The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-03-12
of the family of Mr.. ohrbaugh's de-
ceased wife's sister on the other hand.


Women can not vote for the officers
of city courts in the first class cities of
Kansas under ruling of the Kansas
supreme court today in the suits or
James Fee, jr:. against w. D. Rich
William Brown from Kansas City, Kan.
Richardson and Brown were elected
marShalS of the city court in Kansas
City, Kan, by majority of the male
vote cast in the election a year ago.
Fee and Corcoran did not receive a
majority OF the male vote but they
did receive a large number of the
votes of the women of the city. Count
ing the male and female vote together,
Fee and Corcoran had a majority
Counting the male vote alone. Rich
ardson and Brown had majority. Fee
and Corcoran wanted the job. so they
asked the supreme court to oust the
other two. The court held that the
women were not qualified voters for
officers of the city court and that their
votes could not be counted. giving
Richardson and Brown the offices.
A saloon keeper who is rnobbed has
not very many rights in Kansas and
when he gets hurt and his saloon fix
lures damaged, he can only recover
nominal damages. This is the deci-
sion of the Kansas supreme court in
the suit of Geo. d. Stevens against the
city of Anthony, appealed from Har-
per county. Some Anthony women
raided a saloon said to have been
owned by Stevens. The women ftfiurt''
Stevens by hitting him with eggs of
more or less ancient origin. Then they
smashed his saloon fixtures. Stevens
contended that the city was liable for
damages which might arise on account
of mob violence. In the district court
he was given 500 damages, but he
wanted $1,000, the value of his saloon
fixtures. The court held that 500 was
sufficient damages for any person who
fw1fs rAI 4
damaged in a raid on joint and af-
firmed the decision of the lower court
giving him $100.
In passing upon the Stanton county
mortgage case the supreme court today
made no decision on the question as to
whether the old mortgages given out
there in the boom days were still valid
instruments. Western lawyers had ex-
pected a decision on that point in this
case, and Judge Thompson of that dis
trict, who decided in his court that
such mortgages were null and void,
came to Topeka for the express purpose
of hearing what the court had to say
on the matter. His decision in the case
was affirmed but on an entirely differ
ent grounds. 1t seems that the property
involved had gone to tax sale and tax
deeds and the supreme court simply
held that q tax deed was valid as
against a mortgage. This leaves
much mooted question of the validity
of old western Kansas mortgages still
unsettled. The test case involved the
ownership of a farm in Stanton coun-
ty. A speculator bought up a mort
gage on this farm for about five cents
on the dollar and when the land be-
gan to advance in value in western
Kansas, he sought to recover the land
under the mortgage. Judge Thompson
held that the mortgage was outlawed.
A railroad engineer is not bound to
know every defect in the ties and rails of
the tracks over which he runs his engine
and is entitled to damages because of de-
feet in the track, which had caused his
injury. This is the decision of the Kan
sas supreme court in the suit of d. P.
Smith against the Rock Island Railway
company. The court says that an en-
gineer is bound to keep a lookout ahead
to see that the track is clear and if the
track appears all right he is to suppose
that the company has kept the track in
good shape and free from defects. Smith
was injured when his engine was de-
rallied on a curve near Horton. 1t was
shown that the rails and ties were old and
defective. The company contended that
Smith assumed risk of injury in rum
ming his train over this track, but the |
court held that the company was liable If |
its tracks were not in good repair and for |
any damages which might arise as a re-