Слике страница


against a bank receiver, or assignee iu bankruptcy, prudent man would not. Held, correct, and to cover a who represents creditors. Ib.

request to charge that if plaintiff knowingly and vol4. Rule of equity as to thing not done.- Equity will uutarily placed himself in a position where he was not regard a thing as done, which is not done, when it liable to receive the injury complained of, he was would injure third parties who have sustained detri- | negligent. ment and acquired rights by the things that have been [Decided April 2, 1878.) done. Ib. 5. Deposit of bills and notes by bank with president to

FRAUD. secure third party: laro of Louisiana.– Where it was 1. Premiums paid for life insurance upon fraudulent agreed that a bank should deposit bills and notes with representations : representations must have been known its president and his partner by way of pledge to to plaintiff to authorize recorery back.-In an action to secure a loan made by a third party; and the president recover back premiums paid by plaintiff upon a life delivers them back to the bank officers for collection, insurance policy, on the ground that plaintiff was with power to substitute other securities therefor, it induced to take the policy on certain false and fraudis not such a delivery and possession as is necessary to ulent representations made by the company, held, create a privilege by the law of Louisiana. Ib.

that only such false representations as came to the

plaintiff and induced her to take the policy, would be CONFLICT OF LAW.

ground for sustaining the action. False statements 1. Lex rei siti governs transfer of real estate and mort

made to the general public and not shown to have been gage. The laws of the State in which land is situated

made to or to have influenced her, would not be sufficcontrol exclusively its descent, alienation, and trans

ient. Judgment below affirmed. Rohrschneider v. fer from one person to another, and the effect and

Knickerbocker Life Insurance Co. Opinion by Earl, J. construction of instruments intended to convey it. All

2. A promise not a fraud.-Plaintiff testified that at such laws in existence when a contract in regard to the time she took the policy the insurance company's real estate is made, including the contract of mort

agent told her that she would at the end of four years gage, enter into and become a part of such contract.

receive over $570. Held, that this was at most a mere Decree of U.S. Circuit Court, N. D. Illinois, modi

promise to be performed in the future, and fraud fied and in part reversed. Brine, appellant, v. Hart

could not be predicated on such a promise. Ib. ford Fire Insurance Co. Opinion by Miller, J.

[Decided May 21, 1878.] 2. State statute as to redemption part of mortgage contract and obligatory on Federal courts.-A State statute, therefore, which allows to the mortgagor twelve Surrender by husband whose life is insured in favor of months to redeem after a sale under a decree of fore- | wife not valid without consent of wife.-A husbaud took closure, and to a judgment creditor of his three

a policy of insurance on his life in favor of his wife, paymonths after that, goverus to that extent the mode of

ing the premium out of his owu means. Subsequently transferring the title and confers a substantial right, while out of health, he was persuaded by an agent of and thereby becomes a rule of property. This right of the insurance company that a failure by him to make redemption after sale is, therefore, obligatory on the known in his application the existence of a bodily malFederal courts, sitting in equity, as on the State courts, formation would invalidate the policy. He, therefore, and the rules of practice of such courts must be made

surrendered the policy and took back the premium. to conform to the law of the State, so far as may be Held, that the husband took the policy as agent for his neccessary to give substantial effect to the right. Ib.

wife, that he had no power to surrender it without her authority and that the failure by the wife to notify

the company of her dissent from the husband's act COURT OF APPEALS ABSTRACT.

until after his death, a month after the surrender, was CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE.

not a ratification, and that she was entitled to a res1. What does not constitute: preserving one's own prop

toration of the policy. Held, also, that she could not erty when in danger.-Plaintiff, the owner of a tug be required to return the premium as a condition of which was alongside of a boat on which he was, seeing relief. Judgment below affirmed. Stilwell v. Mutual defendant's tug approaching his own and apprehend- Life Insurance Co. of New York. Opinion by Church, ing a collision, immediately ran upon his boat to

C. J. protect it. The collision took place and plaintiff was [Decided February 5, 1878.] thrown down and injured. In an action to recover for the injury done to plaintiff and his tug boat, held, that

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION. plaintiff was not guilty of contributory negligence. It Must keep public places safe for unmanageable as well is the duty of a person whose property is endangered as docile animals.-The complaint stated that the by the negligence of another to do what he reasonably horse of deponent, which was 'attached to a cart and can to protect it. Judgmeut below affirmed. Re.xter v. engaged in carting brick on a dock near the river, sudStarin. Opinion by Earl, J.

denly became unmanageable and by reason of the 2. Exercising reasonable prudence: not negligence.- neglect of defendant, a municipal corporation, to proThe court at trial charged : “ A man contributes to an vide a proper string piece on the dock, backed off the injury himself when the injury is one which a prudent dock and was lost; that plaintiff did all in his power man might well anticipate as resulting from the cir- to prevent the accident, etc. Held, that it was the cumstances to which he has exposed himself. No duty of the city, in the matter of erecting the string speculation should be entered into as to whether it piece or barrier, to protect animals that, at the time of might result in the bruising of his finger or the smash- the loss, were temporarily out of the control of the ing of his leg. When any thiug of that character is owner and unmanageable, as well as those that were anticipated, he is guilty of contributory negligence, if docile and obedient, and that the facts stated in the he exposes himself in such a way as a careful and complaint were sufficient to constitute a cause of ac


[ocr errors]

tion. Judgment below reversed. Kennedy v. Mayor court, and has died in the performance of the duties of New York. Opinion by Andrews, J.

of his high office. We cannot on this occasion enter [Decided April 16, 1878.]

into a proper consideration of the judicial character PRACTICE.

and labors of the distinguished Judge who but a few 1. Objection not founded on defect in complaint: when

days since sat with us on the bench, and whose loss not available: right of action.--When a complaint in an

will be felt and deplored not by the bench and bar of action for negligently destroying a boat by setting it this State alone, but by the whole country. The first on fire, stated that the boat belonged to plaintiff at

thirty-nine volumes of Barbour's Reports contain the the time of the fire, an objection to proof that plain- | published opinions of Judge Allen, pronounced by him tiff had acquired title by an assignment subsequent to while a judge of the Supreme Court. They attest his the fire, not based upon the ground of any defect in eminent ability, the fullness of his learning, a firm, the complaint, held, not sutficient. Judgment below intelligent and comprehensive grasp of the most diffiaffirmed. Riddell v. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co. cult questious in the law, and the wisdom which he Opinion by Earl, J.

brought to bear in adjusting a new system of practice 2. When case not re-examined as to extent of damages. and procedure to the solution of legal controversies. --Plaintiff did have some interest in the boat which The same qualities which distinguished him in the Suwould enable him to recover some damages. Held, preme Court marked his judicial labors in the Court that when the question was raised by motion to non- of Appeals. He was fertile in resource, patient and suit only, the extent to which he was entitled to re- laborious in the investigation of causes, and unswervcover would not be examined if he sustained his case ing in his adherence to his convictions. His knowlin other respects. Ib.

edge of constitutional and commercial law, and his 3. Negligence : proximate and remote cause.-Straw clear apprehension of their principles were especially piled in and upon a boat was negligently set on fire by conspicuous. Some of us have been intimately assodefendant, and the burning straw set fire to the boat. ciated with him on the bench of this court since iis Held, that defendant's negligence was the proximate organization, eight years ago, and others for lesser cause of the loss of the boat. Ib.

periods, and we unite in bearing testimony to his great [Decided April 26, 1878.)

qualities as a judge, to the facility with which he could

comprehend and formulate the principles applicable to CHIEF JUDGE CHURCH'S EULOGY ON

the most difficult and complicated cases, to his untirJUDGE ALLEN.

ing industry and conscientious performance of his

duty, and, above all, to his independence of judicial T the session of the Court of Appeals, held on the judgment and the fearlessness with which he adhered

4th inst., Chief Judge Church paid the following to and enforced his conviction of right. We dever tribute to the late Judge Allen:

knew him to be influenced in the slightest degree by The judges of the present Court of Appeals are again any attempt to bring popular prejudice or flattery to called to lament the death of one of their members, bear upon the judgment of the court. He was not the Hon. William F. Allen, the third of those who only independent, but upright and just. Such is a made up its original members, the fourth of those who skeleton of his public life. How slenderly it exhibits have sat upon the bench during the present organiza- the many years of mental labor, the firm, intelligent, tion, who has been taken from them. It is appropriate conscientious and courageous administration of pubfor this court to make some record of the public loss lic trusts which distinguished him! thereby, and its remaining members will not forego For a fuller history of them resort must be had to an expression of their private sorrow. He has filled a

the public annals of the State, to the records of the large space in the annals of the State. In the years courts, the reports of their decisions, and to the mem1843 and 1844 he was a member of Assembly from ories of our judges and lawyers and of the citizens of Oswego county, and was accorded prominent and the Commonwealth. He was truly a man of distincinfluential positions upou important committees and tion among his contemporaries; a distinction of the in the house. He was the attorney for the United

sort to be coveted, for it was reached by the qualities States for the Northern District of New York for

which exalt the character, and it took no advantage by some years, and in that office showed the ardor and

false pretensions. Through an extended life he was energy of his character and the strength of his intel

an honor to his race, to his profession of the law, and lect. After the adoption of the Constitution of 1846, to his judicial office, and just as men are lamenting upon the first organization of the judiciary under it, that the arbitrary provision of the Constitution would he was elected a justice of the Supreme Court for the soon take him from the bench in the ripeness of his Fifth District, and, having been re-elected, served character, his talents and his powers, the Almighty continuously for sixteen years. His second election Hand, in its wisdom, has removed him from earth. was without opposition, though the political majority Even “ beyond the circle of those private affections in the district was adverse. This is a weighty and which cannot but shrink from the inroads of death,” unmistakable proof of the high public and private there is a “grief for the departure of the eminently estimate of his judicial and personal competency and good and wise.” character. He was elected State comptroller in the His personal character was of the highest order. He year 1867, and re-elected in 1869, and displayed in that took no step outside the path of a wise sobriety and office his characteristics of honesty of purpose, indus- exemplary rectitude. His judgments and his life were trious attention to official duty, adherence to couvic- in accord. He was simple and modest. He was kind tions of right, and also showed complete capacity for in nature, affable in intercourse, of warm social imthe needs of the position.

pulses, sensible of the claims of his fellows and prompt While holding the office of comptroller he was in rendering all the dues of neighborhood. His warm elected, under the provision of the constitutional judi- and impulsive nature was held under restraint of reaciary article adopted in 1870, an associate judge of this son and of the religion he professed aud practiced.


with the work of Fearne is indispensable, and as a TH HE following decisions were handed dowu Tuesday, means of comprehendiug that work, and fastening the June 4, 1878:

principles it enunciates on the memory, the little book McMahon v. Walsh, Wilson v. The Knickerbocker before us will serve an important purpose. It contains Life Ins. Co., Quinlan v. The ('ity of Utica, Stewart v.

first an analysis of the principal work in which the Bramhall, Litchult v. Treadwell, judgment affirmed, leading ideas are briefly stated, followed by an epitome with costs.- Gelpcke v. Quentell, Burnham v. Bren- in which all the principles of that work are separately nan, Presbyterian Society of Knoxboro v. Beach, and distinctly set forth. Under each principle is given judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to

a siugle, simple case by way of example iu illustration. abide the event.- Parkinson v. Sherman, In the Then the wriiter has endeavored to add such explanation matter of Sackett street, Brooklyn, order affirmed,

as will give the student a clear and distinct view of with costs. - Woolsey v. Brown, order affirmed and the particular principle under consideration. The judgment absolute for plaintiff on stipulation, with book will prove of use not only to students, but to costs.- - Ulster County Savings Institution v. Decker, lawyers engaged in active practice, who wish to refresh motion to correct remittitur granted, as far as that

their memories in respect to the sometimes intricate costs abide event, without costs of this motion. and technical doctrines of the common law, on the

Elwell v. Johnson, appeal dismissed, with costs. subject discussed.
Chief Judge Church read a eulogy on the late
Judge Allen, and announced that in token of respect

OBITUARY. for his memory of the deceased, and to enable the re

WILLIAM F. ALLEN. maining members of the court and the bar to attend his funeral, the court would adjourn to Thursday peals of this state, died at his home in Oswego on the 3d

William F. Allen, Associate Judge of the Court of Apmorning, June 6.

inst. He was born in Windham couuty, Connecticut,

July 28, 1808. He came with his father to this State when NEW BOOKS AND NEW EDITIONS.

eight years of age. He was graduated at Union Col

lege in 1825, and commenced the study of law in the ROBERTS' VERMONT DIGEST.

office of John C. Wright of Schenectady, but comA digest of all the reported decisions of the Supreme Court of pleted it in that of Charles M. Lee of Rochester, and

was admitted to the bar in 1829. He commenced the man, Tyler, Brayton, D. Chipman, Aikens, and in forly practice of his profession in partnership with George eight volumes of Vermont Reports; also of all the decisions

Fisher at Oswego, but soon after formed a partuership of the courts of the United States for the district of with A. P. Grant, which continued until the time of Vermont, which are found in the Vermont Reports. By his election as Judge of the Supreme Court. In 1842 Daniel Roberts, Burlington, Vt., 1878.

he was elected Member of Assembly, and again elected THIS years

Attorney for the Northern District of New done, and it can be depended upon as showing in brief in 1856 re-elected to the same otfice. At the close of

1848 he was elected Justice of the Supreme Court, and the existing case law of the State of Vermont. The his second term in 1863 he went to New York and arrangement is excellent, and the plan of the editor in practiced law there for several years. In 1867 he was bringing together or in connection the cases which

elected Comptroller of the State and was re-elected in

1869. In 1870 was chosen to the position he held at the confirm, qualify, distinguish, or in some way illustrate

time of his death. In the various positions, judicial and each other, and iu referring in the abstract of each case otherwise, held by him he was distinguished among other which has been relied on as authority to the subse- qualities by his fidelity to duty and by his industry. quent decisions wherein it is cited will render the digest strumental in very largely reducing the State debt, and

While administering the office of Comptroller he was invaluable as a judicial history of the various important in organizing a movemeut in favor of reforms in the decisions noticed in it. By the plan mentioned, the management of the State prisons and canals that are value of each case as an authority in the courts of

now being carried out. His judicial career, which em

braced nearly twenty-four years, is well known to the Vermont can be at once determined, and one refer- profession throughout the State. The decisions made by ring to it will be able to find other cases bearing upon him and which appear in numerous volumes of the State the subject which he is investigating. A few decisions reports sioce 1848, show that he possessed great mental

powers and superior culture. The eulogy pronounced in the earlier reports, which by change of statute or by Judge Church at the session of the Court of Apotherwise have become obsolete, are omitted. We peals held ou Tuesday Jast and appearing elsewhere, do not find any statement giving the names of the

is an eloquent aud faithful portraiture of the character omitted cases, which is to be regretted. They cannot

and qualities of the deceased. number many, and a brief reference to them, showing

NOTES. the points passed upon, would render the digest exhaustive. The work of the editor is so well done, how

the Southwark England County Court on the 28th ever, that we cannot find fault with him for this

held that a London carman is not a common carrier, omission. The book contains a list of the judges of but is liable to loss or injury of property trausported the Supreme Court of Vermont from 1778 to 1878, and by him, caused by the criminal act of a stranger, ucalso a very carefully prepared table of the cases digest-curring through his criminal negligence as bailee.-

case involving a novel point of law was decided by ed. It will be found of great value, not only to the the County Court of San Joaquin county on the 4th profession in Vermout, but also to lawyers residing in ult. A jury in a civil case while out deliberating was other States, as a very large proportion of the decisions

taken by the sheriff to a restaurant to eat. As the

county had refused to pay for feeding juries in civil are upon questions of general interest.

cases, the sheriff told the restaurant keeper to collect

from the jurors. Of this, however, the jurors had no COLEMAN'S EPITOME OF FEARNE ON REMAINDERS.

knowledge. Que of the jurors refused to pay for his An epitome of Fearne on contingent remainders, and executory meal, and was sued by the restaurant keeper. 'No exdevises, intended principally for the use of stuents. By

press promise to pay was proved. The court held William M. Coleman, Esq. Philadelphia : T. & J. W.

that, under the circumstances of the case, the law Johnson & Co., 1878.

would not imply a promise on the part of the defendTo the student desiring to become thoroughly fa- ant to pay for what he ate, and gave judgment in miliar with the law of real property, an acquaintance l his favor.


ALL communications intended for publication in the

the New York Court of Common Pleas, a lunatic, LAW JOURNAL should be addressed to the editor, and the by the name of Chalmers, having, on the 7th inst., name of the writer should be given, though not necessa

made an assault in open court on Mr. Justice Daly, rily for publication.

who was presiding at a trial there. The assailant, Communications on business matters should be ad

who had an hallucination that the police commisdressed to the publishers.

sioners of New York were annoying him in various ways, bad prepared a petition asking for their arrest, and had presented it to numerous judges and courts, the usual result being his ejection from the court

rooms into which he had intruded. On the day ALBANY, JUNE 15, 1878.

mentioned he began to read the petition to Justice Daly, who at first kindly attended to his reading,

but discovering the nature of the document reCURRENT TOPICS.

quested him to desist, and upon his refusal to do so, THE President has signed the bill for the repeal directed his removal from the court. Thereupon,

The Albany Law Journal.

that statute will go out of existence on the 1st of hand, forcibly hurled them at the head of Judge September next. To say nothing of the benefits Daly, saying, as he did so, “ You are like all the which will accrue to honest tradesmen and vigilant other judges, a liar and a trickster.” Of course the creditors from a restoration of the old order of belligerent suitor was immediately arrested, and he things, the increase in general law business which was subsequently committed by a police magistrate will probably result therefrom, must render the re- as a lunatic. The petition itself, parts of which peal gratifying to the great bulk of the profession. were published in the daily press, indicates clearly We do not go as far as some of the friends of repeal that the assailant was insane. have done and charge the present depressed condition of business upon the bankrupt law, but we be

In the case of Mix v. Andes Insurance Co., just delieve it has contributed toward making trade un

cided by the Court of Appeals of this State, and settled and uncertain. Its direct effect has frequently appearing in our abstract of the decisions of that been to destroy solvent business houses temporarily court, the right of a corporation to take the benefit embarrassed, while the easy means of escape from of the act of Congress, of March 2, 1867, providing

for the removal of causes from the State to the legal liability it offered, bas tempted men to be careless about incurring debts and extravagant in their Federal courts, is maintained, and it is also held that expenditures. Where an obligation can be dis- the verification of the affidavit required by the charged only by payment, most men are cautious president of a corporation is a compliance with the about entering into it, but it is otherwise when an provision of the statute requiring the affidavit of a easy proceeding at law will discharge it. However, citizen. This reverses the decision of the Fourth the bankrupt law will soon pass away, and we be- Department General Term, 9 Hun, 397, which aflieve very few will mourn its departure.

firmed the decision of the Special Term. The Gen

eral Term based its decision upon Cooke v. State NuBy the appointment of Mr. Samuel Hand to the tional Bank of Boston, 52 N. Y. 96, but this was a place on the bench of the Court of Appeals, made

mere pro forma decision made to enable the question vacant by the death of Judge Allen, the court se

to reach the Federal Supreme Court, and the Court cures a gentleman eminent for learning and ability, of Appeals did not hold it to be authority. and who, though yet young, stands among the fore

Mr. Justice Markby, of the Supreme Court of Calmost of his profession in this State. Although without previous judicial experience, Mr. Hand has cutta, in an article appearing in the current number for some years had an extensive practice before the

of the Law Magazine and Review, considers at court of which he now becomes a member, and at length the causes which are at work in England one time occupied the position of reporter of its tending to secure or prevent the adoption of a code,

and also to secure an improvement in the system decisions. The qualities which he has displayed as

of legal education. The writer thinks that the an advocate are an assurance that he will fill with

demand for codification as well as for improved credit the place to which he has been appointed, and the profession and litigants who are interested in legal education comes from the masses of the peo

ple, and that both the bench and the bar, as a rule, causes pending before our highest court have every

as well as the universities, are opposed to any reason to be satisfied with the choice of the Gov

change in the existing condition of matters, and

that what help has been so far given by the inns() The precedent which has been set in the English court and the universities to the inauguration courts of assaulting judges, has been followed in | reform measures has been given because

Vol. 17.- No. 24.


not help it. The solicitors have looked with more private road adjoining his ground a hurdle with a favor upon the changes which have been made and checeaux de frise on the top in order to prevent the are yet demanded, and one of their public bodies, the public from looking over the barrier at athletic Law Institution, for a long time was the only one sports on his ground. Some one not known removed which showed a hearty interest in the teaching of the hurdle to another spot without the defendant's law otherwise than by a mere apprenticeship. authority, and the plaintiff, passing of right along The opposition of the bench and bar to change is the road soon afterward in the dark, and knowing attributed by him to prejudice, indolence and a the original position of the hurdle, but not that it want of confidence in the probable result of the ef- was moved, ran his eye against the chereaux de frise forts about to made. We think, however, that a and lost his sight. The jury, in an action against still more powerful influence than either of the ones defendant for the injury, found that the original named, at least so far as the bar is concerned, is erection of the hurdle was unauthorized and wrongself-interest. The position of the bar is high and ful; that the cheveaux de frise was dangerous to the secure under the existing system, and a change in safety of persons using the road, and that there was the form of the law and an improvement in the no contributory negligence, and gave plaintiff a submethod of teaching it cannot raise that position, stantial verdict. The court held that plaintiff's inwhile it may and probably will result in lowering jury was not an improbable consequence of defendit. The writer criticises the views of those who ant's act; that it was the defendant's duty to take are anxious for the early codification or digesting all necessary precautions under the circumstances to of the laws and thinks that the standaad of legal protect persons exercising their right of way, and learning should be raised before an attempt is that the action was maintainable. The case is one made to construct a code. He says, " The laws of that class represented by the well-known squib of a country, whether they be codified or not, reflect case of Scott v. Shepherd, 3 Wils. 403; 2 W. Bl. 892, the intellect of the lawyers who create them. A where defendant threw a lighted squib into a market code is but an embodiment of the legal learning of house where several persons were assembled. It the age. Are we not proposing to construct our fell upon a standing, the owner of which, in selfcode at the very moment when learning is at its defense, took it up and threw it across the market lowest ebb?"

house. It fell upon another standing, the owner of The Society of Comparative Legislation at Paris which, also in self-defense, threw it off, when it takes advantage of the international exhibition held struck plaintiff and exploded and put out his eye, in that city this year to endeavor, in an informal and defendant was held liable. In Diron v. Bell

, 5 way, to bring together lawyers from various coun

M. & S. 198, the defendant, having left a loaded gun tries, who may be visiting the exhibition, by throw- with another, sent a girl to get it, with directions to ing open its meetings to all foreign jurists who de- the other to draw the priming, which the latter atsire to attend. The society is made up of the lead-tempted to do, and, as he thought, did.

The girl, ing members of the bench and bar of France, and supposing the priming was drawn, pointed the gun those interested in international law who attend at plaintiff's son, a child, and pulled the trigger. its meetings are certain to be entertained and in- | The gun went off and injured the child, and destructed. The topics of discussion for these meet- fendant was held liable for the injury. See, also,

llott ings, as announced by the society, are : (1) Bills of

Wilkes, 3 B. & A. 304; Jordan v. Crump, 8 exchange ; (2) Maritime insurance ; (3) What M. & W. 782; Illedge v. Goodwin, 5 C. & P. 190. In authority should a judgment delivered in one State the latter case the defendant's horse and cart were be allowed in another, and under what conditions ; left standing in the street without any one to attend (4) The conditions and effects of extradition ; (5) them. A person passing along whipped the horse To what extent ought foreigners to be admitted to causing it to back the cart against plaintiff's window. share in the private law of the State in which they Also, Lynch v. Nurdin, L. R., 1 Q. B. 29; Daniels v. are commorant; (6) In what cases should crimes Potter, 4 C. & P. 262; Hughes v. Macfie, 2 H. & C. or delicts which have been committed be cogniza- 744; Bird v. Holbrook, 4 Bing. 628; Harrison v. Gt. ble by the courts of the State of which the authors North Ry. Co., 3 H. & C. 231. See, also, McCahill v. are subjects. The rooms of the society are in the Kipp, 2 E. D. Smith, 413; Powell v. Deveny, 3 Cush. “Hotel de la Société d'Encouragement,” 44 Rue 300; Peck v. McNeal, 3 McLean, 22. de Rennes.

Maddox v. Lond. Chat. & Dov. Railway Co., 38 L.

T. Rep. (N. S.), decided by the Common Pleas NOTES OF CASES.

Division on the 1st of February, was a case sinN the case of Clark v. Chambers, 38 L. T. Rep. ilar to that of Jackson v. Metropolitan Railway Co.,

(N. S.) 454, decided by the Queen's Bench Di- 37 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) 679, some months since ion of the English High Court of Justice, on the decided by the House of Lords, and noticed by

il last, the defendant had placed in a us on page 21 of the current volume. In the

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
« ПретходнаНастави »