Minnesota.. Mississippi. New York. North Carolina. North Dakota.. Tennessee U. S. C. C. App. Washington. .17, 23, 32, 36, 45, 53 .73, 83 .1.0 ..70, 79 .16, 57, 67, 69, 80 .63, 85 .11, 24, 26, 90 .1, 2, 39, 40, 84 ..15, 64 1. Arrest Misdemeanor. Officers without warrant have no right to intercept travelers on a public highway at night for purpose of finding someone in act of violating law; an arrest for misdemeanor without warrant on information or suspicion being an unlawful act.-Mitchell v. Hughes, Wash., 176 Pac. 26. 2. Attorney and Client-Disbarment.-Disbarment of an attorney who misappropriates a client's money with intent to defraud is authorized even in absence of statute.-In re Gowan, Wash., 176 Pac. 7. Employment.-In 3. Bankruptcy-Principal determining whether an alleged bankrupt is chiefly engaged in farming, all his activities are to be taken into consideration, the relative amount of time devoted to each, and the comparative amount of revenue received and indebtedness incurred in each.-In re Brown, U. S. C. C. A., 253 Fed. 357. 4. Remainderman.-Regardless of whether interest of one remainderman who, four months prior to filing her petition in bankruptcy, executed mortgages purporting to convey fee, with covenants of warranty, was contingent or vested, the bona fides of transactions not being questioned, the right of the mortgagees to enforce their liens would not be affected by discharge in bankruptcy.-Bisby v. Walker, Iowa, 169 N. W. 467. 5. -Schedules.-A discharge in bankruptcy, the bankrupt having scheduled a debt secured by an assignment of wages, does not render un enforceable the assignment of wages to be earned in the future, the discharge being only a personal release, not destroying a lien created by the assignment.-Monarch Discount Co. v. Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co. of Indiana, Ill., 120 N. E. 743. 6. -Seat on Exchange.-Seat or membership in Stock Exchange, Merchants' Exchange, or Board of Trade, while in the nature of a personal privilege, is property which creditors may reach, and which on bankruptcy of the member or holder will pass to his trustee.-In re Stringer, U. S. C. C. A., 253 Fed. 352. Interest. 7. Bills and Notes-Beneficial Where notes are indorsed and transferred by payee to another, the transferee, having legal title, may maintain action thereon in his own name, though not having beneficial interest in notes. Lower v. Shorthill, Kan., 176 Pac. 107. 8. Payment to Holder.-Where the maker pays the note to the payee who is not the holder, he is not discharged unless the payee was authorized to receive payment or the holder held out that he authorized such payment.People's Sav. Bank v. Manes, Ark., 206 S. W. 315. 9. Carriers of Goods-Misdelivery.-The liability of a common carrier in case of misdelivery is as in case of failure to deliver.-Babbitt v. Grand Trunk Western Ry. Co., Ill., 120 N. E. 803. 10. Carriers of Passengers-Accident.-Where conductor of street car, facing rear, rang up a transfer, and his elbow struck glasses of a passenger, who had risen behind him to be near the door at his stop, and broke them and cut his eyes, the injury was purely an accident, not avoidable by rational care required by common carrier respecting its passengers.-Nichols Boston Elevated Ry. Co., Mass., 120 N. E. 847. V. 11. Avoiding Injury.-A carrier is liable for injuries to passengers caused by wrongful acts of strangers, if they could be reasonably anticipated, but is not liable for injuries caused by premature starting of a car due to pulling of bell rope by an intoxicated passenger, where conductor had no knowledge of the intoxication, and such third person had been orderly up to that time.-Pride v. Piedmont & N. Ry. Co., N. C., 97 S. E. 418. 12. Charities-Hospital.-Where a hospital charged prices similar to those charged by other hospitals being conducted for profit and had operated for 13 years without receiving any charity patients, it was a hospital being conducted for profit and not a charitable institution, though corporation had been organized for charitable purposes.-Stewart v. California Medical Missionary & Benevolent Ass'n, Cal., 176 Pac. 46. 13. Chattel Mortgages-Lump Sale.-Where property covered by chattel mortgage consists of many parcels, and mortgagee at foreclosure sale offers whole in a lump, instead of in such lots as would suit buyers, the manner of sale is unfair.-Henderson v. Fisher, Cal., 176 Pac. 63. 14. Commerce Administrative Duties.-Character of equipment which carrier must provide and allowances which it must make for in strumentalities supplied and services rendered by shipper, such as lining cars used in shipment of grain in bulk, directly concern ratemaking and are peculiarly administrative, so that there should be an appropriate inquiry thereon by Interstate Commerce Commission before submission to a court.-Midway Co-op. Elevator Co. v. Great Northern Ry. Co., N. D., 169 N. W. 491. 15.--Permissive Power. The state has permissive power to prescribe a method of compensation to employes within the field belonging primarily to Congress, until it has exercised its superior power covering the subject.-Suttle v. Hope Natural Gas Co., W. Va., 97 S. E. 429. 16. Common Law-Guide in Construction.-A rule announced by the common law of England, though by decision since the Revolutionary war, may be taken by the Mississippi court at least as a guide.-Richardson v. Sims, Miss., 80 So. 4. 17. Constitutional Law Legislature. - The Legislature cannot exercise a forbidden power merely to aid in the enforcement of a law which it has the power to enact.-Barber V. Commonwealth, Ky., 206 S. W. 290. 18. Obligation of Contract.-A provision in the charter of a traction company, whereby the company shall not at any time be allowed to charge a greater amount than five cents for any one fare, may be changed by the consent of the parties, if the rights of the people are not injuriously affected; such change not constituting an impairment of an obligation of a contract. Robertson v. Wilmington & P. Traction Co., Del., 104 Atl. 839. to 19.--Obligation of Contract.--Where plaintiff's offer to furnish ground upon which build a city hall was accepted by the council, the rejection of such legislative act by the voters upon referendum was not an impairment of the obligation of a contract.-Harbor Center Land Co. v. Council of City of Richmond, Cal., 176 Pac. 50. 20. Contracts--Consideration. -A contract for the support and maintenance of a father by his son in consideration of the father's realty was not lacking in consideration merely because the father lived only a few months, and the value of his keeping was not over $600, while the land worth than $3,000 —Peter Griffin, Iowa, 169 N. W. 411. 21. was more V. Consideration.-Promise by a contractor, threatening to abandon his contract, to continue with the contract, was not consideration for a promise to pay additional compensation.--Hoskins v. Powder Land & Irrigation Co., Ore., 176 Pac. 121. 22.- --Implied Promise.-Where an instrument by which obligor acknowledged an indebtedness contains no express promise to pay, the law implies such promise.-Patterson v. Chapman, Cal., 176 Pac. 37. not allow a corporation to repudiate the acts of its president in executing corporate note, and at the same time retain the property for which the note was given.-Phillips v. Interstate Land Co., N. C., 97 S. E. 417. 25. -Stockholder.-Where persons agree that a corporation shall do a certain thing, which they can compel it to do because of their ownership of a majority of the stock, the corporation is not bound by the agreement; but such persons bind themselves individually, unless the agreement specifies to the contrary.-Morse v. Tillotson & Wolcott Co., U. S. C. C. A., 253 Fed, 340. 26. Covenants-Seisin.-A covenant of seisin in a deed is broken upon the delivery of the deed, if the title is not good.-Wilson v. Vieeland, N. C., 97 S. E. 427. 27. Criminal Law-Impeaching Witness.-Alleged newly discovered evidence which is cumulative and impeaching is no ground for a new trial. Langston v. State, Ga., 97 S. E. 444. 28.- -Intoxicating Liquor.-The court will take judicial notice that whisky is intoxicating. -Bashara v. State, Tex., 206 S. W. 359. 29.-Verbal Statements.-Any statement or conduct of a person indicating a consciousness of guilt, where he is then or thereafter charged with or suspected of crime, is admissible against him upon his trial therefor.-Ryals v. State, Ga., 97 S. E. 444. 30. Voluntary Confession. Defendant's voluntary confessions are admissible in evidence. Kinzer v. State, Okla., 176 Pac. 92. .31. Damages-Parent and Child.-In parents' action for loss of services during minority of their ten-year-old boy injured by defendant's train, it was not incumbent on parents to prove boy would have worked and earned money for them, but only that he had capacity and ability. -Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. v. Roberts, Tex., 206 S. W. 382. 32. Death--Absence Seven Years. Where a person is absent from the place of his residence for seven consecutive years after he is last heard from, a presumption of death is created, sufficient to throw upon the other party the burden of proving the person to be alive.— Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. Gatz, Ky., 206 S. W. 299. 33. Deeds-Delivery.-Delivery may be made by words alone, or by acts alone, or by both together; but there must be sufficient to show an intention to pass the title.-Kanawell v. Miller, Pa., 104 Atl. 861. 31. Dedication---Acceptance.-Before Load dedicated to public will become a public highway, there must be some act on part of duly constituted County authorities which will amount to an acceptance of it as such.-Hillside Cotton Mills v. Ellis, Ga., 97 S. E. 459. a 35.- -Recorded Plat.-The acknowledgment and recording of a plat according to statute, showing streets and alleys thereon, operates effectually as a the deed conveying title to streets and alleys to the city.-Corbin v. Baltimore & O. C. T. R. Co., I., 120 N. E. $00. 36. Record Evidence.-That a deed is on record is prima facie evidence of its delivery, and whoever asserts the contrary has the burden of proving it.-- Middleton v. Balt, Ky., 206 S. W. 275. 37. Descent and Distribution-Exemption.— An exemption act creates an independent bounty, and is of no kin to one of distribution.-In re Hildebrand's Estate, Pa., 104 Atl. 866. 38. Divorce Adultery.-Adultery committed by a wife bars a suit by her for divorce on any ground.-Walker v. Walker, Vt., 104 Atl. 828. 39. Custody of Children. It is within the power of the court Lo grant the custody of children to one party or both as will meet the a 42. Explosives-Proximate Cause.-Where nine-year-old boy was injured by the explosion of dynamite caps which he found on his father's premises, where they had been placed by the city's employes, so as to be accessible and attractive to children, the act of the employes was the proximate cause of the injury, notwithstanding that the injury occurred next day, while plaintiff was attempting to solder two of the caps together.-City of Lubbock v. Bagwell, Tex., 206 S. W. 371. 43. Frauds, Statute of-Interest in Profits.The statute of frauds does not prevent parol proof for the purpose of showing an interest in the profits to be derived from the sale of lands. -Ingram v. Johnston, Cal., 176 Pac. 54. 41. Parol Agreement.-Where adjoining landowners employed surveyor to fix boundary line, their parol agreement that the line so fixed should be the true boundary was not a conveyance of land, and therefore void under the statute of frauds, though the true location could have been ascertained by reference to government field notes and plats.-Wood v. Bapp, S. D., 169 N. W. 518. 15. Fraudulent Conveyances-Badge of Fraud. -While badges of fraud, such as want of consideration, failure to record a mortgage, and the like, cast the burden of proof upon the transferee of land, they are not conclusive, and may be overcome by evidence establishing the bona fides of the transaction-Linn v. Brown, Ky., 206 S. W. 287. 46.- -Fraudulent Intent.-in creditor's action to set aside alleged fraudulent conveyance, creditor need not show that grantee had knowledge of grantors fraudulent intent, where conveyance was without valuable consideration.-King v. Papazian, Cal., 176 Pac. 49. 17. Gifts--Donatio Causa Mortis. Delivery of certificates of stock to third person a to be delivered to another at the death of the depositor, not in contemplation of speedy death, vests a present title in the grantee, subject to a life estate in the depositor.-Coward v. De Cray, Cal. 176 Pac. 56. 48. Habeas Corpus Bill of Exceptions.Where petitioner in habeas corpus was remanded to custody on condition, and no supersedeas was granted, and error was assigned upon judgment, and, while case was pending in Supreme Court, defendant complied with conditions and was discharged, petitioner's bill of exception's would be dismissed, on ground that question was moot.-Cook v. Lowry, Ga., 97 S. E. 440. 19. Homestead-Abandonment.-That the occupant of a homestead removes and resides elsewhere for purposes of health or business does not work an abandonment, unless coupled with an intent not to return to such property as a home.-Yellow-Hair v. Pratt, S. D., 169 N. W. 515. of *50. Personal Privilege.-A homestead right, or the right to claim a homestead as exempt from sale under execution, is a personal privilege-Smith v. Spradlin, Ark., 206 S. W. 327. 51. Husband and Wife Agency.—Act wife in permitting husband and his partner to use her machinery in business as if it belonged to them did not legally estop her from claiming property as against creditor of firm, who accepted mortgage from partners to secure debt against firm.-Burkitt v. Moxley, Tex., 206 S. W. 373. 52. Infants-Tolling Limitations.-Where the statute of limitations has commenced to run in favor of title by adverse possession, the running of such statute is not tolled upon the death of the persen in possession because of the minority of the party claiming under him.Wood v. Bapp, S. D., 169 N. W. 518. 53. Injunction-Recovery on Bond.-The obligees in an injunction bond can under no circumstances recover in a suit thereon an amount in excess of the sum stipulated in the bond.Wilder v. Miller, Ky., 206 S. W. 293. 54. Trespass.-An action for an injunction cannot be successfully maintained to restrain or prevent the commission of a mere trespass, unless it is made to appear that the injury apprehended therefrom will be great or irreparable.-Lake Sand Co. v. State, Ind., 120 N. E. 714. 55. Insurance-Forfeiture of Policy.-Defendant order could not, while it held one full unapplied monthly assessment paid by member, forfeit his mutual benefit certificate for nonpayment of assessment.-Malone v. Grand Lodge, A. O. C. W. of Iowa, Iowa, 169 N. W. 438. 56.--Forfeiture of Policy.-Where insurance company treated the first annual premium note as in existence and demanded payment thereof after its maturity, it could not claim that the policy had been forfeited on account of nonpayment of the note at maturity,-Schumacher v. North American Life Ins. Co. of Omaha, S. D., 169 N. W. 526. 57.---Over-insurance.-The defense of overinsurance in a fire policy is valid. Scottish Union & National Ins. Co. v. Warren Gee Lumber Co., Miss., 80 So. 9. 58. Life Estates-Adverse Possession.-Possession of land by purchaser from life tenant, even under deed purporting to convey the fee, is not, during such tenant's life, so adverse to the remaindermen or reversioner as to set in operation the statute of limitations.-Allison v. White, Ill., 120 N. E. 809. 59. Limitation of Actions-Action on Bond.An action on a sheriff's bond under seal, brought within 20 years from its alleged breach, was not barred by statute of limitations (Civ. Code 1910, § 4359).-Prince v. Wood, Ga., 97 S. E. 457. 60. Lotteries- - Illegal Consideration. Note given to secure money to be used, by agreement between parties, for promotion of lottery scheme. was unenforceable, being based on illegal consideration, under Civ. Code, §§ 1607, 1667,-Sloss v. Holland, Cal., 176 Pac. 72. 61. Master and Servant-Course of Employment.-Where deceased was to eat expected lunch and spend the noon hour at factory, and to operate an elevator as occasion demanded, and he was found crushed between elevator and gate during noon hour, employer was liable for compensation when plant was one included within Workmen's Compensation Act, in the absence of showing that deceased deliberately took his life.-Humphrey v. Industrial Commission of Illinois, Ill., 120 N. E. 816. 62. -Fellow Servant.- Where vice principal enters upon duties relating solely to ordinary work of a servant, he will be presumed to have assumed status of a servant, and, when acting as a mere fellow servant, the master is not liable for his negligence whereby another servant is injured.-Whiters v. Mallory S. S. Co., Ga., 97 S. E. 453. 63. Independent Contractor.-That an independent contractor, undertaking to paint certain smokestacks for a corporation, is furnished paint and a helper by the corporation does not affect his status as an independent contractor within the Workmen's Compensation Laws.Litts v. Risley Lumber Co., N. Y., 120 N. E. 730. 64.-Promulgatory Rules.-Generally an employer owes duty to promulgate and enforce reasonable rules for guidance and protection of employes; but, without evidence showing that such rules would be useful and feasible under similar circumstances, he is not negligent in failing to promulgate them.--Suttle V. Hope Natural Gas Co., W. Va., 97 S. E. 429. be performed in this state, is an Indiana contract, and is governed by the laws in force in this state.-Pittsburgh, Č., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Miller, Ind., 120 N. E. 706. 66. Mortgages-Equity of Redemption.-After foreclosure sale, and until execution of the master's deed, the owner of the equity of redemption is entitled to possession and control the property.-Allison v. White, Ill., 120 N. E. 809. of 67. Municipal Corporation-Condition Subsequent. Even if a stipulation in a deed conveying property to a city to be used as a part of a street, whic is to be maintained by the city, is considered as a condition subsequent, for breach of which the deed may be canceled, such stipulation does not relieve the grantor from taxes to maintain the street; the obligation of the city being simply to maintain such street in the manner in which it must mantain all its streets.-Kimball v. City of Jackson, Miss., 80 So. 3. 68.- -Mistake.-While a municipal corporation is not liable for a mistake in judgment, or even negligence, of its officers in designating a place for the storing of explosives, it has no right to create a public nuisance, and, if it does so, it is liable for the resulting damages.-City of Seattle v. Lloyds' Plate Glass Ins. Co., U. S. C. C. A., 253 Fed. 321. 69. Navigable Waters-Riparian Owner.-The riparian owners takes to center of the thread of navigable streams, subject to the public right of use and navigation; tidewater, navigable streams, and lakes belonging to public for purposes of commerce, fisheries, and other uses. Richardson v. Sims, Miss., 80 So. 4. 70. Negligence - Imputability. The negligence of the driver of an automobile hired by a passenger, who neither had nor assumed control of the vehicle, is not imputed to him.Kalland v. City of Brainerd, Minn., 169 N. W. 475. 71. Partnership Contribution to Capital.Where co-partnership was entered into for purchase of industrial property, one of the partners contributing his knowledge of industrial property and advice as to property to be purchased, and the others to furnish the capital, the partner who furnished no capital was entitled to his share of property purchased with partnership capital.-Ingram v. Johnston, Cal., 176 Pac. 54. 72. Trading Partnership.-One partner of a trading partnership may lawfully and in good faith sell the entire personal assets of the partnership to pay partnership debts.-Diamond v. Gust, Tex., 206 S. W. 366. 73. Holding Out.-One who holds himself out as a partner is liable to another who, believing in and relying upon such partnership, enters into a contract involving the giving of credit to it, even though the former is not a partner, and notwithstanding that such supposed partnership is in fact, but without plaintiff's knowledge, a corporation.-Look v. Watson, Me., 104 Atl. 850. 74. Payment-Mistake of Fact.-To recover money paid through mistake of fact, burden is on plaintiff to show that payments were in fact made under a mistake of fact.-Yowell v. Union Central Life Ins. Co., Tenn., 206 S. W. 334. 75. Perpetuities · - Postponed Enjoyment. Where codicil to will grating estate for life to grandchildren postponed enjoyment and directed the executor not to pay over the share to any devisee not of age, it was not invalid under the rule against perpetuities; the possession and not the vesting being postponed.-Woodard v. Woodard, Iowa., 169 N. W. 464. 76. Principal and Agent-Loyalty to Principal. An executor, acting as agent for other persons interested under a will in the management of common property, was bound to act in good faith and with loyalty to his principals, and could not deal with the property, so as to make a profit out of it, without disclosing the circumstances to his principals.-Kreis v. Cartledge, Pa., 104 Atl. 855. 77. -Scope of Authority.-An agent, with limited authority to buy at a certain price, paying more, is liable to the principal for the excess expended.-Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Chihuahua Exchange, Tex., 206 S. W. 364. 78. Railroads-Look and Listen. One approaching a railroad crossing in an automobile is bound to look as he approaches, after stopping, but is not required to again stop before crossing.-Wingert v. Philadelphia & R. Ry. Co., Pa., 104 Atl. 859. 79. Release-Misrepresentation.-A release of a cause of action for personal injury procured by misrepresentation of a material fact, though innocently made, affords a ground of avoidance.-Enger v. Great Northern Ry. Co., Minn., 169 N. W. 474. 80. Specific Performance-Certainty of Subject-Matter.-Agreement to convey and cannot be enforced in any case, unless the writing identifies with certainty the property sought to be conveyed.-Nickerson v. Fithian Land Co., Miss., 80 So. 1. 81. Street Railroads-Imputable Negligence. -A wife riding with her husband in an automobile may not rely implicitly upon his care and prudence in driving, and, if she makes no effort to have him check a high and reckless speed when approaching defendant's street car tracks, she contributes to her own injuries resulting from collision.-Miller v. Ft. Smith Light & Traction Co., Ark., 206 S. W. 329. a 83. Torts-Contributory Cause.-The right of person to maintain an action for a wrong committed upon him is not taken away because at the time of the injury he was disobeying a statute, provided disobedience in no way contributed to injury.-Cobb v. Cumberland County Power & Light Co., Me., 104 Atl. 844. 84. Trover and Conversion-Tender.-Assuming that a conversion can be so excused by a tender as to absolve the wrong to the extent that no damages may be recovered, a mere direction to the owner to remove his goods from defendant's place of business, where they were stored by defendant, was not a tender.-Pappas v. General Market Co., Wash., 176 Pac. 25. 85. Vendor and Purchaser-Marketable Title. A purchaser of real estate is entitled to a marketable title free from reasonable doubt, and he need not remedy defects therein.-Crocker Point Ass'n v. Gouraud, N. Y., 120 N. E. 737. 86. Wills-Agency.-Where a named executor, by consent of others interested under the will, continued to manage common property for 18 years, he was acting merely as agent.Kreis v. Cartledge, Pa., 104 Atl. 855. 87.- -Charge on Land. No particular language is necessary to create a charge on land, and the intention to charge is to be carried out whenever it is discoverable from anything in the instrument.-Shaffers Estate, Pa., 104 Atl. 853. 88. Construction.-In construing a will, if doubt arises whether the remainder is contingent or vested, it must be resolved in favor of the vested remainder.-Woodard v. Woodard, Iowa, 169 N. W. 464. 89. Negotiable Instrument.-Where an instrument, whether negotiable or not, and whether payable in money or property, acknowledges a present debt to another, it creates a present obligation, and is not a voluntary gift without consideration, and hence testamentary in character, though it contains a provision that it was not to be discharged until after death.--Patterson v. Chapman, Cal., 176 Pac. 37. 90. Witnesses Cross-Examination of Defendant. In prosecution for murder, when defendant became a witness, he was subject to cross-examination.-State V. Wentz, N. C, 97 S. E. 420. : Central Law Journal. ST. LOUIS, MO., FEBRUARY 21, 1919. THE NORTH DAKOTA SEED ACT AND THE FARM LOAN BOARD. · Among the wild and ill-considered experiments in legislation by the legislature of North Dakota, under the domination of the Non-Partisan League movement, was an act, approved January 29, 1918, authorizing counties to make loans to owners and tenants of farm lands to enable them to procure seed grain and feed, such loans to be secured by contracts having the same force and effect as promissory notes. The absurd feature of this act was that it provided that if the indebtedness was not paid on or before the 15th day of October, it should be entered as a lien having priority over all incumbrances except those existing at the time the act went into effect. In other words, a mortgage which was a first lien today might become a second lien tomorrow by the mortgagor's action in borrowing under the Seed Act. While it is possible to justify such displacement of contract priorities by the right of the legislature to determine in what order liens or obligations shall be payable, yet it seems difficult to justify the attempt to classify the priority established by the North Dakota Seed Act, with the recognized "taxes, liens and assessments" which may be lawfully assessed against land and given priority over liens established by the contract of the parties. The borrowing of money for seed and feed is a voluntary act in the interest of the individual and not an obligation imposed by the state for public or quasi public purposes. At any rate it is an unusual interference with the right of contract which, if justifiable under any cir cumstances, must be sustained to a valid exercise of the police power of the state. But whether or not such an act giving priority to state loans to individuals over previous liens established by contract (subsequent to the passage of the act, of course) can be sustained as a valid exercise of the police power on the ground of the public necessity of such loans, the expediency of such laws is very doubtful. For, while the state secures protection for its loans, the individual is deprived of the advantage of borrowing money under private contract. If the borrower can, subsequent to the execution of a first mortgage, create another lien by his own act and for an amount which may exceed the first lien and exhaust the security, the power to create a first lien is practically taken away. This is the very situation that is now con fronting the farmers of North Dakota. For, when they sought to take advantage of the United States Farm Loan Act, the Farm Loan Board refused to lend money on North Dakota farm lands, in view of the possible displacement of the priority of its security under the Seed Act. The Attorney General of North Dakota went to Washington to plead with the Farm Loan Board to rescind its ruling which deprived North Dakota farmers of the right given them under the federal law. After protracted conferences, the Farm Loan Board consented to make loans under the Farm Loan Act, provided the North Dakota farmer gave a surety company bond indemnifying the Federal Loan Bank at St. Paul against any loss resulting from the assertion of any prior lien under the Seed Act. Thus again it has been proven that the law is not a thing that can be played with and jockeyed to suit the whims or purposes of any class of the community. The law is an entirety. an entirety. Its principles are so delicately adjusted that if they are |