Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

138. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS-Public Contracts How Made.-Under St. 1896,ch. 416, an ordinance direct. ing with whom a contract for printing shall be made is invalid.-GODDARD V. CITY OF LOWELL, Mass., 61 N. E. Rep. 53.

139. NEGLIGENCE-Store-Injuries to Customer. - In an action by a customer for injuries sustained in fall. ing down an open stairway in defendant's shop, evi. dence held to sustain a finding of negligence of de. fendant.-TOLAND V. PAINE FURNITURE Co., Mags., 61 N. E. Rep. 52.

140. SALES-Agreed Price-Recovery Not a Quantum Valebat.-Where a complaint alleges a sale of goods at an agreed price, and that the whole amount is due and unpaid, recovery must be had on the express contract alleged, and not on a quantum valebat.-TILDEN V. GOR. DON & Co., Wasb., 66 Pac. Rep. 50.

141. NEW TRIAL - Specification of Error.- Under Comp. Laws, $ 5090, where the statement of intention to move for new trial contains no specificatiuns of error, it is unavailing on the motion for a new trial.NELSON V. JOBDETH, S. Dak., 87 N. W. Rep. 140.

142. NEW TRIAL-Statement.-Under Code Civ. Proc., $ 1054, the judge can grant an extension of time to pre. pare a statement on motion for new trial oply to one who is not in default.-FREESE V. FREESE, Cal., 66 Pac. Rep. 43.

143. PARTNERSHIP- Accounting - Limitations.- Bill to settle partparship accounts may be filled within six years after actual dissolution, or from a partnership transaction on account.-DUGGER V. TUIWILER, Ala., 30 South. Rep. 91.

144. PARTNERSHIP-Agreement to Divide Fee-Con. sideration.- Where partnership is formed to buy land, agreement of partners that fee to be paid one of the partners for effectiog the sale should be divided among all the partners held supported by a suficient consideration.-DUGGER V. TUTWILER, Ala., 30 South. Rep. 91.

146. PARTNERSHIP-Proof of- Relation - Testimony of Allegod Partners.-In an action against alleged co. partners it was error to refuse to allow defendants to testify as to relations existing between them.SCHOLTZ V. FREUD, Mich., 87 N. W. Rep. 130.

146. PLEADING – Amendment – Matter of Right.Where a complaint is bad for not showing jurisdiction an amended complaint is a matter of right, is a new pleading, and becomes the complaint in the action.JOHN W. SIMMONS V. Co. COSTELLO, 71 N. Y. Supp. 577.

147. PLEDGES-Bonds-Conversion.- A pledgee of railroad bonds payable to bearer does not convert such bonds by causing them to be registered in his own name.-RITCHIE v. BURKE, U. S. C. O., N. D. (Ohio), 108 Fed. Rep. 16.

148. PLEDGES — Note - Conversion.- Liability of Pledgee.-Pledgee of note held liable for its conver. sion, without payment or tender of the debt for which the note was pledged.-MEYER BROS. DRUG Co. v. MATTHEW8, Ark., 64 S. W. Rep. 264.

149. PLEDGES-Note-Pledgor's Liability for Debt.Pledgor of a note, the possession of which the pledgee parted with without authority, held to be liable for the amount of the debt for which it was pledged.-MEYER BROS. DRUG CO. V. MATTHEW8, Ark., 64 Pac. Rep. 264.

150. POWER OF ATTORNEY-Stamp Requirements.Note, with power of attorney autborizing confession of judgment attached thereto, held not within act June 13, 1898, requiring powers of attorney to be stamped.-TOLMAN V. TREAT, U.S.C.C., 8. D. (N. Y.), 109 Fed. Rep. 80.

151. PUBLIC LANDS-U. S. Patent v. State Certificate. -Under St. 1873-74, p. 327, a certificate by the register of the state land office to a tract of land as swamp land, which had previously been patented by the United States to a settler was void.-FREDERICKS V. ZOMWALT, Cal., 66 Pac. Rep. 38.

162. RECEIVERS-Adequate Remedy-Discretion of Court.-Appointment of receiver is in the discretion of the court, where there is a probability that person asking theretor will succeed, and there is no other adequate remedy or means of accomplisbing the desired object.-MEYER V. THOMAS, Ala., 30 South. Rep. 89.

153. RECEIVERS.-Corporations- Right of Equity to Appoint.-Chancery has no jurisdiction to sequester the property of a corporation by means of a receiver outside of that specially conferred by statute.-DAVID SON V. JOHN GOOD CORDAGE & MACHINE CO., 71 N. Y. Supp. 565.

154. REMOVAL OF CAUSE 8 - Petition for RemovalRecord.--Where a case removed from a state court is taken to a circuit court of appeals for review the peti. tion for removal is an essential part of the record to enable the court to determine its jurisdiction.-LARNED V. JENKINS, U. S. C. 0. of App., Eighth Circuit, 109 Fed. Rep. 100.

165. REPLEVIN - Ownership by Third Party – Dis. missal.-W here, in a sult to recover chattels, the evi. dence showed that peither plaintiff nor defendant bad title, and defendants were in possession for a third party, held error not to dismiss the complaint.-LEVY V. KELTER, 71 N. Y. Supp. 809.

156. SALVAGE-Towing-Disabled Bark.-The towing of a partially disabled bark into port by a steamer on request of the master of the bark held to be a towing, and not a salvage service.-THE J. C. PFLUGER, U. S. D.O., N. D. (Cal.), 109 Fed. Rep. 93.

157. SCHOOL AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS-School FundsApportiopment.-The apportionment of school funds under Pol. Code, $ 1858, subd. 4, must be based on the average daily attendance in the primary and gram. mar schools of the district, to the exclusion of the night and high schools.-STOCKTON SCHOOL DIST. OF SAN JOUQUIN COUNTY V. WRIGHT, Cal., 66 Pac. Rep. 34.

158. SEDUCTION-Conditional Promise to Marry.There is no seduction if prosecutrix submitted in reliance of defense special promise of marriage in the event of pregnancy, though the parties were engaged to marry at the time of the special promise.-PEOPLE v. RIAN, 71 N. Y. Supp. 527.

159. SHIPPING-Barge-Lost Through Unseaworthi. ness.-A carrier by water beld not liable for loss of cargo by the sinking of a barge through its unsea. worthiness under the term of the bills of lading.-THE ARCTIC BIRD, U. S. D. C., N. D. (Cal.), 109 Fed. Rep. 167.

160. SHIPPING-Barge-Presumption of Unseaworthi. ness.-The sinking of a barge six hours after starting on a voyage and while being towed in smooth water held presumptively due to her upseaworthiness at the commencement of the voyage.-THE ARCTIC BIRD, U. S. D. C., N. D. (Cal.), 109 Fed. Rep. 167.

161. SHIPPING — Ten Days' Notice of Logg – Reasonable Regulation.-A provision of a bill of lading requiring notice of any claim for loss or injury to the goods to be given within 10 days after such loss or in. jury is known to the shipper is reasonable and valid. -THE ARCTIC BIRD, U. S. D. C., N. D. (Cal.), 109 Fed. Rep. 167.

162. SHIPS AND SHIPPING-Master-Wages. The mas. ter of a dredge which was incapable of being nav. igated, held entitled to a lien on the vessel for his wages.-THE JOHN MCDERMOTT, U. 8. D. C., D. (Conn.), 109 Fed. Rep. 90.

163. SHIPS AND SHIPPING – Voluntary Towage-Com. pensation.-The master and crew are not entitled to share in an award mide for a voluntary towage serv. ice performed for a partially disabled veggel, but not as a salvage service.-THE J. C. PFLUGER, U. S. D. C., N. D. (Cal ), 109 Fed. Rep. 93.

164. SHIPS AND SHIPPING - Voluntary Towage-Com. pensation.-A steamer which interrupted her voyage

to tow a bark, which was partially disabled, into port, the service delaying her for eight hours, held entitled to an award.-THE J. C. PFLUGER, U. 8. D. C.; N. D. (Cal.), 109 Fed. Rep. 93.

165. SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE – Sale of Plantation.-A contract for the sale of a plantation as a going con. cern, including stock, inoplements, and supplles, for a fized sum, may be specifically entorced in equity as an entirety.-BROWN V. SMITH, U.S. C. C., D. (8. Car.), 109 Fed. Rep. 26.

166. STATUTES - General Statute Repealing Special Act.-Laws 1899, p. 133, entitled "An act to provide for the confirmation of titles to real estate," being a gen. eral statute, does not repeal Sand. & H. Dig. ch. 25, re. lating solely to contirmation of tax titles.-EX PARTE MORRISON, Ark., 64 S. W. Rep. 270.

167. STATUTES – Interpretation-General Purpose.Where a statute is not framed with regard to the lan: guage employed, the legislative will is to be ascer. tained from the text as a whole, interpreted in view of the general object and purpose of the act, and not from the literal meaning of the words of the statute alone.-CHERRY POINT FISH CO. V. NELSON, Wash., 66 Pac. Rep. 55.

168. STATUTE8-Time of Taking Effect.- A legislative act, to take effect immediately, is of Iorce from the beginning of the day on which it was enacted.-IN RE BOYCE, Wash., 66 Pac. Rep. 64.

169. STATUTES -Title – Two Objects Expressed.-Act No. 171 of 1893 held not unconstitutional, as baving two objects expressed in its title.- JACKSON & S. TRACTION CO. V. COMR, OF RAILROADS, Mich., 87 N. W. Rep. 133.

170. STREET RAILROADS - Commissioners - Discretion.-Discretion of the railroad commissioners in compelling street railroad to elevate its tracks over those of a steam road, not reviewable.--JACKSON & S. TRACTION CO. V. COMR. OF RAILROADS, Mich., 87 X. W. Rep. 133.

171. STREET RAILROADS - Injuries - "Paramount Right of Way."-Where a street railroad has a “para. mount right of way" in a street at a point where its raila pass a cul de sac, such rigbt must be exercised with view to the surroundings.-HEWLETT V. BROOK. LYN HEIGHTS R. Co., 71 N. Y. Supp. 531.

172. SURROGATION-Right of Vendee of Land Taken by Grantor's Creditors.- Where one, purcbasing land from a graptor who acquired his titlo by judicial sale, did not have the transfer registered, he was not en. titled to subrogation, on seizure of the land by his grantor's creditors.-AYMETT V. CITIZENS' NAT. BANK, Tenn., 64 S. W. Rep. 302.

173. TAXATION – Assessment - Hearing.-The Massa. chusetts statute for the assessment and collection of taxes held not ubconstitutional, because not giving taxpayer a chance to be heard.-HARRINGTON V. GLID DEN, Mags., 64 N. E. Rep. 54.

174. TAXATION – Decree of Non-Liability - Res Adjudicata.-A decree enjoining the collection of taxes levied in one year cannot be given effect as an adjudication of complainant's non-liability for s'milar taxes levied on the same property for similar taxes levied on the same property for a subsequent year.MERCANTILE NAT. BANK V. LANDER, U. 8. C. C., N. D. (Ohio), 109 Fed. Rep. 21.

175. TRADE LABELS-Use by Otberg-Loss of Right.The originator of a distinctive package or other dress for his goods, who has used the same generally and continuously for many years, does not lose his right to protection in its exclusive use because it has been used by others.-ACTIENGESELLSCHAFT-VEREINIGTE ULTRAMARIN.FABRIKEN V. AMBERG, U.S.C.O. of App.. Third Circuit, 109 Fed. Rep. 161.

176. TRADEMARKS-Exclusive Use-Ivjanction.-A preliminary injunction will not be granted against the infringement of an alleged trade-mark, unless com.

plainant's right to its exclusive use is clearly estab. lished.-DIAMOND MATCH CO. V. SAFE HARBOB MATCH Co., U. S. O.O., E. D. (Pa.), 109 Fed. Rep. 154.

177. TRADE-NAMES -Becoming a Descriptive Term.The manufacturers of the original Singer sewing machines, by permitting the name to be applied to the machines themselves as a descriptive term, did not forfelt the right to prevent others from using it.SINGER MFG. Co. v. HIPPLE, U. S. 0. C., E. D. (Pa.). 109 Fed. Rep. 152.

178. TRESPA88- Justification - Specially pleaded.In an action of trespass a defense of justification must be specially pleaded.-BARRET V. CITY OF MOBILE, Ala., 30 South. Rep. 86.

179. TRIAL-Instruction-Embodied in Apother.-It is proper to refuse an instruction, the same proposition having been embodied in anotber instruction.-WILLIS V. METROPOLITAN ST. RY. Co., 71 N. Y. Sopp. 554.

180. TRIAL-Jury-Withdrawing Case.-In a cause involving the title to real estate it was error to take the case from the jury.-NELSON V. JORDETH, S. Dab., 87 N. W. Rep. 140.

181. TRIAL-Proper Iostruction-Refusal.-The refusal of a proper instruction is not error, when the court fully explains the copteption ot the parties in an instruction given.-JARVIS V. FLINT & P. M. B. Co., Mich., 87 N. W. Rep. 136.

182. TROVER AND CONVERSION-Defepse-Legal Au. thority.-In trover, & defense that the conversion of property was under legal authority may be proven under the general issue.-BARRET V. OITY OF MOBILE, Ala., 30 South. Rep. 36.

183. TROVER AND CONVERSION- Property Sales-Conversion.-Wh-re a watch is stolen from one in posses. sion thereof as a conditional purcbaser, a subsequent demand by the seller for the return of the property on the falling due of an installment and the purchaser's failure to deliver do not show a conversion.-STERNBERG V. SCHIEN, 71 N. Y. Suppl. 511.

184. TRU8T8-Land Purchased With Wife's Money.Husband taking title to land purchased with his wife's money, a trust results to the wile, which may be proved by parol.-HANEY V. LEGG, Ala., 30 South. Rep. 34.

185. TRUSTEE8-Trustees Appointed by Court-Pow. erg.-Trustees appointed by the court beld to be in. vested with all the powers of those named in a will.MYERS V. MCCULLAGH, 71 N. Y. Supp. 520.

186. VENDOR AND PORCHASER - False Representa. tions.-One who contracts for the purchase of real estate in reliance on the representations of the vendor, but alter he bas had the means of verifying sucb state. ments, cannot avoid the contract on the ground that they were false.- BROWN V. SMITH, U. S. 0. C., D. (8. Car.), 109 Fed. Rep. 26.

187. WILLS – Bequest - Insurance Policy-Right of Executrix.-W bere testator bequeaths to his wife an insurance policy payable to bis legal representatives or assigns, the proceeds of the policy go to the wife, instead of the executrix.-LEONARD V. HARNEY, 71 N. Y. Supp. 546.

188. WILL8-Devise to Husband and Wife in Trust for Children.- Devise of real estate to testatrix's son and his wife in trust for the support of themselves and children, children arriving at a certain age being en. titled to their share, does not create & valid trust.TREAT V. VO8E, 71 N. Y. Supp. 507.

189. WITNESSES - Cross-Examination - Disparaging Questions.-Disparaging questions to defendant on cross examination held within discretion of trial court.-MARKGRAF V. KLINGE, 71 N. Y. Supp. 590.

190. WITNESSES-Husband as Witness Against Wlle.

In a sult to set aside a conveyance by a busband to his wife as in fraud of creditors, the husband is not competent as a witness against the wife.- VIRDEN Y. DWYER, Miss., 30 Soutb. Rep. 45.

Central Law

Journal.

lature itself. Besides being very often inac. curate these private reports were generally

several years behind the decisions. The ST. LOUIS, MO., NOVEMBER 1, 1901 lawyer of the present day who sometimes

learns to his cost what it is to be a few

months behind the decisions, finds it hard to The West Publishing Company has just

conceive of such a situation with any other issued a most beautiful little booklet, giving

feeling than that of amazement. The Naan interesting description of its great estab

tional Reporter System started with the lishment, and an account of the remarkable

Northwestern Reporter covering a small growth of its business. The success of this

group of the northwestern states. It was enterprise is one of the marvels of the nine

some years later until the system was exteenth century. Beginning in 1876 in the

tended to embrace the entire country, the corner of one little basement room, it is to

instant success of the idea encouraging this day, cramped into three and one-half acres of

extension more than any other influence. floor space, and has acquired within that

This revolutionary idea was simply to report short period the enviable, but well merited,

the decisions from a group of states in one distinction of being the largest law-publish

"reporter,” thus insuring a sufficient voling house in the world.

ume of matter to make p’ssible the weekly But the lawyers of the country are not so

publication of "advance sheets" in pamphlet much interested in the magnitude of this

form. This also insured a clientele embraccompany's business or in the vast number of

ing the bar of several states, whi:li justified a publications which it does or is able to turn

low subscription price. The erlitorial work out, as in the character and value of the

on this system is its highest ic'ommendabooks which it publishes and offers to the

tion. A most efficient corps of law editors profession. Of the making of books there is

qualified and trained for this particular field no end, and this is just as true of law books

of legal work, read, correct and report the as of any other kind of books. Good books

decisions of the different state courts imhowever, are rare, and their publication is

mediately upon their receipt, with the proper always a benefaction. In the law this is

syllabi and head notes. The accuracy and especially true, the lawyer of the present

clearness of expression which so prominently day baving to depend more largely on the

characterizes this work has secured its genlogic of cold type and precedent than ever

eral recognition in the citations of the courts before in the history of the profession. In

and in the briefs of counsel. Especially is this regard the West Publishing Company

this so where the citations are from can, without any stretching of the truth, be

those states where the decisions are considered a public benefactor, and is en

reported and the syllabi prepared by some titled to take very just pride in being the

salaried reporter instead of by the court. discoverer of the greatest and most useful of

Indeed, we are willing to bazard the predicall legal inventions,—the National Reporter

tion that the general excellence, convenience System and the American Digest System.

and economy of this system will, in not a These publications have become absolutely

long distance in the future, result in its alindispensable to every American lawyer

most universal adoption for citation and whose practice is of any importance whatever. authority.

The National Reporter System has unques Of the American Digest System little need tionably revolutionized the whole plan of law be said either to recommend it or to predict reporting. The old system of reporting by its future. Both are absolutely established. local reporters, being generally on their own As we bave more than once said, the Century responsibility and at their own convenience, Digest and its annual continuations, besides bad little to recommend it, except to the for being the most stupendous undertaking in tunate reporter himself who had secured a

the whole range of law publishing, are beprivate monopoly of a business whose impor yond question, the most valuable tools of tance to the lawyer is equalled only by the the American lawyer. This system embodies publication of the session acts of the legis- | the most perfect system of law-digesting ever invented. Its classification of the law | agent is instrumental in bringing together a prohas received the official indorsement of the

posed purcbaser and seller, the fact that the

owner himself made the sale would not release American Bar Association, which, in 1900,

bim from his responsibility to the agent for bis recommended its universal adoption for all

commission as the procuring cause. While the legal indexes and local digests. The ines identical question presented here is not raised in timable advantages of such a system of di those cases, yet there can be no distinction for gesting can hardly be fully appreciated by

the underlying principle is the same. It is im

material whether the owner sold at the same any but the busy practitioner. With the

price or at a lower figure than given to the agent, wide differences and increasing changes, to

for the agent might still remain the efficient gether with the delicate modifications and

cause of bringing the parties together. The constructions by judicial opinion, of the laws case would present an entirely different aspect if of the several states, the average lawyer is

the owner bad refused to deal with the pur. buried and bewildered under the very mass

chaser at the time in question, had dropped all

proceedings connected with it, and afterwards, of it. To put into his hands such an index to

through some other source or from some other all the law of his own state, or better still, of

cause, negotiations were opened anew. In such all the law of all the states, is like tbrowing a case, the agent would not be the procaring cause rope to a drowning man. He clutches at it or instrumental in bringing the parties togetber. with a sense of infinite relief and sees the

Upon this question may be cited Wilkinson v.

Martin, 8 Car. & P.1; Murray v. Currie, 7 Car. expected labor of weeks melt away irto the

& P. 584; Earp v. Cummins, 54 Pa. 394, 93 'Am. delightful labor of a few hours, and he

Dec. 718; Martin v. Silliman, 53 N. Y. 615." plunges into his adversary with the feeling of confidence of a general who knows the INJUNCTIONS-RIGHT TO INJUNCTION WHERE strength of the enemy's position as well as THERE IS A REMEDY AT LAW. It is not a suffihe does his own.

cient defense to an application for injunction that

the injury threatened is not irreparable or that We congratulate the West Publishing

there is a remedy at law. The remedy at law Company on its well merited success, and

must be adequate. In the recent case of Staples very cordially wish them a continuance of v. Rossi, 65 Pac. Rep. 67, the Supreme Court of favor in the appreciation and patronage of Idaho held that an injunction will issue to rethe American bar.

strain temporarily an act which will result in great damage to the plaintiff, although the injury

is not irreparable, and notwithstanding that other NOTES OF IMPORTANT DECISIONS. remedies lie in behalf of plaintiff. This case was

an appeal from an order granting the plaintiffs FACTORS AND BROKERS-RIGHTS OF REAL Es a temporary injunction restraining the defendTATE BROKER TO COMMISSION.—The difference ants from removing from the Golden Group placerbetween ordinary brokers and real estate mining claim logs cut by the defendants from brokers or agents as they are more trees growing thereon, wbich logs are now banked often called, is that the power of a real upon the Middle Boise river, upon said mining estate broker does not generally extend to exe claim. It is contended by the appellants that cute a sale, but merely to bring the parties to the order granting said injunction was unaugether or to negotiate for the contract. Morris thorized, for the reason that the appellants were v. Ruddy, 20 N. J. Eq. 236; Reitenberg v. Main, solvent, and that a plain and adequate remedy 47 Cal. 213. In the matter of compensation, exists in behalf of the respondents, either by therefore, a real estate broker has earned his action of replevin, or by action to recover damcommission, if he is the means of procuring a ages for said timber, in the event of plaintiffs purchaser ready and willing to buy upon terms establishing title to said mining claim. The court, acceptable to tbe owner. Such was the decision however, did not consider these remedies adein the recent case of Hubachek v. Hazzard, 86 quate and granted the injunction. The court said: N. W. Rep. 426, where the Supreme Court of “We are not in sympathy with the idea that a Minnesota further beld that if the agent is the trespasser, notwithstanding that he may be solvprocuring cause, the owner cannot sell at a less ent, may go upon the lands of another and cut figure than that named to the agent, thereby es- timber thereon, and that the owner of such caping liability for the commission. The court lands is not, under our statute, entitled to a said: “The point which appellants seem to temporary injunction to restrain the removal of insist upon is tbat, because Clark refused to pay said timber until the owner can establish his title $8,250, the agent's figures, the owner was at lib- to said land in an action commenced for that purerty to sell for $8,000, without liability for his pose. The inconvenience to the defendant from agent's commission. But the various decisions a temporary injunction will be less than would of this court have established the rule that, if an be the injury to plaintiff should plaintiff succeed

in establishing his right." The trend of modern | The question in such a case always is, what was decisions and authorities upbolds the court in its the fair estimated cash market value at the time decision of this case. Davis v. Reed, 14 Md. 152; of the incorporation and not at some future time, Fulton v. Harman, 44 Md. 253; Shipley v. Ritter, when, through large expenditures of money or 7 Md. 408, 61 Am. Dec. 371; Smith v. Rock, 59 Vt. capital, the property has been demonstrated to 232, 9 Atl. Rep. 551; De La Croix v. Villere, 11 possess no value. If this were otherwise,-if La. Ann. 39; Lanier V. Alison (C. C.), 31 Fed. stockholders in such a corporation, the moment Rep. 100; U. S. v. Guglard (C. C.), 79 Fed. Rep. the property, which had, in good faith, been 23; Smith's Appeal, 69 Pa. 474; King v. Campbell deemed of ample value, and taken in full (C. C.), 85 Fed. Rep. 814; Disbrow v. Harwood payment of their stock, was, by development Co. (Sup.), 59 N. Y. Supp. 378; King v. Stuart thereof, shown to be worthless, were to be held (C. C.), 84 Fed. Rep. 546; Watson v. Sutherland, liable to creditors for the value of the stock,-it 5 Wall. 74, 18 L. Ed. 580; Irwin v. Lewis, 50 Miss. is apprehended that few person, especially those 368; U.S. v. Parrott, Morr. Min. Rep. 335; of limited means, would be willing to assume the Boyce's Exrs. v. Grundy, 3 Pet. 210, 7 L. Ed., 655. | risk of developing mines. Fortunately for the In Watson v. Sutherland, supra, the court said: “If mining industry such is not the law. The statute the remedy at law is sufficient, equity will not re contemplates no such results. Under its prolieve, but it is not enough that there is a remedy at visions, as we have seen, incorporators of mining law. It must be plain and adequate, or, in other corporations are permitted, in the absence of words, as practical and efficient to the ends of fraud, to pay for their stock in property at its justice and its prompt administration as the estimated fair, cash market value, whatever its remedy in equity."

actual cash value may be; and this is so even

where the property has no ascertainable market MINING CORPORATIONS_VALUE OF PROPERTY value. The fixing of such value is a matter of TAKEN IN PAYMENT OF CAPITAL STOCK.-In the

opinion. It requires the exercise of judgment; formation of mining corporations one of the most and the exercise of judgment for such purposes difficult questions is the value to be attached to it is clear the legislature left to the incorporators the property which is turned over to the company where the corporation is organized for mining by the promoters in payment of stock. The value purposes. An opinion thus formed must be one is entirely problematical. It may be worth mill honestly entertained, but it is subject to no other ions or it may be worth notbing. In the recent qualification." case of Richardson v. Mining Company, 65 Pac. Rep. 74, the Supreme Court of Utah held that

CONTRACTS IN RESTRAINT OF where property is taken in payment of capital stock at the inception of a corporation, the ques

TRADE. tion is, what was the fair estimated cash market The term public policy received a judivalue of the property at the date of incorpora cial definition in Egerton v. Brownlow, tion, and not at the time when, through the ex

where the following language was used : “By penditure of large sums of money, the property has been demonstrated to possess no value. Hon.

public policy is intended that principle of esty and good faith are the tests, and when it

the law which holds that no subject can lawe appears that the value of mining property taken fully do that which has a tendency to be infor capital stock was fixed honestly and in good jurious to the public or against the public -faith, that the owner had title thereto, and that

good, which may be termed the policy of the the property conveyed to the corporation and

law, or public policy in the administration of accepted by it in full payment of the capital stock, the courts will not disturb the transaction, and

the law.” parties dealing with the corporation are bound to The administration of justice being maintake notice of what lawfully appears in the arti tained at the expense of the public, no court cles of incorporation and in the statutes under

will render its assistance either directly, by which it was created. See, also, Transit Co. v.

compelling specific performance, or indiLynch, 55 Pac. Rep. 639; Henderson v. Turngren, 35 Paç. Rep. 495; Coit v. Amalgamating Co., 119

rectly, by awarding damages or compensaU.S. 343, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 231; Young v. Iron Co.,

tion for the breach of a transaction or con65 Mich. 111, 31 N. W. Rep. 814. The court in the tract which, in its object, operation or tendprincipal case said:

ency is calculated to be prejudicial or "In the organization of a mining corporation

which might have been injurious to the pubwhere the capital stock is to be paid for in prop

lic welfare. erty, the statute does not require the property to be accepted at its actual cash

Illegality when applied to contracts is an value, but at its fair estimated cash mar element which wholly vitiates the contract ket value. The fact that the property may between the immediate parties, as well as in have been deemed worthless when the corporation ceased to operate it is wholly immaterial.) 14 H. L. Cases, 1235.

« ПредишнаНапред »