The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-06-11

gin an action to annul tax deed
Where the tax deed holder is not in
IN the opinion:
The owner of land may use it as he
sees ut He may take it into his ac-
luaI possession or, If it suit his pur-
pose better to leave it uncccupied and
vacant he can do so without danger
OF thereby losing his title, unless some
person obtains possession with color
or title and retains it adversely for a
length OF time sufficient to bar the
owners rights. Nor is the owner I'M
der any obligation to record his title
papers. The recording acts protect
the rights of innocent purchasers. To
the holder of a tax title, whether valid
or invalid, the owner owes no duty to
record his title papers, nor to assert
his claims, nor to acknowledge owner
ship by taking the land into his ac-
tual possession
of mandamus against ]. NJ. Nation,
state auditor, one brought by Jennie
M Schmidt of Cove county and c. J.
Roll and Oscar Roll of Mcpherson coun-.
". In the Schmidt suit the court held
that where a purchaser of school land
sells mis- rights to the land and inn
proveElcnts to anotiee r person and gives
possession that person becomes the
cwner of the improvements. And when
he has completed the purchase by MAX
ing full payment of the purchase price
he Is entitled to a patent. A tract of
S2G acres was involved in this suit.
In the Roll case the court held that the
Roll brothers could rely upon the regu-
larity of forfeiture proceedings and af-
ter having purchased the land even
though the forfeiture was invalid could
take an assignment from the former
purchaser and perfect their rights to
the land under such first certificate.
State Auditor j. NJ Nation has an
nounced that he will ask for a rehear-
ing in the Schmidt case. He states
further that if he loses on the rehear-
ing or fails to get a rehearing it will
mean the loss of thousands of dollars
to the state annually.
The Garden City, Gulf & Northern
railway company won the suit against
the county commissioners of Scott
county brought in the supreme court
to compel the commissioners to issue
the bonds voted in support of the
road. The court allowed the peremp-
tory writ of mandamus which was
prayed for. The court held in this
case that the railroad company had
substantially complied with the terms
and conditions in it's contracts with
Scott county and was entitled to have
its subscription made and bonds is
sued. The contention of the county
was that the company had failed to
comply with the conditions of the
contract under which the bonds were
voted and also that the election in one
of the townships of the county was ir-
regular. The bonds which the railroad
sought to have issued were voted at
a special election in Scott county, De-
cember %, 1909.
The supreme court reversed the
Shawnee county court today in the
case of George Hampe against Aaron
Sage. George Hampe sued Aaron Sage
fr,- n NV n
to carry out a contract for the ex-
change of lands and recovered judg-
ment In reversing this verdict of
the lower court the supreme court
holds that Hampe had not submitted
evidence sufficient to justify the al
legation of fraud.
The supreme court in affirming the
case of S. F. Walters against the Mis-
souri, Pacific Railway company appeal
ed from Marshall county, held that 1t
was the duty of the railway company
to not only safely transport passengers
but to set them down safely at their
destinations. In this case Walters al
legged that on July %, 1903, he was
passenger on train OF the Missouri
Pacific due to arrive at Bigelow at 4
O'Clock in the morning; that the con-
| ductor directed him to get down on
the lower step of the car and alight
from the train. In obedience to this
order he undertook to do so but the
train starting suddenly just then he
was thrown down and badly injured.
The snuI.reme court holds that where
a railroad bridge has been built too
narrow and the track laid Loo close to
the upright part of the bridge for an
engineer to lean out of his cab Win
COW in safety that the road must pay
G:tmageS fer the death of that engineer.
The widow OF Thomas Cloud brought
suit in the Lyon county court to recov
er damages from the Santa Fe Railway
company for the death of her husband.
Cloud was killed while leaning out of
q moving locomotive to obtain signal
from the rear of his train. His head
ccllided with a girder of a narrow
bridge, the injury costing him his life.
The supreme court today held that a
person is not prohibited from using his
own name upon marks of brands placed
upon articles of his own manufacture
ly used by another who had established
the reputation of these articles by the use
was a case of the Aetna Mill and Eleva-
tor company brought against the Kramer
Milling company the OF Harper o county s a r
versed. Kramer had owned and operated
the Aetna mills and made several high
grades of flour which were extensively
advertised. Later Kramer sold the Aetna
mills and started a mill of his own. He
Sought pS to o. prevent the Aetna Milling com
| mark he had established first to aid the
| sale of his flour. The supreme court held
that he could not do so.
The supreme court held that Butler
| county was liable for damages on ac-
count of the injury of Daniel Mosier. due
! to the defective railing on a county
bridge Mosier sued the county for dam
| ages in the lower court and was denied
relief The supreme court reversed this
decision holding that the county com
| missioners knew of the defective condi-
| ton of the bridge and that fact alone
was sufficient to justify Mosiers suit for
drixirae buggy