Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1910-05-09
Important Decisions

Important DECISIONS
1.-The following notes Of cases are
from the West Publishing Company.
st. Paul, Mimi
INTERSTATE COMMERCE..
The ever-recurrent question as to
the power Of a state to lesislate in re-
gard to interstate shipments of in
toxicating liquors comes up dn a de-
cision of the Oklahoma supreme court
in State against Eighteen Casks of
Beer, 104 Pacific Reporter, 1893. One
B. w. Tucker, in attempting to satiate
the thirst of his Oklahoma. neighbors,
and incidentally provide for
himself, ordered a "a load OF 100
casks Of beer to be shipped to him at
Oklahoma City from q point without
the state. After in some way disposing
OF 1902 casks h state took the re-
manning Is into custody Tor the pw-
pose of FORGETTING them in accordance
with the state statute providing for
their seizure when kept for the pur-
pose of sale, barter, etc., contrary to
law. The casks had not been removed
from the car in which. they were ship
ped, and Tucker claimed that they
were still within the protection Of the
Interstate commerce clause OF the
United States constitution, ana not
subject to operation OF the state Law
The Jul gives an extensive review of
various decisions OF the United States
supreme court, n comes to the con
clusion that is not necessary that
goods shipped shall be removed to the
store or home of h consignee in order
to come within the jurisdiction of the
state, and, in view of h fact that
claimant specifically admitted hat the
liquor was held. for purpose of dispo-
sition in violation Of law, that it was
subject to seizure.
NO CRIME TO WRITE LETTERS.
The United States circuit court of
lappeals for the Eighth circuit was re-
Gently called upon to determine wheth-
er the law relating to use of mails to
defraud could be violated by writ
ing letters to himself. The statute
provides punishment for use of the
mails for any scheme to defraud "to be
effected by either opening or intending
to open correspondence or communf-
cation with any person." etc. The I'LL
innate question to be determined was
whether the word person" should be
construed to include the n mailing
the letter, or whether it necessarily
implied some third person to whom
the communication should be adj
dressed. The court took the latter
view and held that an indictment
which in effect alleged that the writer
Of the letter directed it to himself was
insufficient to charge any offense. The
decision is reported under the title
$50 -
Erbaugh against United States. lIo
Federal Reporter, 433.
CRUEL, UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT.
In the case of state VS.. Ross, l04 Pa
cifc Reporter, 596, it appeared that de-
PENDANT was convicted of larceny of
/; some S28S, 900 from funds Of the state,
and a fine in double that amount as
! sessed in addition to a five-year term
in the -penitentiary. Defendant was to
stand committed till the fine should be
paid: thus making a total imprison-
ment of more than 790 years in case he
hal to work it all out at the 81 per day
| allowed, Interest seems to hay not
| been imposed. but it is worthy Of note
that. il it had been, accused would not
only nave been condemned, to languish
lin the county Jail thru all eternity. but
would have needed the daily allowance
of a dozen fellow prisoners to keep
from plunging further toward hope
less insolvency for all. time to come.
Fortunately, however, the Oregon SUI
preme court held the punishment cruel
land unusual" Notwithstanding 1T was
within the maximum provided by
statute
RELErsE BY UsURY..
The. Geargia court Of appeals, in
Hancock VS.. Bank of Triton, IS South
eastern Reporter. 7S4, holds that usury
in a note makes invalid a waiver or
homestead therein, and thus increases
the risk of a surety, 20 as. to operats
as e discharge Of his liability when ne
| signs without notice of the intirmity.
The decision follows that Of the
Georgia supreme court in the carrier
case.of Prather VS.. Smith, % South
eastern Reporter, S57.
CAvEAT EMPTOR.
Wart, a butcher, bought what he ees-
tilted TO be a good-looking COW, without
apparent disease. The vendor knew
that It was intended to be slaughtered
and retailed as meat, practiced no
fraud. and made no express warranty
that it was In a healthful condition.
When killed, her meat was found 10 be
diseased with tuberculosis to such an
extent as to render 1t unit TOT 1000.
Action was brought to recover the pur-
chase price. The county court OF New
York in Wart VS.. Hoose, 119 New YORK
Supplement. 1907, held that he rule
that implied warranty Of quality at
tacnes to provisions sold for domestic
use has no application. Where neither
Of the parties knows that the animal is
diseased, and no warranty accompanies
the sale, the only rule applicable is that
of caveat emptor. The buyerttakes all
of the risk If he have h opportunity
Of inspection. and, IL he would be pro-
tected against latent defects, he should
require a warranty.
CERTIFICAT1ON OF CASES.
An instance OF difference In interpre-
tation OF q plain statute by successive
tribunals appears in Baltimore & Ohio
Railroad Company VS.. interstate COM
merce commission, 80 Supreme Court
Reporter, So. Act Feb. II, 1908 (32 Stat.
at Large, 1913, c. 544; u. s.. Comp. st.
Supp. 1907, p 951). permits the certi-
ication to the supreme u OF the
United States Of a case arising under
the acts involving m~onopoiies and in
terstate in the event the
Judges sitting therein, shall be divided
in. opinion. The circuit court for the
district of Maryland. IN a suit against
the Interstate commerce commission,