The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1913-03-08

In an injunction suit brought by
the city of Topeka against the county
commissioners, the supreme court af-
firms the action of the lower court in
issuing a writ. When the South side
dikes were built, the city spent sew
eral thousand dollars removing the
dirt under the arches of Melan bridge
TO guard against flood trouble. AT
the same time the county board en-
ployed men to remove dirt near the
dikes. This dirt was dumped under
the bridge where the city was remoV-
ing it The supreme court decided
that the county had a right to remove
the dirt near the bikes, but that they
should be enjoined from putting it I'M
der the bridge.
when a young man under p years
of age meets the girl of his heart
marries her and later finds that life
with his new companion is unhappy,
courts and plead the faet that he was
a minor in a suit for divorce. Such
is the terms of a decision handed
down today by the supreme court in
Beatrice l.. Browning on appeal from
the Woodson county district court
Browning was but 10 years old
when he met the woman who a few
weeks later became his wife. This
woman was 80 years old and had been
married twice before she met Brown
ing So anxious was Browning to
marry the woman that they We're we'd
ded without the formal consent of the
bridegroom's parents. Then things
happened.
Day and night, Browning charged,
his wife made life a misery for him.
She nagged him and bossed him until
all of his stock of good nature and
patience had been exhausted. Then
Browning rushed to the divorce courts
for relief 1t was charged in Brown
induced the boy to marry her, follow
ing very brief acquaintance. that she
soon became tired of her third hus-
band and caused him more grief than
he could carry on his young should
erS.
When the case was tried in the
Woodson county district court, that
tribunal found legal technicalities in
Brownings pleadings. But Browning
was unwilling to go back to his wife
and appealed to the supreme court.
The supreme court in reviewing the
case makes clear that Browning can
not secure a divorce on his pleading
of his age at the time of the wedding,
but sends the case back for rehearing
with the instruction that if there is
sufficient cause of action shown in the
evidence that Browning may have his
decree and become free man again.
Supreme Court Decisions.
The following decisions were hand
ed down To-Day Dy the kansas supreme
court:
JOHNSTON, c. J.
Hester McClain, appellee, VS.. C. R.
/ & P. Ry- Co., appellant; appeal
from Sedgwick county. Affirmed
Eta H. Osnicup. appellant, VS.. Jen-
ME Henthorn ct al, appellees; appeal
from Trego county. Reversed for the
reason of error in sustaining the de-
murrer to the evidence.
u p. R. r. Co., appellant, VS.. Board
of County Commissioners of Leaven-
worth County ct al, appellees; appeal
from Leavenworth county. Affirmed.
City of Winfield, appellee, VS.. Roscoe
Bell, appellant: appeal from Cowley
- county. Affirmed.
BURCH, J.
Joe Root, appellee, VS.. Cudahy
Packing Co., appellant: appeal from
Wyandotte county, court of common
pleas Motion to modify judgment
and petition for rehearing denied.
Aetna Mill and Elevator Co, appel
lee. vs. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co. appel
liant; appeal from Sumner county. Re-
versed and remanded for a new trial
Mayer Coal Co., appellant, VS.. Joe
Stallsmith, appellee; appeal from
Cherokee county Affirmed.
J. B. vosburg, appellee. VS.. A. T. &