contact with water; Chicago, St. P. M. & O. R. Co. v. Elliott, 20 L. R. A. 587, 5 C. C. A. 352, 12 U. S. App. 381, 55 Fed. 954, holding conductor's statement to stockman that caboose would not be changed and he would not have time to look at sheep not proximate cause of injury where stockman while walking on top of cars fell when the caboose was changed; Cole v. German Sav. & L. Soc. 63 L. R. A. 424, 59 C. C. A. 602, 124 Fed. 122, holding opening of elevator well door in hallway by stranger proximate cause of injury to one who stepped into shaft.

Cited in footnotes to Kelly v. Bennett, 7 L. R. A. 120, which holds sharp point on iron railing around area not proximate cause of injury to person slipping on walk; McClain v. Garden Grove, 12 L. R. A. 482, which holds narrowness of bridge and insufficiency of railings not proximate cause of injury from horse falling from disease or choking; Schumaker v. St. Paul & D. R. Co. 12 L. R. A. 257, which holds master's neglect to furnish transportation proximate cause of injury in walking to find shelter; Vallo v. United States Exp. Co. 14 L. R. A. 743, which holds throwing trunk from delivery wagon in highway proximate cause of traveler falling over another trunk; Southwestern Teleg. & Teleph. Co. v. Robinson, 16 L. R. A. 545, which holds telephone company liable for injury by electricity generated by thunder storm in low-hanging telephone wire; Herr v. Lebanon, 16 L. R. A. 106, which holds want of barrier not proximate cause of omnibus going over wall, while horse was attempting to rise; McKenna v. Baessler, 17 L. R. A. 310, which holds original fire cause of destruction of property by back fire; Chicago, St. P. M. & O. R. Co. v. Elliott, 20 L. R. A. 582, as to proximate cause of injury to shipper while stepping from stock car to caboose; Western R. Co. v. Mutch, 21 L. R. A. 316, which holds excessive speed not proximate cause of death of boy attempting to catch on train; Hoffman v. King, 46 L. R. A. 672, which denies liability of one negligently starting fire for damage to lands of remote proprietors to which fire spreads; Kansas City, Ft. S. & M. R. Co. v. Blaker, 64 L. R. A. 81, which holds railroad company liable for loss due to spread of flames from buildings on its right of way negligently set on fire by it.

Cited in notes (13 L. R. A. 733) on proximate and remote cause of damage; (12 L. R. A. 283) on proximate cause of injury fixing the liability; (13 L. R. A. 193) on responsibility for proximate or direct consequences of negligence; (12 L. R. A. 280) on contributory negligence must be proximate cause of injury; (8 L. R. A. 85) as to effect of intervening cause upon liability for negligence; (17 L. R. A. 38) on effect of concurring negligence of third person on liability of one sued for negligently causing injury.

Distinguished in Martin v. New York, O. & W. R. Co. 62 Hun, 185, 16 N. Y. Supp. 499, holding sparks from engine which set fire along track proximate cause of burning of woodland a mile distant to which wind and intervening conditions carried fire.

Question for jury.

Cited in Stone v. Boston & A. R. Co. 171 Mass. 543, 41 L. R. A. 797, 51 N. E. 1, holding case need not be submitted to jury if damages are too remote. Sufficiency of exception.

Cited in Huerzeler v. Central Cross Town R. Co. 139 N. Y. 493, 34 N. E. 1101, Affirming 1 Misc. 138, 48 N. Y. S. R. 651, 20 N. Y. Supp. 676, holding general exception to the granting and refusal of requests to charge insufficient; Purcell v. Lauer, 14 App. Div. 53, 43 N. Y. Supp. 988 (dissenting opinion), majority holding question for jury where death resulted over a year after fall on side

walk; Southern P. R. Co. v. Yeargin, 48 C. C. A. 504, 109 Fed. 443 (dissenting opinion), to conceded proposition that if there is evidence that defendant's negligence was proximate cause of injury question is for jury, otherwise for court; Barker v. Cunard S. S. Co. 91 Hun, 500, 36 N. Y. Supp. 256, holding general exception to refusal to charge requests insufficient unless each should have been granted as preferred; McKinley v. Metropolitan Street R. Co. 77 App. Div. 259, 79 N. Y. Supp. 213, holding "exception in due form to each request refused or modified" allowed by court after retirement of jury, sufficient; Benedict v. Deshel, 77 App. Div. 279, 79 N. Y. Supp. 205, holding exception to each refusal to charge to several requests, too indefinite; Connor v. Metropolitan Street R. Co. 77 App. Div. 388, 79 N. Y. Supp. 294, holding exception to court's charging requests "first, second," etc., sufficient.

Admissibility of evidence.

Cited in Ives v. Ellis, 169 N. Y. 106, 62 N. E. 138 (dissenting opinion), majority holding erroneous admission of letter incompetent as hearsay, not cured by general verdict.

7 L. R. A. 134, LAWTON v. STEELE, 119 N. Y. 226, 16 Am. St. Rep. 813, 23 N. E. 878.

Affirmed in 152 U. S. 133, 38 L. ed. 385, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 499.

Police power.

Cited in State v. Dow, 70 N. H. 287, 53 L. R. A. 315, 47 Atl. 734, holding statute forbidding catching of trout in local waters with intent to sell same, constitutional; State v. Lewis, 134 Ind. 256, 20 L. R. A. 55, 33 N. E. 1024, holding statute declaring possession of gill nets or seine, misdemeanor, constitutional; People v. Rosenberg, 67 Hun, 60, 22 N. Y. Supp. 56, holding statute declaring fat rendering nuisance, and prohibiting same within municipal limits, valid; Warner v. Stebbins, 111 Iowa, 88, 82 N. W. 457, holding township health board may restrain establishment of municipal pest house within limits without proof of nuisance; People v. Hawkins, 157 N. Y. 8, 42 L. R. A. 494, 68 Am. St. Rep. 736, 51 N. E. 257, holding statute forbidding sale of convict-labor products except where labeled, void as interference with interstate commerce; People v. Buffalo Fish Co. 164 N. Y. 112, 52 L. R. A. 810, 79 Am. St. Rep. 622, 58 N. E. 34 (dissenting opinion), majority holding statute prohibiting possession of certain fish during close season applies only to those caught in local waters; People v. Pierson, 176 N. Y. 211, 63 L. R. A. 192, 98 Am. St. Rep. 666, 68 N. E. 243, holding constitutional, statute making it a misdemeanor to refuse to provide medical attendance for a minor.

Cited in footnotes to Com. v. Manchester, 9 L. R. A. 236, which holds state may regulate fishing in bay within its borders; People v. Bridges, 16 L. R. A. 684, which upholds prohibition of fishing with seine in lake on private land during part of year; Peters v. State, 33 L. R. A. 114, which holds valid as to private lake act regulating mode of taking fish; Com. v. Brown, 28 L. R. A. 110, which sustains weekly tax on sales of oysters; State v. Harrub, 15 L. R. A. 761, which holds statute prohibiting shipment of oysters in shells from state not interference with commerce; State v. Mrozinski, 27 L. R. A. 76, which holds absolute prohibition against taking fish otherwise than by hook and line with specified exceptions, valid; State v. McGuire, 21 L. R. A. 478, which holds having in possession during close season fish previously caught not an offense.

906

L. R. A. CASES AS AUTHORITIES.

[7 L. R. A.

Cited in notes (39 L. R. A. 586, 588) on government control over right of fishery; (9 L. R. A. 807) on fishery rights; (8 L. R. A. 449) on property in feræ naturæ; (36 L. R. A. 593, 598) on power of municipal corporation to define, prevent, and abate nuisances.

Due process of law.

Cited in Bittenhaus v. Johnston, 92 Wis. 598, 32 L. R. A. 383, 66 N. W. 805, and Osborn v. Charlevoix Circuit Judge, 114 Mich. 665, 72 N. W. 982, holding statute authorizing summary destruction by warden of fish nets used in violation of law, constitutional; Colon v. Lisk, 13 App. Div. 199, 43 N. Y. Supp. 364, holding statute authorizing summary seizure of boat used in unlawfully disturbing oysters, constitutional; Egan v. Health Department, 20 Misc. 40, 79 N. Y. S. R. 327, 45 N. Y. Supp. 325, upholding statute authorizing health board to order vacation of unsanitary premises where such order not final; Cartwright v. Cohoes, 39 App. Div. 72, 56 N. Y. Supp. 731, refusing to enjoin summary destruction of privy by board of health under ordinance declaring same nuisance; Hempstead v. Ball Electric Light Co. 9 App. Div. 51, 41 N. Y. Supp. 124, holding village trustees authorized by statute to maintain action to compel removal of electric-wire poles constituting nuisance; Re Kenny, 23 Misc. 14, 49 N. Y. Supp. 1037, holding provision for penalty dependent upon decision of prison official as to identity of prisoner, without hearing, unconstitutional; Garland Novelty Co. v. State, 71 Ark. 142, 71 S. W. 257, upholding constitutionality of statute authorizing summary destruction of gambling devices; People v. Booth & Co. 42 Misc. 326, 86 N. Y. Supp. 272, holding unconstitutional, statute prohibiting possession of imported fish or game during close season; Rockefeller v. Lamora, 85 App. Div. 263, 83 N. Y. Supp. 289, denying right of public to fish in waters running through private park, although stocked by state.

Cited in footnotes to Eichenlaub v. St. Joseph, 18 L. R. A. 590, which holds no judicial proceeding necessary to authorize tearing down of wooden building within fire limits; State v. Robbins, 8 L. R. A. 438, which refuses to direct summary destruction of gaming devices seized.

Cited in notes (19 L. R. A. 197) on right to compensation for property destroyed in abating public nuisance; (36 L. R. A. 606) on extent of municipal right to take or destroy property in abatement of nuisance; (38 L. R. A. 167) on municipal power over buildings and other structures as nuisances; (9 L. R. A. 716) on abatement of nuisance by action.

Distinguished in Colon v. Lisk, 153 N. Y. 195, 60 Am. St. Rep. 609, 47 N. E. 302, Affirming 13 App. Div. 202, 43 N. Y. Supp. 364, denying power of legislature to arbitrarily provide for forfeiture to state of any boat used in interfering with oysters or other shell fish of another; Josh v. Marshall, 33 App. Div. 79, 53 N. Y. Supp. 419, holding seizure of 1-inch bar nets used more than 1 mile from shore not justified under fisheries statute making use within 1 mile nuisance; Fox v. Mohawk & H. River Humane Soc. 25 App. Div. 29, 48 N. Y. Supp. 625, Reversing 20 Misc. 467, 46 N. Y. Supp. 232, holding statute subjecting unlicensed dog to summary destruction unconstitutional where not declared nuisance; New York Sanitary Utilization Co. v. Health Department, 61 App. Div. 113, 70 N. Y. Supp. 510, holding statute declaring boiling garbage within city limits unlawful, void where not actually nuisance; People ex rel. Copcutt v. Board of Health, 140 N. Y. 10, 23 L. R. A. 484, 37 Am. St. Rep. 522, 35 N. E. 320, holding board of health liable for destruction of dam unless same in fact nuisance; Houston v. State, 98

Wis. 486, 42 L. R. A. 48, 74 N. W. 111, holding destruction of healthy animals under statute against diseased does not found statutory "claim against state;" Chicago & E. R. Co. v. Keith, 67 Ohio St. 293, 60 L. R. A. 530, 65 N. E. 1020, holding unconstitutional statute requiring railroads to construct ditches by side of roadbed.

Construction of statutes.

Cited in People ex rel. Holmes v. Lane, 53 App. Div. 536, 65 N. Y. Supp. 1004, holding statute creating office of police justice not void in toto by reason of unconstitutional provision for exclusive jurisdiction; Rathbone v. Wirth, 150 N. Y. 479, 34 L. R. A. 416, 45 N. E. 15, holding unconstitutional provision disqualifying party for office unless member of particular political party renders statute providing for bipartisan police board, void; Newman v. People. 23 Colo. 308, 47 Pac. 278, holding statute authorizing seizure of gambling devices without notice constitutional, irrespective of validity of section authorizing destruction thereof; Re Burger, 21 Misc. 372, 47 N. Y. Supp. 292, holding provision relating to present incumbent fails where part of unconstitutional act extending term of officer; Hennessey v. Volkening, 30 Abb. N. C. 111, 22 N. Y. Supp. 534, construing statute providing for collection of water rents from all buildings on street supplied with distributing pipes, to authorize collection only from premises using water.

Cited in notes (10 L. R. A. 196) on partial invalidity of statutes; (11 L. R. A. 583) on construction of redelegated powers.

Lake Ontario.

Cited in People v. Featherly, 35 N. Y. S. R. 159, 12 N. Y. Supp. 389, holding Great Sodus bay part of Lake Ontario within exemption of statute regulating duck shooting.

7 L. R. A. 139, RAPPLEYE v. RACINE SEEDER CO. 79 Iowa, 220, 44 N. W. 363. Right to assign contract.

Cited in Worden v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co. 82 Iowa, 735, 48 N. W. 71, holding contract to furnish coal not in law assignable; Jackson v. Sessions, 109 Mich. 222, 67 N. W. 315, holding assignment by subvendees of rights in contract for purchase of timber void as between assignee and original vendor; D. C. Hardy Implement Co. v. South Bend Iron Works, 129 Mo. 230, 31 S. W. 599, holding executory contract with partnership may be repudiated by person contracting with firm, upon one partner withdrawing therefrom.

7 L. R. A. 143, PATTERSON v. LECKIE, 83 Ga. 703, 10 S. E. 355. Power of appointment.

Cited in Stearns v. Fraleigh, 39 Fla. 616, 39 L. R. A. 709, 23 So. 18, holding power of beneficiary in deed to appoint trustee possesses none of the elements of an estate.

Cited in footnote to Cotting v. De Sartiges, 16 L. R. A. 367, which holds intent to execute power of appointment not shown by will not referring to power.

7 L. R. A. 145, THOMAS v. WABASH, ST. L. & P. R. CO. 40 Fed. 126.

Statutes partly good and partly bad.

Cited in note (10 L. R. A. 196) on statutes valid in part and invalid in part.

Special and exclusive privileges.

Cited in note (14 L. R. A. 582) on constitutional equality of privileges, immunities, and protection.

7 L. R. A. 149, WOOD v. ST. PAUL CITY R. CO. 42 Minn. 411, 44 N. W. 308. Authenticated affidavits from another state.

Cited in Duggan v. Washougal Land & Logging Co. 10 Wash. 85, 38 Pac. 856, holding verification of lien before notary of another state certifying to jurat sufficient; Hickey v. Collom, 47 Minn. 568, 50 N. W. 918, holding authentication of affidavit by clerk of court of another state incomplete; Re Pancoast, 129 Fed. 645, holding signature and seal sufficient proof, in first instance, of official character of notary out of state.

Cited in note (38 L. R. A. 411) on mechanic's lien under contract made or performed in another state.

7 L. R. A. 151, MOORE v. SANFORD, 151 Mass. 285, 24 N. E. 323. Pendency of proceedings as affecting rights.

Cited in Newburyport Water Co. v. Newburyport, 85 Fed. 726, holding water company having petitioned state court for appraisal of its property for public use can apply to Federal court to test validity of statute; Norcross v. Cambridge, 166 Mass. 510, 33 L. R. A. 843, 44 N. E. 615, holding pendency of petition for damages for taking land does not prevent action to determine validity of act for taking; Boston & M. R. Co. v. Graham, 179 Mass. 67, 60 N. E. 405, holding lessee of railroad petitioning for determination of value of stock of dissenting stockholders of lessor not bound to admit right to dissent. Legislative determination of necessity to take land for public use.

Cited in Butte, A. & P. R. Co. v. Montana Union R. Co. 16 Mont. 529, 31 L. R. A. 306, 50 Am. St. Rep. 508, 41 Pac. 232, holding necessity to take property for railroad follows from determination that it is for public use; Re Kingman, 153 Mass. 572, 12 L. R. A. 421, 27 N. E. 778, holding determination by legisla ture that sewage system necessary for certain territory conclusive; Connecticut River Lumber Co. v. Olcott Falls Co. 65 N. H. 388, 13 L. R. A. 836, 21 Atl. 1090, holding abandonment by state of public right to float logs down a stream when it grants a manufacturing company the right to use the water power thereon, not inferable from fact that the manufacturing business is the more important; Ulmer v. Lime Rock R. Co. 98 Me. 591, 66 L. R. A. 393, 57 Atl. 1001, upholding right of railroad company to condemn land for purpose of building branch track to quarry.

Cited in note (8 L. R. A. 58) on right of eminent domain.

7 L. R. A. 154, RAMSDELL v. NEW YORK & N. E. R. CO. 151 Mass. 245, 23 N. E. 1103.

Construction of Massachusetts employer's liability act.

Cited in Clark v. New York, P. & B. R. Co. 160 Mass. 41, 35 N. E. 104, holding administrator no right of action for instant death of intestate, without widow or dependent next of kin; Gustafsen v. Washburn & M. Mfg. Co. 153 Mass. 471, 27 N. E. 179, holding widow only person who could maintain action for negligent instantaneous killing of her husband; Dacey v. Old Colony R. Co. 153 Mass.