The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-02-15

y.
Where widow without regard to the /
provisions of the will of her deceased
descents and distributions such eIectionI
goes not render the will imperative. AS |
between other persons the will will be en-
forced as near in accordance with the
intention of the testator as it can be.
All the Justices concurring.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE.
lSeaLI Clerk Supreme Court.
The State ex rel Joseph Taggart. County |
Attorney, ct al.
F. NJ. Holcomb, as County Clerk ETC.,
and the Cudahy Packing Company. In
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN MANDA-
PTLT1AsIiNTIFF On PRoPosfT1oN SUE
Syllabus. BY the Court Johnston, C. ]. |
l. Mandamus is an appropriate remedy |
to compel county clerk to enter upon
the tax rolls taxable property, omitted |
from the assessors returns, where such |
on 3alce nro admits the existence and value of
because Of a contention that the property
as to his power in the premises.
Taxable property, not listed for tax
be added to the tax rolls by the county |
clerk after the settlement with the county |
treasurer in October of the year the as,
after the tax rolls have been turned over |
to the county treasurer.
8. The finished product of manufac- |
turer is subject to taxation and it is his
duty to list such property and where it
turned by the assessor it is the duty of
the county clerk or the board of county
commissioners con lss to take steps to correct
clerk to enter such omitted property on
the tax rolls.
All the Justices concurring.
Attest: D. A VALENTINE,
lSeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court.
No. 16,8 25.
Charles E. Gibson, Appellant,
Cynatha Garst, ct al, Appellee.
Appeal from Gomanche County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. By the Court. Graves,
A tax deed purchaser had been in the
peaceable, actual and open possession of
The tax deed under which he claimed
ownership had been on record during ali
this time. The holder of the patent title
to recover the land. The tax ueed was
interposed as q, defense. The deed wss
Contains Contains D Several separate tracts of
land and does not recite the amount
8 9ac TT w The eaGh a
sale sen @ 4 T91 @ Of s
amount are recited, but the time when
paid is omitted. 1t is claimed that be-
be computed upon such subsequent taxes.
Under such circumstances IL will be pre-
sumed that the subsequent taxes were
paid when by law they became due and
payable, and interest will be computed
thereon from that date. If a computation
sumption added. differs from the aggre-
gate consideration stated in the deed,
the ony s tie will
be deemed trivial and insufficient to avoid
Ali tbo T,1effooS
Attest: d. A. VALENTINE,
ISeal1 Clerk Supreme Court
No. 15,474.
| The Broadway Manufacturing Company,
Appellant,
The Leavenworth Terminal Railway &
Appeal f from neavenWorth pGp COUNTY.
REVERSED.
/. Where there is no difficulty in pro-
curing jurors whose impartiality Is I'M
| questioned, it is material error to retain
! upon the trial panel resident taxpayers
| of a city against whom judgment is
sought, and the fact that other corpora
same state of facts. are Joined as defend
ants. does not change the rule
bridge over a stream is required to leave
| openings for the passage OF al! the water
reasonably to be expected to flow therein
gives the proper measure Of his duty To
can attach for the results of an unusual
rain or an extraordinary freshet, without
| further explanation, tends to mislead the
| jury.
| over a water course to avoid ObStructing
| it does not end with making provision for
| the escape of so much water as can be
| reason to anticipate that the stream will
| at times overflow it's banks he must Also
| if practicable, provide an outlet for the
| flood water.
/ l. The provision of the new code Claws
| 1909, CHI. Isl, sec. SD that reversals shall
not be ordered for errors which do not
| affirmatively appear to have prejudicial-
| ly affected the. substantial rights OF the
party complaining. when IT appears tna I
not authorize the affirmance of judg-
| ment upon the ground that it is in &C
i the reviewing court itself might derive
i from the conflicting evidence, where it is
Il apparent influence of a materially erron-
i eous instruction, or by a jury made up in
part of persons disqualified on account OF
i All the Justices concurring.
/ Attest test e0p' D. A VALENTINE.
+ TSean Clerk Supreme Court.
i No 1874
Joseph Feunell and Enos Fennel1, Appel
lants,
| VS..
| John Fennell, ct al. Appellees.
| Appeal from Jackson County.
| on REHEARING. MODIFIED.
| SYLLABUS. BY the Court IraVeS, D.
Where widow elects to take under. the
law instead of under the will of her hus-
band, the provisions of the will, where
| other persons, unaffected by the action OF
| the widow.
| All the Justices concurring.
A true copy.
| Attest: D.. A. VALENTINE,
| TSeal,1 Clerk Supreme Court.
! No. IL, 1872.
: The State of Kansas, ex rel,
:
The International Harvester Company OF
> America.
3 Original Proceeding, in Quo Warranto.
| SYLLABUS. BY the Court Graves, j.
4 i. Where foreign corporation is trans
) acting business under a license granted by
this state and violates the ANTITRUST laws