*In an action against a street railroad com-
pany for injuries to plaintiff in a collision with
his vehicle, held. that the question of plaintiff's
contributory negligence was one for the jury.-
Rapp v. St. Louis Transit Co. (Mo. Sup.) 865.

In an action against a street railroad for in-
juries to plaintiff in a collision with his vehicle,
certain instructions held to have correctly pre-
sented the issues. Rapp v. St. Louis Transit
Co. (Mo. Sup.) 865.

resentatives are not parties.-Dyer v. Jacoway
(Ark.) 901.

Creditors, seeking subrogation to sureties
rights under indemnity mortgage, held guilty of
laches.-Dyer v. Jacoway (Ark.) 901.

*An indorser on notes who has paid only a
portion of them cannot claim by subrogation
the right to participate in the securities held
for the payment of the debt.-Bank of Fay
etteville v. Lorwein (Ark.) 919.

It is the duty of a person crossing railway
tracks to look and listen until he is safely
across, and it is not sufficient merely to look
before going on the track.-Ross v. Metropol- See "Action."
itan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 144.

It is not the duty of a motorman operating

a street car to stop merely because he observes

a pedestrian approaching the track, but he is See "Process."
only required to stop when something in the
conduct of the pedestrian indicates that he is
unaware of the presence of the car and apt to
be struck by it.-Ross v. Metropolitan St. Ry.
Co. (Mo. App.) 144.

SUIT.

SUMMONS.

SUNDAY.

Liquor sales on Sunday, see "Intoxicating
Liquors," §§ 3, 4.

SUPREME COURTS.

In an action against a street railroad company
for injuries to a pedestrian, who was struck
by a car, evidence held to show plaintiff guilty
of contributory negligence.-Ross v. Metropol- See "Courts," §§ 1, 4.
itan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 144.

In an action against a street railroad company
for injuries to a pedestrian who was struck
by a car, evidence held to justify submission

SURETYSHIP.

to the jury of the question whether defendant's See "Principal and Surety."
motorman observed plaintiff's danger in time
to have avoided the injury.-Ross v. Metropol-
itan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 144.

SURPLUSAGE.

Question of contributory negligence of plain- In pleading, see "Pleading," § 1.
tiff in action against a street railroad held to be
for the jury.-Waechter v. St. Louis & M. R.

R. Co. (Mo. App.) 147.

SWAMP LANDS.

Woman, who was struck by a street car, See "Public Lands," § 1.

which she would have seen, had she looked, held
guilty of contributory negligence.-Waddell v.
Metropolitan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 765.

SWINDLING.

TAXATION.

Negligence of a pedestrian in failing to dis- See "False Pretenses."
cover an approaching street car held super-
seded as proximate cause by negligence of the
motorman, who failed to prevent the injury
when it was possible to do so. Waddell v.
Metropolitan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 765.

In an action against a street railroad for in-
juries to a pedestrian, testimony that the mo-
torman would have been mobbed held erroneous
and prejudicial to defendant.-Waddell v. Met-
ropolitan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 765.

In an action against a street railroad for in-
juries to a pedestrian, evidence held to raise
an issue of fact as to whether the motorman
could have stopped the car after discovering
plaintiff's peril.-Waddell v. Metropolitan St.
Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 765.

In an action for injuries, where plaintiff char-
ged negligence in defendant's permitting its
rails to be charged with electricity, causing his
horse to fall, etc., an instruction held erroneous

as

not presenting the issues involved.-San
Antonio Traction Co. v. Yost (Tex. Civ. App.)
428.

STREETS.

See "Highways"; "Municipal Corporations,"
§§ 7, 8.

Dedication, see "Dedication," §§ 1, 2.

SUBROGATION.

Creditors cannot procure subrogation to de-
ceased surety's rights in indemnity mortgage in
a proceeding to which the surety's heirs or rep-

Payment of taxes to sustain adverse possession,
see "Adverse Possession," § 1.

Power of county to contract for expenses of
publication of notice to nonresident de-
linquent taxpayers, see "Counties," § 2.
Local or special taxes.

See "Highways," § 2; "Municipal Corpora-
tions," § 9.
Assessments for municipal improvements, see
"Municipal Corporations," § 5.

Occupation or privilege taxes.
See "Intoxicating Liquors," § 2.
Foreign corporation, see "Corporations," § 6.
§ 1. Sale of land for nonpayment of
tax.

The fact that taxes had been paid by defend-
ant or his grantors, and that a forfeiture of the
land and sale for taxes was void, did not estop
defendant from acquiring the void tax title and
setting up adverse possession thereunder.-Car-
penter v. Smith (Ark.) 976.

The personal property received by an assignee
for the benefit of creditors is subject to the un-
paid taxes on the assignor's real and personal
property before the real estate can be subjected
thereto.-Phoenix Brewing Co.'s Assignee v.
Central Consumers' Co. (Ky.) 1051.

Petition in an action seeking to enjoin the
sale of property bid in by the state for delin-
• Point annotated. See syllabus.

INDEX.

12

quent taxes held fatally defective.-Alexander | Parol or extrinsic evidence of telegram, s
v. Aud (Ky.) 1103.
"Evidence," § 8.

Under Ky. St. 1903, §§ 3760, 4030, an al-
legation that the tax collector has certified
certain facts gives rise to the presumption
that the acts certified to have been performed,
as well as all other acts required to be done
to support them.-Alexander v. Aud (Ky.)
1103.

Under Ky. St. 1903, § 4036, plaintiffs, in
a suit to enjoin the sale of land which had
been bid in by the state for delinquent taxes,
must tender the unpaid taxes.-Alexander v.
Aud (Ky.) 1103.

Under Civ. Code Prac. § 25, all the tax-
payers of a county held not entitled to join
in a suit to enjoin on various grounds the
sale of lands bid in by the state for delinquent
taxes.-Alexander v. Aud (Ky.) 1103.

Under Const. § 171, and Ky. St. 1903, §§
4019, 4021, 4143, failure of sheriff to levy
upon a landowner's personalty to collect taxes
assessed against the land held not to render
a sale of land for taxes invalid.-Alexander
v. Aud (Ky.) 1103.

*Under Gen. Laws 1897, p. 138, c. 103, § 15,
a citation or notice in a tax suit by the state
against a nonresident landowner, not comply-
ing with the form prescribed, held insufficient
to support a judgment.-Garvey v. State (Tex.
Civ. App.) 873.

§ 2. Tax titles.

Tax deeds held not sufficiently certain in their
descriptions and consequently void.-Covington
v. Berry (Ark.) 1005.

Under section 3, p. 97, Acts 1866-67, ex-
empting Real Estate Bank lands from taxation,
listing of such lands for taxation held evi-
dence of the sale by the bank's receiver.
Cracraft v. Meyer (Ark.) 1027.

Under the act of 1867 exempting lands of the
Real Estate Bank from taxation, certain re-
ceivership proceedings held to constitute evi-
dence of a sale of certain lands belonging to

the bank.-Cracraft v. Meyer (Ark.) 1027.

1. Regulation and operation.
for telegraph company's failure to transmit
message, when construed with sections 7943 an
7944, and Mansf. Dig. § 6419, applies only t
Kirby's Dig. § 7946, prescribing a penalt
a willful or intentional refusal to transmit
Co. (Ark.) 834.
message. State v. Western Union Telegraph

ordering potatoes from the addressee, held proper
In an action for failure to deliver a telegram
order.-Elam y. Western Union Telegraph Co.
to permit him to testify that, if he had received
(Mo. App.) 115.
the message, he would have complied with the

gram for persons residing 31⁄2 miles from the
A telegraph company, on receiving a tele-
messengers available, held not guilty of negli-
gence in failing to deliver until succeeding day.
destination station, after hours when it had
(Tenn.) 325.
-McCaul v. Western Union Telegraph Co.

Homestead rights of tenant in common, see
"Homestead," § 1.

TENANCY IN COMMON.

§ 1. Mutual rights, duties, and liabili-

ties of co-tenants.

co-tenants. Mahoney v. Nevins (Mo. Sup.)
A co-tenant cannot, by buying in an outstand-
731.
ing incumbrance, acquire title as against his

-

§ 2. Rights and liabilities of co-ten-
ants as to third persons.

the other co-tenants are bound to contribute
their respective proportions of the considera-
Where a co-tenant buys in an incumbrance,
tion paid.-Mahoney v. Nevins (Mo. Sup.) 731.

TENDER.

Of property on rescission of sale, see “Sales,”
Sufficiency of complaint to show tender of goods
§ 3.
to agent, see "Carriers," § 1.

Under Rev. St. 1837, c. 128, §§ 133, 134, Acts
July 15, 1868 (Laws 1868, p. 62, § 1), and
Kirby's Dig. § 4807, a land commissioner's
deed to land forfeited for unpaid taxes is prima
facie evidence of the taking of the steps neces-
sary for the transmission of title.-Cracraft of leases, see "Landlord and Tenant,” § 2.
v. Meyer (Ark.) 1027.

Failure to record a deed to certain land be-
longing to the state held not to overcome the
presumption of sale which arises from the is-
suance of a subsequent tax deed by the State See "Wills."
Land Commissioner.--Cracraft v. Meyer (Ark.)
1027.

3. Legacy, inheritance, and transfer
taxes.

Under Shannon's Code, §§ 724, 735, one-half
of personal property belonging to a nonresident
decedent, which his widow elected to take in
kind under his will, held not subject to collat
eral inheritance taxation.-Memphis Trust Co.
v. Speed (Tenn.) 321.

An executor of a nonresident, owning prop
erty in Tennessee which passed to collateral
legatees, held not entitled to deduct from the
amount subject to collateral inheritance tax
Tennessee debts not shown to have been paid
from such assets.-Memphis Trust Co. v. Speed
(Tenn.) 321.

TELEGRAPHS AND TELEPHONES.
Municipal regulations, see "Municipal Corpora-
tions," 6.

TERMS.

TESTAMENT.

TESTAMENTARY POWERS.

Creation, see "Wills," § 3.

See "Larceny."

THEFT.

THREATS.

see

Effect on admissibility of confessions,
Evidence of threats by defendant in prosecution
"Criminal Law," § 12.
Instructions as to threats by deceased against
for homicide, see "Homicide," § 7.
accused in trial for homicide, see "Homicide,"
§ 10.

TICKETS.

For carriage of passengers, see "Carriers," § 4.
* Point annotated. See syllabus.

As cause of fire for which railroad was sued, der the sole heir of a former vendee, was not en-
see "Railroads," § 9.

• Point annotated. See syllabus.

INDEX.

which

dor's lien to secure the purchase money,
had never been paid.-Wall v. Club Land & Cat-
tle Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 534.

§ 2. Proceedings.

In trespass to try title, a charge to find for
plaintiff if defendant failed to establish the al-
legations of his plea in reconvention, without re-
quiring plaintiff to prove his right to posses-
sion, held properly refused.-Freeman v. Slay
(Tex. Civ. App.) 404.

Where the petition in trespass to try title
attacked the sheriff's deed, under which defend-
ant claimed, as void, plaintiff was not entitled
to relief on a showing that the deed was merely
voidable.-Temple v. Branch Saw Co. (Tex. Civ.
App.) 442.

TRIAL.

See "New Trial"; "Witnesses."
Construction of contract as question for court,
see "Contracts," § 1.

Harmless error relating to instructions, see
"Appeal and Error," § 25.

Instructions

as to

damages.

see

"Dam-

ages," § 5.
Instructions as to negligence of passenger, see
"Carriers," § 7.

Legal effect of dedication as question for court,
see "Dedication," § 1.

Negligence of passenger as question for jury,
see "Carriers," § 7.

Objections to instructions for purpose of review,
see "Criminal Law," § 22.

Questions relating to instructions presented for
review, see "Appeal and Error," § 12.
Trial of right to property levied on, see "At-
tachment," § 2.

Proceedings incident to trials.

See "Continuance."

122
Corporations,"§ 8; "Railroads," § 6; "Stree
Railroads," § 2.

Probate proceedings, see "Wills," § 2.
For wrongful death, see "Death," § 1.
Suits to set aside fraudulent conveyances, see
On bill or note, see "Bills and Notes," § 6.
On insurance policy, see "Insurance," § 7.
Trespass to try title to real property, see
"Fraudulent Conveyances," § 2.
"Trespass to Try Title."

See "Assault and Battery," § 2; "Burglary,"
Trial of criminal prosecutions.
§ 1; "Criminal Law," §§ 14-18; "False
Pretenses"; "Homicide," § 10; "Larceny,'

§ 2; "Perjury," § 2; "Rape," § 2; "Seduc-
tion," § 1.

For establishing lottery, see "Lotteries," § 1.
For offense against liquor laws, see "Intoxicat-
ing Liquors," § 4.

1. Course and conduct of trial in gen-
eral.

In an action for injuries, a statement by the
court in the presence of the jury, in ruling on
an objection to the examination of a juror as
to his qualifications in the presence of the en-
tire panel, held not error.-Alexander v. Mc-
Gaffey (Tex. Civ. App.) 462.

2. Reception of evidence.

to depositions and documentary evidence are to
ton v. Ashabraner (Ark.) 1011.
Under Kirby's Dig. §§ 2743, 3190, exceptions
be determined before final submission.-Boyn-

mediately following the answer is timely.-
Where a question is proper, but the answer
is improper and prejudicial, an objection im-
Waddell v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.)
765.

Entry of judgment after trial of issues, see Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 765.
"Judgment," § 4.

Objection to improper answer to proper ques-
tion held to have fulfilled the purpose of a mo-
tion to strike.-Waddell v. Metropolitan St.

Place of trial, see "Venue," § 1.

Right to trial by jury, see "Jury," § 1.
Summoning and impaneling jury, see "Jury,"
§ 2.

Trial of particular civil actions or proceedings.
See "Cancellation of Instruments";
spiracy," 1; "Libel and Slander," 83;
"Malicious Prosecution," § 3; "Negligence,"
"Con-
§ 4; ""Trespass to Try Title," § 2; "Trover
and Conversion," § 2.

Against building and loan association for negli-
gence of contractor, see "Building and Loan
Associations."

Against carrier for failure to furnish cars, see
"Carriers," § 1.
Condemnation proceedings, see "Eminent Do-
main," § 2.

Election contest, see "Elections," § 3.

For accounting by broker, see "Brokers," § 2.
For breach of contract, see "Contracts," § 3.
For breach of contract to transport passenger,
see "Carriers," § 5.

For breach of warranty of goods sold, see
"Sales," § 7.

amination were allowed to proceed the court
Where it appeared on the examination of a
witness for plaintiff in rebuttal that if the ex-
the examination to so proceed.-Union Ry. Co.
would again have to go at large into testimony
in chief, it was proper to refuse to permit
v. Hunton (Tenn.) 182.

recover property transferred by a bankrupt in
mitted by agreement between the plaintiff and
In an action against several defendants to
other defendants.-Horstman v. Little (Tex.
fraud of his creditors, certain testimony, ad-
Civ. App.) 286.
certain of the defendants, held not harmful to

ages, held to be excluded, where the case, when
Evidence of false statements of vendor, ad-
mitted on a claim by the purchaser for dam-
developed, shows the purchaser was not war-
ranted in relying on them, or did not rely on
them.-Oneal v. Weisman (Tex. Civ. App.)

290.

For causing death, see "Death," § 1.
For compensation of broker, see "Brokers," § 4.
For delay in shipment by carrier, see "Car-8
riers," § 1.

For injuries from fires caused by operation of
railroad, see "Railroads," § 9.

For injuries to live stock by carrier, see "Car-
riers," § 2.

For injuries to live stock from operation of
railroads, see "Railroads," § 8.

For loss of cargo, see "Shipping." § 1.

because made after plaintiff has rested.-Pitts-
An offer of competent evidence sufficient to
establish plaintiff's case should not be excluded,
burg Plate Glass Co. v. Roquemore (Tex. Civ.
App.) 449.

3.
dence and derogatory to the opposite party, held
Arguments and conduct of counsel.
Argument of counsel, unsupported by the evi-
derson (Ark.) 583.
to constitute reversible error.-English v. An-

been made in a written contract, held not error
On an issue as to whether an alteration had
for counsel to have called the jury's attention
to the fact that the contract was in several

For personal injuries, see "Carriers." 8 6; handwritings.-Harrison v. Lakenan (Mo. Sup.)
"Master and Servant," § 9; "Municipal | 53.

* Point annotated. See syllabus.

Where no objection was made to the allow-
ance of time for argument, and plaintiff's coun-
sel argued for 35 minutes of the hour allowed
him, he cannot complain that the time was not
equally distributed.-Ray v. Pecos & N. T. Ry.
Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 466.

Rules for the District Courts 39 (67 S. W.
xxiii) held violated by an argument of plaintiff's
counsel which appealed to the jury on consid-
erations other than the merits of the case.-St.

Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of Texas v. Boyd
(Tex. Civ. App.) 509.

Rules for the District Courts 39 (67 S. W.
xxiii) held violated by an argument of plaintiff's
counsel which appealed to the self-interest of
the jury. St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of
Texas v. Boyd (Tex. Civ. App.) 509.

Argument of counsel that the jury should err,
if at all, in giving excessive damages for per-
sonal injuries, as this could be cured on appeal,
held improper.-Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of
Texas v. Nesbit (Tex. Civ. App.) 891.

§ 4. Taking case or question from jury.
In an action on an insurance policy, where the
evidence as to value is uncontradicted, the ques-
tion of value need not be submitted to the jury.
-American Cent. Ins. Co. v. Noe (Ark.) 572.
Where there was substantial evidence intro-
duced by plaintiff to establish the allegations
of the petition, a demurrer to the evidence was
properly overruled.-Harrison v. Lakenan (Mo.
Sup.) 53.

The question whether a child was sui juris is,
when the evidence is all one way, a question for
the court; otherwise, for the jury. Holmes v.
Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. (Mo. Sup.) 623.

In considering whether a party is entitled to
recover, all the evidence of both parties must
be reviewed, and, if there is any substantial
testimony in support of his case, it must be
submitted to the jury.-Fields v. Missouri Pac.
Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 134.

Though there be slight testimony, yet if its
probative force be so weak that it only raises
a mere surmise or suspicion of the existence
of the facts sought to be established, the court
should instruct a verdict.-Wills v. Central Ice
& Cold Storage Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 265.

the character of any witness, held proper.-
Harrison v. Lakenan (Mo. Sup.) 53.

discredited, a charge that the jury may reject
Where the testimony of a witness is wholly
the testimony of any witness whom they believe
has willfully sworn falsely, etc., is proper.-
Fields v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.)
134.

An instruction, in action for slander, author-
izing the jury, in making up their verdict, to
consider the facts and circumstances admitted
in evidence as produced by both parties, held
error.-Grimes v. Thorp (Mo. App.) 638.

evidence.

A charge requested, which is not justified by
the evidence, is properly refused.-Haxton v.
Kansas City (Mo. Sup.) 714.

In an action on a note, an instruction held
erroneous as excluding a good defense.-City
of Cleburne v. Gutta Percha & Rubber Mfg.
Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 300.

In an action for injuries to plaintiff's son, an
instruction that if, at the time of his injuries,
he was performing work outside the scope of
his employment, he assumed the risk, held error.
-Wood v. Texas Cotton Product Co. (Tex. Civ.
App.) 496.

It is not error to refuse a requested charge
withdrawing from the jury an essential element
of an oral contract supported by the evidence
of a party.-Texas Cent. Ry. Co. v. Miller
(Tex. Civ. App.) 499.

$ 9.

- Requests or prayers.

In an action for damages for breach of con-
tract, the request of an incorrect instruction
on the measure of damages held sufficient to
require the court to give a proper instruction
on that point.-Nicola Bros. Co. v. Hurst (Ky.)
1081.

In an action for injuries, an instruction_on
damages held not objectionable.-Smith v. For-

5. Instructions to jury-Province of dyce (Mo. Sup.) 679.
court and jury in general.

In an action against a railroad for wrongful
death, certain instructions held not erroneous
as an expression of the court's opinion on the
evidence. St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co. v.
Hitt (Ark.) 908, 990.

In an action on a contract on which de-
fendants pleaded fraud, instructions on that
subject held correct.-Craft v. Barron (Ky.)
1099.

In proceedings to condemn land for a railroad
right of way, an instruction held error, as as-
suming that the construction of a proposed depot
and switches constituted a special benefit to de-
fendant's land.-Kirby v. Panhandle & G. Ry.
Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 281.

It is not error to assume in the charge facts
established by uncontroverted evidence.-
Northern Texas Traction Co. v. Yates (Tex.
Civ. App.) 283.

Where defendant, in an action for injuries
to a servant, desires to have the question of
assumption of risk submitted to the jury, it is
his duty to pray an instruction to that effect.-
Smith v. Fordyce (Mo. Sup.) 679.

A charge requested, which is covered by the
instructions given, is properly given.-Haxton
v. Kansas City (Mo. Sup.) 714.

Omission in a charge held not to be com-
plained of by one asking a special charge in
effect like it. Oneal v. Weisman (Tex. Civ.
App.) 290.

Where a charge was correct as far as it went,
plaintiff could not avail himself of an error of
omission therein without having requested a
charge to supply it.-Freeman v. Slay (Tex.
Civ. App.) 404.

There is no error in refusing to give a special
charge, where the issue to which it relates was
fully covered by the general charge and another
In an action against a carrier for damages to special charge given at the same party's re-
a shipment of cattle, an instruction held prop-quest.-Parlin & Orendorff Co. v. Vawter (Tex.
erly refused as being on the weight of evidence. Civ. App.) 407.
-Texas Cent. Ry. Co. v. Miller (Tex. Civ.
App.) 499.

In an action for injuries, an instruction,
though defective, held sufficient to direct the
court's attention to the matter, making it in-
cumbent to charge in reference thereto.-Ray
v. Pecos & N. T. Ry. Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 466.
* Point annotated. See syllabus.

§ 6. Necessity and subject-matter.
An instruction that the jury, in determining
the credibility of testimony, might consider