wrongfully converted by the guardian.-Miller | show what was intended to be charged.-People v. Ash (Cal.) 600.

Expenses as element of damages in action for
breach of covenant, see Covenants, § 127.
Of district attorney, see District and Prosecut-
ing Attorneys, § 7.

EXPERT TESTIMONY.

In civil actions, see Evidence, §§ 471-553.

v. Russell (Cal.) 416.

§ 28. An information which stated that a check was drawn with intent to defraud "Lesser Bros. Co., a corporation" clearly apprised defendant of the corporate character of the defrauded party.-People v. Russell (Cal.) 416.

§ 38. Variance between information for false pretenses and proof held not material.-People v. Russell (Cal.) 416.

FALSE SWEARING.

See Perjury.

FAMILY SETTLEMENTS.

Reconveyance as sale or family settlement, see
Vendor and Purchaser, § 209.

FEDERAL COURTS.

See Courts, §§ 431, 435.

Decisions of United States courts as authority in state courts, see Courts, § 97.

FEES.

In foreclosure, see Mortgages, § 581.

In criminal prosecutions, see Criminal Law, §§ Of sheriff or constable, see Sheriffs and Con452, 456.

EXPLOSIVES.

Injuries to servants, see Master and Servant, §§ 129, 201, 286.

8. Since mere possession of dynamite for a lawful purpose is not unlawful or negligent, the burden is upon one injured by an explosion to show negligence causing the explosion or circumstances which would justify an inference of negligence.-O'Brien v. Corra-Rock Island Mining Co. (Mont.) 724.

EX POST FACTO LAWS.

Retroactive operation of statutes, see Statutes, § 277.

EXTENSION.

Of time for appropriation of water, see Waters and Water Courses, § 17.

Of time for payment of loan on insurance policy, see Insurance, § 17912.

Of time for preparation of statement on motion for new trial, see New Trial, § 131.

FACTORS.

See Brokers; Principal and Agent.

FALSE IMPRISONMENT.

See Malicious Prosecution.

FALSE PRETENSES.

Conspiracy to defraud, see Conspiracy, §§ 32, 43. Uniformity of operation of law relating to drawing of checks with intent to defraud, see Statutes, 86.

§ 26. An information charging that defendant "uttered" a check taken together with other allegations in the information, held to clearly state a public offense.-People v. Russell (Cal.) 416.

stables, §§ 29-74.

On increase of corporate stock, see Corporations, § 66.

FELLOW SERVANTS.

See Master and Servant, §§ 185-201, 294.

FENCES.

Liability of lessee railroad company for injuries from dangerous fence, see Railroads, § 259.

FERRETS.

Laws impairing obligation of contract with persons employed to discover property not listed for taxation, see Constitutional Law, § 121.

FILING.

Bill of exceptions, see Criminal Law, § 1088;
Criminal information or complaint, see Indict-
Exceptions, Bill of, § 50.
Indictment or presentment, see Indictment and
ment and Information, § 41.
Information, § 16.

Of deposition, see Depositions, § 79.
Petition for local option election, see Intoxica-
ting Liquors, § 32.

Record on appeal or writ of error, see Appeal
and Error, §§ 622-630.

Referendum petition, see Statutes, § 352.

FINAL JUDGMENT.

Appealability, see Appeal and Error, § 66.

FINDINGS.

Conformity of judgment, see Judgment, § 256.
Irregularities or defects ground for new trial,
see New Trial, §§ 60, 64.
Presumptions to sustain on appeal or error, see
Review on appeal or writ of error, see Appeal
Appeal and Error, § 931.
and Error, §§ 1008-1011.

Setting aside, see New Trial, §§ 70-79.
Special findings by jury, see Trial, §§ 350, 352.
FIRE INSURANCE.

§ 28. An information under Penal Code, & 746a, charging defendant with drawing a check with intent to defraud "Lesser Bros. Co., a corporation" while the check was payable to "Lesser Bros. Co.," held sufficiently definite to

See Insurance.

FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER. opinion. Henry V. Continental Building &

§ 16. In unlawful detainer, conflicting evidence of defendant's possession under a parol agreement to purchase was insufficient to oust VI. REAL PROPERTY AND ESTATES the court of jurisdiction to try the right of possession.-Powers v. Myers (Okl.) 674.

Presumptions on appeal, see Appeal and Error, oral lease and plow, cultivate, and summer fal

§ 158. Evidence held to sustain findings that a contract called for the manufacture of certain boxes, which did not exist in specie, and were not kept on hand or regularly manufactured in accordance with specifications, for a speBar to prosecution, see Criminal Law, §§ 173- cial purpose.-Courtney v. Bridal Veil Box Fac

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES.

GAMING.

I. TRANSFERS AND TRANSACTIONS Delegation of legislative power as to punish

INVALID.

(E) Consideration.

§ 91. The fact that the consideration for a conveyance alleged to be fraudulent as against creditors was a note barred by limitations held only a circumstance which might or might not prove fraud according to the circumstances. Hoover v. Wasson (Cal. App.) 945.

(I) Retention of Possession or Apparent Title by Grantor.

$147. A delivery held sufficient to prevent a sale being fraudulent, under Rev. Codes, § 6128. -Western Mining Supply Co. v. Quinn (Mont.) 732.

§ 149. A sale held not void as fraudulent against creditor of the seller, though there was not an immediate delivery, as provided by Rev. Codes, 6128; the buyer taking and retaining possession prior to attachment proceedings by the creditor.-Western Mining Supply Co. v. Quinn (Mont.) 732.

III. REMEDIES OF CREDITORS AND
PURCHASERS.

(G) Evidence.

§ 295. Evidence held sufficient to show that a sale of goods was made to defeat a claim for the price due the seller's vendor.-Elsom v. Moore (Cal. App.) 271.

§ 298. Evidence held to show that a conveyance was not made with intent to defraud the grantor's creditors.-Hoover v. Wasson (Cal. App.) 945.

$299. On an issue as to the validity of a sale of hotel fixtures and personal property, under Civ. Code, § 3440, requiring a change of possession of personal property sold to be valid against creditors of the seller, evidence held to sustain a finding that there was no change of possession.-Bucher v. Allen (Cal. App.) 942. $299. Under Civ. Code, § 3440, the employment by the vendee of the vendor after the sale is some evidence that there has been no actual

change of possession.-Bucher v. Allen (Cal. App.) 942.

FUGITIVES.

From justice, right of sheriff to compensation for taking in another state, see Sheriffs and Constables, § 68.

See Fish.

GAME.

Liability for injuries from negligent use of weapons while hunting, see Weapons, § 18. Venue of action to recover penalty for unlawful transportation, see Venue, § 9.

§ 7. In a prosecution for violation of Sess. Laws 1903, p. 168, c. 15, § 3, defendant's intent in having the quail in his possession held material.-Snow v. State (Okl. Cr. App.) 575. § 9. An instruction that possession of a large quantity of quail would authorize conviction under Sess. Laws 1903, p. 168, c. 15, §3, was unauthorized.-Snow v. State (Okl. Cr. App.) 575.

§ 9. In a prosecution under Sess. Laws 1903, p. 168, c. 15, § 3, held error to charge that possession alone of game authorized conviction.-Snow v. State (Okl. Cr. App.) 575.

ment, see Constitutional Law, § 61.

Creation of offense, see Criminal Law, § 13.
Persons entitled to question validity of statute,
see Constitutional Law, § 42.
Validity of statute relating to betting on in-
closed race tracks or fair grounds as grant of
special privileges, see Constitutional Law, §
205.

63. The Legislature in the exercise of its police power may regulate or prohibit pool halls as the exigencies of the community may require.-People v. McKeehan (Cal. App.) 273.

§ 63. The Legislature held authorized to prohibit and punish gambling.-Ex parte O'Shea (Cal. App.) 776.

722. Under Pen. Code, § 337a, it is a crime to receive money from another to hold the same as a bet or wager on a proposed horse race.-Ex parte Brown (Cal.) 739.

$73. In a prosecution under Laws 1909, p. 122, c. 92, for aiding and abetting in the reporting and recording, etc., of a bet as to the result of a horse race without the state, it would be immaterial whether the transaction was completed within or without the state.-State v. Rose (Mont.) 82.

(B) Prosecution and Punishment.

Conviction of offense included in that charged,
Cruel and unusual punishment, see Criminal
see Indictment and Information, § 191.
Law, § 1213.

Defects or irregularities in verdict as ground
for new trial, see Criminal Law, § 933.

§ 85. An indictment for permitting a game of poker to be played held not required to give the names of the persons permitted to play.State v. Radmilovich (Mont.) 91.

§ 90. An information held to charge a misdemeanor, under 2 Ballinger's Ann. Codes & St. $ 7260 (Pierce's Code, § 1877), making it a misdemeanor to carry on any poker game, though it did not allege that accused was the proprietor, etc., of the place.-State v. Gaasch (Wash.) 817.

§ 90. An information in a prosecution for gaming held insufficient, under Laws 1903, p. 63, c. 51, and 2 Ballinger's Ann. Codes & St. § 7260 (Pierce's Code, § 1877), where it did not allege that accused was owner, proprietor, etc. -State v. Gaasch (Wash.) 817.

$94. An indictment, under Rev. Codes, § 8416, charging only the permitting of draw poker to be played, held, the playing of such game must be proved, and not merely the playing of some game.-State v. Radmilovich (Mont.) 91.

§ 97. In a prosecution for aiding and abetting in recording and reporting a bet under Laws 1909, p. 122, c. 92, certain evidence held admissible.-State v. Rose (Mont.) 82.

§ 97. In a prosecution for aiding and abetting in recording a bet on a horse race, certain evidence held admissible.-State v. Sylvester (Mont.) 86.

For cases in Dec. Dig. & Amer. Digs. 1907 to date & Indexes see same topic & section (§) NUMBER

$98. In a prosecution under Laws 1909, p. 122, c. 92, for aiding and abetting in the making, etc., of bets on a horse race without the state, evidence held to show that a bet was actually made through accused, and that it was reported and registered by him.-State v. Rose (Mont.) 82.

§ 98. In a prosecution for aiding and abetting in reporting, recording, and registering a bet on a horse race, evidence held to sustain a conviction.-State v. Sylvester (Mont.) 86.

GARNISHMENT.

See Attachment; Execution.

GAS.

Restraining construction of pipe line across homestead, effect of consent of husband and wife to establishment of, see Homestead, § 117. Restraining destruction of pipe line, see Injunction, 54.

§ 20. In an action against a gas company for negligence, evidence held to justify an inference that the meter placed in an apartment was so placed by employés of the gas company.-Heinz v. Consumers' Light, Heat & Power Co. (Kan.) 527.

§ 20. In an action against a gas company, evidence held insufficient to warrant an inference that jets from which gas escaped causing an explosion were negligently left open by employés of the company.-Heinz v. Consumers' Light, Heat & Power Co. (Kan.) 527.

GIFTS.

By states, see States, § 119.
Charitable gifts, see Charities.

I. INTER VIVOS.

§ 48. In an action to cancel a deed of gift from brother to sister to enable the grantee to more easily settle a decedent's estate, in which they were both interested, plaintiff may testify that he had no legal advice regarding the execution of the deed except that of the grantee's attorney. Fagan v. Lentz (Cal.) 951.

II. CAUSA MORTIS.

§ 54. A transfer of certificates of bank stock held not invalid as an attempt to make a gift causa mortis.-Cahlan v. Bank of Lassen County (Cal. App.) 765.

GOOD FAITH.

GUARANTY INSURANCE. Incorporation of insurance companies, see Insurance, § 32.

GUARDIAN AND WARD.

Guardianship of insane persons, see Insane Persons, 30.

II. APPOINTMENT, QUALIFICATION,
AND TENURE OF GUARDIAN.
Opinion evidence as to mental capacity in pro-
ceedings for appointment, see Evidence, § 478.

V. ACTIONS.

Effect against guardian, of allegations as to execution of written instruments not denied under oath, see Pleading, § 294.

VI. ACCOUNTING AND SETTLEMENT. Action against estate of guardian for funds wrongfully converted, see Executors and Administrators, § 431.

Presentation of claim against estate of guardian, see Executors and Administrators, § 229. Rights of heirs of ward to require accounting, Splitting causes of action, see Action, § 53. see Descent and Distribution, § 89.

$137. It is the duty of a guardian, after his wards have attained majority, to present his final account to the probate court for settlement.-Miller v. Ash (Cal.) 600.

139. Executors of a deceased guardian who had not accounted after his wards had reached their majority held not entitled to account.-Miller v. Ash (Cal.) 600.

§ 146. In a suit by certain wards against their guardian's executors to recover money fraudulently concealed and controverted by the guardian in his lifetime, allegations of the complaint held not demurrable as showing laches.— Miller v. Ash (Cal.) 600.

GUARDS.

Duties of abutting owner to guard excavations in streets, see Municipal Corporations, § 808.

HABEAS CORPUS.

I. NATURE AND GROUNDS OF
REMEDY.

§ 2. Rule as to habeas corpus held to satisfy constitutional guaranties respecting the writ.

Of purchaser, see Bills and Notes, § 372; Ven- Ex parte Newcomb (Wash.) 1042. dor and Purchaser, §§ 224-238.

GOVERNOR.

Authority to pardon, see Pardon, § 4.
Validity of contract between governor and bene-
ficiary under appropriation bill for signature
of bill on condition to accept less amount in
satisfaction as affected by public policy, see
Contracts, § 126.

GRAND JURY.

See Indictment and Information.

GRANTS.

Of public lands, see Public Lands.

GUARANTY

See Principal and Surety.

§ 4. Habeas corpus cannot take the place of a writ of error or appeal.-Ex parte Cranford (Okl. Cr. App.) 367.

§ 5. Habeas corpus held not to lie where as prompt a hearing will be given without it.-Ex parte Hamilton (Wash.) 1046.

§ 21. Under the Civil Code (Gen. St. 1901, § 5168; Laws 1909, p. 459, c. 182, § 700) party committed by examining magistrate can appeal to district court by writ of habeas corpus.State v. Ray (Kan.) 46.

30. Where petitioner was committed to the penitentiary under a judgment of the district court, no other court had jurisdiction to inquire into the validity of the commitment.-Ex parte Hornung (Kan.) 23.

30. A court having jurisdiction to grant a temporary injunction, a commitment for contempt for violating it will not be set aside on habeas corpus.-Ex parte Fowler (Okl. Cr. App.) 180.

§ 92. An application for a writ of habeas See Descent and Distribution. corpus, on the ground that the proceedings under which a person was committed to an insane asylum were irregular, does not raise the question whether he has recovered his sanity, and is

therefore entitled to be restored to competency. See Municipal Corporations, §§ 646-705, 771-Ex parte Lewis (Cal. App.) 774.

§ 92. Under Pol. Code, § 2168, what is a "reasonable opportunity" held left to the sound discretion of the court, to be exercised in view of the surrounding circumstances of each particu- (A) lar case, and, where it does not appear on the face of the proceedings that such discretion has been abused, the judgment of the court will not be disturbed on habeas corpus.-Ex parte Lewis (Cal. App.) 774.

§ 92. Under Ballinger's Ann. Codes & St. § 5826 (Pierce's Code, § 1376), habeas corpus cannot be used as a writ of error, and the court on habeas corpus can only determine whether