The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-05-08

the breach of a contract should be al
| lowed such damages as are in natural
and direct result of the breach. This
case involved the transfer of a stock
| of goods and Leonard for a farm be-
| longing to George and McQuilkin.
The jacket, pierced with bullet
holes and stained with blood, worn by
| a woman at the time she was MUIR
| dered, although it may be a grewsome
| object, may be introduced as evidence
| in a murder trial. John c. Moore
murdered his wife as she was return
ing from church in Arkansas City. She
was shot twice in the back. The mur-
der was committed on the street. At
| the trial of the case the county attor-
ney introduced the jacket worn by
| Mrs. Moore. There were two bullet
holes through the back and it was
soaked with blood. After being intro
duced as evidence the jacket hung on
a chair in the court room for five or
six days during the trial. Moore's at
torney contended that this exhibition
| tended to arouse the feelings and
prejudice the minds of the jury and
| that he did not have fair trial on
account of it. But the supreme court
affirmed the conviction of Moore of
murder in the first degree and in the
decision said: Spectacular displays
of physical obpects germane to the
/ transaction under investigation, cum
ningIy devised to arouse passion or to
excite prejudicial emotions on the part
! of the jury, should be thwarted or
promptly suppressed; but legitimate
| evidence can not be excluded merely
| because it is grewSome and may tend
| to move the jury's feelings"
! While a car of grain did not have
the state of Kansas, the sale OF 1t
could be made on the board of trade of
Kansas City. Mo-. and the deduction Of
100 pounds for dirt and leakage made
and no one can be punished for 1t. That
is the decision of the Kansas supreme
court in the Amos Martin habeas cor
pus case. Martin was a grain dealer
and elevator man in Kansas city,
Kan. He went to Kansas City, MO-,
and bought a car of wheat on the board
of trade and the deduction of 100
pounds was made in settling the ac-
count, according to the rules OF the
board But Kansas has a law prohib-
iting this deduction and making 1t
criminal offense to make the deductlon
of 100 pounds. The case was taken into
the supreme court at once 70 test lne
law. The court does not express any
opinion on the law but holds that the
transaction was made in Missouri and
] hence Martin cannot be unished in
Kansas.
| The state won a big point in it's prohibi-
| tion fight in Ieavenwor.h today when the
! supreme court held that prooaIe 1udlss 1lss
( in liquor cases when the district judge IS
absent from the county. When the attort
/ in I,eavenworth county the district judge
was out of town and ill. The temporary
court When the district Judge returned
citations for contempt were brought
against Henry Werner and others & t4r ;stri viot
court held that the probate court. nad no
right to issue a temporary restraining or
der in liquor cases when the district
! Judge was absent. The supreme court re-
versed this and sent the case back Tor
trial. Henry Werner was discharged from from
custody in Leavenworth but the decision
| means is TO be arrested and tried for the
contempt of the courts order.
| The law regards a railway track as a
place of danger and a view OF railway
track as a warning OF canger Io, an d.,s.p1 apr
of herd of cattle does not exercise que
diligence and caution in driving MT caitie
he cannot recover damages for any of his
cattle that may be killed by passing
railroad train. This is the decision OF the
sunreme court in the case of the heirs
of Mitchell Wheeler of Clay county VINO
sought to recover damages for some cat
Rock Island train the Mitchell heirs
had been awarded damages by the loWer
court, but the supreme court heio tao tnae
the driver had been negligent IN the lace
of danger and reversed the Clay dlstrlct
court. In its decision the supreme court H1Ie I
held: lone who drives herd OF cattie
along a highway for distance OF -
rods and upon a railway crossing with
which he is familiar without taking any
precautions to ascertain whethee there is
a train in dangerour proximity Is guiILy
of contributory negligence wnlcn VIII Iis9aI par
a recovery for cattle killed In a colllslon
which might have been avoided by the eX1
ercise of care proportionate with the peril
of the situation.
A distiller or brewer or wholesale liquor
agent who sells liquors to Kansan can
J not have the aid of the courts OF tnls ms
! IN,
t decision of the supreme court In the APP
: peal of the suit of V. l.. BerShears
; against the Nelson Distilling Co., from
: Ions of whisky from the distilling COM
: l.pany an drefused to pay for it. The COM
l pany sued and recovered damages IN tne
lower court but the supreme court holds
in reversing the dicision, that where the
; facts set out in the trial show that the
liquor was not used for medicinal, me-
. | chanical or scientific purposes but was
. used in violation of the Kansas pronlpHl- H
l collected through the courts of the state
as the transaction was unlawful as far as
Kansas laws were concerned.
, Whenever jointist is convicted he
! must pay the attorneys fee to the coun-
: ty attorney. The supreme court holds
that this fee is not a violation of the
2 United States constitution providing fol
Fritz was convicted of running joint al
< Salina. The court ordered him to pay 6
$50 fee to the attorney who prosecuted
!, him and Fritz contended that this wa:
e his own prosecution and did not apply II
4 other criminal cases. The court hold
o that the fee was specifically allowed b,
y statute in liquor cases and was exercise
e of the police power of the state.
G (Continued on Page Eighty