Year: 1875

VIM Sou"eos nasssssc0 euVB PctMSAtO0
to sell to her husband, and the deSsad-
ant disregarded her request and per-
sisted in selling TO him, he i hs6ls
for such selling, provided il psodnosd,
or contributed to produce, intexi&-
tion to the plaintiff injury.


9TH. It appears from the oriGinal
petition, ~ well = from The evidences
in the case, that others were sslliax
intoxicating liquors to The husband q
the plaintiff during the time CO.,
planned of,and it appears that shs has
settled and compromised her claim
for damages against some q thsm.-
These settlements by the plaintiff do
not, in case of this character, oper-
ate as q discharge of those not settled
with. Where the drunkenness con-
planned Of consists not of mere sin-
gle fit of intoxication contributed -
by two or more, the action ID not
joint but several, and each 10 oaly
liable for the injury. produced by his
own acts. 1t is proper, however, 70
consider whether the defendant, IL
liable vt all, is liable for all the injur-
les complained Of. II others sold him
liquor which contributed 10 produce
drunkenness which led TO idleness
and squandering of his property to
the injury Of the plaintiff, each party
contributing to the injury is liable for
the injury which he alone did.


.th. II the plaintiff, after forbidding
sales to her husband, directed the de-
fcndant TO let her husband have
glass Of beer occasionally, this would
not authorize sales to be made to him
in such quantities as to produce in
toxica,ion, or sales made to him when
in state Of intoxication.


Sih. On the question Of fact - to
whether the defendant did sell intox-
icating liquors to the husband Of
plaintiff, which produced intoxication
or contributed thereto, to the plain
tiff's injury, you will take oil the tes-
timonv in the case, and If you find
the defendant is not liable, you win
inquire no further in the case but re-
turn verdict for the defendant.


9th. If you find from the evidence,
and in the light Of the foregoing in
structions, that the defendant is liable,
the next inquiry is as to the measure
Of damages. You should take the
condition of the husband, physically
and mentally, and his financial coa-
dition, two years prior to the CEN
mencement Of the suit, or, II he
bought no liquor Of the defendant at
any time but beer, ale or native wine,
then you should consider the injury
as commencing on the 1st day Of
Sept, 1873, and find what and how
much was the injury to the plaintiff
BY reason of the defendants acts.-
The plaintiff claims that she has been
injured in her property and in her
means Of support. II you 6nd that
the defendant is culpable and 1t the
time his liability commenced, the wife
had property which, between herself
and her husband was regarded -
hers, whether the actual legal title
was in her or not and you further 6nd
that the husband squandercd the
property by reason of drunkenness.
produced by the acts of defendant, or
contributed to thereby, then il is
proper for you to allow the plaintiff
damages by reason of the loss Of such
property in such amount - you think
right, taking into account that others
we're also selling liquor to the hss-
band. The wife is entitled to and it
is her legal right to expect support
from the personal labor aud earnings
Of her husband. II you find that the
defendant is liable, it il proper you
should allow her such sum a. you
think right by reason Of being depriv-
ed Of support on account Of druak-
cnness and, if you consider this, ysu
should also consider that the defend-
ant is not liable for the acts of others.
In estimating the damages it is not
proper that you should take into &C
count any mental anguish or loss oi
society and affection the plaintiff may
have suffered by reason Of the habits
Of her husband. This is an action for
loss of the means Of support and in
jury to the property of the wife, and
the actual damage are to be measur-
ed by money and not by the mental
suffering of the plaintiff.


10th. The law provides that exem-
plary damages may be allowed in CO
ses of this character. Exemplary
damages are in the nature of pun
ishment for wrongful act and are
intended as an example and warning
to others to desist from like violations
of Law. 1t is some amount added to
to the actual damages and is allow.
able where the wrongful act Of the
defendant was done maliciously or
wantonly. In this case you will take
all the testimony and determine, il
the defendant be liable, whether there
should be exemplary damages. If
the defendant sold nothing but the
mild drinks above named, and STOP
ped the sale as soon as requested by
plaintiff and refused to sell after that,
it is not proper case for exemplary
damages. On the other hand If the
husband was notorious and confirm
ed drunkard and the defendant knew
that fact and wantonly sold him in.
toxicating liquors both when drunk
and sober, it is proper case for ex-
emplary damages, and if the defend
ant persisted in the sales after being
warned by the plaintiff to desiss, then
it is proper case for exemplary dam
ages


JAS. H. RoTHRocK, Judge. n


It is understood that the case will
60 to the supreme court.