Omaha daily bee., 1910-01-02

other than defendant. the trial court did
not abuse its discretion in permitting plain
tiff'S counsel on croSs-eXamination to ask
the witness whether she believed that man
to be the father of the bastard child.
=. The chastity Of the prosecuting at the
time of the trial is not an issue in bastardy
proceedings and testimony concerning her
reputation in that particular is irrelevant,
but if she Is permitted to introduce test
without prejudice to defendant.
8. In such proceedings the jury should
not be instructed that they should consider
whether or not, at or about the time the
prosecutriX became pregant, she associated
with men other than defendant under such
circumstar ces as to make 1t possible for
them.
4 judgment for the p%rosecutrix in
bastardy proceedings will not be reversed
because the court Informed the jury that
her uncorroborated testimony may be suffi-
ci,nt to sustain a verdict of guilty, where
they are further instructed concerning the
burden of proof, the duty Of the jury to
compare her testimony at the preliminary
examination with that given before them,
and the law of the case Is given in other
instructions as favorable to defendant as
the facts In the case warrant.
1856, Sowerwine against Central Irriga-
REVERSED fseW DeSrr and dismissed AiPPHfss n0 FaS Scett ]. BUT
l. AN order of the county board estab-
fishing and defining the boundaries of an
irrigation district in pursuance of the pro-
visions Of section 2, article 3, chapter 93a,
Compiled Statutes ANNOTATED Statutes,
6S23), is conclusive. at least In a collateral
proceeding, on the question whether the
lands included therein will be benefited by
irrigation by the system therein contenl-
plated; alter, on the al estion whether any
of such lands cannot, from some natural
causes, be irrigated thereby" Andrews
against Lillian Irrigation District, 66 Neb..
i61.
2. After an irrigation district has been
duly organized, the statutory procedure
prescribed in said chapter for detaching
lands, other than those which cannot from
| qnmp natural RalGa he irrigated is nXnlu-
sive.' Ibid.
3. In a case appealed to this court upon
the special findings of the trial court, this
court cannot add to or take from the lam
guage of, the trial court or enlarge the
scope of it's findings.
4. Where the owner OF land proceeds in
equity to have the same detached from an
irrigation district, i'm order to defeat the
jurisdiction of the county board, it must
be clearly shown, and In like manner found
by the court, that the and embraced within
the district Is in fact such, that from some
natural cause it is non-irrigable, or is eK-
pressly exempte by statute from the OPP
%ization of irrigation districts and the tax
ing of lands within the boundary of such
district for irrigation purposes.
1867. Mccartney against Hay. Appeal
from Lancaster. Judgment of district court
reversed. Barnes, j.; Rose, j., not sitting.
In habeas corpus to secure a release from
the asylum, brought by one who has been
found to be a dipsomaniac, his unsupported
AA-N ASN pC~A '
a hearing is insufficient to overthrow the
~recitals of the warrant of commitment.
1855. Darr & Spencer against Kansas City
Hay Company. Affirmed. Appeal from
Dawson. Letton, j.
The findings of fact i'm a law action, tried
to a court without the Intervention OF a
jury, are entitled to the same weight as
the verdict OF a jury in a like case.
1880. McCook Water Works Company
against CITY of McCook. Appeal from Red
Willow. Plaintiffs action dismissed with
out prejudice and as thus modified judg-
ment of district court affirmed. Rose, j.
Where a city, in the exercise of power
delegated to IL by the legislature. enact,
an ordinance fixing the rates which a pub
lie service corporation may exact for watel
furnished to consumers, a court Of equity
should not Interfere with the enforcement
or the ordnance before there has been
tair trial showing the practical results o
us actual operation, unless the rates ar
2. Rates which a public service corpora
ton may exact for furnishing water TO
city and its Inhabitants are presumed Il
be lawful and reasonable when fixed by al
ordinance passed In the exercise of legisla
tive power.
5. A public service corporation engage,
In the business OF furnishing water TO
city and its inhabitants must make a ful
disclosure OF tho value OF the property de
I Voted 10 that purpose and OF its earning
and expenses, when IL assails as ~oonfisca
tory rates fixed by ordinance.
1857. McCollum against Central Granarie
: Company. Appeal from Harlan. Affirmed
Where conflicting testimony has bee
fairly submitted to a jury in an action a
l law, a new trial will not be granted
4 there is evidence sufficient TO sustain tn
verdict, although this court might hav
found otherwise from a consideration OF a
OF the evidence.
1854. Gardiner against City OF Omaha
; Appeal from Douglas. Affirmed. Rose, j
D l. Section go. chapter xii-a. Compile
e Statutes Of 1909, the curative act authOriz
q ing cities OF the metropolitan class to rs