The Oskaloosa herald. (Oskaloosa, Mahaska County, Iowa) 1885-1919, 1911-10-05
RECENT COURT DECISIONS.

\
main issue in a recent notable case
entitled Robertson VS.. Dwyer. The
appellants filed petition to have
him adjudged bankrupt, and he
pleaded his exemption from the bank
ruptcy act because he was farmer
The facts respecting his occupation
are, namely: He was born and raised
on farm. He had acquired consider.
able farm land, having one farm of
160 acres in Illinois on which he
dwelt. Here he raised corn and oats
on 46 acres and grass for feeding
purposes on the balance. His stock
consumed a great deal more of grain
than he was able to raise for them,
SO he was required to buy about S,400
bushels year. A very high proper
ton of cattle were purpchased and
raised on the farm. When his stock
became fattened he would sell them
to growers or ship them to Chicago
The question is: Was he engaged in
the business of dealing in stock or in
farming? If the former, he was with.
in the bankruptcy act; if the latter,
he was exempt. The circuit court of
appeals holds that instead of being
dealer appellee was something like
manufacturer who takes raw ma
terials CfeedersD and converts them
into finished product Cfat beef cat.
tleO" and concludes that conducting
stock farm" as we'll as conducting
a grain farm" is farming, so appellee
was exempt.
- =. -
A dentist brought action to recov.
er $40 for false teeth which he alleges
were made to order for the defendant.
One of the defenses alleged is that
the defendant is married woman
living with her husband and that she
has no separate estate. The only
question then in dispute is whether
the dependents husband is liable for
the sets of artificial teeth as articles
of such necessity that he as husband
is obligated to pay for. The supreme
court of Wisconsin in passing upon
this question in the case of Clark VS..
Tenneson, 100 Northwestern Reporter
SS5, says: ut is matter of common
knowledge that artificial teeth are
most useful and necessary articles
for the promotion of personal COM
fort and health, and that their use in
this country has attained practical
The court holds that
the facts are insufficient to indicate
that the wife purchased the teeth on
her separate account, so as to render
her liable therefor instead of her hus-
band, and found further that they con.
stituted necessaries which her hus.
band was bound to furnish her.
- - -
Most divorce cases are brought on
the ground of cruel and inhuman
and in the last report of
the Iowa supreme court it was decid.
ed that the wife was entitled to a
divorce, although the husband had not
used physical violence upon her. She
was widow with four children when
she married defendant and the court
saws they were good children, but the
husband frequently kicked and swore
at her children and otherwise mis-.
treated them in the presence of their
mother. He struck his own brother
when he came to shield plaintiff. The
husband compelled his wife to change
her church and he quarreled with
his neighbors. The husband frequent
ly left home for days. The wife did
not resent his abuse, but had resort
to woman's chief reliance in such
The court sustained
the divorce and said that such a man
made a most unfit companion for a
with any sort of feeling.