davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24

BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY, LIGHT AND POWER co. V. WILLIAMS.
 Action for Damages to Employe.-(De-
 cided Dec. IT, 190S.-4S South. 2S)
 l. Railroads; injury to persons on track; trespassers.-The employe of a going to his place of work in the usual way is not a trespasser.
 2. Street railways; use of streets; duty of railroads.-The duty of street railways to recognize the right of per sons in the lawful use of the street Is imperative. and 1t Is bound to ex- ercise proper degree of care and reasonable prudence and precaution as attending circumstances may re- ouire to avoid injury to such persons. although it has the right of way in case of meeting or overtaking per- sons on the track.
 S. Same; contributory negligence A person using a street occupied by railroad tracks Is bound to exercise ordinary care and such reasonable pru- dence as attending circumstances re- quire to avoid being injured. A. Same; injury to persons on track negligence-The duty being on the motorman to give warning of the ap- proach of the car by sounding the bell. or otherwise, upon seeing pedes- trians on the track or dangerously near if. his failure to do so may constitute negligence.
 B. Same; jury question.-Whsther the nosition of plaintiff on the track when seen by the motorman was ob- viously perilous or not, under the evil dence in this case, was question for the Jury.
 a. Same.--A motorman may assume that a person on the track will get or. but such assumption cannot be in dulged beyond the time when such per sons danger is seen to be imminent.
 z. Same; jury question--The ques- ton of defendants negligence and of plaintifrs contributory negligence, Is under the evidence In this case, one for the jury.
 s. Negligence: wantonness. -Tne conscious failure of one charged with duty. to exercise due care and dili- gence to prevent an injury after dis ,covery of the peril, or under circum- stances where he Is charged with a knowledge of such peril, to perform inc duty, being conscious of the inevi- table or probable results of such fah- ure, Is wantonness.
 g. Trial: instructions; argumentative and misleading.-A charge asserting that If plaintiff was not entitled to re- cover by reason of the fact. If 1t De a fact. that the motorman failed to dis- cover plaintiffs danger as soon as he might have by reasonable care and in the exercise of his duty to keep a lookout. and that, on the other hand. nlaIntiff was entitled to recover only in the event that the motorman was
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24

It Is admitted that Bright's Disease of the kidneys causes more deaths in the United States than In any other country; that more than half the sick ness In America is due to weak or dis eased kidneys.
 We are a weak -kidneyed people. and the reason Is plain. Ambitious to en- joy more than a mere living. to have all the pleasures that our neighbors have. anxious for wealth and success. we overwork, rest little. eat and drink unwisely, and are lon the go" all the time.
 This strenuous life of today tells on the kidneys. The buman body was just so much work that each organ can do. The kidneys filter our blood day and night. receiving 1t In a cease less stream. draining off the poisonous impurities This duty Is heavy enough in a normal average life. hut when we work early and slate, give up rest and repose for enjoyment, and retire late to troubled sleep, the work of the ktd- neYs Is increased enormously. Every bit of energy, consumed throws Into the blood a quantity of waste like the ashes of a fire, and if the using up Is too rapid. the kidneys cannot keep strain or any excess may hasten the inevitable break down. and as the clr culation of the blood never stops. the kidneys have no time 10 rest. no chance to mend. Sick kidneys cannot get well alone.
 The first warnings of kidney weak ness are dull aching pain In the pack retention, excessive flow, discoloration or scalding of the urine. This tells or
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24
THE LAND OF WEAK KIDNEYS

kidney congestion or inflammation. Neglect the trouble and dizziness. ner- yousness, rheumatic pain. swollen ankles and limbs, dimming of the eye sight. sediment in the urine. or fiut- terinG of the heart will mark the near approach of dropsy. gravel, stone in the kidney. diabetes or Bright's dls- ease.
 Only in one way can kidney disor- ders be checked and cured-by prompt treatment of the kidneys themselves with a special kidney remedy Deans Kidney Pills are for the kidneys only. ulate the urine. relieve strain upon the heart and nerves, and cure back2che. rheumatic pain and dizziness. They are recommended at home by people you know;
 J. T. Davis, 239 Lee street. Mont nomery Ala. says: About four years ago I had occasion to use Deans Kid ney Pills and they did me so much good that on all occasions since when I have felt any need of a kidney rem edy 1 have taken them. l think kid ney trouble in my case was brought on by almost constant bending while mt my work Some days my back be- came so sore and lame that l could scarcely straighten. Doan's Kidney my back at that time. few months ago had another attack, again pro- cured a box of Doans Kidney Pills at E e. Fowler's drug store and after using them. was entirely cured Doan's Kidney Pills lived up to the claims made for them and have my endorse-s mept."
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24

,s in the absence of stipulations to the rontrarv. entitled to the same ingress and egress that purchaser would have; and where the landlord leases to the tenant a portion of his lands Tor occupation as dwelling. eye, anu there is no agreement to the con,.ary, the tenant has the right to use all such apparent ways as are reasonably nec- essary to the enjoyment of the prop erty. and the owner cannot exciude the terant from the reasonable use of such ways and cannot exclude therefrom other persons who desire to use such ways for the purpose of visiting the tenants dwelling on business or pleas ure. provided such use puts no addi- t,orai servitude on the landlords oth- CT land.
 5. Same; ways; necessity presump- ton While e way of necessity Is matter of presumption, and may De re- stricted by special contract. yet, In the absence of such contract or stat ute. the way will be presumed to De for the use of the owner and his ram iiy. and he may license others to use it for the purpose of going to,or coming from the premises.
 G.. Same.--A way appurtenant to an estate may be used by those who own or lawfully occupy any part thereon, and by persons lawfully going to or from such premises, whether mention ed In the grant or not.
 '. Same.-Where an employe In mine leases house on the premises of an employer. he acquires way or necessity over the premises to and from the house, which Is presumptively one for the convenience of the employed so long as the necessity exists, ana ne may invite persons to visit them, either
 o rd nf- sons travelling tho way are not tres nassers. where the lessee has extend- ed the invitation either actually or by implication.
 &. Same.--Where a person desires to visit a lessee for the purpose or col lecting a debt, though 1t might be in ferred that such person was authorized by the lessee to come for that purpose, the mere desire of such person to go n the house of the lessee. without an invitation, direct or implied for that purpose, would not be a legal excuse for entering on the way.
 e Same.--An invitation by a ten- ant who possesses a way or necessity over the premises of the landlord to a third person to visit him is not an assignment of the easement of the right of way, but the exercise Of right which defendant possessed.
 10. False imprisonment and mali- cious prosecution.-A complaint al- 1eRtng that defendant, acting through agents. who were acting within the line and scope of their employment. ma- liciously and without probable causes procured a warrant for the arrest of plaintiff, that by virtue of the warrant plaintiff was arrested and imprisoned for day, and subsequently, brought before court for trial. and by that court adjudged not guilty. states a cause of action for false Imprisonment, if not malicious prosecution.
 II. Malicious prosecution; action: evidence. In an action for malicious prosecution, growing out of the pros ecution for trespass upon the premises of defendant, where 1t was shown that plaintiff entered the premises with a
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24

view Of visiting the tenant thereon to collect debt, and that he entered in way of necessity provided by iiefend- ant, 1t was competent to show whether the debt was due from defendant or not, whether there was any other way 10 reach tenants house, and whether the way fin question was the way usu- ally travelled. since 1t tended to shed light on the question of the way of necessity. and as to whether such way had been established by consent.
 IF. same.--Where there was evi- dence tending to show that the entry was made after the plaintiff had been warned according to law, 1t was incorfl- potent to show whether plaintiff was molesting the property of defendant or not. since the offense was complete when plaintiff entersd upon the prem ises.
 1s. Same.--Proof that the president of the defendant corporation was pres ent at the trial of plaintiff for tres pass after warning was admissible for ths purpose of showing the part taken by such president In such prosecu- tion.
 IAy Same.---where it appeared that plaintiff entered on the promises by the consent of gnards placed thereon by the defendant 1t was proper to permit the president of the defendant corporation to testify as to the author ity delegated by him to the guards, since if they had authority to admit persons into the premises, a person en- tering by such permission could not be guilty of such trespass.
 l. 15. Same: damages; attorneys fees. Where the complaint in malicious prosecution fails to specifically claim attorneys fees as damages, testimony as to attorneys fees Is not admissi- ble; and if the claim is made for at torney's fees the amount recoverable is the amount proven to be reasonable. and 1t is not admissible to show an agreement to pay certain amounts.
 1e. Same; evidence; jury question.
 Where the evidence was in conflict as to whether the arrest was made on the charge of refusing to leave defendants premises after having sntered. or for having entered unlawfdlly previously. and plaintiff was arrested by an ofti- cer. the general charge to find for the defendant on the count in false im prisonment on the grounds that the ar rest was made by an officer In whose presence the offense was committed (Section 62es-e27S, Code 1so7) was properly refused.
 IT. Trial; instructions; asserting no proposition of law.--An instruction as- serting that defendant was in posses sion of the premises on which plaintiff was at the time he was arrested, as- serts no proposition of law and its re- fusal was proper.
 IS. Same: affirmative charge.-- Where there is conflict in the evidence as to any material question, the af- firmative charge is always properly rec fused.
 Appeal from Birmingham City Court
 Heard before Hon. c. c. Nesmtth.
 Reversed and remanded. Opinion by Simpson. J.
 Tyson, O. J. Anderson and Denson. JJ., concur.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24

negligent in failing to conserve plain tin's safety after he actually became aware of his danger, was properly re- fused as argumentative. misleading and evasive of the province of the Jury.
 10. Same; invading province of jury. "A charge asserting that plaintiff was negligent in allowing himself to be or remain in dangerous proximity to the oar. was properly refused as in- vasive of the province of the jury.
 II. Same; injury to persons on track Where, from the evidence, the jury might have inferred wantonness on the part of the motorman, instructions permitting an inquiry as to wanton- ness were properly refused.
 Appeal from Birmingham City Court.
 Heard before Hon. H. A. Sharpe.
 Affirmed. Opinion by Denson. J.
 Tyson. c. J.. Dowdeli and simpson, JJ., concur.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24
RUSH V. MASONIC TEMPLE AssocI-
 ALTON.

AsSuHlpSlt- bcCeHiUct ti
 1908. 4S South. 11S.)
 Damages; grounds; remote and spec ulative.-Where 1t was not shown what was the difference between the value of the rooms properly heated and with elevator service, and without these accessories.-an 1t did not ap- pear that any loss resulted from de- fendant's patients being compelled to walk upstairs, or that prospective pa tlents who did not go for treatment on named days were not subsequently, treated. and 1t was not shown that de- fendant would have been profitably en- gagged during the estimated time he lost by lack of heat and elevator ser vice, the loss caused by the lack of such accessories was so speculative and remote that damages therefor cannot be allowed. although 1t was agreed that plaintiff should furnish defendant heated rooms and elevator service.
 Appeal from Mobile Law and Equity Court.
 Heard before Hon. Saffold Berney.
 Affirmed. Opinion by Anderson, J.
 Tyson, c. J., DowdeIl and Mcclellan, JJ., concur
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24
IF IT DISAPPEARS. IT'S ECZEMA

HOW To Tell Whether c skin Affec- 'tisn ts an Inherited Blsod Dis
 ease Or Net.
 Sometimes it Is hard to determine whefhar a skin affection is 0 sign or . blood disorder of simply a form oI eczema. Even physicians are oiten puzzled in their diagnosis. The pest way for one afflicted is to go to E. o. Fowler. or any good druggist wno handles pure drugs and obtain eo cents worth of poslam. Apply tnls, and if the itching stops at once ana the trouble is cured in a few days II may be set down as having been ecze- ma. as this Is the way poslafn acts m the worst cases of eczema. and in cur Ing acne, herpes. blotches. letter. piles. salt rheum, rash. barbers and other forms of itch. scaly scalp, and all sur face skin affections.
 [. Those who will write to the Elmer. gency Laboratories. No. 32 West Twenty-fifth Street. New York. can secure by mail free of charge, Sup ply to cure a small eczema surface or clear complexion overnight and re- move pimples in twenty-four hours.
 CD
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24
Head Notes of the Decisions
 Of the ALabana Supreme Court

MOBILE LIGHT AND RAILROAD co. Damages for Injury to Person and
 Property-tDecided Dec. IT. 190s.--
 IS South. 119o.
 1. Negligence; contributory neglf- gence.-Contributor negligence Is good as a defense to a count is simple negligence.
 [ 2. Street railroads; injuries; plead ing; complaint.--A count which sets : out all the conditions surrounding the collision and ayers that the injuries and damages were caused as 6 prox- innate consequence of the failure of defendants servant to keep proper lookout while operating car on the highway, is count in simple negh- gence and not for wilful or wanton injury. and hence. such count is sub Ject to the defense of contributory negligence.
 s. Same; collision; wanton conduct.- Where a car cannot be stopped in time to avoid Q collision, after the dtscov- cry Of the peril. those operating the car cannot be said to be guilty of wan ton misconduct, or of subsequent neg Ngence. s
 I 4. Same.-Unless the motorman dis { covers the attempt to cross the track : fin time to stop the car before the col lision and negligently fails to do so. there is no antecedent negligence.
 5. Same: dnty of motorman to keep lookout-Wbere the track Is In or on a public highway, it is the duty oi the motorman to keep a lookout Tor persons on the track.
 G. Evidence: res gestae; deciarauon of agent.-The declarations or admis- sions of agents as to an act then be- ing done, are admissible as a part of the res gestae; but this rule has no application to admissions as to past transactions, and declaration by the motorman; subsequent to the collision was Improperly admitted.
 Appeal from Mobile Law and Equity Court.
 Heard before Hon. Saffold Berney. Reversed and ,remanded. Opinion py
 Tyson, c. J.. Simpson and Denson. JJ concur.
 HANDLE vs. BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY LIGHT & POWER co. Damages for Injury to Person or
 .Track.-(Decided Dec. IT, 1s0S.-
 4S South. 114)
 1. Street railways; operation; duty of motorman.-A motorman may as' sume that pedestrian on the track will turn out of the way of a car, but he cannot rest on. such assumption foi 50 long time as to reach point where it will be improbable for hin to control the car or to give warning in time to prevent injury
 g. Same; injury to pedestrians; con . tributory negligence.-After discover. ing that a pedestrian was unaware oi his danger, if the motorman failed tc use reasonable care to avoid inturins him, the act of the pedestrian in plac' . ing himself in a position of danger was the remote rather than the proxi- mate cause of the ensuing injury, B. Same: negligence; jury question Where the facts are unjisputed and the inferences to be drawn therefrom n clear and certain. it is a question oi law, as to whether or not motormar realized that a pedestrian on the track was unaware of his danger, and as to whether the motorman exercised the proper care to avoid injuring him but if the facts are disputed. or If faii minded persons may arrive at different conclusions from the facts stated these questions become one for the Jury.
 4. same.-Under the evidence in thi,
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24

Ifide holder for vafue as to be protected |aEainst the infirmities in the paper, 'unless some othsr consideration passes; |such transaction merely creates the relation of debtor and creditor between \ the bank and depositor. and so long as that relation continues and the de-
 posit is not withdrawn. the bank is subject to the equities of the prior parties. though the paper Is taken be- fore maturity and without notice. Appeal from Madison Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. D. w. Speake. Reversed and remanded, Opinion by Haralson, J.
 Dowdeil. Denson and McClelland, JJ., | concur. '.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24

No Election Yet. Springfield. Ill. Mar. 2s-The forty eighth joint ballot for United States Senator today was without result.
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24

case 1t was a question for; the deter imitation of the jury whether the mo- torman was guilty of negligence In falling to exercise reasonable care to avoid injuring a pedestrian on the track after the discovery that he was unaware of his peril, and also as to whether the sounding of the gong was sufficient to attract the attention of the pedestrian.
 5. Evidence; expert and. opinion.-A witness who qualities as an expert as to the operation of cars may give the opinion as to the distance in which a car could be stopped running at the speed of the car in question; and where no objection was raised on the ground that the question asked related to the distance in which the particular mo- torman could stop that particular car, the testimony of such . witness taken on the former trial. 1t being shown that the witness was dead. was a1mis- sible as aganist the objection that the question should have been as to the distance in which a properly equip ped car could be stopped by motor man of experience.
 Appeal from Birmingham City Court
 Heard before Hon. c. c. Nesmlth.
 Reversed and remanded. Opinion by Denson. J.
 Tyson. c. J., Dowdell and Simpson, JJ., concur.
 HOME ICE FACTORY vs. HowELLS
 MINING COMPANY. ssumpsit.-(DecideJ Dec. IT, 1908.
 4S South. 117)
 1. Sales. contract; performance; lia- bility for price-Where one buys and uses coal of designated quality he cannot, resist payment of the purchase nriCa fa rha tLn& | Is valueless.
 ?. Same; performance by seller: quality of goods.-The evidence'in in this case stated and examined and held not sufficient to show that the quality of the coal delivered was not in accord . ance with the contract
 3. The same; contract; performance price.--Unless the coal was vaIueless the fact that the coal was not of a designated quality could not defeat the sellers right to recover, where the buyer kept the coal and used it with out rescission of the contract, aI- though it might abate the price.
 1. Evidence; relevancy; condition of property.-Where~ the quality of the coal was an issue, it was competent to show the quality of exactly the same kind of coal, though not a part of the coal involved.
 .. oahe' aoHiisslohs' corporate of- ficers.-Admission by the president and general manager of a corporation made subsequent to the negotiation for the sale are binding on the corporation.
 Appeal from Mobile Circuit Court.
 Heard before Hon. Samuel B.. Browne.
 Reversed and remanded. Opinion by Anderson, J.
 Tyson. c. J. Simpson and Denson, JJ., concur.
 ALABAMA GROCERY co. V. FIRST
 NATIONAL BANK OF ENSLEY. Assumpsit,-Decided June 30, 1908--
 4S South. 340.)--(Rehearing De- nied Jan. 14, 1909).
 1. Pleading; replication: departure Where the plaintiff declared on bill of
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24
CITY OF MOBILE V. FACTORS AND
 TRADERS INSURANCE co.

CITY OF MOBILE V. FACTORS AND
 TRADERS INSURANCE co. Action to Recover Taxes.-(Decided
 November 19, 1908. 4S South. 342.
 Reh rearing denied January 4. 1909.)
 l. Municipal corporations; taxes; ac- tions to recover; complaint.-A com plaint which alleges. that the plaintiff claims of the defendant a sum certain being the taxes due and unpaid upon the assessment and levy of said taxes duly made by the proper authority of the city; said tax levy being made on a named date on named property in the city owned by the defendant and duly assessed In a named sum- Is sufficient and good against demurrer.
 2. Same: organization; statutes By the terms of the act. the municipal code act General Acts 1907, page 790) did not become effective until 5Septem- Der. 1908. except in such municipalities as availed themselves of Section 199 of said act; and the city of Mobile not having availed Itself of the provisions of that section said act was not oper- alive therein and taxes were properly assessed and levied under the charter of the city enacted in 1901.
 Appeal from Mobile City Court.
 Heard before Hon. O. J Semmes.
 Reversed and femanded Opinion per curiam. TUTwILER COAL. COKE AND IRON
 co. V. TUVIN.
 Malicious Prosecution and False Im-
 prisonment .-(Decided December
 IT. 1908. 4S South. 79.)
 1. Trespass; trespass to realty: en- try.-Where one stationed guards at entrance to premises with discretion as to the admission of persons, and n-1 1u7tf tfc flA Argr- inal entry on the premises of such per- son is rightful.
 2. Same; rental-If. under the con- tract of rental, the right to have per- sons visit the house on business or pleasure Is acquired, one who crosses the lands of the landlord of necessity to get to the rented premises. either on invitation or on business. is not guilty of trespass in exercising such right; and where the Tight is acquired under contract 1t cannot be taken away by mere notice to such person so long as the rental contract remains in force.
 3. Easements; ways; ways of ne- cessity. Where one acquires land so surrounded by other lands that ingress and egress to and from it cannot be had save over other lands. and there is no stipualtion or circumstance In the conveyance showing a contrary tn- tent. the law gives the right of way of necessity, which is appurtenant to the conveyance of the land the owner of the land having the right to designate the way. and failing. the purchaser has the right. and if neither designates the way. then the one used by conralon consent will be considered the way.
 | Same; lease A lease for d long or short period carries with 1t the in- cfdents of a conveyance. and the les see occupying the lands entirely sur rounded by the lands of his landlord
The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-03-24
ALABAMA GROCERY co. V. FIRS
 NATIONAL BANK OF ENSLEY.

NATIONAL BANK OF ENSLEY. Assumpsit.-Decided June 30. 190S--
 4S South. 340.)--(Rehearing De- nied Jan. 14, 1909).
 1. Pleading; replication: departure Where the plaintiff declared on bill of exchange as the payee thereof. repli- cations to defendants plea setting up that plaintiff purchased the bill after its acceptance. are demurrable as for 0 departure.
 ?. Bills and notes; bona i'd eholder; banks.-Where a bank discounts paper for depositor and gives him credit for the proceeds. it is not such a bona