| Show 1 l L Is THIM I 1 COURT on issued against the OWES 11 II IDE THE CASE nt aa cell ill fly till aws I 1 il comel V up bleen for trial id Itu ariff culled up tip in the die case rot v 6 daY rooming morning w wae as i jabe ago 6 the aiden an tile CHT city dozens citizens electric electrio electric lg light bt malay ep ie to a through its orally and metr ibers cf the city coun conn or ill by the plaintiff to prevent lorod an t tb rugh a temporary deet action aniro Sn front Iro entering e into any i 3 cr contract whereby the to lent rould bae fiste to py pay out any M I 1 sod a to ennui annul the infract alt entered into ingot providing lor for t the he j at streets reels by one hundred fjug tiling of 0 the ad V miner ivr lamps Xer delav ered edthe the follo follow 11 aan decision action is brought against the rule elated stated other things allol als ag po darit and restrain the benj all kahili bill to I 1 ff eding he teral te eerily rarity rily and bathe by the illy I 1 irom rom recognizing e act entered into ct of a contract city corporation and the seen ill and electric E 11 hectric light com company pany and ts making any payments out of belonging to aid taid city or any an d or koiv gorfon on thereof provided and from mid cont contract to be paid bing ires elec currents abang he streets or any city under eaid said pre via 01 ol oi aiden 1 ad ti fra tichie or other lee 5 elimination of the pleading plead inns a evidence rid ecce the court cour cannot find 1 I abe be pair tiff ie is not instigated by in in and a selfish elfish motives proceedings proceed inte aga just a it 11 abile bile the public good is claimed its II 11 yet it is plainly debern r W rom from the its buee presen presented led that it is mug of iniz itself from the I 1 petition of 0 an objectionable riyal rival JJ DB the compan evidently 1 r cited for the rood good of the he public ic ong kupect at least that is to ard 3rd d i a cheaper and more continuous one A likht light for the oily city and lige t it ie is claimed that the citizens pidy the defendant wai was artian in land ol 01 te t e the city illy means mearis of an unlawful fil con coll q and c im imbi naion on the part ita projector in with f lv a city officers for its on own gain i pt kt ibe the court C cannot annot look 11 this as organized fr any euch such pose go is claimed clai the character with ith the thede de dat fi tn in connection with the pro prey need for or more light slid tho the ap I 1 t goed bcd ocd foth with ach all en ad ete luv into the enterprise for public i to cm baet t a shadow against iv gi d fat faith tb of abe pre of the was in instituting this action fo for r V public good however as to institute these pro dings and A it before stated the court cannot fook the plain requirements of ri and the tile law bearing upon eques yie tion which absolutely abol probia i say ny officer ot of the city govern government ment a entering Hit ering into any contract con trait w with ah s ully corporation whereby such jar can receive any emol amente or belits real c r I 1 imaginary we gi nary hein g front eintract in which faid er is or albe a be a beneficial recipient on the a put aad a giver of public corpo s datert eta upon the tb other eother part nor does it make any difference tt 9 tuch such an officer did not or could A tote vote upon the question tho the I 1 1 a tvr 1 r I 1 lic 0 has A to ez hect the exercise talmo t tb is beet j jd ite 0 officer in I 1 ie ill ct y f r whom h 0 h he 5 em employed p lobed and that all bis his pies lea an and d shall be ener exerted in the interest int eresta and for I 1 the he befaro we ura of such ouch corporation as I 1 lone jonir an as he in is a public servant end and hm his failure to act rot or ote vote for a measure which may be to hie his personal interest does not excuse him 0 ho O hag as no DO right to pit vely by and seo public interests sacrificed daive inac lose ion full would be as a censure able as active in re securing curing the tile passage of en an illegal tire so careful ie to the law in guarding against the abuse of fiduciary relations that it will not vermit an agent gen to act for himself and principal I 1 in the ame tran transaction as to buy of himself 11 as 11 agent the property of ha altic pl priscil tic alor al I 1 or cell sell tobis to bie principal his hi own ap pp Op erty actual injury ie is not the principle r icicle the law proceeds on I 1 I 1 n holding buch such to void id IT fidelity in the agent is what is aimed at and aa a meaos means of securing it t the lw law will not permit the agent to place himell him ell elf in a in w which h ich he may be tempted by his own private interest to disregard that ot of bia his principal ci a wey they are trusted with public banc fanc functions for the good of the public to protect advance and promote its interests against their own A judge cannot an no t hear and decide his oz 4 aeo or one in which he ie is peri nally tonally interested either as coun conti elor el or otherwise I 1 llo I 1 oma may y decide it and accordion accor to the law but that Is not enough no ugh the law will not permit him to reap a personal advantage from an 0 official act performer i in favor of him st atif 11 however demota such acts may be in entering into this contract the price alone is III but one element embraced in the question qi clu estion and even this in cad d by their influence liy by the time and place of the letting by their right to decide upon the responsibility of the bidders and by many other circumstances over w whit birb h as members of the board they might exercise an influence bat but the plan of the work the materials to be used med and the mode atil time of completion might all be influenced by the individual interests of these men and determined iii in a way which would effectually exclude a lair fair competition of bidding biddi cg and they would of course have a voice la in determining upon the tile mode in which the work was afterwards done under the contract and in its acceptance la in all these matter the influence inno ence of these contractors would not only be given aved by their votee but as ml 1 the e members may be supposed to tu his more or less influenced by them though but a minority they may determine the ty and I 1 it t is manifestly impossible from the nature ot of the case to ac certain or measure the amount of their influence upon the tile board or in what manner it may have effected the action of the other mem be bes e or what would have tin de termination of the majority without that influence the tile members themselves could neither state nor know it and while the court cannot discover any intended ft wrong rong on the part of any officer yet to tl t erate bern such ilia illa caf gat practices althous altho uh honestly done might be conducive ln in the hands of lues less honorable officers to disastrous results to those interests entrusted to the bands of the public servants Eer and arid while the court dos doa not now pass upon the main question in issue in the case yet it has reached the conclusion that an injunction should be isred as prayed to prevent the daymen payment t of any public morey by this city to the defendant upon the coa com tract entered into injo between them bearing g date november 14 1 the other questions may eland stand until the final heating hearing smith and smith excepted and gave notice of an appeal and were I 1 I 1 granted leamelo leave ao file a bill of exceptions I 1 I 1 I 1 i th i case of michael merphy and J jimei a X e gwint IE it charged will aith robbery br y and bouse braking committed tin on or ati lt li in lon city wai was next called and a jury attorney dye appeared forthe thede de ferid Ants and attorney evens evans represented the people A number of witnesses were exam fried among amon them thena being james ie farr of ligan and tue tae defendant mccormick the etory 0 0 of the crime as gleaned f from r am the witnesses Is as follows oa on or about the let lot of august the this defendants entered the elore store of jam james to quayle Q sayle do lb at kozati and desired tu to purchase a shoes previous to this the worthy luo duo had bad been ewa seen around the city for several dayland days and their actions aroused so much cion clon that they were watched by the police it was stated by one witness that they told him they wera regular fate fats crackers crac kera and came from rom the east E iet during the Oar carnival to work the I ou ea while the were absent ae As elated stated bocc above the two entered euyles quayles Qu ayles etore store and mccormick tried oa a pair of shoes not hiving having enough mosey moiel to py pay for 1 hem them they were wera ordered by the this bierk to I 1 leave eave As they were ere going out of tb the e door mr quayle noticed that murphy had something over hie his houlder shoulder but did not think anything ol 01 it at the time the no at day dahho hn miss misad eds a pair of pints and when be he went into a saloon near by there was the leal ical pair which the barkeeper elated stated the two men had sold to a mr faust borne some little time later the pair was arrested and after an examination before the commissioner bound over to await the action of the grand jary jury the attorneys attorn eye made able arguments and the case went to the jary jury who returned a verdict of guilty as charged in the indictment judge miner sentenced murphy to two years in the pen and mccormick to eighteen teen months the two were arraigned on another charge of robbery and upon the recommendation ommen dation of mr sir evans mccormick was discharged on that con count nt and murphy pleaded d guilty g getting etting eix six months for ill the li little agu P pastime illy tm henry ander anderson son the man convicted last week of illegal voting wh cb ell took place on the fth of august last la at was for sentence jude judge miner stated that the jury ha had d I 1 aund the prisoner prie oner guilty of illegal voting and he had not perhaps been entirely to blame for the crime be he would hafe hale to take the cons quence qu encee the judgment of the court as that the defendant be imprisoned in the penitentiary for the period of five months I 1 the next case called was that of the people vs ed mccaffrey charged wl h assault with a deadly weapon with intact to murder committed upon the body of cole noel oo 00 the morning of the 28 ah of june in the capi capitol to I 1 P a 0 n attorney evana evans appeared for the leopie and breeden for mccaffrey cole noel was he the first witness called caled I 1 live in to and remember a shooting eho olini which occurred on the rooming morning of 0 the of june my eel I 1 1 and mr jago went to the saloon in order to obtain the services of a hackman we went into the saloon and asked for the driver of a back standing in front of the building mccaffrey stepped up and said be could fit us out jago said but to have a dri k before we went while standing anding Bt at the bir bar mccaffee MC mcgaffrey CAffre y said he would fl p up for a dollar we both played several times and boh both won noa a number numb r I 1 shook sad handed the box to mccaffrey lie ile made a lower throw but turned one dice over with his finger I 1 laughed and took t the be money but mccaferey aid faid put pat bat that money back ill have you yon s s 0 bs blis know that I 1 am a thorough 11 dM I 1 r I 1 I 1 bred and palled pulled a 1 it t at rn ray stor stomach nitch murrison remarked i aa aked 1 I ilont dont believe you dare pull th ahn tri Keer geer just jast at that moment AlLOdi frey ored I 1 do not remember much else lint that happened only ill ahat at I 1 become very weak balc calc and was ta taken k on home ane bullet entered near t the h e canter of my stomach and came out around on the eido side the hurt laid me no tit for about four weeks and baa has deards healed up tip at the prent tirre to mr breeden 1 had been around among the sj sa luois luos having femoral blaeske of beer and talking to my friend jago we passed the capitol and as I 1 aid paid bore b fore ore asked for the driver at this lime time mccaffrey McCa firer spoke to us and tho the event I 1 hare have of took place mr jago wag examined and testified fiedt to othis the same acts facts as 9 bad had been told by mr coll before the witness was excused coil rt ad arned ur ned the following additional waa was tran faced willard city vs thomas woodland mollon tos to fettle ettla bill of exceptions dewillard nied city TB vs thomas woodland order made eeltink setting aside former rule granting nR additional time to gerve and file notice of intention to move for a new now trial as order was improve bentiv granted tran led J D watson vs H jemmett jen moti demurrer and nd ten days given to amend complaint 5 attorney fees to defendant ve peterson demurrer to answer sustained tea ten days to amend and ta 5 at torney Is fees w 11 ingham in ve vs ogden cit city y motion for a new rial trial don denied led thirty dave davet stay tay of execution granted frank pric vs city of wellsville demurrer and motion overrated t led fault set aside and 0 5 attorneys fee granted |
