Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

Page
Smith v. Central of Georgia R. Co. (Ala.).. 792 State v. Call (Fla.)..
Smith, City of Ensley v. (Ala.).

343 State, Calvert v. (Ala.). Smith, Floyd v. (Fla.).

537 State, Carraway v. (Fla.). Smith v. Jefferson (Ála.).

.1038 State, Carter v. (Miss.). Smith, Kerl v. (Miss.).

3 State, Chandler v. (Ala.). Smithov. Krause & Managan Lumber Co. State, Chandler v. (Ala.). (La.)

693 State v. Compagno (La.). Smith v. New Decatur (Ala.)

994 State, Connell v. (Ala.). Smith v. Opelika (Ala.).

821 State, Davis v. (Ala.). Smith v. Police Jury of Claiborne Parish State, Dobbs v. (Miss.). (La.)

701 State, Edwards v. (Miss.). Smith, Randall v. (Miss.)

917 State, Everett v. (Miss.). Smith v. State (Ala.)..

602 State, Fantroy v. (Ala.). Smith v. State (Ala.).

610 State, Ford v. (Miss.). Smith v. State (Ala.).

632 State v. Fort (Ala.). Smith v. State (Miss.).

813 State, Frierson v. (Miss.). Smyer, Rittenberry v. (Ala.)

233 State, Geiders v. (Ala.). Snellgrove v. Evans (Àla.).

560 State, Gillespie v. (Miss.). Snowden v. Cunningham (Fla.).

543 State, Gillespie v. (Miss.) Snyder's Cafe v. Queen City Market Co. State, Gillman v. (Ala.). (Ala.)

.1038 State y. Glover (La.). Sorrell, Cruise Splawn Lumber Co. v. (Ala.) 727 State, Granberry v. (Miss.). Sorrell, Timberlake v. (La.).

586 State, Green v. (Ala.). Sorsby v. State (Miss.).

276 State, Griffin v.`(Miss.) Soule Steam Feed Works, Vinegar Bend State, Hall v. (Miss.). Lumber Co. v. (Ala.).

...1038 State v. Haney (Miss.). Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Walker (Ala.). . 169 State, Hardy v. (Miss.). Southern Exp. Co., City of Birmingham v. State, Hatch v. (Miss.). (Ala.)

159 State, Heflin v. (Miss.). Southern Exp. Co. v. Ramey (Ala.). 314 State, Henry v. (Miss.). Southern Hardware & Supply Co. v. Stand State' v. Hood (La.). ard Equipment Co. (Ala.).

789 State, Holliman v. (Miss.) Southern Iron & Equipment Co. v. Holmes

State, House v. (Miss.). Lumber Co. (Ala.).

531 State v. Hughes (Miss.) Southern Mineral Land Co., Vandegrift v. State, Jackson v. (Ala.). (Ala.)

983 State v. Jeanisse (La.).. Southern R. Co., Ables v. (Ala.).

327 State v. Jefferson (La.). Southern R. Co., Adams v. (Ala.).

987 State v. Johnson (La.). Southern R. Co. v. Carter (Ala.).

147 State, Jordan v. (Ala.). Southern R. Co., Clanton v. (Ala.)..... 616 State, Kennedy v. (Miss.) Southern R. Co. v. Crawford (Ala.). 340 State v. Kirby (Miss.). Southern R. Co. v. Drake (Ala.).

996 State v. Kirkland Miss.). Southern R. Co. v. Hyde (Ala).

368 State, Kimbell v. (Ala.). Southern R. Co. v. Lewis (Ala.).

746 State v. Lanassa, three cases (La.) Southern R. Co. v. Lewis (Ala.).

863 State, Lewis v. (Ala.). Southern R. 06. v. Penney (Ala.)......

392 State v. Lewis (Miss.)... Southern R. Co., Pratt v. (Ala.)..

604 State, Little v. (Miss.). Southern R. Co. v. Stewart (Ala.).

324 State, Long v. (Ala.), Southern R. Co. v. T. A. Hatter & Son State, Long v. (Miss.) (Ala.)

723 State v. Louisville & N. R. Co. (Miss.). Southern R. Co., Terrell v. (Ala.).

254 State, McDonald v. (Ala.). Southern R. Co. v. Weatherlow (Ala.). .381 State, McDuffie v. (Àla.). Southern R. Co. v. W. T. Adams Mach. Co. State, McGowan v. (Miss.). (Ala.)

779 State v. McPherson (Ala.). South Florida Citrus Land Co. v. Walden State, Magee v. (Miss.). (Fla.)

554 State y. Megs (Ala.) Sparks v. J. S. Reeves & Co. (Ala.). 574 State, Menefee v. (Fla.). Speakman v. Vest (Ala.).

980 State, Miller v. (Ala.). Spears v. State (Fla.).

815 State v. Miller (La.). Spellman v. McKeen (Miss.),

914 State, Mills v. (Fla.). Spellman v. McKeen (Miss.).

.1039 State v. Mitchell (Miss.). Stallworth v. Roberts (Ala.).

759 State, Moore v. (Ala.). , Standard Equipment Co., Southern Hard State, Morgan v. (Miss.). ware & Supply Co. v. (Ála.).

789 State v. Nix (Ala.) State, Ex parte (Ala.).

309 State v. Noel (La.). State v. Abraham (Ala.)

788 State, Nutt v. (Miss.) State, Adkinson v. (Fla.).

818 State, Nutt v. (Miss.). State v. Alley (Miss.).

467 State v. Parker (La.), State v. Anderson (La.).

846 State, Palmer v. (Ala.). State v. Avant (Miss.).

813 State, Parker v. (Ala.). State, Barnett v. (Ala.).

299 State, Perryman v. (Miss.). State v. Baroni (La.),

688 State, Peters v. (Ala.). State, Barrentine v.' (Miss.).

275 State, Pope v. (Ala.). State, Bell v. (Miss.).,

276 State, Powell v. (Miss.). State, Bexley v. (Fla.).

278 State, Powell v. (Miss.). State V. Birmingham Waterworks Co. State v. Prater (La.). (Ala.)

354 State v. Pruitt (Miss.). State v. Board of Adm'rs of Tulane Educa State, Quin v. (Miss.). tion Fund (La.).

483 State v. Quintini (Miss.) State v. Board of Levee Com’rs of Yazoo State v. Ragan (La.). Mississippi Delta (Miss.).

211 State, Rhyne v. (Miss.). State, Brown v. (Miss.).

273 State, Richards v. (Miss.). State, Brown v. (Miss.).

277 State v. Richardson (La.). State, Bryant v. (Miss.).

276 State v. Riney (La.).

Page 537 311 142 276 318 610

0 1 . 1037

239 915 SIS 277 931 813 317 483 232 811 92€ 722 677 813 734 466 276 913 460 276 404 814 599 547 274 464 1038 290 203 289 620 898 811 813

16 688 308 813 276 636 404 918

629 .1038

813 603 483 758 555 1038

189 278

4 357 277 754 215 277 401 590 358 260 813 952 521 465 813 647 547 277 276

89 401 812 673

89

Page

Page State v. Rose (La.)......

496 Texas & P. R. Co., In re (La.)...... 582 State, Sadler v. (Ala.). 564 Texas & P. R. Co., In re (La.)..

846 State, Scott v. (Miss.),

898 | Texas & P. R. Co., Belle Alliance Co. v. State, Scruggs v. (Ala.). 302 (La.)

846 State, Seals v. (Ala.). 337 Texas & P. R. Co., Jones v. (La.).

582 State, Short v. (Miss.).

547 Texas & P. R. Co. v. W. K. Henderson State, Sides r. (Miss.)... 465 Iron Works & Supply Co. (La.)..

221 State, Smith v. (Ala.). 602 Theisman's Estate, Kreher v. (La.).

656 State, Smith v. (Ala.).

610 Theriot v. Daigle (La.).. State, Smith v. (Ala.). 632 Thiel v. Butker (La.).

500 State, Smith v. (Miss.).. 813 Thomas v. Henderson (La.).

202 State, Sorsby v. (Miss.).

276 Thomas, North Alabama Traction Co. v. State, Spears v. (Fla.). 815 (Ala.)

418 State, Stockdale v. (Ala.). 563 Thomas v. State (Fla.)

410 State, Streety v. (Ala.).. 415 Thomas v. State (Fla.).

.1039 State v. Sullivan (La.)...

588 Thompson v. Central Iron & Coal Co. (Ala.) 603 State, Tedder v. (Miss.). 277 | Thompson, Goldring v. (Fla.).

46 State, Thomas v. (Fla.). .1039 Thompson v. 'Logan (Ala.)..

985 State, Thomas v. (Fla.)... 410 Thompson v. Winona (Miss.).

129 State, Upch urch v. (Miss.)

810 Tidwell v. Western Union Tel. Co. (Ala.).. 934 State v. Vollm (Miss.)... 275 Timberlake v. Sorrell (La.)..

586 State, Walker v. (Ala.).

357 Tombigbee Valley R. Co., Fairford LumState, Watson v. (Miss.). 277 ber Co. v. (Ala.).

770 State, Webber v. (Miss.). 404 Tomlin, Phelan v. (Ala.)...

382 State, weils y. (Miss.)..

209) Tootle, Jackson Naval Stores Co. v. (Miss.) 801 State v. Wilson (Miss.). .

715 Town of Clayton, Ventress v. (Ala.). 763 State, Wilson v. (Miss.).

813 Town of Ft. Myers, Wetzel v. (Fla.). 540 State ex rel. Bouvier v. Walet (La.). 28 Town of New Decatur, Smith v. (Ala.). 984 State ex rel. Bush v. Trahan (La.). 216 Trahan v. Broussard Cotton Oil Co. (La.) 893 State ex rel. Courthouse Commission v. Trahan, State ex rel. Bush v. (La.)...... 216 Board of Liquidation of City Debt of Tripkovich v. Kranky (Miss.).

547 City of New Orleans (La.)...

283 Trustees of Internal \Imp. Fund v. Root State ex rel. Hubert v. New Orleans (La.) 517 (Fla.)

535 State ex rel. Louisiana State Bank v. Bank Tucker v. Atlanta & B. A. L. Ry. (Ala.).. 949 of Baton Rouge (La.).

95 Tucker v.. Vicksburg, $. & P. R. Co. (La.) 689 State ex rel. People's Fire Ins. Co. of New Turner, City of Laurel v. (Miss.).

403 Orleans v. Michel (La.). 66 Turnipseed, McDaniel v. (Ala.).

757 State Sav. Bank, R. J. & B. F. Camp Lum Tuten, Johns v. (Fla )...

1039 ber Co. v. (Fla.). . 543 Tyler, Jones v. (Fla.)....

283 Stein v. S. L. McGinnis & Co. (Miss.). 214 Tyler, Jones v. (Fla.)..

.1039 Stephenson v. Allison (Ala.).

622 Stewart v. Lumpkin (Bliss.).

801 Upchurch v. State (Miss.)... ..... 810 Stewart, Miller-Brent Lumber Co. V. (Ala.) 943 Stewart, Southern R. Co. v. (Ala.).

324 Stockdale v. State (Ala.).

563 Vandegrift v. Southern Mineral Land Co. Stomatiаthis Bros., Nicopolopolus v. (Fla.) 1039 vanmeter Lumber Co., Sims v. (Miss.).

983

459 Stone Bros., Bluthenthal v. (Fla.).

833 Stone & Stone v. Marshall County (Miss.) 214 Venable v. Venable (Ala.). Stouffer, Venus v. (Miss.).

482
Ventress v. Clayton (Ala.).

763 Ventress v. Reeves (La.)....

845 Stovall, Haley v. (Miss.). 404

482 Strater Bros. Grain Co., Cassels' Mills v.

Venus v. Stouffer (Miss.). (Ala.)

58 Vernon Lumber Co., Palmer v. (La.).

969 Stratton v. Fike (Ala.)..

980 Vest, Speakman v. (Ala.)...

874 Stratton, Marshall v. (Miss.).

132

Vicksburg, S. & P. Ř. Co., Tucker v. (La.) 689 Street, Louisville & N. R. Co. v. (Ala.).::: 306 Vicksburg Waterworks Co. v. Yazoo & M. Streety v. State (Ala.)

915 V. R. Co. (Miss.)..

415 Strickland Bros. Mach. Co. v. Fairbanks

Villere v. New Orleans Pure Milk Co. (La.) 699 Co. (Ala.)

1038

Vinegar Bend Lumber Co. v. Busby (Miss.) 547 Stringfellow, Cooley v.

(Ala.).

321
Vinegar Bend Lumber Co. v. Soule Steam

.1038

Feed Works (Ala.). Sullivan, State v. (La.)..

588 Sumrall, Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. (Miss.). .:: 545 Vinter, Birmingham Waterworks Co.

(Ala.)

356 Sun Ins. Co. of New Orleans v. DosterNorthington Drug Co. (Ala.).

275 414

Vollm, State v. (Miss.).. Swain, Nona Mills Co. v. (La.)...

128

Waggner v. Police Jury of Parish of JefT. A. Hatter & Son, Southern R. Co. v. ferson (La.).

1016 (Ala.)

723 Walden, South Florida Citrus Land Co. v. Tallant, Alabama Steel & Wire Co. v. (Fla.)

554 (Ala.)

835 Walet, State ex rel. Bouvier v. (La.)...... 296 Tatum, Northen v. (Ala.). 17 Walker, McDuffie v. (La.). .

100 Taylor, Hester v. (Ala.).

. 1038 Walker, Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. (Ala.) 169 Taylor, Iowa City State Bank v. (Miss.). 1 Walker v. State (Ala.).

357 T. C. Bingham & Co., Carroll v. (Ala.). .1037 Wallace, Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. v. (Ala.) 371 Tedder v. State (Miss.). 277 Wallace, Savage v. (Ala.)..

605 Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co. v. Bonner Walton v. Atkinson (Ala.).

826 (Ala.)

145 Warren v. Frank Gardner Hardware & Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co., Gordon v. Supply Co. (Miss.)

129 (Ala.) 316 Warren v. Ingram (Miss.).

888 Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co. v. Gunn Watkins v. Carter (Ala.)..

319 (Ala.) .1038 Watson Bros., In re (La.).

187 Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co. v. Kelley Watson Bros. v. Jones (La.)

187 (Ala.) 604 Watson v. State (Miss.)..

277 Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co. v. William Watts, Montgomery Light & Water Power son (Ala.) 144 Co. (Ala.).

726

v.

Page

Page Weatherly V. Nashville, O. & St. L. Ry. Williams V. Arkansas, L. & G. R. Co. (Ala.) 959 (La.)

.1027 Weathers, Birmingham Ry., Light & Power Williams, Brandon v. (Ala.).

873 Co. v. (Ala.)..

303 Williams, City of Meridian v. (Miss.). 897 Webber v. State (Miss.). 404 Williams v. Talladega (Ala.).

330 Weber's Heirs v. Martinez (La.).

679 Williamson, Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co. Weems, Ex parte (Miss.)... 2 V. (Ala.).

144 Weinhardt v. New Orleans (La.). 286 Williams, Penton v. (Ala.).

35 Weller & Sons v. Rensford (Ala.). 344 Williams' v. White (Àla.).

559 Wells v. State (Miss.)..

209 Willis, Louisville & N. R. Co. v. (Fla.). 134 Western Union Tel. Co. y. Burns (Ala.).. 373 Willoughby v. Pope (Miss.).

721 Western Union Tel. Co., City of Troy v. W. L. Weller & Sons v. Rensford (Ala.).. 344 (Ala.) 523 Wilson, Robertson v. (Fla.).

849 Western Union Tel. Co. v. Fuel (Ala.). 571 Wilson, State v. (Miss.).

715 Western Union Tel. Co., Hall v. (Fla.)... 819 Wilson v. State (Miss.):

81: Western Union Tel. Co. v. Johnson (Ála.) 230 Wilson v. Wilson (Miss.),

134 Western Union Tel. Co. v. Patty Dry Wilson & Co., Martin v. (Miss.).

214 Goods Co. (Miss.).

913 Winn, Louisville & N. R. Co. v. (Ala.). 976 Western Union Tel. Co. v. Rowell (Ala.).. 880 Winston v. Huddleston (Miss.).

812 Western Union Tel. Co. v. Saunders (Ala.) 176 Winter, Pollak v. (Ala.).

938 Western Union Tel. Co., Tidwell v. (Ala.) 934 Wise v. Yazoo City (Miss.).

453 Western Union Tel. Co. v. West (Ala.). 740 Witherington v. White (Ala.).

726 West Huntsville Cotton Mills Co. v. Alter

Withers v. Hart (Miss.).

714 (Ala.) 338 Withers, Robley v. (Miss.).

719

205 West, Western Union Tel. Co. v. (Ala.).... 740 Witzman, Roux v. (La.). Wetzel v. Ft. Myers (Fla.).

540 W. K. Henderson_Iron Works & Supply Whaley y. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co.

Co., Texas & P. R. Co. v. (La.)...

294 (Ala.)

419 Woodlawn Cemetery, McLester v. (Ala.)... 793 Wheeler v. Armstrong (Ala.).

268

Woodson v. Odd Fellows' Benefit Ass'n of

598 Wheeler v. Pannell (Miss.).

Grand United Order of Odd Fellows

812 White, Craney v. (Ala.).

(Miss.)

236 White

635
Wright v. Bush (Ala.)...
Henderson-Boyd Lumber Co.
V.

389 (Ala.)

Wright, Hudson v. (Ala.).
764
Wright v. Wright (Ala.)

429 White, Williams V. (Ala.).

559

W. T. Adams Mach. Co., Southern R. Co. White, Witherington v. (Ala.).

726
V. (Ala.)...

779 White Lumber Co., Cranford v. (Miss.)... 483 Whitmore v. Alabama Consol. Coal & Iron

Yancy, Benbrook v. (Miss.).

461 Co. (Ala.)...

397
Yazoo City, Wise v. (Miss.).

453 Wilkerson v. Cantelou (Ala.)

799 Yazoo & M. V. R. Co., Cage v. (Miss.)... 483 Wilkerson, Lodge v. (Ala.).

609 Yazoo & M. v. R. Co., Dandridge v. (Miss.) 927 Wilkins Co., Board of Com'rs of Iowa

Yazoo & M. V. R. Co. v. Greenwood Grocery Drainage Dist. No. 1 y. (La.)..

91
Co. (Miss.),

450 Wilkins Co., Board of Com’rs of Iowa Yazoo & M. V. R. Co., Vicksburg WaterDrainage Dist. No. 1 v. (La.)..

works Co. v. (Miss.).

915 Wilkinson v. Lee (Miss.).

718 Yount, Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. Williams V. Anniston Electric & Gas Co.

(Ala.)

737 (Ala.) 385 | Young' v. Brock (Ala.)..

315

94

[ocr errors]

THE

SOUTHERN REPORTER .

VOLUME

51,

of both parties, directing shipment of certain IOWA CITY STATE BANK V. TAYLOR et goods to defendant, and providing that the order al. (No. 14,119.)

was subject to approval of plaintiff, that no

verbal agreement would be recognized, and that (Supreme Court of Mississippi. Jan. 24, 1910.) all conditions of sale must appear on the order. BILLS AND NOTES (8 537*) SIGNATURE OF Held, that the order, when accepted by plaintiff, PARTIES-EVIDENCE-QUESTION FOR JURY.

was a contract of sale, the terms of which could There, in an action on notes alleged to not be varied by parol evidence of an agreement have been signed by defendants, the loss of the of plaintiff to sell the goods for defendant. originals was shown, and copies were intro [Ed. Note.-For other cases, see Evidence, duced, and a defendant denied the signing of the Cent. Dig. $ 2035; Dec. Dig. $ 441.*] notes, the giving of a peremptory instruction for defendants was erroneous.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Alcorn Coun. [Ed. Note.-For other cases, see Bills and ty; E. O. Sykes, Judge. Notes, Cent. Dig. § 1863; Dec. Dig. $ 337.*] Action by the Cheek-Neal Coffee Company

Appeal from Circuit Court, Simpson Coun against the Morrison-Hinton Grocery Com. ty; R. L. Bullard, Judge.

pany. From an adverse judgment, plaintiff Action by the Iowa City State Bank against appeals. Reversed and remanded. W. M. Taylor and others. From a judgment The appellant brought suit against the apfor defendants, plaintiff appeals. Reversed pellee to recover the purchase price of cerand remanded.

tain goods alleged to have been sold appelAppellant was the holder of certain notes lee upon a written order signed by the agent alleged to have been signed by the appellees. of both appellant and appellee. The orders The notes were destroyed by fire, and copies were addressed to the appellant and containwere introduced, and on the trial secondary ed the following clause: "Ship to Morrison. evidence was introduced to show the loss of Hinton Gr ery Company, at Corinth, Misthe originals. One of the defendants on the sissippi. When, ship at once.

This stand denied the signing of the notes. On order is subject to the approval of the firm. this disputed state of facts, there was a per- No verbal agreement will be recognized. All emptory instruction for defendant.

conditions of sale must appear on this or

der." After keeping the goods for some A. M. Edwards, for appellant. Hilton &

months, appellee returned most of them, Hilton, for appellees.

and appellant, who refused to accept them, MAYES, J. It is our view that the court brought suit for the purchase price. On the below erred in giving a peremptory instruc- trial the appellee sought to defeat a recovtion to find for defendants. Indeed, it is ery because of an alleged parol agreement very doubtful as to whether or not, on the had with an agent of appellant, who was a facts as they now appear, a peremptory in- traveling salesman, to sell the goods for apstruction should not have been given for pellee, which he failed to do. Appellee tenplaintiff. We leave this question to be de- dered a small part of this money, which he cided by the trial court on another trial.

admitted he owed for goods already used, Reversed and remanded.

which amount appellant refused to accept. The case was submitted to a jury, and there

was a verdict for the appellant for the amount (96 Miss. 835)

tendered by appellee, and this appeal is prosCHEEK-NEAL COFFEE CO. V. MORRI-ecuted. SON-HINTON GROCERY CO. (No. 14,082.)

Bennett & Sweat, for appellant. Candler (Supreme Court of Mississippi. Jan. 24, 1910.)

& Candler, for appellee. EVIDENCE ($ 441*)-PAROL EVIDENCE-VARYING CONTRACT.

SMITH, J. Leaving out of view the auDefendant gave plaintiff's agent an order, thority, or want of authority, of appellant's addressed to plaintiff, and signed by the agent salesman to make the parol agreement alFor other cases see samo topic and section NUMBER in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Reporter Indexes

leged to have been made by him, the terms When we examine the title of chapter 73 of the written orders given him by appellee of the above acts, and compare it with the for transmission to his principal cannot be requirements of the above section of the varied by parol testimony. These orders, Constitution, it is seen that it is in plain having been accepted by appellant, .clearly violation of the letter and purpose of the constitute contracts of sale. Under the evi- constitutional provision, in so far as section dence appellant was entitled to a verdict and 7 of the act is concerned. Thus, the act in judgment for the full amount sued for, ex- question is entitled "An act to amend seccept, possibly, for the item in appellant's set- tions 3778, 3789, 3791, 3793, 3810, 3826, 3837, off for goods alleged to have been delivered, | 3840, 3846, 3847, 3849, 3851, 3860, 3866, 3870, as to which we express no opinion.

3873, 3876, 3886, and 3875, and to repeal secReversed and remanded.

tions 3836 and 3869 of chapter 114, Code 1906." Let it be here noted that nowhere in

the title is it indicated that section 3832 of (96 Miss. 832)

the Code is to be amended in any way, and BOARD OF LEVEE COM’RS OF YAZOO- yet section 7 of the acts does amend secMISSISSIPPI DELTA V. ROYAL INS.

tion 3832, and makes of it a materially difCO. (No. 14,072.)

ferent section. In other words, the title to (Supreme Court of Mississippi. Jan. 24, 1910.) the act should indicate fully what subjects STATUTES (8 109*)_TITLES-SUBJECTS OF LEG- of the Code are to be dealt with in the body ISLATION.

Const. 1890, $ 71, requiring every bill to of the act, so that any legislator reading the have a title which shall indicate clearly its sub- title might, from that, have full knowledge ject-matter, requires the title of an act amend of the scope of the proposed amendments, to ing the Code to indicate fully what subjects of the end that nothing should be concealed in the Code are dealt with in the body of the act; the body of the act by a misleading title; and Acts 1908, p. 59, c. 73, § 7, entitled as an act to amend enumerated 'sections of chapter and this is the purpose sought to be accom114, Code 1906, but the title to which does not plished by section 71 of the Constitution. refer to a certain section which was materially

We are not to be understood as saying amended in the body of the act, contravenes the that, when a section or sections of the Code Constitution. [Ed. Note.-For other cases, see Statutes,

are to be amended, the title must contain Cent. Dig. § 138; Dec. Dig. $ 109.*]

each specific section to be amended; but, Mayes, J., dissenting.

where the title makes no other reference to

the subject of the act than by sections of Appeal from Circuit Court, Coahoma Coun- the Code to be amended or repealed, then ty; Sam C. Cook, Judge.

no other sections than those named in the Action by the Royal Insurance Company title can be dealt with in the body of the against the Board of Levee Commissioners act. The title to this act specifies the sections of Yazoo-Mississippi Delta. From a judg- proposed to be amended, and it was violament for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Re tive of the Constitution to deal with any but versed and remanded.

those named. F. A. Montgomery, for appellant. J. W.

We are bound to hold that section 7 of Cutrer, for appellee.

chapter 73 of the Acts of 1908 is in violation

of the Constitution, and therefore void. In SMITH, J. This case is before this court the case of Sample v. Town of Verona, 48 a second time. On the first appeal it was South. 2, this court has already said that sought to have this court declare unconsti- this provision of our Constitution is mantutional section 7, c. 73, p. 59, of the Acts datory. of 1908, because in violation of section 234

Reversed and remanded. of the Constitution of 1890. The court held to the view that the act of 1908, in section

MAYES, J., dissents. 7 of above chapter, did not violate the above section, and the case is reported in 48 South.

(96 Miss. 635) 183.

Ex parte WEEMS. (No. 14,359.) On this second appeal it is sought to have the section declared unconstitutional because

(Supreme Court of Mississippi. Jan. 24, 1910.) in violation of section 71 of the Constitution. HAWKERS AND PEDDLERS (8 7*)—DOING BUsi.

NESS WITHOUT LICENSE PROSECUTION This section declares that: “Every bill in SUFFICIENCY OF AFFIDAVIT. troduced into the Legislature shall have a In the prosecution of a peddler for doing title, and the title ought to indicate clearly business without a license, an affidavit charging the subject-matter or matters of the propos- the business of a peddler without first having

that he "unlawfully did carry on and conduct ed legislation. Each committee to which a procured the necessary license therefor," failing bill may be referred shall express, in writing, to bring accused within any subdivision of Code its judgment of the sufficiency of the title 1906, $ 3819, requiring different license fees from of the bill, and this, too, whether the recom

different classes of peddlers, was not sufficient

to sustain a conviction, mendation be that the bill do pass or do not

[Ed. Note.-For other cases, see Hawkers and pass."

Peddlers, Dec. Dig. $ 7.*]

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »