« ПредишнаНапред »
etc. of City of Jersey City, 47 N. J. Law, 286; ruled in its general scope by the subsequent case State v. Sheppard, 64 Minn. 287, 67 N. W. Rep. of Grossman v. City of Oakland. There will be 62, 36 L. R. A. 305; and other cases cited by an affirmance of the judgment. counsel. One of the primary essentials of a
NOTE.-Power of Municipality to Prohibit or Reyalid ordinance is that it must be general in its
strict the Establishment of Cemeteries or Right of operation; that is, it must affect all persons alike,
Burial within Certain Limits.-Wbat is termed in under like circumstances and conditions. 1 Dill.
law the police power" of a State has never been Mun. Corp. (4th Ed.) $ 322. It may, and often satisfactorily defined, and the Supreme Court, the does, become a question whether certain persons tribunal most competent of any other to define it, or corporations, acting in peculiar capacities or
has absoluteiy confessed its inability to do so, and special emergencies, come within the legitimate
therefore refuses to try it. It would bardly be act
ing with becoming modesty on our part,in the face of purview or spirit of the ordinance, and such was
this confession, to make any attempt at definition, the question presented and determined by the
but we will content ourself with the suggestion above cases. The ordinance in each case was
offered by Scott, J., in the case of Lake View v. general in its scope, affecting all persons alike,
Cemetery Co., 70 III. 191, where, after suggesting but in the first the business of the railroad con several other attempts at detinition, the learned centrated in a small compass, but had grown to judge says: “It (the police power] may be said to be such proportions that the ordinance became un that inherent and plenary power in the State which reasonably embarrassing and burdensome, and it
enables it to prohibit all things hurtful to tbe comwas held, therefore, that it should not be en
fort, safety and welfare of society."
The question whether a cemetery is a nuisance per forced against the company as to the particular
se, while sufficiently settled by authority, has been locus in quo. So, in the latter case, the ordinance
opened for academic discussion Tiedemad, for in. probibited the driving of animals in the street at
stance, in his late work on State and Federal Control a rate of speed exceeding six miles an hour, and of Persons and Property, says: “It is held by some it was held that a fireman, acting in the discharge that a cemetery is not a nuisance per se, and conseof his duties in hastening to the scene of a con quently the interment of the dead cannot be proflagration, did not come within the inbibition.
bibited altogether. Or late, the advocates of crema. The doctrine is operative in the establishment of
tion of dead bodies have been urging the unwhole
someness of burial as a reason why cremation should an exception rather tban that of a general rule,
be adopted in its stead, as a means of disposing of and can have no application in the case at bar.
corpses. If the burial of the dead does not cause or Reliance is bad upon the case of City of Port
threaten injury to the public health, burial could not land v. Terwilliger, 16 Oreg. 465, 19 Pac. Rep.
lawfully be probibited; but if it is proven to be a 90, as being an adjudication sustaining the power fact that the interment of dead bodies does injure the of the eity to exclude burials from within the public health, and is a fruitful source of the transcity limits. The court there bad under considera mission of disease, as it is claimed to be by many tion the effect of an ordinance probibiting the
scientists, it canpot be doubted that the State may burial of the dead within the city, and conse
probibit burial and compel the remains of the dead
to be cremated, or disposed of in some other harmqently upon an estate conceded, for the purpose of
less way." While not disposed to share completely the case, to have been vested in the municipality
with Mr. Tiedeman the sentiments thus expressed, upon a condition subsequent as to the continued
any discussion of the question would be useless, as use and occupation thereof by it for cemetery pur it bas been determined, not by “some," but by all poses. The power to adopt the ordinance in that autborities which have come to our observation that case seems to have been taken for granted, or, at a cemetery is not a puisance per se. Lake View y. least, it was not a matter of controversy in the
Cemetery Co., 70 III. 191; People v. Pratt, 129 N. Y. course of the hearing. In announcing the opin
68; Dunn v. Austin, 77 Tex, 139; Pfleger v. Groth, 103 ion, Mr. Justice Strahan incidentally says: “That
Wis. 104; Kingsbury v. Flowers, 65 Ala. 479; Hum.
phrey v. M. E. Church, 109 N. Car. 132; Monk v. power was delegated by the State to the city of
Packard, 71 Me. 359. Not being a nuisance, per se, Portland under the general description of police
the interment of bodies cannot be declared such ex. power,” referring, we presume, to the power of
cept upon proof showing that in the particular case prohibiting burials within the city limits. The it has become such. For instance, in Monk v. Pack learned justice then proceeded to an elaboration ard, 71 Me. 309, it was held that a cemetery which of the idea tbat every citizen holds bis property does not affect the physical health of the occupants subject to the proper exercise of the power, but
of a dwelling house near it, nor their olfactories by the question whether the cbarter did or did not
any eflluvia from the graves, is not in law & nuisance.
To become a nuisance the effect must be such as to confer the power to adopt the ordinance was not
interfere with ordinary physical existence, and the mooted so far as we are informed by the record,
injury must be something more tban fancy, delicacy much less can it be said to have been decided.
or fastidiousness. If it is established, however, by The idea of declaring the act of burial a nuis
sufficient proof tbat the place of burial has become so ance, and the power commensurate to that par situated as to injure the health and comfort of the ticular purpose, does not seem to have been sug people living in its neighborhood, equity will inter. gested at any time during the proceeding. The fere and grant relief by injunction abating the nuis. case is therefore not controlling as a precedent.
ance. Jung v. Neraz, 71 Tex. 306. If, however, it ever had any vitality in the direc
In regard to State and municipal regulations it is now
detinitely settled by a long line of decisions that the tion claimed for it, it must be considered as over
Perl, legislature has the right, under the police power, to regulate the burial of the dead and may restrict it if the legislature had given express power to the within definite limits or even prohibit it altogether, | municipality of Portland to restrict or probibit the as, for instance, in large cities. Brick Presbyterian interment of the dead within that city the ordinance Church v. Mayor, 5 Con. (N. Y.) 423; Concordia under consideration could not be questioned as to its Cemetery Assn. v. Railroad Co., 121 III. 199; reasonableness. But the court insists tbat under a mere Woodlawn Cemetery v. Everett, 118 Mass. 354; general provision to provide for the health and com Pfleger v. Groth, 103 Wis. 104; Kincaid's Ap. fort of its citizens the municipality had no authority peal, 66 Pa. St. 423; People v. Pratt, 129 N. Y. 68. to unreasonably restrict or prohibit the right of In Town of Lake View v. Rose Hill Cemetery Com burial. This is in line with the weigbt of authority. pany, 70 III. 191, the court seems to take an opposite Two cases directly in point on this question seem to view. In this case the charter of a cemetery com: have been overlooked by the court in the principal pany authorized it to acquire and use land not ex. case. For instance, in the case of Los Angeles v. ceeding five hundred acres for burial purposes. Cemetery Association, 124 Cal. 344, it was held that a After it had acquired the land and spent money in city cannot prohibit or suppress cemeteries under & preparing and adorning the same, & statute was charter power to institute police regulations. Again passed forbidding the company to use any of its lands in the case of Austin v. Cemetery Association, 87 for burial purposes outside of its tben inclosure, Tex. 330, it was held that a municipal ordinance lim. which was less than five buvdred acres. Held, that iting the places witbin a city in wbich it shall be lawas it did not appear that any nuisance existed or was ful to inter deceased human beings is not void on its liable to arise, the statute was not a valid exercise of face. It is valid unless it unreasonably restricts the the police power and was unconstitutional. The
rights of its citizens to procure places for that pur. court said: “There is no pretense that the cemetery, pose within such limits. These cases contain a most as constructed, is a nuisance, nor is there any charge exhaustive discussion of this very interesting ques. that the health or comfort of the people in the vicinity tion. We shall examine them at length. In Los bas been or will be affected in the near or even in the Angeles v. Cemetery Association, the ordinance in distant future. If it can be maintained at all, it must question made it "unlawful to locate or establish, ex. be by some absolute power by which the general
tend or enlarge any cemetery or graveyard within the assembly, it being the sole judge of the extent of its
limits of the county of Los Angeles without the perpowers,may declare what sball and what shall not be, mission of the board of supervisors." After showing independently of all constitutional restrictions. ···
that a cemetery cannot in the least degree be conWe are unwilling, however, to concede the existence
sidered a nuisance per se, the court says: “We quite of any indetinable power superior to the constitution
agree with the learned counsel for respondent that that may be invoked whenever the legislature may there are many considerations which may bring deem the public exigency may require it, by which a cemeteries witbin the power of reasonable regulation party way be capriciously deprived of bis property of both city and county municipalities. · · · Is or its use without compensation." The difficulty the ordinance before us a reasonable exereise of the in reconciling this decision with the weight of power conferred by the constitution and the statute autbority is wrapped up in a further question. upon boards of supervisors, and as applicable to Is the question whether there was a sufficient counties? The ordinance makes it unlawful to estab. occasion for the exercise of the police power in any lish or enlarge any cemetery within the limits of the given case a judicial or political question? In Coates
county without the permission of the supervisors. v. Mayor, 7 Cow. 585, it was said: “It is of the nature It declares that in no part of Los Angeles county, of legislative bodies to judge of the exigency upon however remote from any city or town, even though which their laws are founded.” It may be safely the location be suitable for the purpose and entirely affirmed tbat the proper rule is that that the discre. satisfactory to the neighboring inbabitants, no ceme. tion of the legislature as to what constitutes a suffic. tery shall be established except by permission of the ient exigency for the exercise of the police power, if supervisors. There are reasons why the burial of the not merely colorable, will not be reviewed by the dead should be subject to reasonable regulations, but court. Of course the police regulation must be one we can see no more reason wby the right to establish in fact and the right to use private property cannot cemeteries in a county should be subject to the will be arbitrarily abridged under the mere pretense of a of the supervisors than that the right to engage in police regulation. It is also to be observed that the any other lawful enterprise should be so circumlegislature may delegate the exercise of this power scribed. ··· Under the guise of regulating a to its municipalities who may restrict or probibit business the municipality cannot make prohibition the interment of dead bodies as they may believe possible by committing to the officers of the munici. necessary. People v. Pratt, 129 N. Y. 68; Kincaid's
pality the arbitrary power to deny permission to en: Appeal, 66 Pa. St. 411; Austin v. Cemetery Asso. gage in that business. We do not think it was ever ciation, 87 Tex. 330; Page v. Symonds, 63 N. H. 17. intended by the legislature in the statutory enact. Nor is the police power being a "aw of over. ment, to include, in the power to make and enforce ruling necessity” restricted by rights of con.
regulations, a power purely personal and arbitrary." tract or long user. For instance, where the right of In the case of Austin v. Cemetery Association, the sepulture bad existed for over one hundred years ordinance under consideration, made it unlawful for under grants of or titles to cemetery lands, it was any person to bury any dead body within the corporheld that the length of time was not conclusive ate limits of the city of Austin except within a ceragainst the exercise of the police power by the legis. tain designated district, and providing for a severe lature or municipality probibiting future interments. penalty for its violation. The ordinance was passed Coates v. New York, 7 Cow. (N. Y.) 585.
under a provision in the city charter giving the It may seem from our argument so far that the municipality power to "regulate the burial of the position of the court in the principal case is not in dead." The court held that this provision of the city accord with the weight of authority. Such a conclu. charter authorized the passage of the ordinance in sion, however, would not be justified by a careful question, and then proceeded with the following exreading of the opinion. The court distinctly says that I planation: “To regulate an act implies that the act shall be permitted, but that it may be controlled by with the mercantile maripe, will cease on July 1, reasonable restrictions as to the manner and circum: | namely: Certificates of registry and of enrollment, stances of its performance." Here the court comes certificates to the acknowledgments of bills of sale of to tbe vital question: "Il said ordinance was legally | vessels, charter parties of registered vessels, certifi. passed by virtue of authority of the charter, bave the cates of record of American built vessels owned by courts the authority to inquire into the reasonable. aliens, master carpenter certificates, certificates of ness or unreasonableness of the ordinance?" In issue of temporary documents, certificates of owner. answer to this question the court said: “It is doubt. sbip, of the surrender of documents and of payment less within the power of the legislature to make arbi. of topage duty, United States bills of health, certifitrary laws, provided tbey peither infringe the copsti. cates to shipping articles required by section 4512 of tution of the State or of the United States. We are the revised statutes, certificates of damage by port not prepared to say that it could not delegate that wardens or marine surveyors, certificates as to wages power to a municipal corporation. But before it and effects, certificates of discharge and accounts of should be held that such grant was intended, it would wages and effects. seem that the language of tbe charter should be Upon a number of articles and documents reduc. sufficiently explicit clearly to manifest that intention; tions and modifications have beer, made by the pew and, in the absence of such language, we think it law. For example, the tax on beer is reduced from should also be beld that it was not the intention to | $2 per barrel, and 71.2 per cent. discount, to $1.60 per confer authority to make an arbitrary and unreason. barrel. The rate on cigars of all descriptions made able law. It occurs to us that it is upon this princi. of tobacco or any substitute therefor, and weigbing ple that the courts proceed when they hold that the more than three pounds per thousand, is fixed at $3 ordinance of a municipal corporation must be rea. per thousand. On cigars, weighing not more than sonable. We are therefore ot opinion that it was not tbree pounds per thousand, the rate is fixed at 18 the intention of the legislature to confer power upon cents per pound. On cigarettes, weighing not more the city council of the city of Austin either to pro. tban three pounds, and of a wholesale value or price hibit the burial of tbe dead within the limits of the of more than $2 per thousand, 36 cents per pound is city, or to unreasonably restrict the rights of its citi. charged. On cigarettes, weighing not more tban zens to provide places for that purpose within such tbree pounds per thousand, and of a wholesale value limits." The court furtber beld that whetber the or price of not more than $2 per thousand, the charge ordinance was reasonable or unreasonable depended is fixed at 18 cents per pound. On cigarettes, weigh. on the facts in each case, and tbat the question was ing more than three pounds per ibousand, the tax of one of law for the court. Further, the court held $3.60 remains. On tobbacco and snuff, the rate of that the presumption would be in fayor of tbe reason which was fixed by the war revenue law at 12 cents ableness of the ordinance and that he who claims the per pound, a discount of 20 per cent. is allowed by contrary must assume the burden of proof. And, the amending law. The rate on foreign bills of exfinally, the court decided that under the facts in this change is changed from 4 to 2 cents for $100. Con. case the cemetery could proceed in equity by injunc. veyances of property below $2,500 in value are now tion against tho city probibiting them from enforcing exempted from taxation, wbile each $500 above that the ordinance and was not required to test the law in amount is taxed at the rate of 25 cents. The law a criminal proceeding for its violation.
affecting legacies is modified so as to exclude from taxation legacies of a charitable, literary, religious or
educational character after March 1, 1901. Orders JETSAM AND FLOTSAM.
for the payment of money by telegraph issued by ex: press companies, drawn in but payable out of the
United States, are to pay 2 cents for each $100. Pas: CHANGES IN WAR REVENUE TAXES.
sage tickets from the United States to foreign ports, On Monday, July 1, 1901, the act of March 2, 1901, formerly paying from $1 to $5, are now exempted went into effect amending the war revenue law of from taxation when below $50 in value, but for each 1898, which will remove a number of stamp and other | $30 they pay a rate of 50 cents. On sales of products taxes and will modify other charges upon the busi. | at excbanges the rate of 1 cent for each $100 is reness of the country. The taxes repealed comprise | tained, but sales of merchandise in the actual course those on bank checks, issues or obligation of I of transportation are exempted from the tax. guarantee companies, certificates of damage, certiti. A number of items in the law remain unchanged. cates of deposit and certain other kinds of certificates, These comprise the tax of $50 for each $25,000 of cbarter parties, commercial brokers, sight drafts, ex: bankers' capital and surplus and $2 for each addi. port bills of lading, express receipts, life, marine, tional $1,000; the tax of 5 cents for each $100 wortb of inland, fire, casualty and fidelity and guaranty insur bonds, debentures, certificates of indebtedness, etc.; ance policies, Jeases, manifests for custom house the tax of 50 cents on bonds of indemnity or for the entry, mortgages or conveyances in trust, orders for 1 execution of the duties of any ottice; the tax of $30 on the payment of money on sight or on demand, powers brokers; the tax of 10 cents on brokers' contracts, of attorney to convey and to sell, promissory notes, and tbe tax of $2 for every $100 on certificates of protests, telegraph and telephone messages, postoffice profits, of $2 for each $100 of certificates of stock money orders, warehouse receipts, perfumery and transfers, and of 5 cents for each $100 of the original cosmetics, proprietary medicines and chewing gum. | issue of the certificates of stock. There also remain In relation to drafts and orders for the payments of the taxes of $10 on custom house brokers; of from $6 money other than at sight or on demand, and foreign to $24, according to sales, on dealers in leaf tobacco, bills of exchange and foreign orders for the payment and of $12 on dealers in tobacco whose sales exceed of money, it may be said that these still remain taxa. 50,000 pounds. In like manner the law, maintains the ble. The tax ofil cent also remaids upon freight receipts tax of 2 cents for each $100 on time drafts or inland or domestic bills of lading. The requirement that bills of excbange, of 25 cents to $1 on the entry of stamps shall be affixed to the following documents, goods at the custom house for consumption and of 50 used extensively by all who have business connected 'cents for entries for withdrawal. The taxes of from
$ to $24 on manufacturers of cigars, of $12 per annum pended to the case of Bootb v. People, 186 III. 43, 78 on manufacturers of mixed flour, of 4 cents per bar. Am. St. Rep. 229, entitled, “Acts Which the Legisla. rel on mixed flour, of $20 on pawnbrokers, and of 1-4 ture May and May Not Declare Criminal.” The per cent. of the gross receipts in excess of $250,000 on treatment of this subject embraces a full discussion petroleum and sugar retineries are also retained, as of the extent of the right in the legislature under the are the taxes on bowling alleys, circus, theaters, police power to 'declare acts criminal which were museums, concert halls and other public amuse heretofore innocent, and contain among others the ments.
following subtopics: Abandonment of Children, Finally, the new law maintains the tax of 1 cent on Erection of Building witbin "Fire Limits,” Burial of sleeping and parlor car tickets, of 1 cent a pint on the Dead, Compulsory Vaccination, Game Laws, sparkling and other wines, and of 2 cents on quanti Laws against Free Speech, Horse Racing, Lotteries, ties of more tban a pint, and of 10 cents per pound on Miscegenation, Oleomargarine Laws, Licensing of tea, while the special taxes of $50, in addition to other Pbysicians, Prostitution, Sunday Laws and Ticket special taxes, on class 2 of brokers and of 2 cents for Brokerage Laws. Other notes especially valuable each $100 on bucket shop transactions, wbich went and interesting are the following: Fletcher v. Amer. into effect on April 1 last, are continued under the ican Trust & Banking Co., p. 164, on the “Common new law. It is somewhat difficult to estimate wbat Law Powers of Executors;" State v. Michel, p. 364, will be the effect upon the revenue of the changes in on the “Computation of Time;" Jordan v. Grerns. the law, but there is, of course, no doubt, wbatever boro Furnace Company, p. 644, on “When and How that the reduction of taxes effected by it will still the Statute of Frauds Must be pleaded." Published leave a comfortable surplus at the end of the fiscal by Bancroft.Whitney Company, San Francisco, Cal. Fear, assuming that at the next session congress will make no material reduction in the revenue rates.Bradstreet's Journal.
American Bankruptcy Reports, Annotated (cited BOOK REVIEWS.
Am. B. R.), Reporting tbe Bankruptcy Decisions
in the United States of the Federal Courts, State COLLIER ON CIVIL SERVICE.
Courts and Referees in Bankruptcy. Edited by It is not often that we enjoy the novelty of review
James W. Eaton and Wm. Miller Collier. Vol. V. ing a treatise on a subject of law wholly new or never
Albany, N. Y. Matthew Bender, 1901. before brought down into the systematic form of a
The Law of Bankruptcy, Including tbe National text book. Such, however, is the work entitled "The
Bankruptcy Law of 1898, the Rules, Forms, and Civil Service Law of the State of New York," by
Orders of the United States Supreme Court, the William Miller Collier, president of the New York
State Exeluption Laws, the Act of 1867, etc., etc. Civil Service Commission. The compass of the book
With Citations to all Relevant Decisions. Second is not so narrow as its title would seem to indicate, as
Edition, by Edwin C. Brandenburg, LL. M. it embodies copious references to analogous statutes,
Author of the Digest of Bankruptcy Decisions; and to decisions by the federal courts and courts of
Professor of Procedure in Bankruptcy at Columotber States. Civil service legislation inaugurated by
bian University; in Cbarge of Bankruptcy Mat. the federal government January 16, 1883, bas to day found entrance into the statute law of eigbt States of
ters in the Department of Justice. Chicago, Cal.
layhan & Company, 1901. Sheep, pp. 1,041. the Union, and is rapidly gaining in popularity and
Price, $6 00. Review will follow. . influence. Appointment to positions in the civil service, either of the State government or of the mu. nieipality, according to merit and fitness of the ap.
HUMORS OF THE LAW. plicant, rather tban to political service or preference, is such a clear step in advance that one fails to un.
A well known San Francisco attorney, who prides derstand the stubborn opposition that is sometimes
bimself upon the bandling of Chinese witnesses, was made to such legislation. The civil service law, how. defending a railway damage case. Instead of follow. ever, is no longer an experiment, and it has estab. ing the usual questions as to name, residence, if the lished itself as a part of our system of political juris nature of an oath were understood, etc , he began: prudence with wbicb every practitioner of tbe law “Wbat your name?” “Kee Lung.” “You live San must acquaint himself. Mr. Collier's excellently ar. Francisco?" "Yes.” “You save God?" "Mr. At ranged work on this subject will fill every require.
torney, if you mean 'Do I understand the entity of ment of the lawyer, and to the vast army of public
our Creator? I will simply say that Thursday eve. officers and public employees whose powers, rights,
ning next I shall address the State Ministerial Asso. and duties are measured and determined by the ciation on the subject of the Divinity of Christ,' and civil service law, tbis treatise will be of invaluable shall be pleased to have you attend." A roar of service in construing, applying, and enforcing the
laugbter swept over the courtroom, and it was some provisions of that law. Published in law buckram,
minutes belore the examination proceeded. and for sale at the price of $1.50 by Matthew Bender, Hennypeck-Skoots eloped with my wife last night. Albany, N. Y.
Gabbleton-Why, I thought he was your best AMERICAN STATE REPORTS, VOL. 78.
friend. The 78th volume of the American State Reports is
Hennypeck-He is! a welcome addition to the long line of excellent vol. When William E. Evarts was secretary of state the umes wbich bave preceded it. Probably the most elevator that carried bim to the State department valuable of the contents of these reports are the one day contained a number of strangers, presumably monographic notes which are exceedingly concise, applicants for appointment as ministers or consuls. and at the same time practically exhaustive of the On seeing them, Mr. Evarts whispered to a friend: entire subject which they attempt to treat. Probably "This is the largest collection for foreign missions the most interesting note in this volume is that ap. I that I've seen taken up in some time."
“The old judge was one of the kindliest of men," low the required standard. It is competent for the leg said an attorney of New Orleans to a representative islature to declare that the doing of an act shall gub. of the Times Democrat, speaking of a distinguisaed
ject the doer thereof to a penalty, irrespective of his
lotive or knowledge, and in such a case the courts member of the local bar, who is now dead, “but his
have no power to require proof of knowledge or temper was as warm as his heart, and when momen.
motive to be shown.-VANDERGRIFT V. MIEHLA, N.J., tarily exasperated he bad a tongue like a razor.
49 Atl. Rep. 16. When I was studying law in his office we had a copy.
2. AGENCY-Authority-Burden of Proof.- Where the ing clerk who was known about the place as 'the late
defendant, in an action to recover money, has paid the Peter Jones'-a sobriquet be acquired by being al. money to a person formerly authorized by plaintiff to ways behind time. He was a slow, abstracted, collect the game, but whose authority is shown to have dreamy kind of a fellow, with his mind generally a been revoked prior to the payment,the burden of show. hundred miles from bis business, and he was contin. ing that the money was paid in good faith, and in reually working the judge up to the point of explosion.
liance on the continuance of the agency, is on the de One day a wire basket fell off the top of his desk and
fendant.-WHITAKER V. BALLARD, Mass., 60 N. E. Rep.
379. grazed his cheek, making & slight scratch several inches long. Being very busy at the moment, and
3. BILLS AND NOTES-Consideration-Parol Evidence. wishing to protect the abrasion from the air until he
-A note promising to pay a certain sum of money at a
certain date, in consideration of the founding of a col. could get some court plaster, he slapped on three
lege at a place named, is based upon a sufficient conpostage stamps and wenion with his work. A little
sideration. In an action on a note "given in considera later on he had some papers to take to the United
tion of founding a college,” evidence that at the time States court, and, forgetting all about his peculiar the pote was signed plaintiff undertook to perform decoration, he put on bis hat and sallied out. He certain acts at the request of the maker of the note is must have created a sensation on the street, but, as
admissible to establish that there was a good conusual, bis mind was elsewhere, and when he returned
sideration for the pote in the acts which the payee of
the note was to perform. - KEUKA COLLEGE V. RAY. in half an hour or so, he was still in blissful ignorance of his Mardi Gras aspect. The tbree stamps hap.
N.Y., 60 N. E. Rep. 325. pened to all be of different colors, and be looked like
4. BILLS AND NOTES-Husband and Wile-Ratifica. an Apache chief made up for a ghost dance. As be
tion.- Where a husband signed his wife's name to a entered the office, the judge raised his bead and fixed
note without her authority, and no adoption of the
ture by the wile, por estoppel, was pleaded, por him with an astonisbed stare. Poor Jones quailed
proof thereof given, an instruction in a suit on under his eye. Anything-er--wrong, sir?' he in note against the wife was correct whicb stated, in quired, tremulously, when the silent scrutiny became substance: “If you find that defendant, with full unendurable. Yes, sir!' thundered the old gentle knowledge of plaintiff's claim of her liability on the man; 'you are carrying too much postage for second note, and the facts and circumstances respecting the class matter.'”
indebtedness evidenced thereby, admitted the liability thereon, and promised to pay the game, this will be a ratification, otherwise, it she was not informed of the
facts and circumstances respeeting the indebtedness WEEKLY DIGEST.
evidenced by the note.- MEYER V. WEGENER, Iowa, 86
N. W. Rep. 49. 01 ALL the Carront Opinions of ALL tbo Stato
5. BILLS AND NOTES-Indorsement in Blank-Want and Territorial Courts of Last Resort, and of
of Consideration.- Where defendant was sued as in.
dorser of a note, and it appeared that the note was the Supreme, Otroaft and District Courts of the made payable to him by mistake, and without his United States, except those that are Pablisbod
knowledge or consent, and tbat be ipdorsed it in
blapk at the request of the true owner, for the pur. in Fall or Commented apon in our Notes of Im. pose of showing title in him, such indorsement was portant Decisions and except those Opinion, in
without consideration, and defendant was not liable
thereon.-FARMERS' SAV. BANK V. HANSMANN, Iowa, 86 wbieb no Important Logal Principles are Di..
N. W. Rep. 31. cassed of Interest to the Profession at Large.
6. BILLS AND NOTES-Pleadings – Joint Answer.INDIANA, 3, 6, 8, 19, 24, 28, 29, 33, 44, 48, 49, 56, 57, 59, 62, 67,
Where sult is brought on a note and to foreclose a 69, 75, 87.
mortgage securing it, an answer purporting on its Iowa, 4, 5, 9, 10, 17, 18, 20, 25, 36, 38, 39, 43, 52, 60, 65, 66, 71,
lace to answer the entire complaint, but only alleging 73, 83, 89.
facts showing a defense to the mortgage, and wholly MASSACHUSETTS, 2, 15, 16, 30, 40, 47, 51, 53, 54, 70, 76, 77, 78,
silent as to the liability on the note, is subject to de 79, 82, 84, 86.
murrer.-HOLLINGSWORTH V. MCCOLLY, Ipd., 60 N. E.
Rep. 371. MICHIGAN ......
....72 MINNESOTA, 12, 13, 14, 21, 22, 23, 34, 35, 41, 45, 46, 50, 55,61, 64 7. CHATTEL MORTGAGES-Right of Pogssession-Exe. NEBRASKA......
........ 68 cution. Where one of the members of a firm dealing NEW JERSEY ................. ..... 1, 11, 26, 27, 31, 32 ip race horses was given a power of attorney to act for NEW YORK......................3, 37, 42, 63, 80, 81, 85, 86 the firm, and, acting thereunder, mortgaged the OHIO........... 10.....................................
horses to pay a judgment for which they were about to RHODE ISLAND....
be sold, and agreed with the mortgagee that the SOUTH DAKOTA......
horses should be entered in races, and the mort 1. ADULTERATAON-Milk-Evidence.-Io the proceed.
gegee should advance the entrance fees and ing to recover a penaity for the violation of section 36
have a lien on the horses therefor, such agree. of the act to prevent the adulteration of milk (Gen.
ment was not beyond the partner's authority, so as to St. p. 1170), it is not necessary to show the particular
make evidence thereof inadmissible in an action by manner in which the analysis was conducted. All that
the mortgagee, to recover possession of the horses it was necessary to allege or to prove was that the
from a sheriff who had seized them under an execu. milk contained more than 88 per centum of watery
tion in favor of a creditor of the mortgagee.-MORRIS fluids, or less than 12 per centum of milk solids. Nor
v. HUBBARD, S. Dak., 86 N. W. Rep. 25. was it necessary to aver or to prove that the milk in 8. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Obligation of Contractsquestion was, to the knowledge of the defendant, be I Wages as Preferred Debts.-Acts 1885, p. 96 (Burns