feated of the possession by the
holder of the legal title and
claims CONDENSATION for permanent I'M
provements and taxes paid. reasonable
rent of the premises without the improve
ments should be offset but not rent as in
creased by the improvements.
3. In such case the rent is to be deter
mined from the cash price usually paid for
the use of like premises during the same
time and in the same locality.
All the justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest: d. A VALENTINE
ISeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16

No. 1860.
The Board of County Commissioners of
| Shawnee County, Kansas.
vs.
! Joseph Jacobs
Error from Shawnee County.
REVERSED.
Syllabus By the. Court. Graves, j.
| l. A county. while engaged in building
br1tdge upon a pubic hlgnWay; ACTS as a
| is not liable for the negligent perform
ance of such work unless expressly made
2 Under the provisions of section SO
Gen. Stat. 1901. a bridge is defective only
when the defect affects its safety OF use
| fulness as a part of the public highway.
3. A county constructed a bridge where
the public highway crossed a stream. The
bridge as constructed was in perfect con-
dition for all the purposes of a highway.
low. it INSTRUCTED the flow of the water
during unusually heavy rains. so as to
and fniure the crops thereon Held, that
section $40 Gen. Stat. 1901 does not create
any liability against the county in favor
of the owner of such lands.
All the Justices concurring.
Attest: d. A. VALENTINE,
[Seall Clerk Supreme Court.
No. 1566S.
Anna K. McKelvey
VS..
John A. McKelvey.
Error from Johnson County.
REVERSED.
Syllabus. By the Court. Burch, J.
l. A husband may, in good faith. make
of which his wife has made no convey
ance without defrauding her if she has
effective to bar her statutory right &C
cruing after his death he must consum-
mate it by a conveyance, and the grantee
must not be guilty of actual fraud in OBJ
2. Certain facts stated in the opinion
are held to show a fraudulent attempt to
defeat a widow S statutory right in land
owned by her husband in his lifetime, of
which neither he nor she had made
All the justices concurring.
Attest: D. A VALENTINE,
[Seal1 Clerk Supreme Court.
No. 1858.
Charles NJ. Hines
vs.
Frank NJ, Stahl.
Error from Shawnee County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. BY the Court Mason, ].
l. Intoxicating liquor is not subject to
seizure on execution, because the statute
forbids its sale except by certain persons,
for restricted purposes, and upon affi-
daV1t OF the buyer showing the occasion
for his purchase.
2. Where repleVin was brought for in
toXicating liquors and after obtaining pos
session thereof the plaintiff dismissed his
ment of the litigation the defendant held
the property city marshal under a war
rant issued by the police court, justifies
a presumption in the absence of anything
to suggest the contrary that he was act
Ing under an ordinance passed in aid of
the Drohibitory law authorizing the seizure
and destruction of liquors kept for sale
in violation Of the statute.
B. In such a case If the defendant is
found to be entitled to a return of the
property he is also entitled to a Judgment
for its. full value in case a return cannot
be had.
In such a case a recovery by the de-
PENDANT is not. defeated by the fact that
his term of office has expired.
All the Justices concurring.
A true copy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
lSeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court.
The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-16
No. Is, 69S.
Alice T. tanning.

Alice T. Lanning.
VS..
Alden F. Brown.
Error from Thomas County.
REVERSED.
SvlIah11s BY the Court. Porter J.
a compromise tax deed which shows on
its face that it is based on a tax sale GER
tificate assigned by the order of the board
of county commissioners requiring the
navnnent of taxes which were not at the
time a lien upon the land is void on Its
face Notwithstanding it has been of rec
ord more than five years.
All the Justices concurr1ng.
true copy. "
Attest: u. a VALENTINE,
TSeaI1 Clerk Supreme Court