Hutchinson News, March 9, 1890 : Front Page

Publication: Hutchinson News March 9, 1890

Hutchinson News (Newspaper) - March 9, 1890, Hutchinson, Kansas 2 fllTCHINPON DAILY NEWS: 8CNDAYM0HN1N&,MAUCH 9,1^90. STAY LAW. Ctntinwtl fiimfint }ingc. baolute i>od for what the lanil anulrl krli-g Tub court prune meed me ctatute y.Id bo far at it applleil t� this mortgage, ml ordered an atinolute decio� of B&le Chief Jurtlce Taney pronounced the opinion of the court, and In that opinion be rea-onn m"�t clearly. In the r��� of McUra'.-ken t�. Hay wan), 1 flow. Bil8, tlie eflxct of tbe same statute upon eiecutiun (mips �ra? examined, uud the �anie comOuiInn reached In the latter cane, Baldwin, Jimtiue, ri-Hvered Ihe opinion, and he readmit most forcibly galml the t .lldity of such laws. You will bIro find substantially the ww doctrine in the case or Grantley'n leBsee ��. Ewinpr. 8 (low 7117, and Howard vs. Bugliee, U How 401 The state court?, as Fhave said, have generally disregarded the ru\e� established by the federal mprerae court; they have attempted to evade the decisions by refined aud tech nlcal distinction, or they have entireij repudiated the principle, and acserted i eomplete control In the state legislatures over the whole subject of remedies. Betting down to reason we may ask If Ihe creditor may be debarred from pursuing his remedy for a year after the breach of his contract, then why may not the legislature just as well make It two years; and If tw,iyears where is the limit, beyond which the legislature may not go! I can see no difference on principle In a law forbidding a suit to be brought upon a contract until the expiration of three years after the same becomes due and payable by Its terma, and in a law forbidding the Issuing of an execution on a judgment until the expiration of three years after the rendl'lon of such judg ment Surely both affent the obligation of the contract as directly and as inju rlously os adding three years to the time fixed by the parties for the payment of the debt. Very reapectfully yours, O. Uccu".n. Newton, Kan., Feb. 27, 1890. Bon. 8. 8. Lawrence. I will answer the first question by Bay lug I am not a lawmaker and hence de' eltae to make any suggestions. Your second question I answer in the affirmative. I think it would be a uaelesB expense to call the legislature together for the sole purpose of passing a "stay law." Such laws are generally held unconstitutional. See the following cases: Deering vb, Boyle, 8 Kins. 683. Tennessee vs. Sneed, 90 U. 8. (0 .Otto) 18. Edwards vs. Kearzey, 06 V. S. (0 Otto) 485. Antonl ts Qreenhow, 17 Otto 700. Bel hurt vs. Bennett, 123 V. 8. 284. Denny va. Bennett, 128 U. 8 489. Joaes vb. Crittenden, 0 American De- iBioUB 640. Townseud vs. Townaend, 14 American Decisions 740. Rockwell v>. Hubbell, 43 American Decisions 263. There are quite long notes to each of the cases in the American decisions above cited, thit refer to and review numerouB decisions of the state and federal courts. Tao law, ai I understand it from these decisions, la that any law that lessens or enfeebles the remedy upon a contract so as to substantially impair and lessen the value of thecouiraci is void. Tue note of the editor to ihe case of Jones vb. Grit tenden above cited occupied two pages, and commences as follow.-: �'The c luns of this country have differed v*ry much a* >o tn* uoaatitu'-lnn-ality of wnat are termed 'Btiy laws,' and until lately it waB doubtful bow far the supreme court w mid hold such laws valid, but a lite important declsai m, Elward* va Kenz->y 011 United Sr.ate , 61W, loaves no il >unt an t> their uncoo stu I ioali�y." Mr. Justice Swayne, de livering ihe opinion it that case sayB "Toe obligation of a contract includes � everything within its obligatory Bcope. [ Among 'hade elements nothing is more Imp irtment than the me >ns of its en forcemeat. One of the teats that a con-! tract has beei lmpared ib, that its value has, by legislation, been diminished. It Is not by tie e institution to be Impaired tall." Very Respectfully, f*. -V fiAWUBNCK. Ojborne, Kan, Fib 23. 1800. Qua T I* md*r*ou. I think It would be uawiie to enact any stay law or change oar present law once ning the foreclosure of m irrgageg The longer the law delays the creditor in collecting tin dVir, an I the more expen eive or dull ult it is made for him, and the greater opp'trtuiiity that Ib given tiie debtor'o iuj'ire or destroy the mortgi^ed security the h'gher rate of interest the burr >wur ha- to pay and the less money hi can gel on the security he ofl-ra Nw what I think the debtor clas* in KinBiS needs mist just now Ib cheaper money, and in many instances more of it to tide over these hard times. 1 think if the legislature should be called and >h mid enact a Btay law It would cause the bankruptcy of many who will be able to work out of their financial troubles, and would help very few, 'f any. I think any long-r May of judgment than the present law nffirds, would be unwise at any time, but parUnultrly- at this time H Wiuid b* disastrous to many, wherethere I* so much interest on mortgage iu-debtedue-B uno-tld I speak as one of the debtor class, for I have i-everal mort-gairn* outMtanding me, and it is all I can d> to keep my head above w .ter. I therefore answer your Uigl quesiion Done Your second t answer no, if within the bionds of i-mh-o'i I'.iK-ibly the law might go fir enough to r-nder it unconstitutional. Yours  ru'v, t. P Akukhsom. Kansai Olty, IC 'in the dat> provided fori" the murta'age. That U, in case ap-, prala-nieni la wmred and a �t�yof ej-nu-. Ilpp fur *'l moolhs is provided for lu the . mortgage, (be judgment shall not be eo tore*d uu'll midra bn of eighteeu mon'taa from the data uf Id* ittodttioa of tbit judgment, I A* I'l 'be t'CUlil propottlloe, I �hli kl *Uoh  l�� woind unt vioUf* the ohl'g* r.har.gini?, or modifying the remedy of entoicing I', and unlem the law mailing such Chang-, or modification be carried to Mich an unreasonable extent as to sub-8'antially Impair tbe nature of the con truer. Itself, would he constitutional. * * * Hut while the enactment of such a law at this time may by us be onsid ered reasonable and humane, may it not so Impair our credit, that a prpat many of ih� prt-fpnt rcortgago s may be unable to either renew their mortgages, or otherwise meet their dnanial obligations within the time provided by law, aVl Anally leave the very people we now fpek to prot�ct In a great deal worte financial condition than they are now? With the k'ftdett feellnga for the fin >nclally op pressed, I am,yours respectfully, W. A. H. Bird. Topeka, Kan., Feb. 28,1880. Hon J. W. Clresn. There are two claBses of cases which may properly be called "stay laWB." First-Those which extendthe time of serving process or extend the time la which to answer after procerB served. Second-Those laws which stay execution after Judgment obtained. I am of the opinion that a law which extends tbe time in which to serve civil process, or extends the time in which to answer after the service of process, providing the extension Ib reasonable, as it affects tbe remedy only and doeB not touch the obligation of the contract, Is constitutional as to contracts existing, and, of course, is constitutional as to con tracts entered into after passage of act. There is a conflict of authority, but I think the weight of authority and reason id with me. Second-A law which grants stay of execution to debtor upon judgments rendered before the passage of tbe act or upon judgments to be subsequently rendered upon contracts formed before it went into effect is unconstitutional as it impair* the obligation of contract. Tbe peennd class embraces laws which are usually called 'stay laws." I am not fully advised as to the policy of enacting any of these laws I am of the opinion, subject to conversion, that a debtor class cannot afford to pass any of these lawB. Of course It would be worse than useless to pasBlaws of the second claBs. It may be advisable to pass a law of tbe first class but if one should be passed I would Bay make the extansion of time very reasonable. Very truly yours, J. W. Grubs. Lawrence, Kan., March 6,1890. Hod. 11. A. Caltaoan. No form of stay law should be passed as it would do the state great harm and no person any good. Second-Are such laws constitutional at to existing debts? It would be an unconstitutional law as lo existing debu. Hee Bronson vs. Knzie 1 Upward U. S.,811; Howard vs. Bugbee, 24 Howard U. a., 401; (Jodington vs. UiS)iham, 86 N. Y. Eq,S74; Malony vs. fortune, 14 Iowa,4 7; Monday vs. Hon roe. 1 Mann (Mich), 63; Hay ward v� Judd,4 M.nn., 483; Bothold va. Fox, 13 Minn, 601. The legislature cannot interfere with contracts between individuals.-11 Paige N Y , 481; 13 Wis., 841. Yours r�3p3ct-fully, tt. A. Oa.L,nous, Garden City, Kan, March 35, 1890. Hob Laden Earl*. My answer to the first queition would be, none; to the BMCond, yet V*rv Ri spelfully, Lucirn E.utut. McPherson, Kan.,Feb,28,18SW. Hon (fcott Uupklos. Firat-D> not regard any form of stay law advisable at this time. Second- Di not think that such laws are unconstitutional as to exiB'iDg debts- The remedy n it the right is affiled. We cannot at thin time afford aa a elate to pass any such laws. We must preserve our credit abroad. Scott Hofkins. Horton, Kan., March S, i890. Hoa J. M. Uakar. Ab to the first question � think that a redemption law thatwouid give tbe debt or from one to two years in which to redeem Mb land when sold at sheriff's aale would be just and proper, but 1 am inclined to think that a law of that nature made applicable to present existing Indebtedness would be unconstitutional and v uri, ae it would be in violation of the oh-ligation* ot contracts. This qn-iolnn bus been previously so deci'ed by the federal p.ircilt court*, b� well fc-* the federal supreme court. Very reflpec'ful'v, .1 ^ Bakwi. Santa Fe, Kan., F- b 27,1800. Huu. Hlltou Hrowne. First-You auk "What form of stay law, if any, would you regard as advisable?" To this I would answer, that I would rather favor a judicious redemption law, thai a mere Btay of execution on a judgment without the stay being secured by a good and solvent bailee. No valid objection, I think, could be urged against a stay law where the debt staved was properly secured by a good and solvent bail. In answer to your second question, to-wit: "Could it be sucoesHfully urged that such laws would be unponstltutlonal as to existing debts as violating the obligations of contracts?" To this I would answer, that In my opii ion such a law, as io existing debts, would beunconstitu tinnal. fu relation to the ques Ion DOW being ngl'a'el and whi'th has rioiihtlers promoted you to a-k those questions, [ *onld say that a little common a�nce nn the part of creditor", as well as mere "collection lawverH," would certainly nogrfoved and rea'ir.ed on, Vly jirigment l� the nex'. legislature oiigb* to enact a law, whereby Heritor* w oibl hn granted a reasonabte t'me la w Mo*i to rpd-o in rroo* rty sold upon execution. Yours rt'spepifn'le, vII,tom "llOWN. Garden City, Kan , Feb. 1'00. Hon J H. Ila'lnwell. In answering, one mu-t fu'ly recog nlze (be pressing necessity for relief to our people fr-.m the debt, b'i'dens. Yet In considering all ihe |,lea�that policy and humanity may suggest, we oatl'.ot well gat away from the now se'tled law o' the land as laid down by tbe United S'ate supreme oourt,under tbeoommand of the federal cnnmltu'lor, which sav�: "No state (ball p�'S any  * � * * liw imptlrlogtheoh'lyatloo of contratiir." \u th* case of Kdw.rdt vs. lUaraay, bumMj tUth MnvtA bmw, pa** 605, in which all the judges unite in tbe opinion except Hirlan, which, in short, ia ai^ tollows: " The remedy sub'lstingin a state when aid where a contract is made and Is to be performed. Ib a part of its obligation, and any luttst quent law of the s ate which to i ff-cts the rrmedy aa tuhstantiallv to impair aud leB�en the v-ilue of the contract i� forbiilden by the conntitution of tae United States, �nd therefore Void." If t�la Is the law, and I ner'alnly understand it 'o be, no stay law could he en forcetl as to existing contracts, and the passage of one would certainly cause ex-pensive litigation. Notwlthstanillt'g this, I do believe the legislature might p�B� ac'a not In conflict with the constitution under which re'lef can be had free from litigation and at the same time preserve thecredltof our people and hence our state. Very respectfully, J R. Hallowell. Wichita, Kan., March 8,1890. Hon. P. P. Hnrknees. In view of the doctrine laid down and adhered to by tbo Uuited States supreme court on this subject, I am unable to suggest any form of stay law which would be of any practical benefit as applied to existing mortgages. After a careful investigation of the question by the judiciary committees, of both branches of legislature at its laatseB6inn,lt was generally conceded that tbe constitution waa insuperable barrier to that class of legislation. A law, providing that defendants In actions for tbe foreclosure of mortgages should have six months time (instead of twenty daye) In which to aDBwer the petition, and that nix months notice of Bale should be given, thus protecting fore closure proceedings, and preventing i sale of the property until the expiration of about eighteen months alter the action was commenced, was enacted by the Wisconsiu legislature In 1868, evidently with a view to evade the rule laid dowu by the earlier cases decided by the United States supreme court relating to stay laws. This law was passed upon by tbe supreme court of Wisconsin io the case of Van Baumbach vs. Bade 9 Wis., 699, and tbe same sustained and held to be coustitutianal. In I860 a similar law waa passed in Iowa aud held conatitu tional by the supreme court of that state in tbe case of Ualloway va, Snerman 12 lona 282. It must be remembered, however, that in construing the constitutional provision that no slate shall pax auy law impairiug the obligation of contracts, the supreme court of the Uuited States is the final arbiter, and "ihe ratio decidendi of its jidgmenta gives the principle by which the correctness of all other decisions is to ue tested " Che supreme court has re-peatedl) held that atay laws are uuc institutional aud void ad to mortgages ex  cuted prior to their enactment aa impair log tbeobllgatiou of contracts. Tbe leading case la Bronson vs. K-inzie, 1 How,, 811, in which Ubief Justice Taney deliv ered the opinion of the court, t bat case has been followed and affirmed in several Bubtequeut decisions. Mr. Sedgwick in bis work on the "Construction of Statutes and Constitutional Law," says that the United States supreme court has clearly settle tbe following rule: "That state statutes which create any arbitrary stay of execution or other rueans of enforcing judgment, whether for a definite or indefinite period, when by tbe proceedure of the courtb euch judgment might be executed or otherwise enforced Booner, were it not for tbe atay, are void as against contracts exi�ting at the time the statutes were passed," It would seem therefore that existing remedies as to contracts already in force must, be preserved "in substance and with integrity," and 'hat legKlntive inter'er enre with the ordinary and regular course of justice which amount to a material de paiture from that principle can not be upheld. Respectfully, etc, F. P Harknebs. Clay Center, Kan., March 8,1890. Hon J A. Wilson. Firat-It is both advantageous to the creditor and debtor to have judgments stayed, because it gives the debtor more t mo and the creditor better security, I think the length of time of atay should be governed by tbe amount of debt. I1 your ii qoiry refers to our present peru liar demand for relief from our deb a, and not the general policy of stay laws, I should say that I do net tbiuk the etay Uw is tbe proper or tbe legitimate rem edy for the disease; and, Second-I do not think that the law would be constitutional if applied to prior a. d exia'ii'g debta. An extension of time on an obligation is a valuable con iderntion, and if valuable to ihe d-btuir must be correspondingly dam aging to tbecteditor. Hence the obligation wou'd be impaired. The Kansas law on interest, stay of execution, and generally ia unjust towards tbe debtor. I do not see, however, any emergency extsti g aa to our atay liiws which would demand a special session of the legislature Yours trulv, J A Wilson. Hartland, Kan., Feb 26,1890. Hon. J W. O e�d. First-I do not think that any change in tbe present stay law would benefit tbe state, My observation la that tbe holders of mortgages will voluntarily forbear in all cases where tbey are met frankly and honestly by tbe debtor. Eastern lei.ders don't Wint our farms Notbi g ought to be doie to endanger our credit We need credit because our present mortgage indebtedness must be renewed from time to time Second-I think It extremely doubtful whether an ex'ension of the present stay law would be cun�lltutional aa to exist IDg debts .1 W Glkkp. Topeka, Kan., March 1, 1890. Hon Ku|[�iie Ware. First-Stay Uwb have been tried oyer and over again. Tbey are no good. Tbe collection of debts should be made speedy aud certain, then people will not rush to recklessly into debt. If the ile-Inya of the law and tbe courts postpone coll ctions of deb's for t ears a strong Incentive Is given fir iu-h'ng Into debt and gamtding ou toe future, Tbe delay ia bail enough now. Second-Stay lawi are not valid aa to pre existing dehti. > vjokmb rVaua. Ft. Scott, Kan. Hon Wm Kasioa Hutohlaoa. First-Ism la f.vorof liberal atay laws, and would regard one year aa  reaaopab'e time in tbls oouotry where busloea interests and relation! undergo uob rapid at>d sudden chengM. An squity of redrtppiloo for two f*�n I  en iblnk would I* advisable allowing iaumi m U� r�t� el 10 p#r m�v durloK such time. But 1 fear the enactment of such laws, ami oip�ctally th* former, would be suicidal to the beat interests of our people, under the present condition of general tuismeBB depression. S40 >nd-1 think It cannot be succer-s 'ully urged that such laws would be unconstitutional as to existing debts, as vio latlng or impirlng the obligations of contracts, heuause tbey go to the rtnvdy or the legal means to recover a Hahr, rather than tn� nbive talked we are an a united in tbe belief that tbe law would be perfectly just under exiB'ing circumstances and we are determined to work for it. On the other hand all tbe banker*, money loaners, and some of the politicians are very much opposed to it. ClIAB. JOUH80N. Elk Falls, Kan. The Rloh and the Poor. Ed. Nkwb: We have often thought of the question as to the rights of tbe rich and poor in society. It is a difficult one to nnBWer to the satisfacllr n of all. We may not fear to appronth it, though at the huxtrd of meeting some disapprobation, if not severe cenBure, wiib some men, it may be Bald that there need be no question on this subject, in this country especially, where the peuple are all on a ,evel and baveequai rights, and therefore there ia no danger that the rights of all classes and conditions will be duly guarded. ltia said by some that there is no just cause of c .mplaint by the poor against tbe ricb, and that what has beeu said or written on the subject was for political purposes. We fear there is good reason for this suggestion with le^ard to some who have attempted to produce, a political effect and to excte prej KliceB in the lower ugamBt the higher order in ti.e commuuity. There can be no question that property should be picietitd to whatever extent il be in the hands of an individual. A just government will take care of tbe pioperty as well as the li-'e of its sut j -cts. The man of millions should be protected by the laws as 80011 t,a the man of only hundreds. He pays for tbe ex penaea of government according to his wealth and may therefore rightfully any as in this case, wuere the statute Maim security in his possessions. Tbe purports to grant a a ay of execution to dnbtora upon juugmeu a rendered before the piasage of tne act upon judgments, to be auurequeutly recovered upon con-t acta formed before it went into operant n. The very question asked in interroga tory two has oeeu pasded ou by Ihe supreme courts of q iiiHit number of statea and have, with but, very few exceptions, declared such a stay taw as uucountiiii-tinnaf. The following are the c*�ea to wit: Webster vs H bp,6 oeisk (TenoeB see) 03; Jacobs vs, rjuia lwiod, 03 N rth Carolina 112; �c lain va Eibi),4 liaxt. ( Teener*. ) 620; Hxp-trte Woods, 40 Alt-nama, 70; Huila,elh vs. Ilavte,41 A>a-li^ms, 380; Luiher vs. limner, 80 I'exaB 688; "ihusou vs. I>uncan, 8 Mar' (Louia an)S8ll; Cm Held vb. Hunter, 80 T.ius 712; Stevens vs. Andrews, 81 (Missouri 206; Tborne v.-t Sn Francisco, 4 California 127; Ouibrath va. Hunter,80Texas; Birues vs. iKneB, 8 Jones L (North Carolina ) The supreme court of tbe United States epe .king tlnough Jud.e Hwayne In tbe rase of Edwards va. Keaizey, 96 U. S. 696, referlng to some of tbe foregoing uecisinnr, particularly in North Caroliua, says that the decis'on of the supreme court of that state were correct, declaring as unconstitutional a stay law as to existing contracts at tbe time it he-came a law. The supreme oourt of Pennsylvania holds tbe opposite. The Wight of authority seems to be against the constitutionality. Yours, GistutoE Gbttt. Syracuse, Kan., P. h. '.8,1890. Tile Mu* J aw, Ed. News:-I have been very much surpised at tbe uufalr manner in which the Kanaas preea has attacked tbe proposed stay law which is being called for by a large number of tbe oppressed farmers and laborers of Ibis state. What object tbe pres. basin making thla bitter F,llmil-,.�,.,,,,,.,,.,.,, , ,, �,, u, ,,. opposition, I do nor know. It might be! tei, 1-t 11m 1 it> , until aco muted for In neveral ways. It uoe�' i'i-u "'.V .I!rp"i'i�" '�."�'.l-1*if.V,"1 tl.i Muri- 1' (tluesi.ilij ItMl I'm tieal� must h* �t-i!i>i ml tor s c tilled , hei k ni'l-n.b |niBf Of A per i-en' O? tile HlllUilft of lira Ml. alii Us..... all he (,netted I I ho Hie-of Its" si II (lie hli (ler f.||. |p t n er lu o a con r t-t within iwod* naa'ivd tn �!> 'itiailnrv lawa which apply to bim should be the same in principle aa to the very poor. The man who has large treasures at command has an advantage over the destitute, In his ability to make favorubie purchases, by wa.chjng the wants of the community. The laws do not give bim tbis advantage, nor di-es it grow out of oppression or it justice toward the poorer claBsea in a cie>y liut tbe nuiur �1 tendency of things is to auvance tbe rich and to keep dowu tbe man who is destitute of property, We know wealth is grasping and it has tbe weans to carry points aud lo attain pnvi leges which the poor have not. It is toe nature of riches to be accumulating by a 1 possible means, (not notoriously to dishocest.) We ate already experiencing, and bitterly too, many of ihe consequences of this unchristian constitution of socieiy, and I would tbat we might be awaie of these consequences before it shall be too late to check or remedy the evil. �*� Burrtoo, Kan., March 8,1890. Cut k>u1. From Hutchinson March 12. 181)0, the Santa Fe will put iu effect reduced rates to Ottlesgo, S� Lima ami all principal points east b wed on the present cut rates to Kuiisas City, to Chicago and St Louis Kaueas City to Uhluag , (8; drat class. Kansas City to Chicago, 16; seconil-cla-s. Kansas City to 8'. Louis, IS. hOIIVK to �1�1 \W� U)t MftM. Tljlid, lh�i 1 � PURE * Used by tbe trotted States tiorernrntint Kr.domd by the heads of tie Onst UnlvenUke and rnbUc Pool Analysts, *� the Mroapwt,, rnrmt and most Itealthftil. fir. Prlrx'a Orewi Buidno Pimdnr does nntrnntaln /mnwma, Unti or Alum. Dr. Price's Dpllclons FlaTprlngifJ-'racta, vanilla, Lomon, OranB.s Almond, Itoee, cU.,donct centals PoisonovaOUeor CherAleaia PRICE B.AKIKC* POWDER CO- Ns�r York. otiioetTO �!. t/iaUJ. A. j. Lu�m, President. . Frank Vihobitt, Vice-Prei. O. H. Mures, Oaahlti HUTCHINSON NATIONAL BANK I HUTCHINSON, KANSAS, o OLDEST JWATIONATj BANK IN HTJTOHnSTSOli OrstanlMd Junw 10, 1884> Oapital Stock Paid up, $60,000.00 fjorplu, .88,00040. Astkorlied Capital, 1*800,000.00. Will do  General Banking Business. Buy and sell Domestic and foreign Hx change. Collections promptly made and remitted for on date of payment DIRKCITOIiS. r. H. Carpenter, K. B. Price, Prank Vincent, A. J. Luek. O. P. Wlialow, J. H Hey. Oeo. O. TJodeeraff, G. A. Vandeveer, and 0 H. Menke, The Peoples State Bank. Capital Stock $100,000. Southeast Cor. Main and Sherman Sta., Hutchine General Banking Business in all Branche?. Interest Paid on Time Deposits. I. , HAKDY. �. W1LOOZ, F. 8 OHKIMLaH, JOHII CmaPMAJI. PnaUaaL Ttoa-Praaidaat. CaiBlat- AMtVaahla tliiNIlY HEGWEE, MONEY to LOANI On Property in ail parts of the Oity or Oouuty. No. 10 Sherman Street West, Hear Firat national Bank KANSASSALTCO- -OPERATING- Rivers*, Western. Diamond and New York SALT WORKS Manufacture all grades of Salt, including Soil Fine. Coarse lift Salt! Also the Finest Grades of Dairy and Table Salt Write for quotations. CAPITAL, *bU,UX). SURPLUS, ffcO.UOtt THE FIRST BANK IN RENO COUNTY. The First National Bank, HUTCHINSON, KANSAS. * ;

Share Page

Publication: Hutchinson News

Location: Hutchinson, Kansas

Issue Date: March 9, 1890