Contained in the "American Decisions" and the "American Reports," Decided in the Courts of Last Resort of the Several States. Selected, Reported and Annotated, by A. C. Freeman, and the Associate Editors of the "American Decisions." Vol. 72. San Francisco: Bancroft Whitney Com pany, Law Publishers and Law Booksellers, 1900. Review will follow.

HUMORS OF THE LAW.

A gentleman who had a suit in Chancery was called upon by his counsel to put in his answer, for fear of incurring a contempt. "Well," says the client, "why is not my answer put in then?" "How should I draw your answer," saith the lawyer, "without knowing what you can swear?" "Hang your scruples," says the client again; "pray do your part of a lawyer, and draw me a sufficient answer; and let me alone to do the part of a gentleman, and swear it."

In Ireland nothing seems to be taken seriously but politics. Even the law has its comical side, as may be seen by a case recently tried at Tyrone Assizes.

The prisoner was charged with setting fire to his own shop, which he had insured. As direct evidence was scanty a good deal turned on the man's character. A petty sessions clerk deposed:

"The prisoner, though honest, is a crooked sort of a character."

Counsel: "You mean that though he is a crooked man, he is straight?"

1. ADMINISTRATION Widow's Quarantine.-Under Rev. St. 1889, § 4533, providing that a widow may remain in and enjoy the mansion house of her husband until dower be assigned, without paying rent, the widow is entitled to quarantine, whether she resides in the mansion house or elsewhere at the time of her husband's death.-KING V. KING, MO., 56 S. W. Rep. 534. 2. AGENCY-Sale of Collateral.-Where P pledged malt to plaintiff as collateral for notes, and plaintiff sold it to defendant, the latter cannot, in an action for the price, inquire into the matter of how much was due on the notes; they not being paid, and defendant having no rights or equities against P; plaintiff having a right to collect the collateral, that it might be ready to account therefor.- RICE & BULLEN MALTING CO. v. `INTERNATIONAL BANK, Ill., 56 N. E. Rep. 1062.

3. ANIMALS-Dogs-Negligent Killing.-Dogs are personal property in this State, and an action will lie in favor of the owner of a dog, having a substantial money value, for its destruction through the negli gence of a third party.- SMITH V. ST. PAUL CITY RY. Co., Minn., 82 N. W. Rep. 577.

4. ANIMALS-Personal Injuries — Dogs.-Under Code 1873, § 1485, providing that the owner of a dog shall be liable to the party injured for all damages done by his dog, except when the party injured is doing an unlaw. ful act, it is no defense to an action for injuries from a bite of defendant's dog to show that several months before the injury the plaintiff threw stones at the dog. -VAN BERGEN V. EULBERG, Iowa, 82 N. W. Rep. 483. 5. ASSIGNMENTS-Wages Fraudulent Conveyances. -Defendant's assignment of his wages to a creditor, who collected the same and turned them over to defendant, retaining a small part to apply on his claim, was fraudulent, as against attaching creditors, whose claims antedated the assignment.-LENNON V. PARKER, R. I., 46 Atl. Rep. 44.

6. ASSIGNMENTS FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS Validity. The right of a debtor to make a common law assignment for the benefit of creditors will be regarded as existing in each of the States of the Union, unless shown to be expressly prohibited.-J. WALTER THOMP SON Co. V. WHITEHEAD, Ill., 56 N. E. Rep. 1106.

7. ATTORNEY AND CLIENT-Right of Plaintiff to Discharge. As plaintiff had the right to discharge her attorneys, though they had brought the action for her under her contract for a contingent fee, they cannot complain of an order substituting the names of other attorneys on the record as counsel for plaintiff in the further prosecution of the case, as this cannot preju dice their rights growing out of the contract and the alleged breach thereof.-ROOT v. MCILVAINE, Ky., 56 S. W. Rep. 498.

Assets

8. BANKRUPTCY Endowment Policy.Where an endowment policy of life insurance was made payable to the wife of the assured if he died dur ing the term, or to himself if living at the expiration of the stipulated period, and was issued upon their Joint application, and for several years before the bankruptcy of the husband the wife saved the policy from lapsing by paying the premiums out of her own money, held, that the bankrupt's interest in the sur render value of the policy, upon passing to his trustee, was subject to an equitable lien or right in the wife to be reimbursed for such proportion of the premiums paid by her as had gone to keep the policy alive for the benefit of the husband's interest.-IN RE DIACK, U. S. D. C., S. D. (N. Y.), 100 Fed. Rep. 770.

9. BANKRUPTCY-Exemptions-Personal Property.Where the law of the State (Const. S. Car. art. 3, § 28) grants an exemption of personal property of the value of $500 to the head of a family, and provides that, if he has not that amount of property, his wife, having a separate estate, shall be entitled to the like exemption as provided for the head of the family, but with a pro. viso that not more than $500 of personal proper y shail be allowed to the husband and wife jointly, a married woman, having a separate estate, who becomes bankrupt, and whose husband owns personal property of

the value of $150, is entitled to claim only $350 as the personal property exemption to be set apart to her in the bankruptcy proceedings.-IN RE MCCUTCHEN, U. S. D. C., E. D. (S. Car.), 100 Fed. Rep. 779.

10. BANKRUPTCY Partnership Assets Fraudulent Preference. - The purpose of the bankruptcy act with reference to the joint assets of a bankrupt partnership is that they shall be first applied, in good faith, to the payment of partnership debts; and any scheme or device resorted to by persons contemplating bankruptcy for the purpose of charging partnership assets with individual debts is in violation of the act, and will be frustrated by the court, the law being administered in such manner as to prevent preferences, and secure the equitable distribution of the estate.-IN RE JONES, U. S. D. C., E. D. (Mo.), 100 Fed. Rep. 781.

11. BANKRUPTCY - Preferences.-A mortgage or assignment of property by an insolvent debtor to one of his creditors, intended to prefer that creditor over others, but executed before the enactment of the bankruptcy law, is not void under that statute or at common law; and, if such a transfer is not contrary to the statutes of the State, or is not aunulled by proceedings taken under a State law within the time limited thereby, the property cannot be recovered from the creditor by the trustee in bankruptcy of the mortgagor or grantor.-IN RE TERRILL, U. S. D. C., D. (Vt.), 100 Fed. Rep. 778.

12. BANKRUPTCY-Property Fraudulently Conveyed. -A debtor mortgaged his stock in trade to a relative, and the mortgage was immediately foreclosed, and the goods bid in by a stranger, who transferred his bid to a friend of the debtor, and the latter ostensibly sold the property to the debtor's wife. The purchaser handed the purchase money to the wife, and she to the officer making the sale. It did not appear that the wife owned anything, but it was stated that the money was advanced to her on the credit of the debtor himself, and that he had repaid it. The debtor continued to carry on business in his own name as "agent," and the property was in his possession at the time he was adjudged bankrupt. Held, that the transfer to the wife was merely colorable, and in fraud of creditors, and the trustee in bankruptcy should be directed to take possession of the property as assets of the estate. -IN RE SMITH, U. S. D. C., S. D. (Ga.), 100 Fed. Rep. 795.

13. BANKRUPTCY Revocation of Discharge.-Under Bankr. Act 1898, § 15, providing that a discharge in bankruptcy may be revoked "if it shall be made to appear that it was obtained through the fraud of the bankrupt, and that the knowledge of the fraud has come to the petitioners since the granting of the discharge, and that the actual facts did not warrant the discharge," it is cause for revoking a discharge that the bankrupt had considerable property at the time of his bankruptcy and of his application for discharge, and concealed the same, showing no assets on his verified schedule, and swearing that he had surrendered all his property and had fully complied with all the requirements of the act, when the creditors, without laches, did not learn the facts until after the discharge was granted, and their petition is filed in due time.-IN RE MEYERS, U. S. D. C., S. D. (N. Y.), 100 Fed. Rep. 775.

14. BENEFICIAL ASSOCIATIONS-Beneficiaries.-Under Act June 22, 1893, relating to beneficial associations, and providing that payment of death benefits shall only be made to the families, heirs, blood relations, affianced husband, or affianced wife of, or to persons dependent upon, the member, and that such benefits shall not be willed, assigned, or otherwise transferred to any other person, the death benefit of a member of such an association cannot be bequeathed by will to a niece of the member's deceased wife.-BALDWIN V. BEGLEY, Ill., 56 N. E. Rep. 1065.

15. BILLS AND NOTES-Defenses-Consideration.-If a person has a right at law, his forbearance to institute proceedings to protect or enforce it is a valuable con

sideration for a promise to pay.-MINNEAPOLIS LAND Co. v. MCMILLAN, Minn., 82 N. W. Rep. 591.

16. BILLS AND NOTES-Note Void Upon Payee's Death.-A note executed by son to father for various articles of personal property named therein, payable one day after date, but reciting that, if it is not paid during the payee's life, "this note is void or not attempted to be collected," became void upon the father's death, though an action by the father thereon was pending when he died.-MCGLASSON V. MCGLASSON'S EXR., Ky., 56 S. W. Rep. 510.

17. BILLS AND NOTES-Payee-Descriptio Personæ.The addition of the word "trustee," following the name of a payee in a note, does not destroy its negotiability, as such word is descriptio persona.-CENTRAL STATE BANK V. SPURLIN, Iowa, 82 N. W. Rep. 493.

18. BILLS AND NOTES-Want of Consideration.-Notes which were executed by defendants in consideration that a certain proceeding brought by other parties to remove the plaintiff as executor of an estate should be dismissed, and that the plaintiff should be allowed certain sums as commissions, attorney's fees, and clerk hire, were unenforceable for want of consideration, since the suit dismissed was not between the signers and the payee of the notes, and the commissions, attorney's fees, and clerk hire allowed in administering an estate must be determined by the county court.— CURRIER V. CLARK, Colo., 60 Pac. Rep. 958.

19. BILLS AND NOTES-Wrongful Possession.-Plaintiff alleged that a note executed by her brother-in-law in favor of her husband was placed in the hands of K as security for a loan to her husband, and while so pledged her husband assigned it to her, of which assignment she informed her brother-in-law on January 14th; that on January 16th her brother-in-law and the other defendants wrongfully obtained the note from K, and, while her husband was in a state of intoxication, persuaded him to assign it to one of the defendants. Held, that the complaint stated a cause of action to recover the note, and a demurrer thereto was properly overruled.-MORE V. FINGER, Cal., 60 Pac. Rep. 933.

20. CANCELLATION OF MORTGAGE-Proof of Title.Where plaintiff filed a suit to set aside a mortgage as fraudulent and the defendant filed a a cross bill for the foreclosure of the mortgage, it was not incumbent on the plaintiff to trace his title back to the government, since both parties claimed title through a common grantor.-ANDERSON V. CARTER, Iowa, 82 N. W. Rep.

482.

21. CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS-Presumption of Neg. ligence. The overturning of a car, resulting in injury to a passenger, raises a presumption of negligence, which the carrier must overcome by proof, in order to escape liability.-FELTON V. HOLBROOK, Ky., 56 S. W. Rep. 506.

22. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Corporations-Revocation of Corporate Charter.-Const. 1831, art. 2, § 17, authorizes the legislature to incorporate "with a reserved power of revocation by the legislature." Held, that such proVision became a part of the charter of corporations subsequently formed, and that the legislature might exert that power at any time.-WILMINGTON CITY RY. Co. v. WILMINGTON & B. S. RY. Co., Del., 46 Atl. Rep.

12.

23. CONTRACTS-Agreement Between Joint Owners.Coupon bonds executed by the trustee, and secured by a mortgage on the trust property, executed by him, may be acquired and held by the parties to the agree ment, not being their individual obligations, and they may enforce payment by a sale of the joint property.COCHRAN V. JACKMAN, Ky., 56 S. W. Rep. 507.

24. CONVERSION-Evidence.-An action for conversion will lie where a mortgagee who has taken prop. erty into his custody for the purpose of foreclosing a chattel mortgage refuses to restore possession to a mortgagor who has made redemption in accordance with the provisions of Gen. St. 1894, § 4137.-LATUSEK V. DAVIES, Minn., 82 N. W. Rep. 585.

25. CORPORATIONS -Action by Creditor.-A creditor of a corporation, under sections 3237, 3239, Rev. St., if, looking to the interests of its creditors, the ends of Justice require or the court direct, may maintain an action in equity to redress wrongs to such corporation growing out of the misconduct of its officers, resulting in loss or waste of the corporate assets. -KILLEN V. STATE BANK OF MANITOwoc, Wis., 82 N. W. Rep. 596.

26. CORPORATIONS-Estoppel to Deny Corporate Existence. The purchase of goods from a corporation, and the execution of a note to the corporation, as such, for the payment thereof, will estop the maker of the note, in an action thereon, from denying the existence of the corporation.-FIRST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH OF CRIPPLE CREEK V. GRAND RAPIDS SCHOOL FURNITURE Co., Colo., 60 Pac. Rep. 948.

27. CORPORATIONS-Forfeiture and Sale of Stock -Quo Warranto. While a quo warranto proceeding might test the right of so-called directors to hold their office, it would be of little avail to restore to plaintiff stock illegally sold; and although a court of equity will not assume jurisdiction to remove an officer of a corporation, or declare a forfeiture of his office, yet when the court has jurisdiction for one purpose, and the right and authority of certain persons, as officers, collaterally appear, it will inquire into and determine such questions.-SCHWAB V. FRISCO MIN. & MILL. CO., Utah, 60 Pac. Rep. 940.

28. CORPORATIONS-Notice-Knowledge of Officer.-A bank is not chargeable with notice of the misappropriation of money by its cashier, acting as agent for a third party, in his individual capacity, although the cashier was in fact sole manager of the bank, and the money was, in the first instance, deposited to its credit with a correspondent, when it was immediately transferred on the books to the credit of the cashier, and checked out by him; nor is it liable to the principal for such money, when it realized no benefit therefrom.SCHOOL DIST. OF CITY OF SEDALIA, Mo., v. DE WEESE, U. S. C. C., C. D. (Mo.), 100 Fed. Rep. 705.

29. CORPORATIONS — Transfer of Property.-W, on whom were conferred, and who exercised as general manager of a corporation, powers of the fullest and most ample character, having bought chattels for it, paying $500 cash, and giving a note of $4,500 for balance, surrendered the chattels and received back the note, which it was unable to pay. This was done in good faith and for the best interests of the corporation, and was acquiesced in by its officials. The arti cles did not constitute all the assets of the corporation. Held that, though there was no vote of the stock. holders authorizing the transaction, the assignee of the corporation could not repudiate the agreement and recover the property without restoring the consideration. -PENNSYLVANIA OIL Co. v. PURE OIL CO., Penn., 46 Atl. Rep. 3.

30. CRIMINAL EVIDENCE Confession-Voluntary.Where defendant, a dull negro boy, while in jail charged with burglary, was told by one who had been his employer for two years that he had better tell all about it; that, if he did not, it would be worse for him, but, if he would turn State's evidence, the court would give him a light sentence; and no warning was given defendant that his confession should be voluntary, and he confessed, it was error to admit evidence of such confession, since it could not be regarded as voluntary.-HAMILTON V. STATE, Miss., 27 South. Rep. 606. 31. DEEDS-Delivery-Presumptions.-A deed made by a father and mother to their infant daughter was, on the date of its execution, placed by the former in the child's lap, the mother taking the instrument to hold for the benefit of the daughter. The father testifled that it was the intention of the parties that deliv ery to the mother should constitute delivery to the child. Held a sufficient delivery.-HALL V. CARDELL, Iowa, 82 N. W. Rep. 503.

32. DEPARTURE-False Imprisonment.-A petition alleging that defendant unlawfully "and without prob. able cause" procured the arrest and imprisonment of

plaintiff stated a cause of action for false imprisonment, and not for malicious prosecution; and plaintiff, by striking out the words "without probable cause," did not change the cause of action.-REYNOLDS v. PRICE, Ky., 56 S. W. Rep. 501.

33. EASEMENTS-Light and Air-Obstruction.-A lot owner, by maliciously erecting on his lot a high fence, did not give a right of action to an adjoining lot owner, whose view was thereby obstructed, and from whose premises light and air were cut off.-SADDLER V. ALEXANDER, Ky., 56 S. W. Rep. 518.

34. EJECTMENT-Equitable Defense.-Since equitable defenses are not permitted in actions at law in the courts of the United States, an equitable title to land cannot be interposed as a defense to an action of ejectment.-DANIEL V. FELT, U. S. C. C., E. D. (N. Car.), 100 Fed. Rep. 727.

35. EJECTMENT-Possession Under Contract to Convey. Where a railroad company takes possession of land under a written contract by the owner to convey on the completion of its railroad, and it and its successors, including defendant, occupy the land and operate a railroad thereon continuously up to the time of bringing ejectment by such owner's grantee, such action cannot be maintained, as defendant's possession was lawful.-WAGGONER V. WABASH R. Co., Ill., 56 N. E. Rep. 1050.

36. EQUITY-Cancellation of Instruments-Fraud.-A creditor, having been fraudulently induced to transfer to another his debtor's duebills, may maintain a bill in equity for a surrender thereof, though such other is solvent, and an action at law might be maintained against him for fraud; the remedy not being as adequate as in equity.-BENSON v. Keller, Oreg., 60 Pac. Rep. 918.

37. EQUITY-Verdict of Jury.-In a case of purely equitable cognizance, where the chancellor, in the exercise of his discretion, directs an issue of fact to be tried by a jury, the verdict of the jury is not conclusive; but it is entitled to considerable weight, and, when confirmed by the chancellor, will not be disregarded on appeal, unless clearly against the preponderance of the evidence.-FORD V. ELLIS, Ky., 56 S. W. Rep. 512.

38. EVIDENCE-Documents-Failure to Affix Stamps.The United States internal revenue law of 1898, requir ing stamps to be affixed to certain documents, affects their use as evidence only in United States courts.CASSIDY V. ST. GERMAIN, R. I., 46 Atl. Rep. 35.

39. EXECUTION SALE-Notice.-Where an execution sale of real estate was made without advertising it for a sufficient length of time, the sale was not void but only voidable, and could not be attacked in an action of trespass to try title, as a voidable deed cannot be set aside in a collateral proceeding.-SMITH V. OLSON, Tex., 56 S. W. Rep. 568.

40. EXECUTION-Sale of Homestead.-The fact that an execution defendant surrendered his homestead, of less value than $1,000, to be sold under execution, does not render the sale valid.-MEADE V. WRIGHT, Ky., 56 S. W. Rep. 523.

41. FEDERAL COURTS-Presumption-Stockholder in Corporation.-The rule that the stockholders of a corporation will be conclusively presumed to be citizens of the State in which it is incorporated, for the purpose of fixing the citizenship of the corporation for jurisdictional purposes in the federal courts, does not extend beyond such purpose, and there is no presumption that an individual who sues a corporation is a citizen of the same State, because he is a stockholder in such corporation.-HANCHETT V. BLAIR, U. S. C. C. of App., Ninth Circuit, 100 Fed. Rep. 817.

42. FEDERAL COURTS-Jurisdiction-Diversity of Citi. zenship. To a suit by a mortgagee of a street railroad company to enjoin another street railroad company from condemning the right to use a portion of the mortgagor's track, the mortgagor company is an indispensable party, and, as its interests necessarily

range it on the side of the complainant, it will be so placed by the court for jurisdictional purposes, although it is made a defendant by the pleadings; and, where it is a corporation of the same State as its codefendant, a federal court is without jurisdiction on the ground of diversity of citizenship.-OLD COLONY TRUST CO. V. ATLANTA RY. Co., U. S. C. C., N. D. (Ga.), 100 Fed. Rep. 799.

43. FRAUDS, STATUTE OF-Debt of Third Person.-An agreement to forbear suit against the original debtor at the request of a third person to answer for the debt is a collateral promise, and is within the statute of frauds, and void, unless in writing.-GILLES V. MAHONY, Minn., 82 N. W. Rep. 583.

44. FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE-Liability of Grantee. -G, an insolvent, having given an absolute bill of sale of all his property, consisting of a stock in trade, to B, for the purpose of hindering creditors, with a secret understanding that it was to secure B's claim, amounting to one-third the value of the property, and that G should be retained as manager, and thus obtain a benefit, and there having been no change of possession, and no evidence thereof, except that B's name was put up in the store as successor to G, the conveyance is fraudulent as to creditors.-BEST V. FULLER & FULLER CO., Ill., 56 N. E. Rep. 1077.

45. GAMBLING CONTRACT-Undertaking to Indemnify Stakeholder.-Under Comp. Laws, § 6602, providing that all trials of speed for reward are common nuisances, and that any person interested in any bet, stake or reward, is guilty of a misdemeanor, an undertaking to indemnify a stakeholder against liability for the surrender of the stakes to one of the parties to a bet on a horse race cannot be enforced against the principal by one of the sureties, who has paid the amount of the indemnity.-FERGUSON V. YUNT, S. Dak., 82 N. W. Rep.

509.

46. GAMING-Wager-Rescission.-Notice by one of the parties to a wager on the result of the election, to the stakeholder, before he had paid over the money, not to pay it to the other party, because the result of the election was in doubt, and stating that he would hold him personally responsible for the amount of the wager, does not constitute such a repudiation and rescission of the wager agreement, and the authority of the stakeholder, before performance, as will support an action to charge the stakeholder with the amount deposited with him by plaintiff, and by the former paid over to the other party to the wager.-MAHER V. VAN HORN, Colo., 60 Pac. Rep. 949.

47. HUSBAND AND WIFE-Agency.-A wife becomes her husband's agent by necessity to procure board and lodging for herself and minor children on his credit, where he drives her away without means of subsistence, and sues her for a divorce.-EAST V. KING, Miss., 27 South. Rep. 608.

48. INTOXICATING LIQUORS - Illegal Sale-Landlord and Tenant.-Gen. Laws, ch. 102, § 7, forbids a licensed liquor dealer from selling liquors to an unlicensed dealer, where he bas reason to believe that the same are to be resold, and section 61 declares that no action shall be maintained for liquors so sold. Defendant, sued for rent, pleaded that the premises had been hired for the illegal sale of liquors, which he was to buy of plaintiff, who was to protect him in such selling, and furnish bail if arrested. Held, that the refusal to charge that, if plaintiff knew that defendant was selling liquors on the premises, and furnished him with liquor there, knowing he was to sell it illegally, plaintiff could not recover, was error.-GORMAN V. KEOUGH, R. I., 46 Atl. Rep. 37.

49. JUDGMENT-Parties not Made Defendants. It is not permissible to bind new parties by a judgment previously entered against other defendants in a former proceeding, under section 5436, Gen. St. 1894, unless they were originally named as parties to the action in which the judgment was entered; such provision being applicable only to cases where parties jointly liable, and subsequently proceeded against, were named as de

fendants in the original suit.—INGWALDSON V. OLSON, Minn., 82 N. W. Rep. 579.

50. JUDGMENT - - Assignment Breach of Marriage Promise.-A Judgment recovered in a breach of promise suit can be assigned.-STEWART V. LEE, N. H., 46 Atl. Rep. 31.

51. JUDICIAL NOTICE-Official Census.-Courts take Judicial notice of the number of inhabitants of a city as shown by the official census taken pursuant to State or federal laws.-STRATTON V. CITY Of Oregon CITY, Oreg., 60 Pac. Rep. 905.

52. JUDICIAL SALES-Caveat Emptor.-As the rule of caveat emptor applies to judicial sales, a purchaser cannot have an abatement of the purchase price because of his failure to obtain title to a valuable spring on the tract of land purchased.-Fox v. McGOODWIN'S ADMR., Ky., 56 S. W. Rep. 515.

53. LANDLORD AND TENANT-Liability to Tenant.-A landlord, under a lease expressly exempting him from any obligation to the tenant to make repairs or improvements upon or about the leased premises during the life of the lease, is not liable to the tenant for damages to his goods occasioned by the leased premises becoming and remaining out of repair. - BENETEAU V. STUBLER, Minn., 82 N. W. Rep. 583.

54. LIFE INSURANCE-Construction of Policy-Warranty. Where an application for life insurance recites that the answers and statements in this application "are warranted to be full, complete and true," and that, if they are not so, the policy issued thereon "shall be null and void," and also stipulates that the answers which it contains are parts of the policy, the policy and the application together constitute the written agreement of insurance, and both the insured and the beneficiary under the policy are bound by the warranty of the answers and statements in the application, although some of the questions and answers are of such a character as to preclude the idea that the parties intended to make them the subject of warranty.-HUBBARD V. MUTUAL RESERVE FUND LIFE ASSN., U. S. C. C. of App., First Circuit, 100 Fed. Rep. 719.

55. LIFE INSURANCE-Mutual Insurance-Interest.— Where a mutual benefit association failed to levy an assessment for the payment of a death loss as provided in a policy, interest should be allowed from the time of the breach.-CHRISTIE V. IOWA LIFE INS. Co., Iowa, 82 N. W. Rep. 499.

56. LIFE INSURANCE-Mutual Insurance-Policies.Where a policy holder in a mutual fire insurance company cancels his policy, and afterwards pays several assessments for the payment of losses and expenses incurred during the time his policy was in force, he is not relieved from the payment of other assessments, necessary to cover such expenses and losses. -PEAKE v. YULE, Mich., 82 N. W. Rep. 514.

57. LIFE INSURANCE-Tontine Policy-Beneficiary.Where a tontine life insurance policy was payable to the insured's executor, administrator, or assigns, and contained no provision for the designation of a beneficiary, no rights under such policy could be conferred on anyone by the insured, except by his assignment or a new contract; and a petition claiming such insurance, by virtue of a letter from the insured asking that the insurer make the insurance payable, in case of his death before maturity thereof, to plaintiff, on which the insurance company did not act, did not show a right of recovery.-ALVORD V. LUCKENBACH, Wis., 82 N. W. Rep. 535.

tions, since the question as to when the services of the attorney terminated was for the jury.-LOWE V. RING, Wis., 82 N. W. Rep. 571.

59. LIMITATION-Claim Against Estate-Discretion of Executor.-It is within the discretion of an executor to plead or waive the bar of the statute to a claim against his testator.-MALCOMSON V. WAPPOO MILLS, U. S. C. C., D. (S. Car.), 100 Fed. Rep. 805.

60. LIMITATION OF ACTIONS.-Where it is sought to avoid the bar of limitations because of a general admission of indebtedness, and such admission is proved, it must be taken to relate to the indebtedness in suit, in the absence of evidence that it referred to some other demand.-BLACKMORE V. NEALE, Colo., 60 Pac. Rep. 952.

61. MALICIOUS PROSECUTION Probable Cause. -An instruction defining "probable cause" as a reasonable ground of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a "really cautious" man in the belief that the person so accused is guilty of the crime charged, was erroneous, since all that can be required is that one shall act as a man of "ordinary caution and prudence."-EGGETT V. ALLEN, Wis., 82 N. W. Rep. 556.

62. MASTER AND SERVANT-Duty of Employer to Furnish Safe Place to Work.-An employer being charged with the duty of exercising reasonable care in seeing that the place where an employee is set to work is reasonably safe, the employee has the right to rely upon the performance of that duty, and he is not required to make a critical examination of his surroundings at the place where he is set to work, to see if it is safe.ROSS V. SHANLEY, Ill., 56 N. E. Rep. 1105.

63. MASTER AND SERVANT-Negligence-Fellow Servant.-Plaintiff, a common laborer, in the line of his duty, was at work for defendant putting a hose upon the tender of an engine, which was loaded with coal, and standing still. At the same time another servant was standing upon the loose coal on the tender to receive the hose from his fellow-servant on the ground, when a lump of coal was dislodged from the tender, and fell upon and injured the plaintiff. Held, upon a claim that defendant was negligent in overloading the engine with coal, and thereby responsible for plaintiff's injury, that its acts in this respect were not the proximate cause of the accident, and did not constitute actionable negligence for which a recovery can be had.-WEISEL V. EASTERN RY. Co. OF MINNESOTA, Minn., 82 N. W. Rep. 576.

64. MECHANICS' LIENS - Architect's Services Contract.-Under Mechanic's Lien Law 1895, § 6, providing that any person who shall, by contract with the owner of a lot, perform services as an architect for the purpose of building on such lot, shall have a lien, etc., an architect, who furnished plans and specifications for a building, was entitled to a lien on the lot, though he did not superintend the construction of the building, since he performed services for the purpose of building thereon.- FREEMAN V. RINAKER, Ill., 56 N. W. Rep.

1055.

65. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS-Contracts Effect of Illegal Provision.-The fact that a city, in a contract made with a water company for supplying water to the city and its inhabitants for a term of years, and fixing the rates to be charged and paid therefor, exceeded its powers by attempting to confer upon the water com. pany an exclusive right to so furnish water, does not affect the validity of the other provisions of the contract, which are in no way dependent upon such illegal provision, and may be enforced, although that is rejected. KIMBALL V. CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS, U. S. C. C., N. D. (Iowa), 100 Fed. Rep. 802.

66. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Ordinance-Repeal by Implication.-An ordinance will not be construed as repealing a prior one on the same subject, unless there is an irreconcilable repugnancy between them, or the new ordinance is evidently intended to supersede all prior ones, and to comprise in itself the sole system of

69. PARENT AND CHILD-Services Compensation.Domestic services performed by a daughter, of legal age, while a member of her father's household, will be presumed to have been performed voluntarily; and, in the absence of a prior agreement or understanding that she should receive compensation, a subsequent conveyance to her in consideration of such services is void as to creditors of the father.-MCCORD V. KNOWLTON, Minn., 82 N. W. Rep, 588.

70. PARTNERSHIP - Accounting.-Where plaintiff and defendant entered into a partnership as insurance agents, they were joint owners of the business during the continuance of the partnership; and defendant, having appropriated plaintiff's share of premiums collected, to which he was entitled, is liable to account to plaintiff for their value at the time of the conversion. -MORRILL V. WEEKS, N. H., 46 Atl. Rep. 32.

71. PENSIONS-Compensation-Contract.-A contract whereby the dependent mother of a deceased soldier employed her son in-law to procure a pension for her, agreeing to pay him two-thirds of the amount she would receive, the application having been filed many years before, was void, being in violation of the pen. sion law; and a settlement between the parties in which that illegal contract was taken into consideration will be disregarded.-CHRISTIE V. STEGER'S ADMR., Ky., 56 S. W. Rep. 521.

72. PHYSICIANS-License-Violation of Statute.-Ann. Code, § 1258, imposed a penalty for practicing as a physician without first having been examined by, and obtained license from, the State board of health. Plaintiff obtained from such board a temporary license to practice medicine, valid until the next succeeding meeting of the board for examining applicants, as authorized by section 3251. The temporary license expired, and thereafter, while without license, plaintiff rendered the services as physician for which he sued. Held, that such services were rendered in violation of such statute, and plaintiff could not recover therefor. -BOHN V. LOWRY, Miss., 27 South. Rep. 604.

73. PLEADING-Assignments.-The defendant, in an action on an account by the assignee thereof, cannot require the assignor to be made a party to the suit, as any defense against the assignor might be made against the assignee.-SHAMBAUGH v. CURRENT, Iowa, 82 N. W. Rep. 497.

74. PLEADING-Joint Liability-Misjoinder.-A count in a declaration which alleged a joint and common undertaking by the owner of a building, the supervising architect, and the contractors, to erect a building, and a joint and common hiring by them of a laborer, who was killed while working on a building, was not objectionable for misjoinder of parties.-COLE V. LIP. PETT, R. I., 46 Atl. Rep. 43.

75. PLEDGE OF MORTGAGE Bona Fide Purchaser.Defendant executed a mortgage as security for certain bonds, which were intended for sale upon the market. When only a few of the bonds had been sold, plaintiff, who was trustee under the mortgage, made a loan to defendant for about one-half the amount of the mort