Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1912-07-05
Important Decisions

Important Decisions
tine following notes q caDee ~
from the West Publishing Company.
INFRINGEMENT OF TRADEMARK
In suit for damages for infringe
ment Of trade mark, 1t appeared that
defendants clerk made . practice OF
Idsfraudtng customers by substituting
and selling cheap cigars In boxes with
plaintiffs trade mark thereon, az well
as In place OF the cigars Of other max
ers, causing the various cigar makers
to complain to the United States in
ternal revenue officers. with the result
that the clerk was fined. The president
OF the defendant company advanced the
money to pay his fine, and thereafter
retained him as clerk. The supreme
court OF Missouri in Lampert VS.. Judge
& Dolph Drug Co., 141 Southwestern
Reporter, 1895, holds that the infringe
ment Of plaintiffs trade mark justified
an award Of punitive damages, and the
jury's verdict for one cent compensa-
tory damages and $500 punitive dam
ages was affirmed.
TYRANNY OF NECESSITY.
The question in the case of Rob-
ertson VS.. state, 142 Southwestern Re-
porter 5S3, Is whether the testimony of
witness in judicial proceeding can
be produced on second trial when
the witness dies, becomes insane, or is
beyond the jurisdiction of the state.
The dissenting opinion by Judge DAY.
ideon OF the court OF criminal appeals
OF Texas is of special interest. 1t reads
in part as follows: THE bill Of rights
are individual guarantees of the cit
izen. and are put into our constitution
! to prevent courts and all other depart
ments OF government from doing under
the plea OF necessity-that specious
plea OF tyranny and despotism--that
| which the constitution and their oaths
of office say they shall not do. Madam
Roland, while upon the scaffold, in the
| anguish OF her soul, said: oh, Lib
erty! What crimes are committed in
| thy name. And we. like she, san say:
oh, Necessity! What crimes are COM
mitted in thy name 1t is the most
monstrous dangerous doctrine that
ever found lodgment in the head of a
judge holding a constitutional office
under the constitution and laws of a
free people. 1t is the recourse of des-
potism and tyranny, and is never used
except in an effort to violate some law
where no other reason can be given.
1t is but pretext for the exercise Of
legislative power resortesf to by q ju-
dicial officer. and is but a shadowy eff
fort to blend those powers, by one Of
the coordinate departments Of gov
c.c:aect. which the constitution says
snail not be united. 1t vas necessity
that prompted Pontius PLATE to APP
pease the cry Of the bowling Jewish
mob to murder the innocent Christ and
send him to his death upon the cross,
and 1t was necessity that made the
same plate play the craven before the
Roman senate when called to account
for his cowardly conduct. It was ne
cessity that caused Jeffreys, puppet Of
an infamous king, to disgrace the laws
Of his country and blacken English
jurisprudence by the horrible butcher
les perpetrated at the behest of q royal
master. 1t may be we'll to remember
that the only monument erected to his
memory is the iEfamy Of his judicial
career. 1t was necessity that murdered
the great Raleigh by the reproduction
Of the testimony Of living witnesses.
The court of England. whose judges,
with one or two exceptions. have rare
ly bowed to despotism and loaned
themselves as tools to accomplish q po-
liticaI end, would not tolerate such
testimony. And necessity therefore.
without sanction Of law. organized It's
commission and destroyed Sir Walter
Raleigh. It was necessity that broke
the neck of Sir John Fenwick He could
not be convicted before the courts Of
England because testimony could not
be reproduced, and parliament, to
please the crown by bill of attainder.
which enabled 1t to violate every rule
OF evidence, convicted him." etc. New
ertheless the court Of criminal appeals
of Texas holds that such testimony
may be reproduced on a new trial, ana
affirms a conviction Of murder
INJURY TO ELECTED PASSENGER.
It seems to be a settled rule that a
passenger or a trespasser on a train
can not be expelled therefrom when
such expulsion would be the direct
cause Of subjecting the unfortunate
one to danger or peril; that is, he can
not be put of on a high trestle, In
swamp, a pond Of water. etc. The rule
| OF law on the subject Is clear and reas-
enable, but the application OF 1t IN some
cases requires care. In the case OF
Gulf, c. & S. F. Ry. Co. VS.. Green, III
Southwestern Reporter, 341. recently
decided by the court of civil appeals OF
Texas, a boy some 10 or IA years old
was travelling alone and fell asleep. SO
that when his station was called he did
not hear 1t and SO was carried beyond
After having gone about mile and
half down the track. and over high
trestle, the conductor awoke him.
simply telling him that they had ar
rived at his station and it was time
to get off, and then added, after the
the boy had alighted from the train
that he would find the station about
mile or 80 back up the track. The boy
was a stranger in the place. and had
no idea Of where the depot was. ex.
! cept from the conductors directions
The night was very dark, no lights t.
be seen anywhere. On starting bach
he encountered the trestle just crossed
and, in order to pass over with safety
ATTEMPTED to ''coon" It (whatever thai
lis); but before reaching the other sid'
o rapidly running train from the souti
dashed upon the trestle. soaring thu
poor fellow out Of his wits tho he wal
physically unhurt. having managed t.
get of before the train reached him
Az result OF the extreme fright hi