COMPUTATION.

Of interest, see "Interest," § 2.

A conspiracy cannot be made the subject of
a civil action, unless something is done which,

tions," § 1.

See "Commerce," § 1.

action.-Wills v. Central Ice & Cold Storage
Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 265.

The mere exercise of one's right to refuse
to sell a certain commodity to a particular per-
son is not actionable.-Mills v. Central Ice &
Cold Storage Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 265.

In an action for an alleged conspiracy to boy-
cott plaintiff, refusal by defendants to place
in evidence certain contracts held not to au-
thorize a verdict for plaintiff.-Wills v. Central
Ice & Cold Storage Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 265.

In an action for an alleged conspiracy to boy-
cott plaintiff, evidence held insufficient to au-
thorize a recovery.-Wills v. Central Ice & Cold
Storage Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 265.

In an action involving the title to real estate,
whether plaintiff's agent conspired with one of
the owners of homestead property in making a
loan of the plaintiff's money, taking the home-
stead as security with intent to deceive and de-
fraud the plaintiff, held a question for the jury.
-Morrill v. Bosley (Tex. Civ. App.) 519.

CONSTABLES.

See "Sheriffs and Constables."
Process directed to, see "Process," § 1.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

Provisions relating to particular subjects.
See "Death," § 1; "Judgment," § 4; "Jury,"
1; "Libel and Slander," § 3; "Mandamus,"
§ 1; "Master and Servant," § 6; "Municipal
Corporations," §§ 6, 7, 9; "Taxation," § 1.
Condemnation proceedings, see "Eminent
Domain," § 2.

CONGRESS.

utes," § 1.

Indian court, see "Indians."
Road taxes, see "Highways," § 2.
Special or local laws, see "Statutes," § 2.
Subjects and titles of statutes, see "Statutes,"
§ 3.

1. Distribution of governmental pow-
ers and functions.

§ 1.

CONSIDERATION.

Of deed, see "Deeds," § 1.

CONSOLIDATION.

Of corporations, see "Corporations," §§ 1, 5.

(Ark.) 881.

Granting to city of power to pass ordinances
for the protection of citizens is not an infringe-
ment of the maxim that legislative power may
not be delegated.-Sluder v. St. Louis Transit
Co. (Mo. Sup.) 648.

*Statute authorizing the commutation of a
"penal sentence for good conduct, and specific-
ally defining the credits to be allowed, becomes
a part of the sentence, and is not an invasion
of the pardoning prerogative vested in the Gov-
ernor by Const. art. 3, § 6.-Fite v. State
(Tenn.) 941.

Shannon's Code, § 7423, authorizing the board
of workhouse commissioners to deduct for good
conduct a portion of the time for which any
person has been sentenced, held an unconstitu-
tional delegation of legislative authority.-Fite
v. State (Tenn.) 941.

§ 2. Obligation of contracts.

Legislation affecting either the validity or
means of enforcement of bonds issued by a city
held repugnant to Const. U. S. art. 1, § 10.-
City of Austin v. Cahill (Tex. Sup.) 542.

CONSTRUCTIVE TRUSTS.

See "Trusts," § 1.

CONTEMPT.

1. Power to punish and proceedings
therefor.

A judgment rendered on a complaint informing
the court of the violation of an injunction held
not appealable under Rev. St. 1899, § 2696.-
State ex rel. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Bland
(Mo. Sup.) 28; State ex rel. Chicago & A. Ry.
Co. v. Same, Id.

Under Rev. St. 1899, §§ 1616–1620, an order
adjudging defendants in an injunction suit
guilty of contempt for violation of injunction
held appealable under section 806.-State ex
rel. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Bland (Mo.
'Sup.) 28; State ex rel. Chicago & A. Ry. Co.
v. Same, Id.

CONTEST.

Of election, see "Elections," § 3.

CONTINUANCE.

rations," § 4; "Counties," § 2; "Master and
Servant"; "Railroads," § 1; "States," § 1.
Contracts relating to particular subjects.
See "Interest"; "Railroads," § 2.
Sale of timber, see "Logs and Logging."
Transportation of goods, see "Carriers," § 1.
Transportation of live stock, see "Carriers." § 2.
Transportation of passengers, see "Carriers,'
§ 4.

Ad-

Particular classes of express contracts.
See "Bailment"; "Bills and Notes"; "Bonds";
"Covenants"; "Deeds," 1; "Guaranty";
"Indemnity"; "Insurance"; "Joint
ventures"; "Partnership"; "Sales."
Affreightment, see "Shipping," § 1.
Agency, see "Principal and Agent."
Bills of lading, see "Carriers," § 1.
Employment, see "Brokers," § 1; "Master and

Servant."

Leases, see "Landlord and Tenant."
Limitation of liability of carrier, see "Car-
riers," §§ 1, 2.

Mutual benefit insurance, see "Insurance," § 8.
Sales of realty, see "Vendor and Purchaser."
Suretyship, see "Principal and Surety."

Particular classes of implied contracts.
Implied warranty, see "Sales," § 5.

Particular modes of discharging contracts.
See "Accord and Satisfaction"; "Payment";
"Release."

§ 1. Construction and operation.
A contract with a newspaper company held to

Refusal of the court to set aside the swearing
of the jury and to continue the case, because
of the presence of witnesses whose depositions
had been withdrawn to avoid a continuance,
held not error.-Craft v. Barron (Ky.) 1099.
The verification to an affidavit for contin-
uance by the attorney of the party, stating that
the matters set forth are, to the best of his
knowledge, information, and belief, true, is
insufficient.-St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co.
of Texas v. Harkey (Tex. Civ. App.) 506.

In action on liquor dealer's bond an applica-
tion for a continuance because of the absence of
witnesses held properly overruled, the desired
evidence being immaterial.-Brewster v. State
(Tex. Civ. App.) 858.

CONTRACTS.

Agreements within statute of frauds, see
"Frauds, Statute of."

Alteration, see "Alteration of Instruments."
Assignment, see "Assignments."
Cancellation, see "Cancellation of Instruments."
Damages for breach, see "Damages," §§ 1, 2,
3, 5.

Election of remedies on breach of contract, see
"Election of Remedies."

Impairing obligation, see "Constitutional Law,"
§ 2.

Parol or extrinsic evidence, see "Evidence," § 8.
Reformation, see "Reformation of Instru-
ments."

Specific performance, see "Specific Perform-

ance.'

Subrogation to rights or remedies of creditors,
see "Subrogation."
Testimony as to transactions with decedents,
see "Witnesses," § 1.

Contracts of particular classes of parties.
See "Brokers," § 1; "Building and Loan
Associations"; "Carriers," §§ 1, 2, 4; "Corpo-

Commercial Press Co. (Ky.) 1063.

A contract construed, and held to require
a purchaser of lumber to pay the pay rolls
of the seller, not to exceed a certain amount.
-Nicola Bros. Co. v. Hurst (Ky.) 1081.

Where the terms of a contract are definitely
known, and the inference to be drawn there-
from is indisputable, the interpretation of the
contract is for the court.-Young v. Van Natta
(Mo. App.) 123.

For the purpose of discovering intention of
parties to a contract, the court must view the
situation of the parties and their surroundings.

Hardwick v. American Can Co. (Tenn.) 797.

§ 2. Modification and merger.
A carrier's liability for breach of an oral
contract to furnish cars held not avoided
by a subsequent written contract.-Gulf, C. &
S. F. Ry. Co. v. House & Watkins (Tex. Civ.
App.) 1110.

§ 3. Actions for breach.

In action against railroad for breach of con-
tract in failing to reconstruct fences after lay-
ing out a right of way, an instruction held
erroneous, as authorizing a recovery beyond
the terms of the contract.-White River R. Co.
v. Hamilton (Ark.) 978.

An instruction held erroneous, as authorizing
a recovery for a tort in tearing down fences,
when a breach of contract was counted on.-
White River R. Co. v. Hamilton (Ark.) 978.

Where defendant signed an original contract
for the purchase of goods sued on, it was im-
material that a purported duplicate of the con-
tract offered in evidence was not the same as
the original.-Standard Mfg. Co. v. Hudson
(Mo. App.) 137.

On an issue of non est factum the burden of
proof is on defendant to show by a preponder-
ance of the evidence that he did not execute
the contract sued on.-Standard Mfg. Co. v.
Hudson (Mo. App.) 137.

CONTRADICTION.

Of record, see "Appeal and Error," § 11.
Of witness, see "Witnesses," § 3.

CONTRIBUTION.

Between co-tenants as to purchase price of out-
standing incumbrance, see "Tenancy
Common," § 2.

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE.

See "Negligence," § 3.

Of passenger, see "Carriers," § 7.

Of person injured by defect in street, see
"Municipal Corporations," § 8.

Of person injured by operation of railroad, see
"Railroads," §§ 5-7.

Of person injured by operation of street rail-
road. see "Street Railroads," § 2.

Of servant, see "Master and Servant," §§ 8, 9.

In trust, see "Trusts," § 1.

Conveyances by or to particular classes of
parties.

See "Executors and Administrators," § 3;
"Husband and Wife," § 2;
"Insane
Persons," § 1.

Agent, see "Principal and Agent," § 2.
Sheriffs, see "Execution," § 4.

Conveyances of particular species of property.
See "Homestead," § 2; "Public Lands," § 1.
Particular classes of conveyances.
See "Assignments"; "Assignments for Benefit of
Creditors"; "Chattel Mortgages"; "Deeds";
"Mortgages."

CONVICTS.

Escape of, see "Rescue."

§ 3. Capital, stock, and dividends.

Transaction by which a trust company ac-
quired corporate stock for a foreign railroad
held not invalidated as between the trust com-
pany and the vendors of the stock by reason
of any inability on the part of the railroad to
enter into the contract.-Newman v. Mercan-
tile Trust Co. (Mo. Sup.) 6.

Transaction by which a railroad, acting
through a trust company, procured a majority
of the stock of a ferry company, held not fraud-
ulent.-Newman v. Mercantile Trust Co. (Mo.
Sup.) 6.

Sale of stock in corporation held complete
and sufficient to pass title.-Newman v. Mer-
cantile Trust Co. (Mo. Sup.) 6.

§ 4. Corporate powers and liabilities.
In an action against a corporation, a finding
that the corporation had appeared held prop-
er. Shorter University Franklin Bros.
(Ark.) 974.

v.

A deed of trust is not made void by a provi-
sion that foreclosure shall not be had till a
certain portion of the holders of the bonds se-
cured so request.-Hasbrouck v. Rich (Mo.
App.) 131.

In an action for breach of a carrier's con-
tract to furnish cars for the shipment of cattle,
evidence held admissible to show that the con-
tract made by the agent of one of the carriers
to furnish cars at a particular point was with-
in the scope of his authority.-Pecos River R.
Co. v. Latham (Tex. Civ. App.) 392.

5. Consolidation.

Corporations created in different states can
consolidate only by concurrent legislation, in
which event there is a separate and distinct
corporation in each state.-Whaley v. Bank-
ers' Union of the World (Tex. Civ. App.) 259.

6. Foreign corporations.

The prosecution of a suit by a foreign cor-
poration held not to constitute "doing business"
within the state, within Act Feb. 16, 1899, p.

CORPORATIONS.

$38.

Action by foreign corporation on foreign
ment, see "Judgment," § 10.
Commission company as agent, see "Principal
and Agent," § 2.

Quo warranto, see "Quo Warranto."

Particular classes of corporations.

See "Building and Loan Associations"; "Hospi-
tals"; "Municipal Corporations";
roads"; "Street Railroads."

Insurance companies, see "Insurance."

"Rail-

Foreign corporation must allege and prove
state.-St. Louis Expanded Metal Fireproofing
Co. v. Beilharz (Tex. Civ. App.) 512.

and material for construction work in the state
Foreign corporation which furnishes labor
pursuant to contract made therein held engaged
in business within Rev. St. 1895, art. 745, and
not engaged in interstate commerce.-St. Louis

81. Incorporation and organization.

Where two corporations, created under the
laws of different states, attempted to consol-
idate without legislative authority, the attempt
was a nullity, and did not create a de facto

(Tex. Civ. App.) 512.

Change in name of foreign corporation held
not to affect the validity of a permit to do busi-
ness in the state.-St. Louis Expanded Metal
Fireproofing Co. v. Beilharz (Tex. Civ. App.)
512.