The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1914-03-10

nor because tho title contains no reference
to the previous amended and repeating
act.
An the Justices concurring.
Attest: d. A. VALENTINE,
[SeaL1 Clerk Supreme Court
No. 1917.
The State. OF Kansas, Appellee,
vs..
Chas. Morton. Appellant.
Appeal from Leavenworth County.
REVERSED.
Syllabus. BY the Court West. J.
In order to sustain q conviction for
maintaining nuisance In violation Of an
Injunction the evidence must fairly tend
to show the defendants guilt.
All of the Justices concurring.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE.
(Seau Clerk Supreme Court
No. 1879.
Albert A. Trocon and Henry A. Freygang.
partners doing business under the style
OF Midland Bridge Company. Appellees.
The Scott City Northern Railroad Com
pany, Dewey Dunn and F. 8. Yantis,
Receivers OF The Scott City Northern
Railroad Company. Commonwealth Trust
Company, Appellants.
sas' Construction & Irrigation Company.
Appellees.
Appeal from Scott County.
Syllabus. By the Court West. J.
I. Courts Of equity in determining the
priority of Hens are governed largely by
Considerations Of essential fairness and
justice.
2. The promoters of Z projected railroad
who also organized q construction COM
pany to build the road ARRANGED with
projected line to secure certain bonds to
be issued by the road, when organized.
to tho construction company which was
to build the road out ofsthe money to be
advanced from time to WINE rs the work
should progress. The relations Of the pro-
moters and the three companies mention
ed were such that all were in some de-
gree interested and substantially under
stood the contemplated enterprise. Pur-
suant to the arrangements indicated the
railroad company contracted with the con.
the road and the trust company furnished
or procured the money ito be furnished,
and before the work was completed took Ok
three months after the contract was made
for the building OF the road the railroad
company contracted with the bridge COM
pany to furnish the bridges for the entire
line the two promoters signing as guaran-
tors, and such bridges were furnished and
partially paid for. To recover the balance
an action was brought against the rail-
road company. the construction company.
the two promoters and the trust company
, in which action the receivers OF the rail-
parties. The court below rendered judy
ment against the RAILROAD company and
adjudged such balance q preferential
F! and paramount to the claims of the other
F, defendants: Held. that such lien was
properly adjudged.
| contested the matters at issue can not
now be heard to deny the Jurisdiction OF
| the court below to adjudge the preference.
although such receivers were appointed
| by another court.
All the justices concurring.
Attest: D. A. VALENTINE.
lSeALl Clerk Supreme Court.
No. Is. e9S.1
The J. I. Case Threshing Machine Com
| pany. Appellant.
w. s. Roach. Appellee.
Appeal from Butler County.
| AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. BY the Court. West, J.
The rule that a decision reached by the
trial court after considering conflicting
| evidence must stand. is followed.
All the Justices concurrtng.
j Attest: D. A. VALENTINE.
I6eal1 Clerk Supreme Court
No. 1851
L. A. Golden, Appellant,
F. 8. Munsinger as County Treasurer, and
Appeal from Smith County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. BY the Court. West. J
i. =. bond for deed calling for a CON
iveyance after certain payments are made
for o~sSession by the prospective grantee
and the payment by him of taxes and In
surance. on which bond certain payments
have been made, is subject to taxation tt
the maker. notwithstanding It was not
signed by the party to whom 1t runs. and
he can quit paying and surrender posses.
sion at any time without being obligated
In any sum to the maker.
2. A contract for the sale of land upor
the completion of specified payments and
interest agreed to be made, together will
the payment Of taxes and insurance to tho
purchaser who Is to have possession. t.
ments being optional with such purchaser
IL subject to taxation in the hands of Tx
maker.
All the Justices concurring.
/ Attest: d. A. VALENTINE,
ISeaL] Clerk Supreme Court
4 No. 1855.
]. D. Malone, Appellee,
David II. Jones, Appeiisnts. -
Appeal from Smith County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus. BY the Court. Benson, J
/. An answer contained an admission
that the plaintiff was employed by 9TH
, that he was employed by only one o
: them, and there was no evidence to tn
contrary. The defendants asked leave t
amend their answer to conform to tn
! allowed. but In the situation disclosed b,
J, the Evidence. the. ruling was no
A son living with Ms. father an
mother on his fathers farm yas carryin!
With his uafunfa ID boAf6 Nh har3g tn