The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1912-01-06
KEG PARTY LEGAL
CONTINUED from Page one,

In its decision. written by Justic'
Porter, the supreme court held tina
| there was no sale and that the meet
| ing at the residence of one of the part.
was not unlawful Justice Porter said
The ultimate purpose of the prohibi
tory law is to make intoxicating liquor
so difficult to obtain that the use o.
| them within the state will be minimizeC
| The proper use of such liquor, however
/ is still as lawful within the state as
| before the prOhibitory law was enact
ed One of the results of the law is
that a person who desires to make law
ful use of such liquor here must re-
| sort to the inconvenience of procuring
them from outside the state"
Arnold Wins Suit.
The supreme court, passing upon
the case of s. S. Urmy against n. B.
Arnold, police judge of Topeka, de-
cided today in favor of Arnold. Urmy
had tried to GUST Arnold from Office
under the old soldiers preference act.
J. NJ. Dumenil was also an interpleader
in this case, which is to say, that he
also wanted the Office under the terms
of the old soldiers preference act.
The court could not pretend to choose
between two old soldiers, neither could
the court award a commission to a
citizen who had been refused one by
the proper appointing power. In 9TH
err words, the present police judge,
Arnold, would have to first be ousted
in a suit brought by the state and not
by a private individual, who might
not have any superior claim to two or
three other old soldiers after the same
Office.
There were six Wyandotte county
cases decided by the supreme court
today. The appeal of the city of Kan
sas City against the r. J. and W. NJ.
Boyd Construction company was af-
firmed by the supreme court and the
Boyds will have to return money paid
to them by the city in an overpay-
ment on a municipal contract. The
city paid the Boyds in bonds for some
city work, and the amount paid was
more than the contract actually called
for.
The Metropolitan Street Railway
will have to pay Lizzie Ait
vein 1851 for injuries she received
when a car was suddenly started as
she was alighting, and she was thrown
to the pavement. She sued for ", UOO-
The lower court gave her $461 and the
street railway appealed. Justice Por-
ter dissented.
Maggie Burnett and Annabel viii
son were given judgment against the
for similar accidents
from street cars that were started be- /
fore they had entirely alighted-
The city of Kansas City lost its APP |
peal from the decision of the Wyan- |
lOtte county district court in the case
brought by H w. Cox, public admin
death of Israel Saron. The public ad-
recovered judgment OF
$4,000 against the city. This judg-
nent is sustained by the supreme
court.
The supreme court reversed the de-
cision of the Shawnee court in the
Santa Paula Comm ercial Co., against
the Parkhurst-Davis Mercantile Co. OF
Topeka over the shipment of lot OF
walnuts. The Parkhurst-Da-
Wis Co. had refused to accept the SNIP
ment of $50 sacks of walnuts from
the Santa Paula concern. on the
ground that it weighed $4,000 instead
Of $4,000 pounds as contracted In the
lower court it was held that the re-
lection of the shipment was proper
Rut the supreme court remanded the
case back for retrial, holding that the
word about in the contract mao
some latitude. The Santa Paula 60.
! greed to furnish $50 sacks of nuts at
bo1,t 100 pounds each. Because the
sacks weighed 105 pounds, that was
not sufficient cause, under the con-
tract. to abrogate it.
!. w. Elkins, the man who discovered /
he murderer of the Van Royen FAMILY |
n Wvandotte county, is to have new |
rial in his suit to collect the reward
,fferad nv the county commissioners for |
he apprehension ard conviction OF the
murderer. The district court of Wyan-
lotte county decided against Elklns
md the supreme court IOudy IefeISSu
he lower court and ordered a new
rial.
Alonzo Van Royen, Margaret Van
2oyen, and Rosa Mcmahon were muir
Tered October 10, 1909, by James Nc
dahon. For several days after the
rhine no clew to the identity of the
murderer was obtained. Elkins was
riend of James Mcmahon and suspect
ng him of the crime talked to Nc
Iahon and finally obtained the re-
oliver and jewelry which Mcmahon had
Iidden in some corn shocks. Ell<ins
ook these to the police and the arrest
f Mcmahon and his confession fol-
owed.
The county commissioners had offered
reward of $500 and Elkins claimed it
s the discoverer of the murderer.
Ienry T. thinner. chief of police. who
rdered the arrest, also claimed the re-
ard and the commissioners refused to
ay to either claimant until the courts
ecidad which one was entitled to the
loney. The lower court held against
Ilkins, because of a technical mistake
the published offer of a reward, |
hich did not offer the rooney for the
discovery of the murderer. but did
fer reward for the ARREST and con-
iction.'' Justice Clark A. Smith wrote
lie opinion and he held that the dis
1very of Mcmahon was paramount
nd necessary to the arrest. +
--------%--