472

52

233

States marshal, if its value is below the jurisdiction
limit of the Federal court and within that of the
justice. Carew v. Matthews (Mich. S. C.)....
RESULTING TRUST. Action to enforce. Unde-
wood v. Sutcliff (N.Y. App.)...
RIGHT OF WAY. When a grantor conveys land
bounded on a street or way over his other land, he
and those claiming under him are estopped to deny
the existence of such way. Franklin Ins. Co. v.
Cousens (Mass. S. C.)......
2.-Vendor selling land, with appurtenances, in a
street, joined at each end by roads, also his property,
may elect over which road vendee may have right of
way. Bolton v. School Board of London (Eng. App.) 197
RIPARIAN RIGHTS are real estate for purposes
of taxation. Minnesota v. Minneapolis M. Co. (Minn.
S. C.)......
2.-Grant by State of exclusive right to construct booms
on stream; precedence of public right over private
exercise of private right. Cohn v. Wasson Boom Co.
(Wis. S. C.)
3.-Owner has a right to natural flow of water past his
land, and any interference by a private person, to
such owner's injury is a wrong for which such owner
is entitled to an injunction. Morrill v. St. Anthony's
Falls Water P. Co. (Minn. S. C.).....
4.-Legal title of seashore and tide-flowed land although
in sovereign is not for his exclusive use and profit,
but in trust for common benefit of the public. Prov-
idence Steam E. Co. v. Providence & S. S. Co. (R. I.
S. C.)

5.-Riparian owners have a right to reasonable use of
water. Bullard v. Saratoga Victory Mfg. Co. (N. Y.
App.)

6.-Sea-bank; right of owner to destroy natural barrier.
Prerogative of the crown. Attorney-General v.
Tomline (Eng. Ch. D.).....

See Vendor and Purchaser.

RIVERS. See Negligence.

.....

413

375

405

302

256

188

222

317

See Mortgage

STATUTE OF FRAUDS - Continued.

PAGE.

2.-Burden of proof is on plaintiff to show that the
statute has not run. Capen v. Woodrow (Vt. S. C.), 837
3.-Where coverture is relied on to save an action from
the bar of, the marriage may be shown by proof of
cohabitation as husband and wife. Lawrence R. R.
Co. v. Cobb (Ohio S. C.)
4.-Where a principal and surety on a note go to holder
to make a payment, and the principal makes a pay-
ment with his own money, the statute is avoided as to
both. Mainzinger v. Mohr (Mich. S. C.)...
5.-To take a case out of the statute no express promise
to pay is necessary so long as a promise may be im-
plied from the acknowledgment of a present
Indebtedness. Fiske v. Hibbard (N. Y. Superior)... 76
6. A partner must be presumed, in the absence of
proof to the contrary, to have authority to make a
payment on account of a debt due by the firm, so as
to take the debt out of the operation of the statute
of limitatious as against the other. Goodwin v.
357
Parton (Eng. Q. B D.)..

7.-Mortgagor's right of redemption is extinguished at
end of twenty years, and surplus proceeds resulting
from sale are also extinguished. Chapman v. Corpe
(Eng. Ch. D.)..........

8.-Proceedings to correct mistakes and irregularities
in obtaining judgment, are not applicable in a case
against a party of whom no personal judgment is
asked. Shelly v. Smith (Iowa S. C.).....

295

55

514

See Practice; Statute of Frauds.
STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION. Statutes of
Alabama; negotiable instruments; bills of exchange;
Federal construction of commercial law; bona fide
holder; illegal consideration; usury; National bank.
Oates v. First Nat. Bank (U. S. S. C.).
2.-Municipal corporations not liable for taxes on gas
furnished free. Pittsburgh Gas Co. v. Pittsburgh.. 474
3. Railroads, grants to, by Congress subject to prior and
acquired rights. Broder v. Natoma W. & M. Co. (U.
S. S. C.)....
4.-State courts followed in construing State legisla-
tion; conflict of decision. Fairfield v. Gallatin Co
5. When statutes conflict, the ascertained intention
must govern. People ex rel. Walsh v. Police Com-
missioners of New York (N. Y. App.)
6.-Laws 1849, ch. 125; 1850, ch. 102; Brooklyn justices
have local jurisdiction only; Constitutional law.
Geraty v. Ried (N. Y. App.)..

494

.455

97

SEDUCTION. Father may maintain action for, of
daughter not living with him; damages. Blagge v.
Ilsley (Mass. S. C.).....

203

SLANDER AND LIBEL Libel; what is not
libellous. Platto v. Geilfass (Wis. S. C.)
2.-Charge of official dishonesty, libellous per se. Evis-
ton v. Cramer (Wis. S. C.)...
3.-Communication transmitted by means of a postal
card, not privileged. Robinson v. Jones (Irish High
Ct.)
4.-Evidence is admissible, in an action of slander for
the use of words apparently actionable per se, to
show that the words were spoken in relation to a
subject of which a felony or other infamous offense
could not be predicated. Fawsett v. Clark (Md. App.) 371
5.-Proceedings of church organizations privileged.
Shurtleff v. Stevens (Vt. S. C.).

See Criminal Law; Evidence.

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. Not decreed
when obligation of parties not mutual. Maynard
v. Brown (Mich. S. C.).....
STATUTE OF DISTRIBUTION. First cousins
of an intestate being his only surviving relatives
and next of kin, such cousins would take intestate's
entire personal estate, and children of a deceased
first cousin would not share. Adee v. Campbell
(N. Y. App.)...........

STATUTE OF FRAUDS. Does not apply to ac-
ceptances. Laflin, etc., Powd. Co. v. Sinsheimer
(Md. App.)...

497

236

454

297

See Corporations; Evidence; Insurance (Life); Stat-
ute of Frauds; Statute of Limitations.
SUBROGATION. See Partnership.
SUCCESSION. When a party adopts the children
of his deceased daughter, upon his death they are
entitled to inherit as adopted children and as heirs
of their mother. Wagner v. Varner (Iowa S. C.).... 52
SUNDAY. Contract made on, void. Stevena v.
Wood (Mass. S. C.).....
317

See Negligence.

55

4.-Surety signing on condition not complied with not
liable. Daniels v. Gower (Iowa S. C.).
5.-Discharge of, by laches of obligee: failure to inform
surety of default of principal. Richmond & Peters
burg R. R. Co. v. Kasey (Va. App.)

515

158

6.-Surety liable only according to terms of bond.
White S. M. Co. v. Mullins (Mich, S. C.)..

895

2.-The statute of frauds is a weapon of defense, not
offense. Hussey v. Horne-Payne (Eng. H. of L.)... 238
3. A contract for the sale of growing fruit, the vendor
to pick and deliver fruit in barrels to be furnished
by vendee, at a certain price per barrel, is not an in-
terest in the land within the statute. Brown v.
Stanclift (Buffalo Sup. Ct.).......
4.-Contract not to carry on business prima facie within
the statute. Davey v. Shannon (Eng. Ex. Div.).. 98, 197
5.-Contract contained in letters; effect of whole
transaction; complete contract. Hussey v. Horne-
Payne (Eng. H. of L.).

TAXATION. Act imposing, upon gross receipts of
persons conducting "any theater, musical entertain-
ment, feats of horsemanship," etc., does not author-
ize a tax upon an incorporated public driving park,
used for horse racing. United States v. Buffalo Park
(U. S. D. C.. N. D. Ñ. Y.)...
2. An institution for the support and education of or-
phan children of a distinct denomination of Chris-
tians, is not such a purely public charity as to be ex-
empt from taxation within the spirit of Constitu-
tion. Burd Orphan Asylum v. School District (Penn.
S. C.).....
3.-When Federal court may not restrain State tax-
ation. Kirtland v. Hotchkiss (S. C. U. S.)...
4.-Property of United States exempt from, though
leased; lessee may object to tax. People ex rel.
McCrea v. United States (Ill. S. C.)..
5.-Land belonging to petitioners and used by them for
charitable purposes is exempt from taxation. Power
of county court to order refunding of a tax illegally
assessed. In re Petition of New York Catholic Pro-
tectory (N. Y. App.)...

6.-Duty of mortgagor to pay. Dayton v. Rice (Iowa
S. C.)
7.-Equalization by State assessors. People ex rel.
Supervisors of Westchester Co. v. Hadley (N. Y.
App.)..

See Contract; Constitutional Law; National Banks;
Riparian Rights; Statutory Construction.
TEMPORARY RESIDENT. See Costs.
TENANCY. When a tenant in common of chattels
destroys them or converts them to his own use, an
action of tort in the nature of trover may by his co-
tenants be maintained against him. Needham v.
Hill (Mass. S. C.)..

See Husband and Wife; Will.

TENDER. A tender of money payable as a compo-
sition on a sum due to a solicitor for costs, to a clerk
in chargeof office during solicitor's absence, is valid.
Finch v. Boning (C. P. D.)..

See Mortgage.

TIME. Computation of; when day of notice excluded.
Dale v. Doddridge (Neb. S C.).....
TITLE to government land; priority between railroad
company and settler. Knevals v. Hyde (U. S. C. C.,
Neb.)..

315

403

383

469

ULTRA VIRES. See Corporations.
USER. See Nuisance.

334

476

USURY. Defense of; the right to defend is personal
to debtor or his privies, and not available to one
standing in position of second mortgagee. Ready
v. Koebke (Wis. S. C.)....
3, 49, 215
2.-Taken by agent for himself, does not affect princi-
pal. Bingham v. Myers (Iowa S. C.)....
3. Right of action to recover money paid as usury,
is personal to the contracting party. Spaulding v.
Davis (Vt. S. C.)..

237

297

4.-Does not affect notes given by new partner for
notes tainted with. Macungie Sav. Bank v. Holten-
stein (Penn S. C.)....

227

5.

495

6.

When note tainted by, valid in hands of innocent
holder. Wortendyke v. Meehan (Neb. S. C.)...
Taking unlawful interest for forbearance is. Mc-
Adams v. Randolph (N. J. S. C.).

338

395

See Conflict of Laws; Statutory Construction; Surety-
ship.

135

3.-Exact imitation not required to make infringement.
Consolidated Fruit Jar Co. v. Thomas (U. §. C C.,
N. J.)

4.-Legislation of Congress in regard to trade-marks,
contained in the act of July 8, 1870, sections 74-84,
and embodied in U. S. Rev. Stat., sections 4937-4947,
is unconstitutional. United States v. Steffens (S. C.
U. S.).

TREATY. See Injunction.
TRESPASS. Defendant's dog, while trespassing on
plaintiff's land, killed his cow. Held, that owner of
dog was liable for damages, although he had no pre-
vious knowledge of the dog's vicious propensity.
Chunot v. Larson (Wis. S. C.)...
2.-Continuing; measure of damages. Carl v. Sheboy-
gan & F. D. L. R. R. Co. (Wis. S. C.)...
See Damages; Lease.

258

447

362

5

TRIAL. Not within privilege of counsel in argument
to jury, to use language calculated to humiliate
and degrade opposite party. Coble v. Coble (N. C.
S. C.)..
363
2. It is error sufficient to reverse a judgment, for
counsel, against objection, to state facts pertinent
to the issue, and not in evidence, or to assume such
facts to be in the case when they are not. Brown v.
Swineford (Wis. S. C.).
363
3.-Under what conditions new trial for insufficient
damages may be granted. Phillips v. South W. Ry.
Co. (ng. App.)....
See Criminal Law.

832

See Covenant; Eminent Domain; Insurance (Fire); Neg-
ligence; Negotiable Instruments.
WARRANTY. Goods ordered of a manufacturer
for a particular use, are impliedly warranted fit for
that purpose, but the manufacturer is not bound to
furnish the best goods, but only such as are reason-
ably fit for the purpose. Harris v. Waite (Vt. S. C.).. 497
2.-Rule of damages in a breach of, on a sale of seed, is
the difference in value between crop actually raised
from seed sown, and a crop of same kind such as
would have ordinarily been produced that year.
White v. Miller (N. Y. App.).....
3.-Measure of damages for breach of. Horn v. Buck
(Md. App.)....

352

294

See Agency; Insurance (Fire); Insurance (Life).
WHARFAGE. Wharfage cannot be collected from
a vessel fastened to an adjacent pier, although it oc-
cupies the greater part of the intervening slip.
Walsh v. N. Y. Floating Dry Dock Co. (N. Y. Äpp.).. 118
WIDOW. The statutory right of a widow to elect
not to take under her husband's will is purely per-
sonal. Crozier's Appeal (Penn. S. C.)...
WILL. Construction; legal heirs Residuary legatee.
In re Goods of Dixon (Eng. P. D.)...
2.--Construction of; time of vesting; tenants in com-
mon or joint tenants. Crosthwaite v. Dean (Eng.
Ch. Div.)

83

179

238

3. The administrator (with will annexed) of the estate
of a married woman does not as such represent an
estate of which she was executrix. In re Goods of
Bridger (Eng. P. D.)...
179
4. The non-recollection of the witnesses does not re-
but the presumption of due publication arising from
the attestation clause and the other circumstances.
The due execution of a codicil restores the will so
far as it is not changed by the codicil. Brown v.
Clark (N. Y. App.).
135

PAGE.

WILL -Continued.
5.-Where the will of one domiciled in Mexico is pro-
bated by the use of a Spanish translation the grant
in England must be made upon the production of
an English copy of the Spanish translation. In re
Goods of Rule (Eng. P. D.)...

6. Construction; devise to trustees; express trusts.
Donovan v. Vandemark (N. Y. App.).
7.-Signing by a testator in an adjoining room to where
witnesses were, is not a compliance with the statute.
Mandeville v. Parks (N. J. C. of E.)...
8.-"Without having any issue" construed "having
had no issue." White v. Hight (Eng. Ch. Div.)

179

275

277

296