Rensselaer Republican, Volume 27, Number 22, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 6 February 1896 — WESTERN. [ARTICLE]

WESTERN.

John llavliii and his wife have given the lease of Jlavlin's Theater, .St. Ism is, to their daughter Katherine for a wedding present. A report from Muskogee says that exCongressman Springer has grown tired of his duties as Judge of the Indian Territory Court and that he is an applicant for the position of general solicitor for the Baltimore and Ohio Itailroad. At Colville. W:ish. t Judge Arthur sentenced Adolph Nicso and his wife to tweut.v years in the penitentiary for beating their 10-year-old son to death. Shortly after the prisoners were placed in their cells both cut their throats with a razor. Niose is dead aipl his wife is iu a critical condition. ■ * *~~~ At the coroner's inquest on.the bodies of Engineer Clark Trimble and Foreman George Waters, who wore killed by the recent explosion of a locomotive boiler near South Charleston, Ohio, on the Pennsylvania Rhilfoad, it was ,conclusively shown that the explosion was caused by their own neglect in letting the water in the boiler get too low. Two impecunious young men, said to be from New England and giving the names of. Mason M. Totten and C. T. Holliday, have been arrested at Kansas City by postoffice inspectors from Denver and St. i/ouis. The prisoners are accused of having used the United States mails in swindling several -mining stock brokers of Denver. Their plan, operating from Kansas City, was to send urgent requests by mail for certain mining stocks, inclosing checks on Kansas City banks covering the market value of the shares asked for. Neither of the men had a cent in bank. In this manner they secured 20,000 shares of, stock from two Denver brokers iu exchange for worthless checks for $335. The stocks have all been recovered. The swindlers were preparing to visit Chicago,-where they hoped to sell their shares on the mining exchange. By a unanimous decision of the Indiana Supreme Court that body has set aside the apportionment act of 1895, reaffirmed the decision of the same court setting aside the apportionment of 1891, and has brought iuto operation the apportionment of 1885, which it declares to be the only legal act since that date. The decision is far-reaching in its effects and emanates from a body composed of both Republicans and Democrats. The Democratic Legis-. lature of 1891, following the constitutional requirements to enact an apportionment law every sixth year, passed an act which was attacked by the Republicans and set aside by the Supreme Court ns unconstitutional, the latter body holding it was unfair in its provisions because it gave greater representation to some portions of the State than to others. The Democratic Legislature ,of 1593 passed another -act and the Republican Legislature' of 1895 repealed it and substituted au entirely new law. This in turn was attacked by the Democrats on the ground that it violated the provisions of the constitution iu being enacted at a time before the sixth year since the of 1893 was passed; This contention was sustained by the Supreme Court, but it failed to concede the Democratic position that the law of 1893 was operative, holding that the same objections which obtained against the apportionment of 1895 existed to render void the apportionment of two years before; that the Legislature of 1891 was competent under the Constitution to enact an apportionment law, but ihe Court having Set that act aside as unconstitutional, recourse must he had to the law of 1885 to find a valid enactment.