3d district, James Lansing, Wm. S. Kenyon, Cornelius Esselstyne; 4th district, J. S. L'Amoreaux, B. M. Beckwith; 5th district, John F. Seymour, J. S. Spencer, Thomas Richardson; 6th district, Marcus Lyon, Charles A. Clark, Isaac L. Newton; 7th district, Oscar Craig, J. Welling, G. T. Spencer; 8th district, A. D. Scott, G. S. Wardwell, Byron Healey. Committee on Law Reform-First district, E. T. Gerry, S. L. M. Barlow, Wm. G. Choate; 2d district, John R. Kenneday, J. Lawrence Smith, E. B. Merrill; 3d district, Matthew Hale, C. P. Collier, A. Schoonmaker, Jr.; 4th district, S. W. Jackson, J. M. Dudley, Jas. Gibson; 5th district, E. B. Wynn, John C. Churchill, Frank Hiscock; 6th district, Wm. Gleason, H. Sturgis, Rufus King; 7th district, M. F. Cogswell, H. V. Howland, Geo. B. Bradley; 8th district, J. M. Humphrey, John H. White, Rufus Scott. Committee on Legal Biography - First district, Wm. Allen Butler, Cadwalader E. Ogden; 2d district, S. D. Lewis, Calvin Frost; 3d district, John Gaul, Jr., T. L. Westbrook; 4th district, A. X. Parker, H. S. Dodd; 5th district, G. W. Adams, Wm. Porter; 6th district, E. H. Prindle, B. F. Chapman; 7th district, John Vanvoorhis, S. G. Hadley; 8th district, E. C. Sprague, Cyrus H. Davis. For Recording Secretary — A. V. DeWitt. For Corresponding Secretary - Edward Mitchell. Committee on Prizes - First district, E. F. Shepard, 2d district, J. M. Van Cott; 3d district, Isaac Edwards; 4th district, John I. Gilbert; 5th district, D. B. Keeler; 6th district, Seymour Dexter; 7th district, Thos. Bacon; 8th district, Geo. Wadsworth. This ticket was unanimously elected, and after some other minor business and some brief remarks on various subjects by various members the Association adjourned. an introductory chapter to his great work, and accomplished it in a manner at once edifying and useful. Dr. Chaillé, with evidently better opportunities than Dr. Beck, has added in his collection of notes, an instructive repertory of knowledge to the student of forensic medicine. His bibliography is also a great addition to the address, although we are surprised that he has not been able to swell his catalogue beyond its present limits. He seems to have overlooked also some of those important monographs which, in a science like this, are in the nature of text books. Thus, in some of the older medical journals, both American as well as foreign, are to be found in occasional contributions the very materials out of which writers on medical jurisprudence have framed their works. For no one man ever has been found who could be called an expert in every branch of this science. Hence it is in culling from every source that a comparative judgment can alone be formed. HOADLEY ON ROMAN LAW PROCEDURE. A Lecture on Roman Law Procedure. By George Hoadley, This is a brief sketch of the successive steps taken in a suit in the courts of ancient Rome, and is worthy the perusal of every law student. While the study of the civil law is not deemed very essential to the American lawyer, a knowledge of the leading features of that system of jurisprudence is of great advantage, not merely as a means of broadening his general legal culture, but for the purpose of acquainting him with the foundation upon which very much of the common law rests. The outline features of the body of the law are given in the chapters in Kent and in Gibbon's history devoted to that subject, but the procedure in the courts is but lightly touched upon there. Professor Hoadley, in his lecture, fills up what is wanting, and shows to the student all that it is important that he should know in relation thereto. BOOK NOTICES. CHAILLE'S MEDICAL JURISPRUDENCE. A Origin and Progress of Medical Jurisprudence, 1776-1876. THE pamphlet of forty pages is an interesting synop HILLIARD'S AMERICAN LAW. American Law.-A Comprehensive Summary of the Law in its Various Departments. By Francis Hilliard, author of "The Law of Torts." "The Law of Mortgages," etc. In two Volumes. New York: Ward & Peloubet. 1877. This work is not equal to the treatise on the subject of American Law, written by the late Chancellor Kent, although it aims to cover a much vaster field, being, as the preface tells us, "as comprehensive in plan as the law itself." It is intended as a text-book, and as it embraces so much in its statements of legal principle must necessarily be concise. It follows in its arrangement according to the preface, "without any variation, the commentaries of Blackstone and to a certain extent of Kent." It is stated to be to but a limited extent a new work, for it contains a “ large amount of the contents of another book, first published many years ago and at that time somewhat largely circulated, though now comparatively forgotten." The title of the book is not given, but we suppose this was not deemed important as its contents are reproduced here. The first volume, which is the only one we have received, is divided into five books, the first treating of the origin and constituents of American Law; the second, of the absolute rights of persons; the third, of the tical sketch of the rise and progress of medical jurisprudence. Its title is somewhat of a mis-nomer, since the address really starts with an earlier inquiry into the history of legal medicine than is implied by its centennial limits of 1776-1876. The field appears to have been well gleaned in most directions, and the very voluminous notes are practical evidence of exhaustive research. The address loses its character, however, in every page, from the attempt to condense so wide a field of scientific research in a few generalizations of an epigrammatic character. Nor does the tumid style in which the author occasionally vents either his indignation, or the contempt he feels for laws that offend his sense of justice, impart any weight to his reasoning. The errors due to human infirmity are not generally considered arguments of any value against the reason of established laws. Apart from these few drawbacks to the otherwise meritorious character of this address, it probably presents the most thorough review of the history of medical juris-relative rights of persons, including husband and wife, prudence which has ever appeared in our language. Dr. Beck undertook this task some forty years ago as parent and child, master and servant, etc., etc.; the fourth, of the rights of things personal, including the law of contracts relating to personal property, and the fifth, of the rights of things real. Fearing that we have already trespassed too much upon your space, we will only add that justice to the profession, which is already over-supplied with unnecessary books, would seem to require the correction of your statement. Yours respectfully, The statements of law contained in the volume, so far as we have been able to discover, are correct, and the work may be considered as a safe guide to those who have occasion to use it. The style in which it is written very much resembles that of a digest, the points decided in each case referred to being given as a separate paragraph, and in the form in which headnotes to reported cases are constructed. It is thus rendered any thing but easy reading, and we imagine opinion. They are all works of rare excellence, and TEXT-BOOKS FOR STUDENTS. To the Editor of the Albany Law Journal: SIR- Prominent among the "Notes" in your issue of the 10th inst. is a reference to the Law Students' Series," recently announced, with the remark that "there is certainly no dearth of books on the subjects they propose to cover, but they are not well adapted to beginners in the study of legal science." While writing the above, you certainly could not have had in mind the review of Sir John Barnard Byles' Treatise on Bills, Notes, etc., in your issue of May, 1874, wherein you say, "This edition of one of the best, if not the best, treatises on the law of bills, etc., comes at a very opportune time, and deserves a hearty welcome from the profession;" nor the following from the American Law Review of about the same date: "If there should ever be an attempt to codify the whole body of the law, * ** the work of Mr. Justice Byles would furnish an admirable model. The arrangement is so lucid, the statements of the law so concise, there is such an entire absence of that loose talk in which inferior writers abound, that the book might well be enacted entire by act of Parliament." Side by side with the above may also be placed Mr. John Adams, Jr.'s, Doctrine of Equity, and Mr. Thos. Starkie's Practical Treatise of the Law of Evidence, in addition to which may be mentioned the invaluable treatise by Mr. John Wm. Smith (compiler of Smith's Leading Cases) on the law of contracts, and last, though not least in point of merit, Mr. Joshua Williams' as yet unsurpassed "Principles of the Law of Real Property, intended as a first book for students in conveyancing." These five works, having stood the test of practical use in the law schools and the office, are so well known that we are somewhat surprised that they were overlooked. In the course of a somewhat extended correspondence on this very subject of text-books for law students, Prof. W. C. Robinson, of Yale, writes under date of October 12: "I have never found a student who could not understand what Williams (speaking of his Real Property) meant by what he said. Not every author is entitled to such praise as that." And Prof. J. C. Gray, Jr., of Cambridge: "I always take occasion to recommend Williams on Real Property to the students as by far the best treatise upon the subject." PHILADELPHIA, Nov. 14, 1877. [Of Byles' Bills and Notes, Adams' Equity and Williams' Real Property, we have the very highest in some respects unexceptionable as text-books for students. But being, in origin, English, it is found necessary to annotate them to adapt them to the American student. Now notes invariably interfere * * with the unity of the subject and distract the atteution. "Notes are often necessary," says Dr. Johnson, in his preface to Shakespeare, "but they are necessary evils. * Particular passages are cleared by notes, but the general effect of the work is weakened. The mind is refrigerated by interruption; the thoughts are diverted from the principal subjects; the reader is weary, he suspects not why; and at last throws away the book which he has too diligently studied." If a book is used simply for reference, or as an index of cases, the objection does not hold, but in institutes of law it is peculiarly forceful. As it is, we do not know of better text-books than some of those our correspondent mentions, but we think it possible to make better for the American student.ED. A. L. J.] CONTRACTS EXTENDING PAYMENT BETWEEN MORTGAGEE AND VENDEE oF MORTGAGOR. To the Editor of the Albany Law Journal: SIR-A couple of my legal friends desire advice. One desires to bring suit, the other to defend the same suit. I submit their statement of facts, and such law as I have been able to collect, to you. John Doe made a mortgage for $1,000 to his old friend Richard Roe, upon lands at A, as security collateral to his bond conditioned for the payment of that sum at the expiration of one year. Prior to the expiration of the year Doe sold the land to his neighbor, Styles, who assumed the mortgage and agreed to pay it off. Near the end of the year, crops being poor, Styles saw Roe and they agreed to let the mortgage stand a year, and they put the agreement in writing, but didn't think it worth while to say any thing to Doe about it. After awhile Doe thought the security was getting a little shaky, and so he notified Roe to foreclose or else he should claim to be released from any deficiency. Roe of course could not foreclose because of the extension, and before the year was up the house on the land burned, and the land itself depreciated largely. The year is now up, for which the extension was given, and the question arises, what are the rights of the parties? Doe's lawyer thought he could get him off, on the ground that he became surety for Styles, and the extension to Styles released him. Judge Gilbert, in 10 Humph. 41, appears to have had no doubt that there was no release when the grantee did not assume the mortgage. We doubted if it might not be otherwise if he had, but in the same volume, page 66, his associates had no such doubts. Nor did the majority of the court in 1 Sup. Ct. (T. & C.) 620. These decisions go upon the ground that, as between the parties, the grantor does not become surety to the mortgagee for the grantee, but that both are principal debtors. But the grantee, assuming payment as between himself and the grantor, becomes the principal debtor, and the latter the surety only. 8 Hun, 373 (affirmed Ct. of Appeals); 10 id. 66; id. 41. And as such surety he has the right to pay off the debt, and become subrogated to the rights of the mortgagee although (see 8 Hun, above) not bound to do But (see Russell v. Weinberg, 16 Alb. L. J., No. 10, p. 164) the notice to foreclose, given by Doe, not having been attended to, the mortgagee has lost his claim for deficiency. We have seen above that he could not have foreclosed, for the extension would have been a good defense, as well probably for the bondsman (1 Sup. Ct., T. & C., 620) as for Styles. Now, we know that the owner of the bond and mortgage need not foreclose it at all, but may sue the maker of the bond; and the extension having expired, Roe desires to collect his money. He dares not foreclose, because: 1st. He cannot make it out of the land; 2d. Styles is a bankrupt; and, 3d. Doe cannot be held for the deficiency. We have seen that the bondsman has not been released by the extension, and that we can sue him. Shall we do so? Has he any defense, or does the right to waive the foreclosure and sue on the bond deprive Roe of the defense he might have made if sued in foreclosure, or is there some bad law in some of the cases. Incidentally, suppose Roe, when the notice was served, had taken his bond and mortgage to Doe, and offered to assign it upon payment. Would it have been an answer to say, "You have extended the time, and I cannot enforce it; I desire to protect my rights now, while you prevent me from so doing for a year." Perhaps there are some "general principles" applicable to the above case, which some of your readers will give the others the benefit of. Order Judgment affirmed, with costs-White v. Baxter; Barry v. Brune; Wattrick v. Freedman.affirmed, with costs-In re Hone; In re Striker.-Order affirmed, without costs - In re Will of Hathaway, deceased.- · Order affirmed, without costs to either party in this court as against the other - De Ruyter v. Lambard.- Motion granted, with costs up to time of making motion, and $10 costs of motion-Chase v. James. - Motion denied, with $10 costs-Jones v. Anderson; McElwain v. Erie Railway.- - Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs-Hallock v. Dominy. Orders of General Term and Special Term reversed and report of referee affirmed, and application denied, with costs Collins v. Collins. NOTES. States Supreme Court, in the case of The Springbok, 5 Wall. 1, and arrives at a different one. The view of the writer has been sustained by the tribunal known as the Mixed Commission in the case of the Circassia and it is in accord with that of Hon. Wm. Beach Lawrence. We intend when space permits to give the article (which was read at the late Antwerp Conference) in our columns. Lord Gifford contributes a very readable article on jurisprudence and amendment of the law. A well-written memoir of the late Lord Justice Mellish, by G. K. Richards, M. A., gives many interesting reminiscences of that distinguished judge. Borough Extension," is the title of an essay having merely a local value. A paper on the "Obligation of Treaties," by Henry Richard, M. P., also read at the Antwerp conference, is the closing article. It is a wellconsidered discussion of the principles which should be observed in carrying out treaties, and ought to be read by every statesman and student of international law. The reviews of decisions, book notices, and digests are, as usual, well prepared and valuable. A correspondent sends us the following extract from a letter written by his brother, now in Constantinople: "Next term I shall have the seniors in international and constitutional law. To a Turk a court of justice, in the American acceptation of the term, is a thing unknown. They never finish a cause at the first hearing, nor do they render an immediate decision; but after all the testimony has been offered, the kadi (judge) adjourns the further trial of the action until some future time, for the known purpose of affording the litigants an opportunity of making him presents. These he accepts from both parties, and in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred the decision is in favor of the person whose gift is the most valuable. There used to be a judge named Kaimil Pasha (he is dead now) who did not go through the formality of listening to the evidence. He was therefore regarded by the common people as the most learned kadi that ever lived, for, said they, he understood the Koran so thoroughly that he could render a decision before a particle of testimony had been presented by either party. I am going to attend a number of trials here, and shall send you a full account of the Turkish procedure. The Turks, as a general thing, know little or nothing of America. The other day, however, as I was going to Constantinople on the steamer from the Black Sea, a Turk, who is quite a prominent man in the empire, and had in some way learned of the presidential contest in the United States, asked me in favor of which party the election had finally been decided - the missionary or the other one. Being a Democrat, I of course replied, "The other one." Mr. C. H. Truax, a frequent and welcome correspondent of THE ALBANY LAW JOURNAL, has an excellent article in Scribner for December on "Some Precepts for Slandering Safely," in which there is much law lore and not a little legal humor. The trial of the English detectives has ended in the conviction of three of those charged, Meiklejohn, HE November number of the Law Magazine and Druscovitch and Palmer, and that of the solicitor, articles. The leading one by Sir Travers Twiss, on the doctrine of continuous voyages as applied to contraband of war and blockade, is a learned discussion of the subject, and refers to the authorities, English and American. He criticises the conclusion of the United Meiklejohn and Palmer to mercy. The convicted persons were sentenced to two years' imprisonment at hard labor. The St. Louis ordinance taxing lawyers has been declared unconstitutional.-The danger of cross-examination is illustrated by these anecdotes which were told at a meeting of an Irish law society. A barrister having been pressed by his attorney to ask a witness whether he had not committed a certain offense, did so, and was promptly answered in the negative. "Now you have got your answer," said the attorney angrily. "Well, did you not oblige me to put the question?" "I did," said the attorney, "but you had no right to listen to me." In another case an attorney began his cross-examination by asking a witness, "Upon the virtue of your oath, sir, did you not borrow the champagne glasses for your wedding breakfast?" "I did, sir," replied the witness quite unappalled, "but I was never driven out of my house by my wife, as you were." parties obtained undisputed possession. The head and front of the movement of recovery is William Young, a retired Cincinnati dry goods dealer, and grandson of the original Robert Young, and he feels confident of establishing his claim. His strongest evidence is several ancient deeds, covering about 50,000 acres, but many formidable points, especially the statute of limitation, will be brought to bear against them. These lauds are in the heart of the "blue grass region," and are worth $100 to $250 per acre. BENCH AND BAR. John B. Hoffman, late one of the judges of the Supreme Court of Appeals, West Virginia, died at Clarksburg, on the 18th inst. He resigned his seat upon the Bench in June, 1876, owing to ill health. Barnard Hill, presiding justice of the Superior Court, which was in session at Knoxville, Ga., on the 6th inst., while conducting a criminal trial, died in his seat without a struggle. The standing at the bar of Samuel Warren was not high, and it was not materially improved by that dangerous ornament, the silk of a Queen's Counsel. If he was not fully employed as a junior, he certainly was seldom retained as a leader. An epigram attributed to Sir George Rose supplies probably the feeling of the Bar respecting Warren's deficiency in The Chicago Law Institute has 397 members; its library contains 9,493 volumes, 1,037 more than last year; its income during the past year was, $6,595.07, and its expenditure, $5,868.29. A will bound in morocco, with illustrated covers and containing 100 quarto pages and an index, was offered for probate in New York city last week. The amount of property disposed of by the document is comparatively small. A question of law was, by consent of counsel at the trial of ex-Speaker Carr, in New Orleans, submitted to a jury and their finding thereon accepted as binding. The Corporation Court of Danville, Va., adju-leading business: dicated the question whether Hayes or Tilden was elected president, in determining a controversy about a bet last week. The court held Hayes to be legally the president.- -The New York City Bar Association treasury contained $11,579.53 on the 12th inst. Judge Morrill, United States District Judge in Texas, was assaulted in the street by an attorney for remarks made by him at the trial of a cause before him. The consolidation scheme for uniting the interests of the Western Union and the Atlantic and Pacific Telegraph companies has met an obstacle in a clause in the constitution of Pennsylvania which provides that "no telegraph company shall consolidate with or hold a controlling interest in the stock or bonds of any other telegraph company owning a competing line, or acquire by purchase or otherwise any other competing line or telegraph.". The stockholders of the Fidelity Savings Bank, in Chicago, have been held individually liable for the indebtedness of the bank in an action recently tried in that city. The decision is of considerable local importance as determining a number of suits brought by creditors of the bank against stock holders. It is said that an extensive land suit is about to be instituted in the Kentucky courts, involving the possession of many thousands of acres in Mason, Fayette, Bourbon and Campbell counties, including portions of the sites of Lexington, Maysville, Paris and Lewisburg. This ownership is claimed by the numerous heirs of Robert and Thomas Young, two pioneers from Virginia, who explored the western section of Kentucky in 1773, patenting, pre-empting and purchasing large tracts of territory. It is claimed by the Young family that the titles to these lands became lost in the process of time, by the burning of Lexington courthouse, containing deeds, in 1800, and in various unknown ways; that some of the heirs selling their portions of undivided property without the knowledge of the co-heirs, and thus, with the scattering of the family, their failure to protect their interest, outside If Warren, though clever, the vainest of men, The men in the first rank of the Northern Bar were The manners of the bar three hundred years ago are illustrated by the following account of the trial of Sir Walter Raleigh, appearing in Cassell's History of England for November: Sir Walter pleaded not guilty, and Heale, the king's sergeant, opened the case against him, recapitulating the points of the indictment; and when ne came to the clause implicating Arabella Stuart, he foolishly exclaimed "As for Arabella Stuart, she hath no more title to the crown than I have, and I utterly renounce any." Raleigh, even in his critical situation, could not restrain a smile at this absurdity. Coke then went into the case at length, and what he lacked in proof he endeavored to supply by the most virulent abuse. He described in inflated language the intensions of the agitators of the "Bye," and amongst other things that they meant to make proclamation against monopolies, as if that were absolute treason. Raleigh calmly reminded him that he was not charged with the "Bye." "You are not," replied Coke; "but it will be seen that all these treasons, though they consisted of several parts, closed in together like Samson's foxes, which were joined in their tails, though their heads were separated.” Raleigh still insisted that the "Bye" was the treason of the priests and said, "what is the treason of the priests to me?" "I will then come close to you," Coke. "I will prove you to be the most notorious traitor that ever came to the bar; you are, indeed, upon the Main,' but you have followed them upon the 'Bye' in imitation." And Raleigh's pertinent checks so enraged the scurrilous lawyer, that he went on furiously denouncing Raleigh as a damnable atheist, a spider of hell, and the most vile and execrable of traitors. You speak indiscreetly, barbarously, and uncivilly," interposed Raleigh. "I want words," shouted Coke, "I want words to express thy viperous treasons." "True," replied Raleigh, "for you have spoken the same things half a dozen times over already." said ALL communications intended for publication in the LAW JOURNAL should be addressed to the editor, and the name of the writer should be given, though not necessarily for publication. Communications on business matters should be addressed to the publishers. The Albany Law Journal. ALBANY, DECEMBER 1, 1877. CURRENT TOPICS. PROBABLY no one thing during the present year has so much interested the bar of this State, and every member of it, as the changes occurring in the law regulating procedure in civil actions. Within the time mentioned we have conducted suits in courts of record under three different statutes. The old Code of Procedure, with which we have been familiar for nearly a third of a century, and which was the harbinger of an era of law reform that the profession of forty years ago would have believed impossible, on the first day of May last, unexpectedly to most of us, ceased to exist, and an unknown and apparently incomprehensible compilation, designated as the Code of Remedial Justice, took its place. Less than a month this volume of mystery nominally governed the action of the courts and the attorneys, when the old Code was brought back for a brief season. With the opening autumn the Code of Civil Procedure, or, as it is familiarly called, the New Code, became the law of practice. How long this should remain was at first a matter of doubt. The bar, as a whole, did not fancy it, and if the legislature had been in session, earnest petitions for its repeal would have come up from practitioners in every part of the State. But petitions and grumbling would avail nothing, and practicing lawyers took the only course that remained for them, and went to studying the new statute. They found it no very difficult matter to familiarize themselves with its provisions, and in doing so, most of them became satisfied that it was not so new or so strange as they had supposed. The Committee on Law Reform at the recent meeting of the State Bar Association, reported that a majority of its members "who had expressed an opinion" were not in favor of a repeal of the new Code; but it might be of interest to know how many and who of the Committee had "expressed an opinion." While they were "not prepared to speak with great confidence of the merits of all the changes," they thought that "the substantial changes are in the main improvements." As the Association itself did not disapprove of this conclusion of the Committee, it may be assumed that that body is not in favor of repeal; and that the bar of the State is also adverse to a change back to the old law. We presume, therefore, that the Code of Civil Procedure will be undis- I VOL. 16.- No. 22. turbed by the coming legislature, except in the way of amendment in those parts where experience has shown it defective. A murder trial is a rare occurrence in the State of Vermont, but the few which do take place there are accompanied by such remarkable surroundings, that each one of them acquires a national reputation. Either the murdered man comes back alive, or an important witness, who can prove an alibi, turns up just in time to snatch the condemned from under the shadow of the gallows, or some other startling incident astonishes the public. The latest case is that of Deacon Smith, who is charged with having, in complicity with the wife of a neighbor, of whom he had become enamored, poisoned his own wife. The accused man, in this instance, after he knew he was suspected of the crime, and after steps had been taken to investigate the circumstances surrounding his wife's death, sent letters to his paramour detailing his feelings and fears, and alluding to certain facts known only to the two, and also wrote to a chemist who was making tests for poison upon the organs of the deceased, offering bribes for a suppression of the truth. These communications fell into the hands of the authorities, and have been published in the newspapers. They afford a remarkable picture of the workings of what is known as a troubled conscience, and will, in connection with the other circumstances of the case, furnish almost conclusive evidence against the accused persons. The practice of the law is not supposed to be, as a rule, attended with any great personal danger. Though counsel in the heat of argument are apt to make remarks concerning individuals, which,if made out of court, would subject the one making them to the risk of an assault, or of a libel suit, those who might take offense are liable to give to the invidious language only the passing suggestion that the attorney using it is paid for doing so, and is only earning his fee. Now and then, indeed, a more than usually sensitive suitor, or witness, is stirred up, by what the lawyer says about him, to offer violence, but such encounters, as a rule, end in favor of the profession, and counsel are not deterred thereby from saying what they deem proper concerning their antagonists and those sustaining them. Danger from one's own client is, however, seldom anticipated, yet that it is possible is shown by the attack upon ex-Attorney-General Martindale, of Rochester, a few days ago. This gentleman had appeared for a man named Manning in a suit which terminated successfully at the trial, but in which the judgment was reversed by the General Term upon grounds fatal to Manning's side. He thereupon desired an appeal to be taken to the Court of Appeals, and asked his counsel to furnish the necessary security, he himself being unable to do so. Mr. Martindale advised |