The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-02-11
LEGAL.

- LEGAL ~
~@~~0~0~-~I~1-~~
ond class to- grade streets, avenues and
alleys. and pay therefor by general tax
on all taxable property within the city,
ing and guttering by resolution as pro-
vided in section 1016, Gen. Stat. 1901 are
separate and independent of each other
abutting property owners to pay for paw
ing. curbing and guttering, constructed In
pursuance to such a resolution will not be
enjofned on account of any irergularity in
the action of the city council in making
the grade upon which such paving, curb
ing, and guttering rests, such irregularity
assessment.
2. Where a city council acquires -juris-
dietion to pave. curb and gutter a street
provided by section 1915, Gen. Stat. 1901, it
has the power to take all the necessary
steps to construct such pavement proper
Iy and may amend or modify it's action
therein. without losing the jurisdiction so
acquired.
All the Justices concurring.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
[SeaL] Clerk Supreme Court.
The Kansas City Elevated Railway Co.
Rachel Service. minor under the age of
IA years. by James Service, her father
as next friend, ]. L. Colvin, L. f. Bird
and H. G. Pope.
Error from Court OF Common Pleas OF
Wyandotte County
REVERSED.
Syllabus. BY the Court. Benson. ].
An agreement between client and his
attorneys for the services Of the latter In
conducting a proposed law suit, wherein
it is agreed that the client shall not settle,
compromise or otherwise dispose OF the
sent of the attorneys, is contrary to public
policy and void.
All the Justices concurrlng.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
ISeall Clerk Supreme Court.
f.f No. 1892. ettss
Conrad Liebheit ct al
VS..
E. A. Enright.
Error from the District Court Of wyan-
AFT HFFIR RETEf5
Syllabus. BY the Court Johnston, C. j.
l. One holding adverse possession of
land may protect his possession and right
to the land by the purchase of an out
ownership is attacked may set up claim
of title by both adverse possession and
under his tax deed. He cannot be required
they are not necessarily inconsistent.
2. In an action where there is an Issue
of adverse possession OF land the declara-
tions OF the occupant importing title in
himself ana which give color to his pos
session are admissible in evidence as YER
bal parts OF his act or occupation.
All the Justices concurrfng.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
GSeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court. a
No 154s
The State of Kansas
vs.
Chamberlain Hoel.
Appeal from Cowley County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. By the Court. Graves, j.
1. The defendant was convicted of per
jury. He, was charged with having wit
messed the commission OF murder, and
on the trial of the supposed murderer, de-
MED having been present at the homicide,
or of seeing the act committed. The kill
ing was done by a blow with a club. The
information, after recfting q history OF
the transaction, contains ayerments which
read:
And all of said things did occur in the
immediate presence of said Chamberlain
Hoel and he the said Chamberlain Hoel,
and the testimony SO given by said Cham
berlain Hoel as aforesaid was false and
was by him at the time known to be
false"
These sufficiently charge that he saw
the crime committed and remembered it
when testifying as a witness. =
2. RecftalS in an information, charging
perjury. which merely describe the trans
action about which the alleged false testf-
m mon, was given. and the hesaring OF trial ai
even IL unnecessarily full. make the infor-
nation defective, and it's not error to
override a motion to strike out such re-
citals as redundant and Irrelevant. =
8. The refusal Of the district court to
give instructions to the jury as requested
by the defendant, will not be deemed err
roneous when other instructions given arc
substantially the same as those refused.
4. In a prosecution for the crime of per-
jury, the evidence charged to be false will
be regarded as material if 1t tended to prove
or disprove a material fact involved in the
trial where the alleged perjury was com
mitted regardless of the effect which such
testimony may have had In the case.
5. Whether or not a defendant charged
with a crime had an adequate motive for
the commission of the act of which he is
accused, is a matter of evidence to be con-
sidered by the Jury, and when the evil
dence is sufficient without proof of q
motive to satisfy the jury beyond a rea-
sonable doubt of the defendants guilt, no
motive need be shown.
All the Justices concurrfng.
A true copy.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE,
[SeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court