« PreviousContinue »
MI'TUAL AID ASSOCIATIONS
Act April 12, 1880, does not enlarge class ;
State ex rel. vs. Moore, Sup't. Ohio..... 425
596 NATIOX'S (THE) SORROW..
81 NEGLECTED (A) DISTRICT.
Burden of proof of; Western Union Tel, Co.
246 By railroad making running switch; Phila.
& Reading R. R. vs. Troutman. Pa..... 661 City responsible for, of employees; Ironton vs. Kelly. Ohio......
486 Contributory and concurrent; when not im
puted to plaintiff; Covington Transfer ('o.
109 In agent, loss of money in carriage, bnrden
of proof; Darling vs. Younker. Ohio........ 349 Inferred from fact of explosion of boiler;
Rose vs. Stephens & Condit Transportation
463 Of foreman of railroad, in protection of em•
ployees; L. S. & M. S. R'y vs. Lavalley. (). 44 Plaintiff must prove, against railroad in kill
ing stock; P. C. &. st. L. R'y vs. McMillen.
412 Setting fire, extending to premises of an
other; Krippner vs. Biebl. Minn ......... 125 Locomotive blocking crossing, not contribu
tory to cross another place ; Phila, & Read-
661 NEW BOOKS
American Decisions, Vols. XXVII and
145 American Decisions, Vol. XXIX
218 American Decisions, Vol. XXX..
289 American Decisions, Vol. XXXI
333 American Decisions, Vol. XXXII....
432 American Decisions, Vol. XXXIJI
503 American Decisions, Vol. XXXIV
571 American Decisions, Vol. XXXV
621 Compensation for legal services..
269 Conveyancing, the law of...
467 Digest (A) of Revised Statutes of Ohio, relat
ing to railroad and telegraph companies..... 161 Manual for Assignees....
468 Nevada Reports, Vol. XV...............
1 Oddities of the Law..
218 Ohio State Reports, Vol. XXXVI.............. 289 Oliver's Conveyancing ....
1 Pleadings, parties and forms under the Code.
Attachment, &c., on property, as husbands
fide inortgagee; Shorten vs. Drake. Ohio... 494
55 When surety or guarantor is not entitled to,
of dishonor of note; Hunter vs. Moul. Pa. 152 NOVATION-Release of party and, effect of; Bacon vs, Daniels. Ohio.......
Obstructing public road ; Cin. Southern R'y
259 Browning, 0. H., (111.).........
1 Dennison, William..
573 Ewart, Thomas W.
130 Fox, Charles...
.363, 373 Powers, Willis W.
65 Rankin, Frank F.
203 Wilson, D. M..
363 OF COURSE HE WAS AN OHIO MAN
529 OFFICIAL BOND--Applied to duties, before as
well as after exocutivn; Dawson et al. vs.
421 OHIO STATE REPORTS.
571. OHIO (AN) TICH BORNE CASE..
131 OLD TIME INSURANCE.....
145 OPENING PRIVATE LETTERS.
Grade of street under contract with railroad.
253 Inoperative in rescision; when; Cin. & S. R. R. vs. Carthage. Obin....
122 ORDINARY COURSE OF THINGS-Legitimate
presumption of; Rose vs. Stephens & Condit
463 OUSTER–Against directors of railroad company
after sale of receiver; Stato ex relve. Mer-
203 OVERDUE CHECKS..
564 OWNER-When liable for sewer assessment; Davis vs. Cincinnati. Ohio ..
7 PAROLF. CONTRACT_Specific performance of;
Ewing et al. vs. Richards et al. (Holmes Co.
460 PART PERFORMANCE-A verbal trust, when enforced ; Robbins vs. Robbins. N. Y.
618 PARTIES-Final judgment as to three; reversal
as to two; King vs. Bell et al. Ohio........ 59 PARTITION
Ambiguous deviso as to quality of land; how
enforced ; Corwine vs. Moll. Ohio........ 35 Effect Statue of limitation as against admin
istrator; Lafferty vs. Shinn. Ohio............ 411 PARTNERS
Stockholders de facto corporation liable as ;
603 Where conduct of party is relied on to charge
liim as; Cook is. Penryhn. Ohio........ 22 PARTNERSHIP-Mutual benefit society not gore
erned by same rules as ; Ash vs. Guie. Pa... 75 PASSENGER-Rights of in public conveyances... PAYMENT
Acceptance of note for antecedunt indebted.
ness; not; Huuter ys, Moul. Pa......... 152 Sufficient to take case out of statute of limi.
tation of principal; effect as to surety;
270 PECULIAR (A) CASE....
620 PERMIT– Distinction between, and assumption
conferring corporate powers ; Sims et al. vs.
412 PERSONAL PROPERTY-Vendee liable for dam
ages in refusing to accept ; Cullen at al, vs.
180 PETITION-Facts held to be sufficient on; L. S.
& M. S. R’y vs. Hutchins, guardian. Ohio... 280 PHYSICIAN
Without diploma; good moral character;
ten years' practice; Wert vs. ('lutter, Ohio. 250 When third party liable for fees of; Berry vs. Pusey. Ky.....
571 Pomeroy's Equity Jurisprudence......
620 Revised Statutes of Ohio, 2d edition .....
467 United States Court Reports, Vol. I......... 432 l'sages and Customs
269 NEW (A) METHOD OF ADVANCING CASES ON THE DOCKET
317 NEW PUBLICATIONSThe Journal of Banking Law
503 The Texas Law Journal....
503 United States Supreme Court Reporter...... 527 NEW TRIAL
In capital cases, by reason of gross incompe
tence of counsel; State vs. Jones. Mo...... 590 When, no error in refusing; Ridenour vs. The State. Ohio
589 NOTARY PUBLIC
Certificate, deed or mortgago, a judicial act;
Commonwealth for use vs. Haines et al. Pa. 47 Extent of liability where imposed on by false impersonation......
337 511 514
Averment necessary under indictment;
Ridenour vs. State." Ohio........
fense available on demurrer; Howard, ad
ministrator, vs. Brower. Ohio........
Bear vs. Knowles. Obio....
with petition in reply ; Fanning vs. Hiber
nia Ins. (o. Ohio... Supplemental, where change in rights of par
ties after issue joined; L. S. & U.S. R'y
Co. vs. Hutchins, guardian, Ohio........... When proceedings in error commenced after denurrer to answer sustained; Lafferty vs.
Shinn. Obio... PLEADINGS, PARTIES AND FORMS UNDER
THE CODE.... POND (THE) LAW. POSTPOWING THE STAIR ROUTE GRAND
JURY PRACTICE-Effect of death of party during pend.
ency of proceedings in error; Williams vs.
Englebrecht et al. Ohio....... PREMIUM-Collection of; on unearned and can
celled policies; Little vs. Eureka Fire Ins.
Co. Ohio..... PRESUMPTION
Natural result of unlawful act; Ridenour vs.
ment of interest, &c.; Andrew's vs. Camp
bell. Ohio...... PRINCIPAL AND AGENT_Title to chattels do
not pass by sale of alleged agent; Hainet vs.
Letcher. Ohio.... PROBABLE CAUSE-When not necessary to al
lege malice; Diebl vs. Friester. Ohio......... PROFANITY PROFESSIONAL ADVERTISING...... “PROFITS AND BENEFITS”-When term does
not devise fee; Coilier vs. Grimesey et al. 0. PROMISSORY NOTE
Continuing security for; of collateral; Day-
delivery ; Conger, adm'r, vs. Bean et al.
Moran vs. Abbey & Hetfier. Cal....
First Nat'l Bank vs. Fowler et al. Ohio...
principal ; Second Nat'l Bank vs. Morrison
et al. (Cuyahoga Co C. P.) Ohio..... One induced to endorse fraudulently, liable
to innocent indorsee; Pitt, Graham & Co.
vs. Foglesong. Ohio...... Once paid cannot be revived by endorsement
payee; Moran vs. Abbey & Heffner. Cal... “Pay to order of myself,"two drawers; First
Nat'l Bank vs. Fowler et al. Ohio..... Rights and liability and endorser; Second
Xat'l Bank vs. D. Morrison et al. (Cuya
hoga Co. C. P.) Ohio....... PUBLIC POLICY-Contract of insurer to pay to
party with no interest, contrary to;
Mutual Benefit Ass'n vs. Hoyt. Mich....... PUBLIC ROAD— Actual obstruction ; dangerous
to pass; Cin.S. R'y vs. Commonwealth. Ky. PUNISHMENT (THE) DEFENSEOF INSANITY
IN CAPITAL CASES.... PURCHASER-Rights of; at void sale; Burns vs.
Ledbetter. Tex...... QUÆRE QUANTUM MERUIT-When verdict not regard.
ed as finding; Howard, administrator, vs.
Brower. Obio..... QUESTIONS OF LAW. QUI PRIOR TEMPORE POTIOR EST JURE
Distribution, bequests'equal; Shorten vs.
To maintain bill, plaintiff must have clear
309 Siute ex rel vs. Merchant et al. Obio............ 203 QUO WARRANTO
For ouster against directors of corporation;
State ex rel. vs. Merchant et al. Ohio......... 203
must corporation officer; State ex rel. vs.
Damages to fellow employees ; P. C. & St. L.
+45 By accepting perforinance of county commissioners bound, though defective; Ath
ens Co, vs. B. S. L. K'y Co. Ohio......... Consolidation-Kights of stockholders; Ohio R’y ('0. vs. Jewett....
517 Daniages against for trespass, before condem
nation ; Leber vs. Minn & N. W. R’s Co.
650 Directors may make contract for transporta
tion at tixed future period; Cleveland and
219 Inposing penalty by art April 20, 1874, for
overcharge, coustitutional; C. S. & C. R'y
231 In action against, want of ordinary care must
be proved; P. C. & St. L. R’y vs. McMillan
412 Injury by fellow employee, when not a de
fense; P. C. & St. L. R’y Co. vs. Henderson
398 Liability for damages in not improving
street; Cincinnati & Springtield R’y vs.
122 Liability for injuries to employees; Lake
Shore & Michigan Southern R'y vs. Laval-
44 Lien for material, written notice to create ob
ligation ; Scioto Valley R’y Co. vs. Dennis
515 Not entitled to compensation for cattle
guards; Sharp vs. Nettleton. Ohio...... 505 Power to regulate stoppages, subject to leg
islative control, Penn, Co. vy. John Wentz.
222 Sued in any county through which road
passes ; Ohio R'y Co. vs. Jewett. Ohio...... 517 Superintendent's order to particular train.
reasonable or unreasonable; P. C. & St. L.
398 Real estate not taken from another by usual
method; Lake Shore & Michigan Southern
R’y vs. N. Y. C. & St. L. R’y. U. S............ 167
others holding by lease; State vs. Vander-
306 Will be enjoined from constructing on street,
when; Scioto Valley R'y vs. Lawrence et
451 REAL ESTATE-Effect of sale of by heir, and
payment of preferred claims; Sidener vs.
402 REAL ESTATE BROKER-Right to represent
both parties, when; Bell et al. vs. McConnell
303. RECEIVER-Appointment of, notice required,
unless ; Ohio R’y Co. vs. Jewett. Ohio...... 517 RECORD-Refusal to allow amendment of Demo
legal plaintiff, error ; Patton et al. vs. P. C. &
613 RECOVERY_To bar consequences, trespass ip«lu
ded; Williams vs. Pomeroy Coal Co. Ohio .. 4. REPORT-36 Ohio State...
1/5 REPORTER (THE) NATIONAL..............
129 RESIDENCE-Certificate of railroad directors
failing to show defective; State vs. Vander-
386 RIGHT OF BAIL TO ARREST PRINCIPAL...... 621 RIGHT OF COUNSEL TO REPRESENT PROSE,
ECUTING WITNESS IN CRIMINAL
CASES.....................324, 333, 343, 345, 363, 431, 443
RIGHT OF WAY-Owner to construct, not inter
serring with rights of others; Pomeroy vs.
400 RIGHT TO SELL TICKETS OX SIDEWALK IN
FRONT OF OWNER'S PREMISES-Wal-
591 RIPARIAX OWYERDwner navigable
streamı, at common law, ownerspip to middle
of stream; June et al. vs, Purcell, Ohio... 70 Right to recover for sand......
Ibid ROAD IMPROVEMENT
Duties of commisioners to raise money for;
Ohio et rel. vs. l'omnissoners of fayette
381 Where not suuticient money from local assess
ment, commissioners to levy general tax... Ibid ROBBERY-('ircumstantial evidence as to; Robe ertson vs. State. Tex.......
139 RULES FOR (ITATIONS..
20 RULES FOR PRACTICE
298 SALARY-Wrongfully dismissed municipal otti
(er, not allowed salary for time out of posi
tion; Terhinc vs. The Mayor. X. Y ........... 476 SC'EXE IV (HICAGO (OU'RT...
5225 SELF-DEFENSE-Mere threats do not constitute
ground for taking life; Oder vs. Common-
339 SEPARATE DEFESSE-Several defendants, defense of one for all ; Tod vs. Stanı baugh. (..
347 SEPARATE ESTATE OF MARRIED WOMAX
CHARGEABLE WITH HER OBLIGA-
314 SEPARATE PROPERTY OF MARRIED WO
MAX; AX AMENDJEST WANTED.. 146 SEWER ASSESSMENT_Owner, not lessee liable; Davis vs. Cincinnati., Ohio......
6 SET OFF-OL ove judgment against another; Diehl vy, Friester. Ohio......
337 SHERIFF-Liability for goods sold_Trespass ; Freeman et ux. 18. Apple et al. Pa.......
524 SLANDER-Words actionable per se; Barrett vs. Ward. Ohio. (See Sodomy)..............
18 SLAUGHTER-HOUSE-prima fucia nuisance ; Woodyear vs. Schaefer. Md.........
455 SMITH SUNDAY LAW.
191 SODOMY-Words charging; allegation of special
damage necessary. Melvin vy Weiant. Ohio. 24 SOLDIERS' AND SAILORS' ORPHANS' HOME.
Construction of act April 19, 1881 ; State ex
rel. vs. Trustees of Soldiers' and Sailors'
234 SOLICITORS CHARGING LIEN ON MONEYS OF CLIENT..
146 SOLICITOR (A) STRUCK OFF THE ROLLS...... 63 SPECIAL LEGISLATION-For a release of sure
ties by a majority of votes, constitutional;
State ex rel. vs. Board of Education. Ohio. 422 SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
Equity will not compel, when; Marietta &
C. R. R.vs. Western Union Tel. Co. Ohio... 436 Judgment as estoppel ; Porter vs. Wagner. O. 6 Of parol contract; Ewing et al. vs. Richards
et al. (Holmes Co. C. P.) Ohio.......... 462 STARE DECISES—Commissioners of appeal,
law of case; Burns vs. Ledbetter. Tex...... 459 STATUTE
Declaration of former, same as embodied
with; Stato ex rel.vs. O.S. & 8.0. Home. O. 234 Stato not bound by general; Ohio ex rel. vs. Board of Public Works; Ohio..........
01 STATUTE OF FRAUDSM(See Contract.)
Verbal promise to compensate either in land
or money within; Howard, administrator,
305 Action for damages applies as well to under
ground as surface; Williams vs.Pomeroy.O. 406 Effect judgment rendered before revise code
took effect; Lafferty vs. Shinn, Ohio....... 441 Effect on surety, by payment of principal;
Glick, administrator, vs. Crist. Ohio......... 270 Must be specially pleaded; State vs. McIntire. Iowa..
628 Runs against township trustees holding titles
to land ; Trustees Oxford Tp. vs. Columbia
When not running against administrator in
favor of heirs; Lafferty vs. Shinn. Ohio... 441 When, not running against specific perform
er of parol contract; Ewirig et al. vs. Rich
arcs et al. (Holmes ('o. (. P.) Ohio......... 402 Assigninent of claims by wife against hus
band, less than six years, not a bar ; Sim-
270 STEPHENS VS. ALLMEX-Qualified; McLain vs. Summington. Olio......
Holders; vle fucto corporation liable as part
hers; Rowland vs. Meader Furuiture ('o.
603 Powers of member of board of Directors to
subscribe for; Sims et al. I's. Brooklyn St.
41: Shares subject of polędye; Layton Nat'l Bank
vs. Merchants' Nat'l Bank. Ohio....... 162 STREET-Railroad constructing track on; when
enjoined ; Scioto Valley R'x. vs. Lawrence
431 STREET ASSESSMENT-When owner may en
join collection; Stone vs. Viele. Ohio...... 587 STREET IMPROVEMENT-Liability of munici
pal corporation in making; Keating vs. Cin-
555 STREET RAILROAD)--Powers of; and council;
Sims et al.vs. Brooklyn Street R'y ('o. 0. 412 SUBJECTION (THE) OF THE STATE TO LAW. 115 SUBROGATION-Right of surety to all rights and
collateral ; Secona Yat'l Bank vs. Morrison
225 SUBSTANTIAL DEFECT IX IMPROVEMENT
Rev. Stat., Sec. -89 courtrued; Stone vs.
Contract for contribution made on, not void;
170 Owner permitting clerk selling on, liable to
penalty imposed by statute ; Seaman vs.
227 SUPREME (THE) (OURT..
608 SUPREME COURT COMMISSION, A.......
113 SUPREME COURT EXAMIXING COMMITTEE 323 SUPREME COURT (THE) REORGANIZATION OF.
Discharged by variance of term by princi
pal without knowledge; Boling vs. Young
504 Name of,not appearing in body of, not affect
ing validity; McLain vs. Simington. Ohio. 351 On promissory note, released by concealment
of facts; Conger vs. Bean et al. Iowa...... 610 SURVEY-Effect of fraudulent; under Virginia
Military District Allotinent. Coan vs. Flagg.
559 TAX-License for dogs, not; Cole vs. Hall, col
with under Act April 19, 1881; Ohio ex rel.
Offices of corporation regarded as residence
ern Transportation Conipany. Ohio........... 358 Unequal “uniform rule" construed ; Wag
ner, treasurer, vs. Loomis et al. Obio...... 416 TENANT IN COMMOM-Where taking as, under will; Corwine vs. Mace. Obio.......
Cipher messages; Western Union Tel. Co.vs.
246 Mistake in message; stipulation in printed matter no excuse for negligence.....
..... lbid Where right to exclusive business not acquired;
Marietta & Cin. R’y Co. vs. West.
436 THIEVES, PICKPOCKETS AND WATCH STUF.
FERS—Right of cities and villages to pun-
253 THREATS—Mere, not defense for taking life ; Oder vs. Commonwealth. Ky......
639 TITI.E-Equitable only by 99 years lease, renewa
ble forever, attested by one witness ; Abbott
538 637 655
TRADE MARK—Sale of factory, when it carries; Pepper vs. Labrot.
U.S................ TRIATOrder of ; . i Sendant beginning and con
cluding, offering of testimony ; Dille vs.
Lovell et al, "Ohio.........
Mere silence of, in presence of, waives
nothing; Leber vs. Minneapolis & N. W.
R’y Co. Minn ........
years, not; Phila. & Reading Å'y vs. Trout
man. Pa.... TRUST–Verbal, enforced when partially per
formed ; Robbins vs. Robbins. N. Y.... TRUSTEES—of wijl-Powers under; Hamilton
et al. vs. Rodgers et al. Ohio.......... TURNPIKE-Various acts relating to; Art. II,
Sec. 26 constitution ; State ex rel. vs. Ports
mouth & C. Turnpike Co. Ohio........ ULTRA VIRES
Contracts not, binding corporation for fixed
time; Cleveland & Mahoning R’y Co. vs.
Himrod Furnace ('o. Ohio..... Stipulations in consideration; void stipula
tions ; Marietta & Cin. R'y Co. vs. West.
Union Tel. Co. Ohio..... UNDUE INFLUENCE-In exccution of deed ;
when voluntarily executed; Cherbonpier vs.
Governing contract as to delivery ; Swift's
Iron and Steel Works vs. Dewey Vance &
Co. Obio...... USURY-Statutes of Obio do pot effect National
Banks; Huntingdon vs. Krejci et al. (Cuy
ahoga C. P.) Ohio...... VALUATION_Taxation-“Uniform Rule;" Wag
ner, treasurer, vs. Loomis et al. Ohio...... VERDICT-"Guilty as in manner and form in
dicted;" Eldredge vs. State. Ohio..... VENDOR AND VENDEE-Creditor of fraudu
lent vendor; title to property; Ohio Coal Co.
vs. Davenport. Ohio......
Effect Act May 27, 1880; Coan vs. Flagg. 0.
sequent to March 3, 1857, void. (Norvill's
Defect in summons, by filing motion ; Handy
et al. vs. Ætna Ing. Co. Ohio........... Suit against administrator before presenting
claim ; effect waiver. Pepper vs. Sidener.
to creditor ; Thorne vs. First Nat'l Bank
Wilmington, Ohio......... WARRANTY
Defect of, known to botb parties; McCormick
vs. Kelly. Minn...... Difference between and misrepresentation ;
Com. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. vs. Huntzinger's
use. Pa... WHO IS LIABLE?... WILL
Acts of widow as acceptance of; Millikin, administrator, vs. Welliver, administrator.
et al. Ohio.....
wine vs. Mace. Ohio....
Words conveying fee; Piatt vs. Sinton, Ohio WIDOW'S ALLOWANCE_$300 in lieu of home
stead; In qp estate of R. Martin. Ohio......... WORD (A) TO GUR READERS... WRONG FULLY CAUSING DEATH-Action for,
abates at death of wrong doer; Russell vs.Sun
Ohio Law Journal.
We have received from the publishers, Wil
liam Gould & Son, Law Booksellers and PubCOLUMBUS, OHIO, : : : AUGUST 18, 1881. : : AUGUST 18, 1881. lishers. Albany N. Y., their Catalogue of Law
A catalogue of law books may not be deemed
an important publication, and, ordinarily, is not. -Counselor Seth Weldy, of Logan, paid us a fying
In this case, however, we find a catalogue which visit, while passing through the city a few days ago. must have required an immense amount of labor
-Judge J. S. Brasee, of Lancastor, was in the city. to prepare, and is correspondingly valuable to Monday last on professional business.
attorneys or legal writers. -J. Wheeler Lowe, of the Circleville bar, was in the
The nucleus to this extensive list was precity last week, on business connected with the Supreme Court.
pared and used by Hon. N. C. Moak in his lec
tures before the students of Albany Law School, ERRATA.
Class of 1880–81, and entitled: Books, their SeBy an inadvertent head put on the “Table of lection and Use. By the request of the pubCases reported in full,” during the past year,
lishers, however, the book was enlarged to its which appeared last week, the belief may obtain present size, 400 pages, by the addition of much that no further index will be furnished. This
valuable matter prepared by J. T. Cook, Esq. is error. We will prepare a full index of all
Fifty pages of the book are devoted to the abthings contained in the Law Journal during breviations used in citing elementary works the year ending with Aug. 11. This will be upon the law. This portion is of the greatest prepared and printed as soon as possible.
value for reference. Thirty pages follow giving We have also omitted from the table of Cases
the abbreviations used in citing English and reported in full, Buckingham v Buckingham,
American Reports and Legal Periodicals. The page 261. Also on page 536 in speaking of the
rest of the book is made up of alphabetical lists cost of obtaining copies of the opinions, we wrote
of Elementary legal works; of all American that they could only be obtained by paying Reports; of all American periodical and miscel“Copying rates" &c. The fiendish compositor
laneous Reports; of all noted trials, the proceedmade it “losing rates” and steadfastly refused to ings of which have been published; sketches of amend. Now, however, that he is no more, we
all the English courts; full lists of English Resucceed in getting it to read as we penned it. ports; Irish, Scotch, Indian, Canadian, Mauritius,
New Zealand and other Reports; making a volume NEW BOOKS.
of the greatest interest and value. In addition to
all this matter we note on page 3, certain "rules NEVADA REPORTS, Vol. 15, has been received
for citations," which are of such value that a from the publishers, Messrs. A. L. Bancroft & Co., simple notice will not do them justice. We will San Francisco. This volume contains fifty publish them in full next week. eight cases decided during 1880. Many important decisions concerning, the úsual range of
OLIVER'S CONVEYANCING. matters litigated, we find therein, the more valuable and novel being as to Evidence, Libel, and
Benjamin Lynde Oliver, the author of Oliver's Partnership in Mining Rights. In Criminal Law, Precedents in Real and Personal Actions, and of Conwe note nothing unusual. Various questions as
veyancing—an earlier edition-is well known to the sufficiency of indictments, the comper throughout the East as a recognized authority in tency of jurors, and the admissibility of testi- matters pertaining to the interpretation of written mony, are passed upon, but no new rules are
instruments. Both his books have been received deduced.
by the profession with favor most marked, and The mechanical execution of the book is ex
have long held an undisturbed place in the cataceptionally good. This, however, is easily ac
logue of really good works. counted for. Messrs. Bancroft & Co: produce no
When we consider that a very large part of other kind of books.
the litigation thronging our courts and filling
our reports, is the direct outgrowth of unskillful Hon O. H. BROWNING, one of the most Distinguished attempts at writing deeds, wills and contracts, lawyers of the State of Illinois, died at his home in Quincy, Thursday evening of last week, in the 76th year
we must be surprised that greater attention is not paid to securing a better general knowledge
of bis age.