Notes of Recent Cases. mother of a bastard child and was afterwards married to Lawson Parker, who, "inasmuch as he was not the father of the bastard, we may assume on matrimonial concerns was free from petty scruples. The court then quotes from the record the plaintiff's testimony concerning this union in which she declares she did not know whether she was married or not, but that they had a preacher there who did something and she and her husband "went together un der that head," that is as husband and wife. After two or three years, "Lawson, weary of well-doing, threw off the connubial yoke, and of his own motion, without disturbing the courts, left for parts unknown." The plaintiff's courtship with decedent is then' detailed. She was sitting in her door, when decedent who was a perfect stranger and whom she had never seen before came up. "He preferred he was lonely. I was sitting in the door there by myself, and he asked me if I was lonely, and I preferred, yes, I was lonely, and he asked tiren if I would like to be his wife, if I would be the mother of.his child, and I said I thought I could, and he asked me if I could live in his house and treat him adjustably, and I told him I thought I could. Q. Did you tell him in what way you wanted to live? A. As his wife. That is the way I went to him. I did not reconsider myself to have any husband after Lawson left me, and I was living there from hand to mouth, and I wanted a husband, and he said he would be a husband to me, and I said as I was a wom an I would accomplish to be his wife, and I went with him." The court continues, "On this primitive, prepluvial agreement they lived together for many years, and up to the time of Daniel's death. But after about a year of their cohabitation there was an un fortunate episode. Lawson Parker turned up! He appeared at Maggie's new home in quite a violent humor, and proceeded to abuse and beat her, without any interference from Daniel, so that she had him arrested and put under bond to keep the peace, and then he left again, and has been seen no more, and Daniel and Maggie continued to live to
437
gether for ten years or more, until Daniel was killed by the railroad train. We cannot hold that she was Daniel's wife. CONSPIRACY. (INJURY то BUSINESS— COERCION —FINES.) MASSACHUSETTS SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT.
In Martell v. White, 69 Northeastern Re porter 1085, the defendants were sued for conspiracy to injure plaintiff's business. It appeared that defendants, who were granite manufacturers in a certain city, formed an ?ssociation, a by-law of which provided that any member having business transactions with any other such manufacturer in the city, not a member of the association, in relation to granite, should, for each transaction, con tribute to the association's expenses from Si to $500, the amount to be determined by the association. By means of fines from Sio to $100, on members for dealing with plaintiff, his business, which was quarrying granite, was ruined. The court says the facts show a clear and deliberate interference with the business of a person with the intention of causing him damage, and ihe question is whether the de fendants, in accomplishing their purpose, have kept within lawful bounds. The de fendants contended that they were justified by the law applicable to business competi tion. The court says that in view of the con siderations upon which the right to competi tion is based, it believes that defendants have failed to show that coercion or intimidation of plaintiff's customers. is justified by the law of competition. It says: "It (the right of com petition), is a right, however, which is to be exercised with reference to the existence of a similar right on the part of others. The trader has not a free lance. He may fight, but as a soldier, not as a guerilla. The right of competition rests upon the doctrine that the interests of the great public are best subserved by permitting the general and na tural laws of business to have their full and free operation, and that this end is best at tained when the trader is allowed, in his busi ness, to make free use of these laws. . . .
