ness under the firm name. Philbrook v. Neuman (Cal.)

265 Pardon: as affecting enbanced punishment for later offense.


2. A contract is not void as allowing surLegislative power to grant pardon or amnesty: price of the interest of a deceased partner,

viving partners to fix their own purchase -(I.) After conviction: (II) before convic, when it permits a representative of his estate tion: (III.) incidental or implied pardon. 251 to participate in the inventory, fixes a definite

amount for the value of store and office tix. PARENT AND CHILD.

tures, and provides that the merchandise sball An adopted child is the lawful issue" be taken at its actual value, not exceeding the of a person within the meaning of a will original cost, and solvent debts be taken at making a gift to such person with remainder their face value.

Id. to his "lawful issue,” under R. I. Pub. Laws 3. The basis for fixing the purchase price 1866, chap. 627, making an adopted child for of a deceased partner's interest is fixed by artiall purposes of inheritance and all other legal cles of partnership at the inventory and apconsequences and incidents a child of the praisement provided for therein to be taken an. parents by adoption the same as if born in pually as the basis of estimating profits, where lawful wedlock, except that be sball not take the articles further provide that in the event property expressly limited to the heirs of the of the death of one partner the inventory body or bodies” of such parents. Hartwell v. provided for herein shall be taken as expediTefft (R. I.)

600 tiously as possible," allowing a representative

of the estate to participate in the business until NOTES AND BRIEFS.

all is settled, and providing that the amount Rights of adopted child as “lawful issue." ascertained to be due the estate sball be paid in

500 twelve equal monthly instalments, but giviog

the surviving partners an option to retain the PARKS AND SQUARES. See also Es- estate in the partnersbip. (Court equally diTOPPEL, 4. vided on this point.)


Parks; dedication of; nonuser; acceptance: See also Bonds.
estoppel to deny dedication.

734 Rights of firm creditors on insolvency of


PARTY WALL. See COVENANT, 4. The indefinite postponement of the consid. PATENTS. See CONTRACTS, 8. eration of an ordinance to authorize a certain company to lay railway tracks in specified PAYMENT. See also EVIDENCE, 6. streets does not prevent the subsequent passage at the same session of another ordinance grant- ing the Rebellion, in Confederate money, was

1. A payment of a debt or judgment during the same company the right to lay tracks valid and settled the debt or judgment in full on streets many of which are the same as were wbere it was accepted. Hendry v. Benlisa named in the prior ordinance but containing (Fla.)

283 new provisions as to the connection of the new tracks with an existing system and various

2. Payment in bonds under a contract by other provisions for a more efficient protection an embarrassed railroad contractor to pay a of the public interest, although a rule of pro- construction company for completing the concedure prohibits action during the session on tract $1 for each $1 expended and an equal the same subject" after a question has been amount in bonds of the railroad company, indefinitely postponed. Zeiler v. Central R. wbich were worth about 40 per cent of tbeir Co. (Md.)


face value when the contract was made, and 2. The two thirds of the members of a

greatly depreciated thereafter, will be applied

ratably on the liepable and noplienable ex. branch of a municipal government which are required by a rule of procedure in order to dis. penditures, and the part applicable to the forpense with one of the regular readings of a will be applied on the excess of the claim over

mer, like other payments to subcontractors, proposed ordinance pced not be two thirds of the security of the subcontractor's lien. Richall the members of the body but only two mond & I. Constr. Co. v. Richmond, N. I. & thirds of the members voting, if they are not B. R. Co. (C. C. App. 6th C.)

625 less tban a majority, and the majority constitutes a quorum.



17; COURTS, 3. Notes, 3; Bonds, 3; INSOLVENCY, 3, 4; PENALTY. LEVY AND Seizure, 1.

NOTES AND BRIEFS. 1. The good will of the business passes to surviving partners upon their purcbase of the Penalty: imprisonment for, as imprisonment interest of the deceased at its inventoried and for debt.

651 appraised value, under a provision of articles of association giving them and their successors PERMANENT INSURANCE. See ACthe right and privilege of continuing the busi- TION OR SUIT, 2; INSURANCE, 9.

URE, 2.


PHOTOGRAPHS. See LEVY AND SEIZ- 1. The legislature has no power to divert

land dedicated to a specific, limited, and defi.

nite public use to any other purpose inconsistPHYSICAL EXAMINATION. See ent with such use. St. Paul v. Chicago, M. & EVIDENCE, 20.

St. P. R. Co. (Minn.)

2. A city is authorized to grant to a rail. PLEADING.

road company such rights in public grounds as 1. An objection that an allegation is not the legislature itself might have granted, sufficiently full, clear, and specific cannot be and such only, by Mind. Gen. Stat. 1894, reached by demurrer, but requires a motion to $ 2680, authorizing the corporate authorities of make it more specific. Louisville, N. A. & C. any city to grant, sell, convey, or lease any R. Co. v. Lynch (Ind.)

293 public grounds within the corporate limits to 2. A demurrer to a complaint against a any railroad corporation,

Id. grantee of one who erected a dam for injuring

3. Although a grant of special privileges land by maintenance of the nuisance cannot be on land dedicated to a particular public use is sustained for failure to state injury after no- always subject to the implied condition that it tice to defendant of the nuisance, where the may be revoked whenever the needs of the notice was given fifteen days before suit was public require it, and the state or municipality brougbt, and the complaint alleged injury up has a large discretion in determining wben to the time it was filed. Leilzsey v. Columbia such a condition arises, such a grant, when Water Power Co. (S. C.)

215 rightfully made and acted upon, candot be 3. A complaint alleging an agreement and revoked at the mere arbitrary pleasure of the promise to convey real estate is not demurrable state or the municipality.

Id. because it does pot expressly allege that the contract was in writing. Van Epps v. Red - PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. See also field (Cond.)

360 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 18. 4. An agreement to convey real estate ap- 1. Power to assess railroad real estate for praised at $3,300, in consideration of the re- local improvements is conferred by a statute lease of the grantor from his liability with re- for the equalization of the public burden, spect to a bastard child, when the amount of which provides that railroad property, with this burden does not appear, is not based on certain exceptions, shall be subject to "taxation such an inadequate consideration that a bill for by ordinances for city purposes." Philadel. specitic performance of the agreement to con- phia v. Philadelphia & R. R. Co. (Pa.) 564 vey will be bad on demurrer, but the suffi

2. A strip of land 1,500 feet wide along a ciency of the consideration will be left for de- river bank and used by a railroad company as termination at the trial.


a coal and cre terminal is not all exempt from 5. One suing for the full amount of an taxation as roadbed although a large part of it accident insurance policy which classifies risks , is covered with tracks.

Id. and promises the full amount only when in

3. A yard owned and used by a railroad sured is engaged in certain business at the time of injury, must allege that he was employed in sold to satisfy a tax liep, but the purchaser will

company as a coal and ore terminal may be such business at the time of injury. Ameri: I take subject to the easement of the company can Acci. Co. v. Carson (Ky.)


to operate its tracks over the property. Id. NOTES AND BRIEFS.

4. A special tax on land in a levee district, Pleading; averments of negligence.

wbich is especially benefited by a levee for 294

which the tax is made, is a tax witbin Tenn. PLEDGE. See HOMESTEAD.

Const. art. 2, § 28, requiring taxes to be levied

on all property, real, personal, and mixed, POLL TAXES. See TAXES, 5.

and levied according to value. Reelfoot Lake Levee Dist. v, Dawson (Tepp.)




Public improvements; assessments on railNOTES'AND BRIEFS. road property.


Taxation by corporation created for. 726 PRINCIPAL AND SURETY. See BONDS, 3.


4, 5. RAILWAYS, 3.

The use of county funds to make a doMiscarriage resulting from fright caused nation to a state institution for the feebleby the negligence of another is not the proxi- minded, in order to secure its location within mate result of the negligence. Mitchell v.

that county, is for public purpose and may Rochester R. Co. (N. Y.)


be authorized by the legislature. Lund v. Chippewa County (Wis.)


NOTES AND BRIEFS. Proximate cause of injury to passenger. 782

Public moneys; liability of officer for; deposit PUBLIC GROUNDS. See also LEVEES, in bapk.

679 3-5; MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS, 8; STAT- Public purposes for which it may be used. UTES, 6.







As affecting right of action for death. PLOSIONS; LEVEES, 3, 5, 6; LIENS, 4, 5; RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES. NEGLIGENCE, 4; PUBLIC GROUNDS, 2; PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, 1-3; RECEIVERS; 1. A majority of the members of an absoTRIAL, 8–10.

lutely independent congregation cannot exer

cise the authority to remove officers whose 1. A lease by a railroad company without term is indefinite, except by acting in compliclear and specific statutory authority is utterly apce with the rules and discipline of the void. Van Steuben v. Central R. Co. (Pa.) 577 church. Long v. Harvey (Pa.)

169 2. Authority to a street-railway company 2. A meeting held by a majority of the to cross any railroad operated by steam or members of an independent congregation of otherwise does not give power to cross else the "Disciples of Christ,” which is presided where than at points where the railroad is over by a clergyman of another congregation crossed by a street or bighway when other sec- and held under a call directed by a tribunal of tions of the street-railway charter confine the the elders of sister congregations to whom the adoption of its route to established streets and majority appealed, and which was held in public highways. Northern C. R. Co. v. Har front of the church because the elders belongrisburg & M. Electric R. Co. (Pa.) 572 ing to the minority had closed and locked its

3. A railroad right of way is property doors, when the laws or rules of the church do which the company may protect from uplaw- not provide for such proceeding, is wholly ful invasion by a street-railroad company without authority to depose the old officers or which seeks to establish a crossing over it.' . elect new ones, but their remedy is by asser

tion of their rights as members of the congre4. Constructing a street railway on via

Id. duct 100 feet long and 22 feet high over a rail- gation. road company's right of way, and operating

NOTES AND BRIEFS. cars thereon, are such an invasion of the rights

Religious societies; Jaws of; power of maof the railroad company as will entitle it to

170 maintain a suit to restrain it.


1. For the enhancement by a trespasser of See also NEGLIGENCE; PUBLIC IMPROVE the value of timber which be manufactures

into lumber, a licensee having the right to cut Railroad; duty as to sounding whistles. 182 and remove the timber must repay him in orRight of street railway to cross.

der to recover the lumber or its value, since if 572

he adopis or ratifies the trespasser's acts in sevLiability for injury caused by lessee.


erance of the timber he must adopt them in

full. Keystone Lumber Co. v. Kolman (Wis.) RATIFICATION. See ESTOPPEL, 2.


2. A licensee under an unrevoked license RECEIVERS. See also Banks, 2; CON- to cut and remove timber for wbich he has

FLICT OF Laws, 6; CORPORATIONS, 10; paid full value bas sufficient title in ihe timber EVIDENCE, 5.

to support replevin for it when wrongfully cut Preference to railroad mortgagees is not by a trespasser.

Id. gained by payment of a judgment against the

NOTES AND BRIEFS. railroad company for damages, wben it is paid after its affirmance on appeal by the surety on

Replevin; for timber, who may maintain.

821 a supersedeas bond who signed it when the mortgage was in existence and no default bad REPUTATION. See EVIDENCE, 26, 27. been made upon it and when the railroad company was apparently solvent, although the RES GESTÆ. See EVIDENCE, 25. bond may have benefited the mortgagees by

See CONSTITUTIONAL preventing a levy on the railroad which might RESOLUTION. bave worked detriment to them directly and

LAW, 1; MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS; indirectly as substantial owners of the prop

STATUTES, 4, NOTES AND BRIEFS. erty. Whitely v. Central Trust Co. (C. Č.

RESTAURANT. See EVIDENCE, 14; App. 6th C.)


Food. RECORDS. See also MANDAMUS, 1; VOT. RESUME. For résumé of contents of book, ERS AND ELECTIONS, 3, 4.


RIVER FRONT. See LANDLORD AND Records; right of citizen to inspect. 144 TENANT, 2.

Id. jority.





ROOF. See LANDLORD AND TENANT, 4, 5. from the university interest fund, will exclude

the legislature from power to designate where SALE.

departments of the university shall be located. NOTES AND BRIEFS.

Sterling. y. Regents of the University of Michigan (Mich.)

150 Sale; recovering back purchase money for

NOTES AND BRIEFS. lack of consideration.

364 Implied warranty of food.


State university; control of; power of legislature as to.

151 SCHOOLS. See also INJUNCTION, 2.

STATUTES. A reservation of the right to apnul all contracts every fourth mouth, stamped across

1. Constitutional requirements as to the the face of a contract with a school teacher, style of acts or the manner of their passage are does not entitle the school directors to dismiss mandatory, and not directory. Union Bank

487 him without charges, or notice, or testimony, v. Oxford (N. C.) under Mill. & V. (Tepp.) Code, $ 1192, subs. 3,

2. Failure to enter the yeas and nays on empowering them to dismiss a teacher for in- legislative journals as required by N. C. Const. competence, improper conduct, or inatten- art. 2, § 14, on the second and third readings tion.” Thompson v. Gibbs (Tenn.) 548 of an act authorizing the creation of indebted

ness by a towy, renders the act void. SERVICE.

3. Certificates of speakers that an act was for by Iowa Laws 1880, chap. 210, 2, in case and ratified, do not show that the act was read 1: Notice by a registered letter, provided ratified, although conclusive of the fact that

it was read three several times in each house of notice precedent to forfeiture of insurance three several days in each house and that the policies, is completed by due registration of the letter at the office from which it is to be yeas and pays were entered on the journal as sent. Ross v. Hawkeye Ins. Co. (Iowa) 466 required by N. C. Const. art. 2: $ 14, when

the act authorizes the creation of indebtedness 2. A letter is not registered so as to com- by a town. plete service of notice by registered letter where such service is authorized, until it is

4. A mere concurrent resolution of the numbered as required by the postal laws and legislature to which the executive approval is regulations, although the postmaster bas re- is passed upon the governor's recommendation

not affixed as in case of a statute, although it ceived it properly addressed and given a receipt iherefor.


to ratify his appointment of an agent for tbe

state, and expressly directs him to allow : SEWERS. See DRAINS AND SEWERS,

certain compensation, is not an “express auNOTES AND BRIEFS; OIL; TRIAL, 7.

thority of law” which can authorize a contract

which will be the basis for a claim against the SHIPPING. See CARRIERS, 1, 2.

state, under Cal. Const. art. 4, S 32, requiring

"express authority of law” therefor, and $ 15 SITUS. See Taxes, NOTES AND BRIEFS.

of the same article, providing that “no law shall be passed except by bill.” Mullan v. State (Cal.)


5. Tenn. Acts 1895, chap. 67, providing SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. See also that specified fraudulent acts to the prejudice CONTRACTS, 9; PLEADING, 4.

of hotel, inn, and boarding house keepers, shall

be misdemeanors, and declaring what shall A contract to convey land to be paid constitute prima facie evidence of fraudulent for in three annual instalments will not be intent in a prosecution for such acts, and auspecifically enforced pearly forty years after thorizing the sale of baggage left by defaulting its execution, where there has been no valid patrons, —is not unconstitutional on the ground payment of the purcbase money and the land ibat it embraces more than one subject. State has greatly increased in value and the pur- v. Yardley (Tenn.)

656 chasers bave become insolvent, although the Partly invalid. vendor ten years after the execution of the

6. Although Mind. Gen. Stat. 1894, S 2680, contract procured a judgment for the purchase authorizing the common council of a city to money, on which an invalid payment in full sell, convey, or lease any public grounds was made to the clerk of the court. Hendry within its corporate limits to any railroad cor. v. Benlisa (Fla.)


poration, is broad enough to authorize a city

to divert lands held in trust for a particular STATE. See EstOPPEL, 5.

purpose to another and inconsistent one, and

is void to that extent, it is not necessarily void STATE INSTITUTIONS. See Coun in toto. St. Paul v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. TIES, 4; PUBLIC MONEY. Co. (Minn.)


7. The unconstitutionality of a provision

that each member of a common council may DAMUS, 2.

vote for but two of the four commissioners to Clauses in a Constitution providing for be chosen, and that only members of the a board of regents to be elected by the people, highest and the next highest political party repand to bave general supervision of the state resented in the council sball be eligible, is so university and the control of all expenditures essential a part of the scheme of N. Y. Laws

1896, chap. 427, the main purpose of wbich right to make a partial repeal of a special law, was to secure a bi-partisan police board, that either directly or by a local-option provision the whole act must fall. Rathbone v. Wirth wbich would have that effect.

Id. (N. Y.)

408 Construction. Title.

17. A statute authorizing the granting of a 8. Tenn. Acts 1895, chap. 67, entitled warrant of attachment against one who makes An Act to Protect Hotel, Ion, and Boarding a false statement in writing to obtain credit House Keepers," is not unconstitutional on the will be strictly construed in favor of those ground that the title embraces more than one against whom it may be employed, as it is in subject. State v. Yardley (Tenn.) 656 derogation of the common law. Penoyar v.

248 9. The subject of Tenn. Laws 1895,

Kelsey (N. Y.) chap. 67, providing for the protection of bolel, 18. A provision exempting debts already ind, and boarding house keepers, is sufficiently contracted from the probibition against transembraced in the title “An Act to Protect fers of property to prefer creditors is not em. Hotel, Inn, and Boarding-House Keepers," al. braced within the title of Tenn. Acts 1895, though the means or instrumentalities for such chap. 128, which indicates merely the probi. protection are not recited therein. Id. bition of such preferences without anything 10. A provision in a statute authorizing Nat. Bank v. Divine Grocery Co. (Tenn.) 445

to show that it permits any preferences. Third “townships” to refund their indebtedness is within the title "An Act to Enable Mu- 19. A prohibition of judgments by default nicipal Corporations . to Refund Their Id. is not within the scope of Tenn. Acts 1895, debtedness.” Rathbone v. Hopper (Kan.) 674 chap. 128, indicating a probibition of prefer

ences by "confession of judgment.” Id. 11. Provisions concerning the condemna.

Repeal. tion and disposal of land by counties in rela

20. The limitation on the taxing power of tion to public improvements undertaken by the state or the United States are sufficiently cov.

counties by the general revenue law of Tennesered by a title "An Act to Grant to and Pre see, passed at the extra session of 1895, does scribe Powers of Counties Relative to Public not repeal the provision of the special act of Works Undertaken or Proposed by the State or to tax to pay bridge

bonds of Knox county;

1895, p. 122, chap. 80, relating to the power 'the United States." Lancey v. King County Burnett v. Maloney (Tenn.)

541 (Wasb.)


21. A statute which does not expressly reSpecial or local laws.

peal, revive, or amend any former law, but 12. The prohibition against local and spe: states that all laws and parts of laws in concial acts regulating county business is violated flict” therewith are repealed, does not violate by Nev, act March 15, 1895, which attempts to Tenn. Const. art. 2, § 17, requiring all acts create Storey county into a municipal corpora which repeal, revive, or amend former laws to tion, as it unquestionably attempted to regu- recite the title or substance of the law repealed, late the business of that county. Schweiss v revived, or amended. State v. Yardley (Tenn.) First Judicial Dist. Ct. (Nev.)

656 13. The requirement of Nev. Const. art. 4, $ 25, that the system of county governments

NOTES AND BRIEFS. shall be uniform througbout the state, means

Statutes; resolution distinguished from. 262 that all county governments must in all essential particulars be alike, and is violated by Nev.

Power of court to look behind record of. 487 act March 15, 1895, attempting to confer upon

Intent of legislature.

248 Storey county the full powers of a municipal Partial invalidity of.

410 corporation.


Embracing more than one subject; defective 14. A statute giving a certain county power title.

818 to issue bridge bonds and levy taxes to pay them does not violate Tenn. Const. art. 11, $ 8, STREET RAILWAYS. See also Railprobibiting the suspension of general laws for the benefit of a particular individual and the granting to any individual of special rights, 1. A person riding between the rails of an privileges, immunities, or exemptions. Bur. electric-street railway upon a bicycle has the nett v. Maloney (Tenn.)

541 duty to look out for and endeavor to avoid

Everett v. Los 15. A local-option law granting cbarter danger from the electric cars.

350 power to all the cities of a certain class, to take Angeles Consol. E. R. Co. (Cal.) effect in ench city only upon the adoption of 2. The motorman of an electric car seeing the same by such city, is in contravention of a bicycle rider going on the track in front of Mind. Const. art. 4, SS 33, 34, prohibiting spe- him may assume up to the last moment that cial legislation as to cities, and requiring all the rider will get out of the way by increasing laws as to the same to be uniform in their his speed or turning aside in time to avoid operation throughout the state, although a the danger.

Id. local-option law granting power to adopt a 3. The negligence of a bicycle rider who mere by law or ordinance may be valid. State, continued to ride on the track of an electric Childs, v. Copeland (Mion.)


car up to the very moment when he was struck 16. The right to repeal any existing special when by the slightest care and effort on his law, but not to amend, extend, or modify it, part he could have put himself out of danger which is given by Minn. Const. art. 4, § 33 up to the last moment is a contributing and (amendment of 1891), does not include the efficient cause of the injury, which precludes


ROADS, 2-4.

« ForrigeFortsett »