Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

BOOK NOTICES.

though the first company may be authorized by its

charter to re-insure its risks. The index is good, but COOPER'S REPORTS, VOL. II.

there is no table of cases cited. The book is well

printed and bound. Reports of cases argued in the Court of Chancery of the State

of Tennessee, and decided by the Hon. William F. Cooper, Chancellor of the Seventh Chancery District of

Cox ON COMMON LAW PRACTICE. Nashville. Vol. II. St. Louis : G. I. Jones & Company, 1877.

Common Law Practice in Civil Actions. By Walter S. Cox

of the Bar of Washington, D. C., and Instructor in CoTHERE are several advantages in the reporting of

lumbian University Law School. Washington, D. C.:

W. H. &0. H. Morrison, 1877. 1 decisions by the judge who makes them, the most important one of which is, that the cases are presented

This volume appears to be a carefully prepared compito the public in the way that they appeared to the

lation of the rules regulating practice under the comcourt, the facts and the legal points having promi

mon law, and will be found useful to students and all nepce in the argument or influencing the determina

others desiring to understand the principles which govtion being made prominent in the report. Another

erued a system of procedure which is fast becoming advantage is that the opinions delivered are prepared

obsolete. While codes or other statutory provisions with reference to their publication, and the reported

have in most places superseded the ancient system of cases are more systematically and harmoniously pre

procedure, a knowledge of that system is essential to sented. The opinions in the volume before us are

the complete understanding of what now exists, and a carefully written and as carefully reported. A number

course of study which should omit the consideration of of interesting decisions are given among which we

it would be decidedly defective. The present volume select the following: Ex parte O'Brien, p. 33. A widow

is particularly intended for the use of students, the auhaving no children of her own, but caring for the

thor's experience as an instructor in a law school leadchildren of a deceased sister, who live with her, is the

ing him to prepare it, there being no other book in exhead of a family under the homestead act. Love v.

istence fitted for the purpose for which it is designed. Allison, p. 111. An accommodation indorser may be

We think the volume will meet the want that existed released by abandonment of levy on realty of a prior

and will prove acceptable to all who desire to study indorser. Pugsley v. Freedmen's Savings and Trust

systematically practice under the common law. Co., p. 130. The right of the defendants to remove a cause to the United States court under Laws 1789, $ 12,

REDFIELD ON THE LAW OF WILLS, VOL. III. etc., is gone, after one of the material defendants has The Law of Wills embracing the Probate of Wills and the

Settlement of Estates; the Duties of Executors, Adtaken the opinion of the State court, upon a question

ministrators and other testamentary trustees. By Isaac which goes to the merits of the litigation. Seasight v. W. Redfield, LL. D. Vol. III. Third Edition. Greatly Payne, p. 174. Where goods are sold and credit given

extended and improved. Boston: Little, Brown &

Company, 1877. to a corporation, an officer or stockholder cannot be

This volume completes the third edition of this wellheld personally liable for the debts thus created upon

known work. The labor of revising this edition was a promise to pay or see them paid, unless such promise

performed by its lamented author before his death, be in writing. Alley v. Myers, p. 206. A judgment

the only additions made by another haud being the by confession before a justice on an open account for

citation of such important cases as were decided bean amount over the magistrate's jurisdiction is void.

tween the occurrence of that event and the printing Carter v. Montgomery, p. 216. If a gift be in consideration of wrong done, such as seduction or past illicit

of the volumes. The treatise is too well known to the

profession to require any description or recommendacobabitation, equity will not interfere to deprive the

tion here. Many additions have been made to former donee of the legal title. Williams v. Corson, p. 269.

editions both in respect to the text and the citation of A husband and father, who has taken out a policy of

authorities, and the work constitutes the latest and insurance on his own life, payable to him, his execu

most complete treatise upon the subjects embraced tors, administrators, and assigns, may dispose of the

therein. same by will. Nichol v. Steger, p. 328. An infant cannot bind himself for necessaries, if like necessaries have been furnished him by his guardian with whom

CORRESPONDENCE. he was living. Stratton v. Perry, p. 638. A judgment is only a security of a higher nature for the same debt

APPEALS TO THE COURT OF APPEALS. and does not extinguish the debt, and, therefore, a To the Editor of the Albany Law Journal: bankrupt, against whom a judgment has been recov SIR - In an article in the Law JOURNAL of October ered in the period between his application to be de 13th instant, after referring to the work done by the clared a bankrupt and his final discharge, may plead Court of Appeals, and to the provision not allowing an the discharge in bar of the judgment. Smith v. St. appeal to that court in actions where the amount inLouis Mut. Life Ins. Co., p. 656. To entitle any one volved is less than five hundred dollars, you have this or more of the defendants to remove a cause from this paragraph: “If the limit could be increased to one court to the United States court, under the act of thousand dollars, it is probable that the judges could March 3, 1875, all of the material defendants must have at present dispose of all the business brought before the necessary citizenship. Rains v. Hayes, p. 669. them without overworking themselves as they are now Money paid by the father as security of his son-in-law doing." is pot chargeable to the daughter as an advancement. Why not go further and say, if the limit could be inSmith v. St. Louis Mut. Life Ins. Co., p. 127. An agree creased to one hundred thousand dollars, the judges ment by which one life insurance company transfers would have but little work to do. In short, why not to another life insurance company all its assets, the abolish that court altogether? That the judges should other company undertaking to re-insure the risks of be overworked is, of course, much to be regretted; the first and to pay its debts, is ultra vires and void, I nevertheless, are the rich to be there heard, to the ex

clusion of others, the determination of whose rights is | Contederacy with salt during the late war. The senior equally important ? and is that court to be known as counsel for plaintiffs, Senator Johnson, has been conthe Rich Man's Court? I have failed to discover that nected with the case since 1847. the questions of law in a case become less or more difficult accordingly as the sum involved is great or small.

There were 326 acts passed at the last session of the Yours, etc.,

English Parliament. Of these 33 related to the whole B. W. WOODWARD.

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, 14 reWATKINS, N. Y., Oct. 16, 1877.

lated to England, 9 to Scotland, 7 to Ireland, 3 to Eng[There must be some limitation upon appeals to the land and Ireland, 1 to England and Scotland, and 2 to court of last resort. The suitor whose dispute is about

the colonies, making 69 in all. There were 40 public five dollars may think he ought to have the highest statutes, which, being of a local character, chiefly for courts of the State adjudicate his difficulty as much confirming provisional orders of various departments as the thousand dollar or even the fifty dollar litigant.

of the government, are placed among the local acts, But we have discovered that it is a matter of impossi

raising the number of that class of acts to 242 in the bility for the court to determine all claims and that

whole. There were 15 private acts. some method of selection is inevitable. The most reasonable and most easily understood method is the

An English newspaper thus describes the Old Bailey: one now chosen. If the limit of appeal should be in "At length I hear one say, 'We'll go and see how they creased to $1,000 instead there would be no more vio

are getting on up stairs.' Now is my time, and I proflation of abstract right than there is in the $500 limit

fer a request for admission. The sergeant bids me now existing. Any talk about the court being a rich follow him. I do so, and am in the Old Bailey. It is man's court is the merost cant. The only privilege in the afternoon, and the audience seem to have rethe suitor of small means is deprived of by a limitation freshed themselves, and, in spite of the hardness of the is the opportunity of wasting what little he has in liti

benches, to be sleeping in a way very creditable to gation; for no case involving less than a thousand dol their consciences. I can't see the prisoner at all. A lars is of itself worth a journey to the Court of Ap dozen unhappy men are seated on one side, with pens peals. Cases involving important questions may now and paper before them; they are the jury. Around go there, for in such cases the court below will always the table opposite the iudges are the counsel. Behind allow an appeal. The poor man is benefited by the

them there are a few benches said to be for reporters; rule forbidding small cases to be kept in the courts but I hope the seedy individuals seated on them are by appeal.- ED. A. L. J.).

not to be reckoned as members of the Fourth Estate.

If so, I rather pity the Fourth Estate, which I have NOTES.

been told is the palladium of British liberty. A narrow

passage divides them from the sleepy witnesses, who THE case of The People v. Lord, which has agitated

sit dozing as if they did not take the slighest interest T the politicians for some time past, was decided on

in what was going on. I doubt not but that they are the 26th ult. by the General Term of the Supreme

keeping their eyes shut to show how unprejudiced and Court of the Fourth Department, sitting at Roches

impartial is their state of mind. As I stand in the ter. The defendant, who was a member of assembly,

little square space by the door, I fancy that I am the was indicted for bribery under the provisions of Laws

sole representative of the British public. Alas! I am 1869, chapter 742. The offense was charged to have

soon undeceived. As I turn up my eyes to the ceiling, been committed in February, 1871, and the indictment

I see hanging over a gallery above me a row of as beery was found in September, 1875. At the time the of

heads as I have seen for some time; and they are the fense was committed the statute of limitations as to

public. I am only an intruder! my proper place is up indictments was three years. In the interval between

with them, where, squeezed together, and sweltering that time and the finding of the indictment, but

in their own unwholesomeness this hot afternoon, they within three years of the time, the time for find

contemplate the way in which judges lay down the ing an indictment was extended to five years. It was

law, and clever barristers argue that black is white. I claimed on the part of the prisoner that the act could

try another court. It is just the same scene of darknot be applied to an offense committed before its pas.

ness and disagreeableness, and bad air and heat, where sage. The court below held that it could be, but the

one can scarce see or hear; for, as the witness is placed General Term reversed the decision and directed the

at the angle between the jury and the judges, he is discharge of the defendant. Judge Mullen delivered

sure to speak in an undertone that is scarcely audible the opinion. The judgment was concurred in by Judge to the reporters. A little of this goes a long way, and Talcott, Judge Smith dissenting.

I retreat into the lower waiting-rooms, where some

are weeping and some are laughing - where some see The most extensive bill of costs upon a small litiga their friends marched off to prison with Christain tion we have recently met with comes from Austra resignation, while others look as if they had lost all lia. Plaintiff sued for breach of warranty on the sale they cared for on earth. The crowd is a very motley of a cow. Defendant was in England at the time and one. They are a wonderful lot of seedy people, and if had to take a journey to Australia to give evidence a clerical looking gentleman comes amongst them, or on the trial. He was successful, and was allowed as a man of respectable appearance, quite a sensation is part of the bill of costs his expenses in going from created. They are young and old, rich and poor, good England to Australia, amounting to £218, or more people and bad, rags and broadcloth - side by side. I than $1,000.-- The Court of Appeals in Virginia is hurry away - thinking that, on the whole, in all engaged in hearing a litigation which has been in London - every way, there is not a more disreputprogress seventy years. It involves the title to the able, or more inconvenient, or a more unsanitary and salt works at Saltville, which furnished the Southern | unsavory place than the Old Bailey."

The Albany Law Journal.

the treasurer for their initiation fee and annual dues. The contribution asked from each individual is

small, and will be repaid to him many fold in the ALBANY, NOVEMBER 10, 1877.

advantage conferred by membership, to say nothing

of the benefit accruing to the bar in general from CURRENT TOPICS.

the existence of the Association. IT is stated that the young men who were admitted

The Court of Oyer and Terminer of Allegheny to the bar as attorneys in New York last week, but who wanted to become counselors also, have

county, Pennsylvania, and the governor of that taken an appeal from the decision of the General

Commonwealth, are in controversy in reference to the Term refusing to admit them as counselors. The

right of the grand jury of the county mentioned

to compel the executive to testify as to certain offigrounds of the appeal are stated to be: First, that

cial acts done by him, and connected with a matter the committee examining the appellants were ap

that they are investigating. The governor, in anpointed to "examine applicants for admission as

swer to the subpæna requiring his attendance, denies attorneys and counselors of the Supreme Court;"

“the right of a co-ordinate branch of the governsecond, that they had certified that the young men were entitled to pass as attorneys and counselors;

ment to compel the attendance of the executive and third, that the Court of Appeals had not power to

officers, or investigate the manner in which, in their prescribe the time for the order issued by it to take

discretion, they have performed their official duties.”

The governor has, however, elected to be guided in effect, but that the same must be regularly pub

his action in the matter by the decision of the Sulished. We can see no substantial reason for this appeal. If the young men making it should be suc

preme Court, to which an appeal has been taken, alcessful (of which result there is very little proba

though he says, “an extreme regard for the dignity bility), the only thing gained, to most of them at

and independence of the executive might justify

the assumption that the decision of the propriety of least, would be a right to assume a year or so earlier the title of counselor. The young lawyer during

recognizing the authority of a co-ordinate branch the first two years of his professional life, especially

lies entirely in the breast of the executive.” Pendin large cities, has very rarely an opportunity to act

ing the decision of the Supreme Court, the governor as counselor. His business is mainly in the inferior

declines to obey the subpoena. As we have before courts, or if he happens to be engaged in a litiga

said, the position taken by the governor is the proper tion in one of the Superior Courts, a trial is not

one. To say nothing of the impropriety of a local reached during the time mentioned, or if it is,

body thus examining into the official conduct of

State officers, the rules of evidence make official counsel will probably be employed whether the attorney is entitled to conduct it or not. Perhaps,

transactions of the chief officers of the State privihowever, the appellants desire to have the status of

leged. Thus, communications between a provinthe obnoxious rules finally settled, and, therefore,

cial governor and his attorney-general in regard to take their appeal for the benefit of those who are to

the conduct of officers (Wyatt v. Gore, Holt's N. P. come after them. Even this would hardly justify

Cas. 299), or between such governor and a military an appeal, for if the Court of Appeals should deter

officer under his authority (Cooke v. Maxwell, 2 Stark. mine that it had omitted any act essential to give

183), the report of a military commission of inquiry validity to its rules, it could by further action

made to the commander-in-chief (Home v. Bentinek, remedy the defect.

2 B. & B. 130), correspondence between the agent

of the government and a secretary of State (AnderWe trust the members of the profession will bear son v. Hamilton, 2 B. & B. 156; Mosbury v. Madison. in mind the annual meeting of the New York State | 1 Cranch, 144), are confidential matters which the Bar Association, which will be held at the Assembly interests of the State will not permit to be disclosed. Chamber in this city on the 20th of this month, and And it was held by Marshall, C. J., in 1 Burn's trial, will so arrange their business engagements as to be 186, that the president of the United States, and able to be present on that occasion. The committee the governors of the several States, are not bound of arrangements earnestly urge all members to be to produce papers or disclose information communipresent, and to come prepared to nominate new cated to them, when in their own judgment the dismembers, and to consider the subjects which will closure would, on public considerations, be inexnaturally arise for discussion. It is stated that pedient. See, also, Gray v. Pentland, 2 S. & R. 23; special addresses and theses may be expected, and Yoter v. Sanno, 6 Watts, 156. that the post-graduate prize will be awarded. The committee will publish the order of exercises, when In 1871 the legislature of Michigan passed an settled, in the ALBANY LAW JOURNAL. In this con- act requiring every negotiable instrument whose nection we would urge those members elect who consideration was the transfer of an interest in a have neglected to do so, to respond to the call of patent right, to have written or printed on its face

VOL. 16.— No. 19.

the words “given for patent rights," and made it a The Institute of International Law, an account of misdemeanor to take or transfer such a note not so the constitution and purposes of which appear at inscribed with knowledge of the facts. The page 130 of our present volume, held its annual statute also made such a note subject in the hands meeting at Zurich at the time appointed. The only of any holder to the same defenses as in the hands subjects discussed at the meeting appear to be those of the original holder. A like enactment was made having reference to maritime law during the time of by the legislature of this State last winter (Laws war, a subject which at the present time possesses 1877, chap. 65). The Supreme Court of Michigan but a secondary interest to the profession in America. in the case of Cranson v. Smith, just decided, and appearing in our present issue, hold that the Michi The Incorporated Law Society of the United gan law is in violation of the provisions of the Fed Kingdom held its annual meeting at Bristol on the eral Constitution, upon the ground that it interferes

| 20th ult. The proceedings and discussions resemwith the value and enjoyment of patent rights,

bled those at meetings of bar associations in this which a State may not do, the subject of granting

country, and embraced many topics of general inpatents, and regulating the rights of patentees,

terest, such as admission to the bar, professional rebeing within the exclusive control of Congress.

muneration, bankruptcy law, etc. In respect to the Whether the courts of this State will reach a like

latter subject, the drift of opinion seemed to be that conclusion in case they should be called upon to

such a law does more harm than good, which, we adjudicate concerning the validity of our law, we

believe, is the general sentiment of the profession do not presume to say, but the Michigan court sus

with us. tains its holding by very satisfactory reasons. Statutes involving something like the same question

NOTES OF CASES. have been passed upon by other courts, and the

In the case of Jones v. Preston, 1 Tex. L. J. 66, weight of authority seems to be in accord with the

1 decided by the Court of Appeals of Texas at its principle advanced in Cranson v. Smith. See Gro

last term, the action was brought to recover from a ver & Baker Seu. Mach. Co. v. Butler, 53 Ind. 454;

carrier the value of a trunk and its contents, which 21 Am. Rep. 200, where a State law requiring for

he was transporting as baggage for a traveler. A eign corporations to perform certain acts as a con

portion of the contents of the trunk consisted of ditiov of doing business, was held not to apply to

these things: $100 in coin and $200 in currency, corporations manufacturing and selling patented

sixteen yards of dress silk, two dozen glasses, and articles; Helm v. First Nat. Bank of Huntington, 43

half a bushel of canary seed; and a material ques. Ind. 167; Ex parte Robinson, 2 Bissell, 309; Hollida

tion in the case was, should these articles be classed v. Hunt. 70 m. 109. In Patterson v. Commonwealth. as personal baggage, so as to make the carrier liable 11 Bush, 311; 21 Am. Rep. 220, however, a statute

for their loss. The court, after stating that merchan

dise is not to be included within the term baggage, forbidding the sale of illuminating oils not able to stand a prescribed test was held constitutional, as

says: “ Such articles as are carried from place to applied to patented oils. See, also, upon the same

place for sale, exchange, or barter, will come under subject, Woolen v. Banker, 6 Am. Law Rec. 236;

the head of merchandise, while such articles as are State v. Peck, 25 Ohio St. 26.

being transported solely for the necessities, comfort

and convenience of the traveler, and not for the A large number of bills have during the week purposes of sale, exchange, or barter, would be bagbeen introduced in Congress, most of them, how- gage in contemplation of law, restricted to the ever, relating to matters of no especial interest to further fact that the articles were such as passengers, the profession. A few, however, merit attention. by the particular mode of conveyance, usually carry One introduced in the House by Mr. Frye, of Maine, with them in traveling.” The submission of the provides for the repeal of the bankrupt law, and question to the jury whether the contents mentioned the enactment in lieu thereof of a brief statute pro came under the head of merchandise or not, and viding that any debtor in failing circumstances, who whether the sum of money was too large to meet shall make a voluntary assignment of his estate, the reasonable requirements of the traveler during without preference, under the laws of the State his journey, was held proper. See, upon this subwhere he resides, shall be discharged from liability ject, Dexter v. Syracuse, etc., R. R. Co., 42 N. Y. for debts other than fiduciary ones, provided his 326; 1 Am. Rep. 527, where it is held that the right estate is sufficient to pay a specified percentage upon of a traveler to recover for lost baggage is not his indebtedness. Another bill introduced by Mr. | limited to such apparel, or other articles, as he esOliver, of Iowa, provides for an amendment of the pects to need or use by the way, but extends to such patent laws, so that a patent may be granted for a things as are ordinarily carried by travelers. Also, term of ten years, with an extension for five years, Toledo, Wabash, etc., R. R. Co. v. Hammond, 33 under the provisions of the law heretofore applica- Ind. 379; 5 Am. Rep. 221, where an opera glass ble to extensions.

I was held proper baggage, and American Contract

Co. v. Cross, 8 Bush (Ky.), 472; 8 Am. Rep. 871, son v. Wilson, 37 Md. 1; 11 Am. Rep. 518, where a where a gold watch was so held. A feather bed not sale, for a valuable consideration, of all the property intended for use on the voyage is not personal bag the vendor then had and might thereafter acquire, gage of a female passenger by steamship from Ire- was held to convey only such property as the vendor land to America. Connolly v. Warren, 106 Mass. then possessed. See, also, Moody v. Wright, 13 Metc. 146; 8 Am. Rep. 300. Neither are ivory handles, 17; Llolroyd v. Marshall, 10 H, of L, 191; Brown v. 283 dozen in number, baggage (G.N. Ry.Co. v. Shep- Tanner, L. R., 3 Ch. 59; Pennock v. Coe, 23 How. herd, 8 Exch. 30); nor title deeds and money to pay 177; Galveston R. R. Co. v. Cowdy, 11 Wall. 489; expenses of a law suit (Phelps v. L. & W. R. Co., 19 Morrill v. Noyes, 56 Me. 458; Pierce v. Lang, 32 N. C. B. [N. S.) 321); watches of the value of £1,895 H. 484; Phelps v. Winslow, 18 B. Monr.431; Arnoult (Belfast, etc., Ry. Co. v. Keys, 9 H. L. 556); household v. Aimes, 16 La. Ann. 225; and cases cited in Wyatt furniture, such as blankets, sheets and bedding. v. Watkins, supra. Macrou v. Great West. Ry. Co., L. R., 6 Q. B. 612.

In the case of Barber v. The St. Louis Dispatch Co., But & watch and jewelry, usually worn, is. Mc

| 5 Cent. L. J. 360, recently decided by the St. Louis Cormick v. H. R. R. R. Co., 4 E. D. Smith, 181. So

Court of Appeals, the action was for an alleged libel are tools used by passenger in his trade (Davis v. C.

in publishing a statement that plaintiff's husband & S. R. R. Co., 10 How. 330); guns for sporting

had brought a suit for divorce, wherein he accused purposes (Van Horn v. Kermit, 4 E. D. Smith, 453);

plaintiff of having committed adultery with a money for traveling expenses, cloth for clothing,

person named, and with divers other persons, and the manuscript books of a scholar. Minter V.

and of having given birth to an illegitimate Pacific Railroad Co., 41 Mo. 503.

child. The defense was that the publication The question whether a thing not in esse, such as

was privileged, as being a fair report of a legal an unplanted crop, may be the subject of a chattel proceeding. Plaintiff showed that the only legal mortgage, has been fruitful of much discussion, and

proceeding at the time in existence was a comthere has been considerable contrariety of decision,

plaint which had been filed in an action for divorce, the tendency of late being to sustain mortgages

wherein the alleged libelous matter was set forth. given upon such property, at least to the extent of

The court held that the contents of the complaint a single crop. The case of Dupree v. McClanahan,

were not privileged under the general rule that recently decided by the Court of Appeals of Texas,

where a court or public magistrate is sitting pub

licly, a fair account of the whole proceedings, uninvolves the question, and the conclusion is in accordance with the tendency mentioned. In Wyatt

colored by defamatory comment, or insinuation, is 1. Watkins, 16 Alb. L. J. 205, the same result is

a privileged communication, whether the proceedreached. Parsons, in his work on Contracts, states

ings are on a trial, or on a preliminary or ex parte

hearing. To come within the rule there must be a as a general principle (pp. 522, 523): “The existence of the thing sold, or the subject matter of the

hearing of some kind. See Rex v. Wright, 8 Term,

298, where the reason of the rule that accounts of contract, is essential to the validity of the contract,"

judicial proceedings are not libels, is stated to be and "a mere contingent possibility,not coupled with

because it is of great importance that the proceedan interest, is no subject of sale, as all the wool one

ings of courts of justice shall be known; that the shall ever have, or the sheep which a lessee has cov

| general advantage to the country in having these enanted to leave at the end of an existing time.”

proceedings made public, more than counterbalances But if "rights are vested, or possibilities are dis- the inconvenience to the person whose conduct may tinctly connected with interest or property, they be the subject before the court. See, also, Curry v. may be sold.” And it is said in Benjamin on Sales,

Walter, 1 Esp. 453; Davison v. Duncan, E. & B.

231; Ryalls v. Leader, L, R., 1 Exch, 299; Pierce v. p. 53: “ Things not yet in existence, which may

| Goodlake, 15 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) 676; Wason v. be sold, are those which are said to have a poten Walter, L. R., 4 Q. B. 93, where the decision is tial existence, that is: things which are the natural based upon the analogy between public proceedings product or expected increase of something already

in courts of justice and public debates in the houses

of Parliament. It also appears from Hunter v, belonging to the vendor." In Jones v. Richardson,

Sharp, 4 Fost. & F. 983, that a hearing and an in10 Metc. 481, it is held that a mortgage upon goods quiry in public is essential to bring the publication which the mortgagor does not own at the time the within the rules as to privilege. So also in Ackermortgage is made, though he afterward acquire

| man v. Jones, 37 N. Y. Super. 43, where the pub

lication expressly described a public appearance, them, is void, the court saying that to be able to

and the statement of a criminal charge before a sell property, the vendor must have a vested right magistrate. In no instance have the statements in it at the time of sale. See, to the same effect, made in bill filed been held to come within the rule, Rice v. Stone, 1 Allen, 566; Head v. Goodwin, 37 Me.

and it would be decidedly unsafe to permit them to

do so. See, also, Edsall v. Brooks, 17 Abb. Pr. 227; 181; Low v. Peu, 108 Mass. 347; 11 Am. Rep. 357,

| McCabe v. Cauldwell, 18 id. 377; Cosgrove v. Trade where a sale of fish, thereafter to be caught, was Aux. Co., 18 Ir. Rep. C. L. 349; Jones v. McGovern, held to pass no title to the fish when caught. Wil- | 1 id. 681 ; Steele v, Brannon, L. R., 7 C. P. 268.

« AnteriorContinuar »