Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1912-04-18
Decisions
(The following notes Of cases are
from the West Publishing Company.
RIGHTS OF NAIL CARRIERS

RIGHTS OF NAIL CARRIERS.
The city of Little Rock. Ark, granted
a franchise to its street railway COM
pany on certain conditions, one Of
which gave all policemen, firemen, and
United States mail carriers the privi-
lege of riding free of charge. The
privileges were for time enjoyed
when the city deemed it proper to can
Gel the mail carriers from the free list
and passed an ordinance to that effect
Certain mail carriers then sought to
restrain its enforcement on the ground
that their rights under the franchise
We're vested and could not be taken
away: but the Arkansas supreme court
held that the ordinance was made for
the ultimate benefit of the public, and
not for any particular classes of indi-
viduals. If certain persons were Incl
dentally benefited by it's provisions. that
could not give them rights which they
could demand exclusively. Little Rock
Ry. & Electric Co. VS.. Dowell, 142
Southw estern Reporter. 165.
SUNDAY AND THE OK"
If it is proper to relieve the sufferings
of the biblical OK by pulling him out
Of the ditch on the initial day of the
week. why should it not be wholly in
keeping with the rule to relieve a hui
man being mired behind prison walls
on that day? Now the question in
volved in the present case is not ex-
actly the act of getting the poor fell
low out OF Jail on bail, but whether the
note given his lawyer on Sunday for
the services rendered, including the
procuring Of his release on that day, is
valid as coming under the exceptions
of the Georgia statute Pen Code 1910,
Sec. 416). providing that ANY person
who shall pursue his business. or the
work of his ordinary calling. on the
Lords Gay. works Of necessity or
charity only excepted, shall be guilty
of misdemeanor." The court of ap-
peals of Georgia held in Few vs. Gun
ter, - Southeastern Reporter z2O, that
the note was therefore valid The hon
orable court leaves us in doubt tho as
to who was the object Of the charity.
the prisoner or the lawyer
BUILDING RESTRICTIONS.
Building restrictions are recognized
ing with the conveyance Of property,
provided they are reasonable. A re-
requiring certain property to !
qite a common form, and an enforce
able Obligation against private parties.
But can such restriction hold good !
against city that buys the property
for purposes such as the erection of q |
fire engine house? In Allen vs.. City
of Detroit, 1873 Northwestern Reporter, /,
317. the supreme court of Michigan
says that building restrictions are pri-
wa ia hfndNnpr rftioS and |
alike, that they are an I'M
terest in real estate in the nature of !
an easement, which goes with the land, |
can not be taken by city for the pub
lie use without the exercise Of the !
power of eminent domain.
A RAILROAD WAITING ROOM?
The question arose in Louisville, II. !
& st. L.. Co. " Commonwealth. 1879
Southwestern Reporter, 776. as to
a railroad company, In using |
a; room In a hotel as a waiting room |
in @ small town, about 500 or 700 popu- |
lation, complied with Kentucky |
Statutes, requiring that suitable wait
ing rooms should be kept. Section 772, |
KY. st. (Russefs st. section 1920, pro-
vides that railroad companies shall |
provide convenient and suitable watt
ing rooms and their appurtenances,
while section 7s4, KY. st. (section $685. |
Russel's ST.. which the Court of APP |
peals of Kentucky held must be read |
with section 772, provides that railroad |
shall keep their ticket offices
open for the sale of tickets at least 80 |
Immediately preceding the |
schedule time Of departure Of all pas :