cludes the supply of gaols, hospitals, almshouses, schools, and other municipal institutions; id. See GROCERIES.

FAMILY MEETING (called, also, family council). In Louisiana. Meetings of at least five relations of minors or other persons on whose interest they are called upon to deliberate, or, in default of relations, then of the friends of such minors or other persons. See Lemoine v. Ducote, 45 La. Ann. 857, 12 South. 939.

The appointment of the members of the family meeting is made by the judge. The selection must be from among those domiciliated in the parish in which the meeting is held the relations are selected according to their proximity, beginning with the nearest. The relation is preferred to the connection in the same degree; and among relations of the same degree the eldest is preferred. The undertutor must also be present. Commaux v. Barbin, 6 Mart. La. (N.

S.) 455.

The family meeting is held before a justice of the peace, or notary public, appointed by the judge for the purpose. It is called for a fixed day and hour, by citations delivered at least three days before the day appointed for that purpose.

The members of the family meeting, before commencing their deliberations, take an oath before the officer before whom the meeting is held, to give their advice according to the best of their knowledge touching the interests of the person respecting whom they are called upon to deliberate. The officer before whom the family meeting is held must make a particular procès-verbal of the deliberations, cause the members of the family meeting to sign it, if they know how to sign, and must sign it himself, and deliver a copy to the parties that they may have it homologated.

FAMILY PHYSICIAN. A physician who regularly attends and is consulted by the members of the family as their medical adviser; but he need not attend in all cases or be consulted by all the members of the family. Price v. Ins. Co., 17 Minn. 519 (Gil. 473), 10 Am. Rep. 166; Reid v. Ins. Co., 58 Mo. 424. See PHYSICIAN.

FAMILY USE. That use ordinarily made by and suitable for the members of a household whether as individuals or collectively. Spring Valley Water Works v. San Francisco, 52 Cal. 120. The supply of water in a municipal corporation for family use in

FAMOSUS LIBELLUS (Lat.). Among the civilians these words signified that species of injuria which corresponds nearly to libel

or slander.

a

FANATIC. A religious enthusiast; bigot; a person entertaining wild and extravagant notions, or affected by zeal or enthusiam, especially upon religious subjects.

The word was formerly defined in English law as a person pretending to be inspired, and was said to be a term applied to "Quakers, Anabaptists, and all other sectaries, and factious dissenters from the church of England." Jac. L. Dict. See Stat. 13 Car. II. c. 6.

FANEGA. In Spanish Law. A measure of land, which is not the same in every province. Diccionario de la Acad.; 2 White, Recop. 49. In Spanish America, the fanega consisted of six thousand four hundred square varas, or yards. 2 White, Recop. 138.

FARDEL. The fourth part of a yardland. Spelman, Gloss. According to others, the eighth part. Noy, Complete Lawyer 57; Cowell. See Cunningham, Law Dict.

FARDING-DEAL. The fourth part of an acre of land. Spelm. Gloss.

FARE. A voyage or passage. The money paid for a voyage or passage. The latter is the modern signification. See Chase v. R. Co., 26 N. Y. 526; TICKET; PASSENGER.

In case of a water company it means the tax or compensation which the company may charge for furnishing a supply of water. McNeal Pipe & Foundry Co. v. Howland, 111 N. C. 615, 16 S. E. 857, 20 L. R. A. 743. See RATES.

FARLEY or FARLEU. Money paid in lieu of a heriot (q. v.). Applied also to the best chattel as distinguished from heriot,-the best beast. Cowell.

FARLINGARII. Whoremongers; adulter

ers.

FARM. A certain amount of provision reserved as the rent of a messuage. Spelman, Gloss.

Rent generally which is reserved on a lease; when it was to be paid in money, it 2 Bla. Com. 42. was called blanche firme. Spelman, Gloss.;

A term. A lease of lands; a leasehold interest. 2 Sharsw. Bla. Com. 17; 1 Reeve, Hist. Eng. Law 301, n.; 2 Chit. Pl. 879, n. e. The land itself, let to farm or rent. 2 Bla. Com. 368.

A portion of land used for agricultural purposes, either wholly or in part. Winn v. Cabot, 18 Pick. (Mass.) 553; Com. v. Carmalt, 2 Binn. (Pa.) 238.

FEAL. Truthful; true. The tenants by knight's service used to swear to their lords to be feal and leal. Feal homager, faithful subject.

FEAL AND DIVOT. A right in Scotland, similar to the right of turbary in England for fuel, etc. Wharton.

It is a predial servitude peculiar to the law of Scotland, in virtue of which the proprietor of the dominant tenement possesses the right of turning up and carrying off turf from the servient tenement for the purpose of building fences, roofing houses, and the like. This, as well as the servitude of fuel, implies the right of using the nearest ground of the servient tenement on which to lay and dry the turf peats or fuel. These servitudes do not extend beyond the ordinary uses of the actual occupants of the dominant tenements, and cannot be taken advantage of for such a purpose as to burn limestone for sale. They are not included in the servitude of pasturage, but must be constituted either by express grant, or by possession following on the usual clause of parts and pertinents; Ersk. ii. tit. ix. s. 17. The etymology of these words has been much disputed. Feal or fail is said to come from the Suio-Gothic wall, any grassy part of the surface of the ground; and Jamieson derives divot from delve (Sax. delfan or delvan), or, as another alternative, says that it may have been formed by the monkish writers of old charters from defodere, to dig the earth. The former is the more probable

conjecture. Int. Cyc.

FEALTY.

That duty which every man who holds lands of another owes to him

of whom he holds.

Under the feudal system, every owner of lands held them of some superior lord, from whom or from whose ancestors the tenant had received them. By this connection the lord became bound to protect the tenant in the enjoyment of the land granted to him; and, on the other hand, the tenant was bound to be faithful to his lord and to defend him against all his enemies. This obligation was called fidelitas or fealty; 1 Bla. Com. 263; 2 id. 86; Co. Litt. 67 b.

This fealty was of two sorts: that which is general, and is due from every subject to his prince;

the other special, and required of such only as in respect of their fee are tied by this oath to their landlords; 1 Bla. Com. 367; Cowell.

The oath or obligation of fealty was one of the essential requisites of the feudal relation; 2 Sharsw. Bla. Com. 45, 86; Littleton §§ 117, 131; Wright, Ten. 35; Termes de la Ley; 1 Washb. R. P. 19; see 1 Poll. & Maitl. 277-287, and was as follows: "Hear this ye good people that I (such a one by name) faith will bear to our lord King Edward from this day forward of life and limb, of body and chattels and earthly honor, and the servtces which belong to him for the fees and tenements which I hold of him will lawfully perform to him as they become due to the best of my power, so help me God and the saints." Stubbs, Const. Hist. § 462 n. Fealty was due alike from freehold ers and tenants for years as an incident to their estates to be paid to the reversioner; Co. Lit. 67 b. Chal. R. P. 13. Tenants at will did not have fealty; 2 Burton, R. P. 395, n.; 1 Washb. R. P. 371. It has now fallen into disuse, and is no longer exacted; 3 Kent 510; Wright, Ten. 35, 55; Cowell. FEAR. Dread; consciousness of approaching danger.

Fear in the person robbed is one of the ingredients required to constitute a robbery from the person; and without this the felonious taking of the property is a larceny. It is not necessary that the owner of the

son; but fear of violence to the person of his child; 2 East, Pl. Cr. 718; or to his property; id. 731; 2 Russ. Cr. 72; is sufficient; 2 Russ. Cr. 71. See Bonsall v. State, 35 Ind. 460; State v. Howerton, 58 Mo. 581; DURESS; PUTTING IN FEAR; THREAT.

FEASANCE.

A doing; a performing or performance. Feasant, doing or making,as damage feasant (q. v.). Feasor, doer, maker,-as feasors del estatute, makers of the statute; Dyer 3 b.

FEASTS. Certain established periods in the Christian church. Formerly the days of the feasts of saints were used to indicate the dates of instruments and memorable events; 8 Toullier, n. 81. The feasts of the English church were formerly used to divide the terms of the legal year, but this division was abolished by the judicature act. See TERMS.

FECIAL LAW. A branch of Roman jurisprudence concerned with embassies, declarations of war, and treaties of peace; so called from feciales (q. v.), who were charged with its administration. It more nearly resembles the international law of modern times than any other department of the Roman law. FECIALES. Amongst the ancient Romans, that order of priests who discharged the duties of ambassadors. Subsequently their duties appear to have related more particularly to the declaring war and peace. Calvinus, Lex.

FEDERAL. A term commonly used to express a league or compact between two or more states.

In the United States the central government of the Union is federal. The constitution was adopted "to form a more perfect union" among the states, for the purpose of self-protection and for the promotion of their mutual happiness. Freeman's Hist. Fed. Govt.; Austin, Jurispr. Lect. 6; see U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 23 L. Ed. 588.

FEDERAL COURTS. See UNITED STATES COURTS.

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. A union or confederation of sovereign states, created either by treaty, or by the mutual adoption of a federal constitution, for the purpose of presenting to the world the appearance of a single state, while retaining the rights and power of internal regulation and administration, or at least of local self-government.

The more extended the renunciation of individual sovereignty, the more powerful does the new government become and the more nearly does it approach to a substantial union. No real diminution of sovereignty is necessarily involved except the relinquishment of the power of conducting independent relations with foreign powers.

"There are two different modes of organizing a federal union. The federal authorities may represent the governments solely, and their acts may be obligatory only on the governments as such, or they

may have the power of enacting laws and issuing orders which are binding directly on individual citizens. The former is the plan of the (old) German so-called confederation, and of the Swiss constitution previous to 1847. It was tried in America for a few years immediately following the war of independence. The other principle is that of the exist

ing constitution of the United States, and has been adopted within the last dozen years by the Swiss confederacy. The federal congress of the American union is a substantive part of the government of every individual state. Within the limits of its attributions, it makes laws which are obeyed by every citizen individually, executes them through its own officers, and enforces them by its own tribunals. This is the only principle which has been found, or which is even likely to produce an effective federal government. A union between the governments only is a mere alliance, and subject to all contingencies which render alliances precarious." Mills, Representative Government 301.

A primary difficulty, it has been said, in framing a federal government and a source of danger to its permanence, is liability to disagreements between the constituent governments or between one or more of the local governments and the federal government as to the limits of their respective powers. The scheme adopted in the American system as a provision for such cases has been thus described: "Under the more perfect mode of federation, where every citizen of each particular state owes obedience to two governments-that of his own state,

and that of the federation-it is evidently necessary not only that the constitutional limits of the authority of each should be precisely and clearly defined, but that the power to decide between them in any

case of dispute should not reside in either of the governments, or in any functionary subject to it, but in an umpire independent of both. There must be a supreme court of justice, and a system of subordinate courts in every state of the union, before whom such questions shall be carried, and whose judgment on them, in the last stage of appeal, shall be final. Every state of the union, and the federal government itself, as well as every functionary of each, must be liable to be sued in those courts for exceeding their powers, or for non-performance of their federal duties, and must in general be obliged to employ those courts as the instruments for enforcing their federal rights. This involves the remarkable realized consequence, actually in the United States, that a court of justice, the highest federal tribunal, is supreme over the various governments, both state and federal, having the right to declare that any new law made, or act done by them, exceeds the powers assigned to them by the federal constitution, and in consequence has no legal validity." "The tribunals which act as umpires between the federal and state governments naturally also decide all disputes between two states, or between a citizen of one state and the government of another. The usual remedies between nations, war and diplomacy, being precluded by the federal union, it is necessary that a judicial remedy should supply the place. The supreme court of the federation dispenses international law, and is the first great example of what is now one of the most prominent wants of civilized society, a real international tribunal." Id. 305. See Freeman, Fed. Gov't.

The American union is the most striking illustration of federal government in existence, and its permanent character was settled by the civil war which finally determined its indestructibility by action of individual states. In Europe, the empire of Germany and the republic of Switzerland are instances of the operation of successful federal governments, as are most of the South American States; while in the British Empire the Dominion of Canada, the Australian federation, and South Africa, as also the Greater Republic of Central America, are indications of a tendency in that direction which existing conditions are likely to increase very rapidly. See these several titles, and also UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; GOVernment.

FEDERAL QUESTION. A term used to designate a case of which the federal court has jurisdiction because it requires a construction of the constitution or some law of the United States or of a treaty made under its authority. Bryan v. Kennett, 113 U. S. 190, 5 Sup. Ct. 407, 28 L. Ed. 908.

The existence or non-existence of a federal question determines the original jurisdiction in many cases of the district court, now the only federal court of first instance, and the appellate jurisdiction of the supreme court in cases from the state courts.

The judiciary act of March 3, 1887, as amended Aug. 13, 1888, conferred jurisdiction upon the federal courts in "cases arising under the constitution or laws of the United States," or, as commonly expressed by the profession, in cases involving a "federal question"; In re Sievers, 91 Fed. 366. And the same jurisdiction is conferred by the Judicial Code of March 3, 1911, in section 24 as to the district court, and in section 237 as to cases taken to the supreme court from the state courts; U. S. Comp. Laws (1911)

p. 135.

If, from the questions involved in a case, it appears that some title, right, privilege, or immunity, on which the recovery depends, will be defeated by one construction of the constitution, or of a law or treaty of the United States, or sustained by the opposite construction, the case will be one arising under the constitution or laws of the United States, and involves a federal question; Starin v. New York, 115 U. S. 257, 6 Sup. Ct. 28, 29 L. Ed. 388; Provident Sav. Life Assur. Society v. Ford, T14 U. S. 641, 5 Sup. Ct. 1104, 29 L. Ed. 261; Kansas P. R. Co. v. R. Co., 112 U. S. 416, 5 Sup. Ct. 208, 28 L. Ed. 794; Ames v. Kansas, 111 U. S. 462, 4 Sup. Ct. 437, 28 L. Ed. 482. Where it does not appear from the record that a federal question was actually presented or in any way relied on before final judgment below, the supreme court is without jurisdiction; Simmerman v. Nebraska, 116 U. S. 54, 6 Sup. Ct. 333, 29 L. Ed. 535; as it must appear on the record that it was raised and decided, or that its decision was necessary to the judgment or decree rendered; Detroit City R. Co. v. Guthard, 114 U. S. 133, 5 Sup. Ct. 811, 29 L. Ed. 118; McManus v. O'Sullivan, 91 U. S. 578, 23 L. Ed. 390; Chouteau v. Gibson, 111 U. S. 200, 4 Sup. Ct. 340, 28 L. Ed. 400; Harrison v. Morton, 171 U. S. 38, 18 Sup. Ct. 742, 43 L. Ed. 63. See Kaukauna Water Power Co. v. Canal Co., 142 U. S. 254, 12 Sup. Ct. 173, 35 L. Ed. 1004.

Whether there is a federal question must be determined by the record alone; Miller v. Nicholls, 4 Wheat. (U. S.) 311, 4 L. Ed. 578; Davidson v. Starcher, 154 U. S. 566, 14 Sup. Ct. 1200, 19 L. Ed. 52; Goodenough HorseShoe Mfg. Co. v. Horse-Shoe Co., 154 U. S. 635, 14 Sup. Ct. 1180, 24 L. Ed. 368; where it must appear by the plaintiff's pleading;