Page:North Dakota Law Review Vol. 1 No. 2 (1924).pdf/7

Rh committees have to answer require that the canons be construed in order that the principles laid down therein may be applied to the question to be answered. Frequently the members of these committees differ as to the construction and application of the canons, and would be glad to avail themselves of some uniform interpretation. When such doubt exists there is at present no committee of this Association of whom they may request an opinion for their guidance, and thus enable them to make their answers uniform with that of similar committees of other associations. Lacking such, they may give an answer on an involved or complicated question that may appear at variance with that expressed on a similar question by the committee of some other association."—American Bar Association Journal.

The final meeting of the national oratorical contest on the Constitution was held at Washington, in Memorial Continental Hall, on June 6. President Coolidge presided, and was presented to the audience by Temporary Chairman, Hon. R. E. L. Saner, President of the American Bar Association. The judges of the contest were Chief Justice Taft and Justices Van Deventer, Sanford, Sutherland and Butler. Mr. Don Tyler of Los Angeles won first place in the contest, and a prize of $3,500. Miss Ruth Newburn of Washington won the second prize of $1,000 and Mr. John M. Dallam, III, of Philadelphia, the third prize of $500.

Ella M. Schlak, Plaintiff and Respondent, vs. Max C. Schlak, Defendant and Appellant.

1. In awarding the custody of children in a divorce action, their welfare is the paramount consideration.

2. Where the defendant father has a farm home and all the boys express strong desire to remain with him, it is held, that it does not appear that their welfare would be promoted by transferring their custody to the mother, where it does not appear that she has a home to which to take them or what her plans are.

3. For reasons stated in the opinion, the alimony award of the trial court is modified.

Appeal from the District Court of Mountrail County, N. Dak., Hon. John C. Lowe, J.

Opinion of the Court by Johnson, J.

MODIFIED AND AFFIRMED.

Caroline Gehler, Plaintiff and Respondent, vs. Herman Kenoske, Defendant and Appellant.

Upon an accounting between parties who have been engaged in a joint enterprise, it is held for reasons stated in the opinion that in