The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1913-07-05
Prosecutors Contract Declared
Against Public Policy.
Woman Was Erjolned-Verdies OF
Lone Star State Judge Who Trav'
eied on a Railroad Pass Satie-
fed His Conscience.

Chicago-ln a case before the SD
pPame court of Michigan involving
Che division Of the profits Of law
partnership, 1t appeared that the plain
ttT was IN attorney with an estab,
aished practice while the defendant
was young lawyer with no expert
snce. Under an agreement by the
partners, wien the plaintiff was pros
eeutlng attorney he promised not to
run for Office again, but to assist the
defendant to be elected. After de-
PENDANT was elected IL was agreed
that the salary of the defendant as
prosecuting attorney should be d.
vided between the lawyers. The court
holds that such partnership contract
fH against public policy, because 1t
ls In effect an assignment Of the earn
ed emoluments of public office. and
is void and unenforcible.
In support Of a recent application in
the supreme court in Brooklyn by
wife for an Injunction against another
woman to restrain her from alienat-
ing the affections of the plaintiffs hus-
band q decision Of the Texas court
or appeals was cited. This case arose
out OF a writ Of habeas corpus sued
CUT by man sent to Jail for con-
Sempt OF court for violating an injunc-
zion prohibiting him from associattng
With the plaintiffs wife. The court
apheid the injunction and laid: THE
auit was brought for damages on an al
seged partial alienation of the afFac-
lions OF the plaintiffs wife. and 1t
was averred that on account of the
past conduct Of the defendant N that
suit plaintiff was apprehensiye and
had just grounds to fear that by the
continuance thereof the wifes affec-
eSons would be entirely alienated.
There would consequently be breach
ana destruction of the matrimonial
contract existing between the parties
oy which plaintiff would entirely lose
ehe affections and services OF his
SAID Wife. These. 1t must be conceded
were OF peculiar value to the plain
tAn; and it would seem that he would
nave right to invoke the restraining
power OF a court OF equity to prevent
the utter humiliation of his vife's
directions and the utter destruction OF
Ehe marital agreement" The court
aeid that the Injunction did not yio-
sate unlawfully the defendants right
as citizen or unlawfully interfere
with his freedom Of speech.
q Judgment rendered by a Texas
justice of the peace, as reported by
LAW Notes. Is in part as follows. "yn
he FIRST place / am going to rule right
Is see 1t regardless of the fact that
he plaintiff Johnson is q friend of
nine. and the railroad company has
n the past issued me pass and that
nope to again ride on their road
rec. There are two things evident
rom the evidence. There is a lie out
somewhere, and number OF turkeys
we're killed on the G. ii. & 8. A. Rail |
Dad company's right OF way. The |
quail seen by the witnesses Ayers |
md Scott must have been large ones,
II the chicken hens seen by the wit
eSs Johnson must have been small |
mes. But, be that as 1t may. the mum.
er Of turkeys killed were about SO.
nd they were not fully grown. Again,
9th parties were negligent-that Is a
act. The company for allowing grass
, grow on Its right Of way, and the
laiatiff for allowing his turkeys to
In upon the railway property, el-
aough there Is no Law against tur-
sys running loose. Now, il both
10 company and Mr.. johnson were at
nit do not see how either could
,ject to paying for his mistake.
therefore,, the railroad will pay Mr..
'hnson for killing his turkeys the
m of SIS, and Mr. Johnson will pay
@ costs of the suit. In rendering
Is Judgment have no apologies to
AXE and my conscience Is clear, as
believe | have done right II have
ade a mistake / have done so I'M
nsciously, but after weighing all the
iaerca feel that am for once
ht. TO you? J. Littleton Tally. J.
Pro. No. !, Goliad county. Texas"