Every son, etc., of tenant for life and the heirs of their respective bodies.-See WILL, col. 495.

Excepting land tax. See LANDLORD AND TENANT, col. 258.

Falsa demonstratio.-See WILL, col. 491. Fee simple.-See RESUMPTION OF LAND. For and on behalf of.-See SALE OF GOODS, col. 391.

Free from exchange, income tax and other deductions. See MORTGAGE, col. 328.

Generalia specialibus non derogant. See LOCAL GOVERNMENT, col. 313.

Goodwill-See CROWN LANDS, col. 127.
His logs and timber.-See EASEMENT.
Inherit. See WILL, col. 513.

WORDS

Absolutely. See WILL, cols. 490, 501.

Action at law. See WILL, col. 508.

As agent for His Majesty.-See SALE OF GOODS, col. 398.

"As soon as possible "-Delivery of goods -See PRINCIPAL AND SURETY.

Attempt. See CRIMINAL LAW, col. 104. Bidders.-See SALE OF GOODS, col. 398.

Bona fides.--See ASSAULT-FEDERAL LAW -LICENSING, col. 279.

Capital. See COMPANY, col. 52.

Clearance. See INDUSTRIAL ARBITRATION, col. 220.

Course of dealing.-See ARBITRATION.

In forma pauperis.-See APPEAL.

Issue. See SETTLEMENT.

Job control.-See INDUSTRIAL ARBITRATION, col. 207.

Laches.-See SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.

Lane 20 feet wide.-See EASEMENT.

Lease Construction of-Words referring to breach or default and not to covenant or condition.-See LANDLORD AND TENANT, col. 262.

Lincoln. See TRADE MARK.

Live and dead stock.-See WILL, col. 490.

Market value.-See LOCAL GOVERNMENT. cols. 286, 287.

Menial servant. - See MASTER AND SERVANT, col. 319.

Act, 1916 No. 71, ss. 5, 10-Accident to workman returning home for dinner-Ranger in charge of water reserve-Injured by bullock in public street-" Arising out of and in course of employment."-A ranger, employed by the Board of Water Supply and Sewerage to patrol the water reserve, to remove cattle found on it and to prevent cattle from going on to it, lived about half a mile from the reserve. He had to keep a general watch on anything that might affect the catchment area; When returning to his home for dinner, having finished his work on the reserve, he saw some cattle and stopped to look at them just opposite his house. He saw a drover with them, and saw that they were being driven in a direction away from the reserve. While so standing, he was gored by a bullock and sustained serious injuries. He had no fixed hours for duty, but was supposed to work forty-eight hours a week. The Board paid him compensation, and sued the owners of the bullock for the amount so paid. Cohen, D.C.J., held, that the accident arose out of and in the course of the ranger's employment, and returned a verdict for the plaintiff. Held, on appeal (Ferguson, J., dissenting), that the evidence did not support this finding, and that the verdict should be set aside and a verdict entered for the defendants. Per Ferguson, J. It was open, on the evidence for the trial Judge to find that the ranger was on duty at the time of his injury, and that being a question of fact, this Court cannot review the decision. BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE v. DUNN, 24 S.R. 360; 41 W.N. 97. [New South Wales.]

Accident arising out of and in course of employment. An accident reasonably incidental to the employment is within the ambit of the Workers' Compensation Act. E. was employed by the defendant, an hotelkeeper, as a waitress, and it was admitted that she had the right to do her own washing on the premises. While in the act of carrying certain articles of clothing from the drying

ground at the rear of the hotel she fell and was injured. At the time she was off duty as a waitress. Held, that she was injured by accident arising out of and in the course of her employment, and compensation was awarded accordingly. EDWARDS v. ST. LEGER, 1924 N.Z.L.R. 219; G.L.R. 194. [New Zealand.]

Workman residing by permission in hut on reservation belonging to employer-Injury while returning to hut outside of working hours-Out of and in the course of the employment. The plaintiff was employed by the defendant corporation. He resided by permission, but not under the contract of employment, in a hut near the scene of his work, on a reservation belonging to the defendant, and no charge was made for the accommodation. The defendant provided food for which a charge was made. The hut was reached from the reservation by a track about five feet wide running along the side of a hill. Once a fortnight he left the works after working hours, and spent the week-end at his home in Auckland. These trips were made for his own convenience, and outside actual working hours the plaintiff's time was entirely at his own disposal. In accordance with this practice the plaintiff left the works on a Friday returning on Sunday evening by motor vehicle which was neither run by nor under any arrangement with the defendant, the visits and means of return being well known to the defendant's foreman. It was after dark when the reservation was reached, and whilst proceeding along the track in the direction of the hut the plaintiff fell over the bank, was injured, and totally incapacitated from work. Held, that the accident did not arise out of or in the course of the plaintiff's employment. ROGERS v. MAYOR OF AUCKLAND, 1924 G.L.R. 66. [New Zealand.]

Accident-Death several months later from heart disease-Whether accident aggravated disease and accelerated death. Where a man meets with an injury that does not noticeably lower his vitality, and is getting on well and then several months later shows symptoms of a form of progressive heart disease, which in its origin is due to bacterial infection and from which he dies, it is impossible to put these circumstances together and say that it is a legitimate inference that the injury caused or aggravated the heart affection and accelerated death. PEARSON V. NEW ZEALAND SHIPPING CO. LTD., 1924 G.L.R. 201. [New Zealand.]

Accident-Whether arising out of employment Employee drowned through swimming his horse across a river. Deceased and another boy employed by defendants were instructed to cross a river to an island to remove some stock that were running there It was necessary to take horses with them and they were definitely instructed to go over in a punt, kept for the use of employees in crossing, and to tow their horses behind and not to swim them across. When ready

Deceased Deputy Superintendent of Municipal Fire Brigade-Whether a worker-Dependency Insurance-moneys. The deceased was at the time of his death the Deputy Superintendent of the Devonport Municipal Fire Brigade, and was killed while proceeding to the scene of fire. The borough by-laws provided for the establishment, maintenance, and control of a fire brigade, and for the appointment of a Deputy Superintendent at a certain salary. The life of the deceased was insured under two insurance policies, the premiums on which were paid by the borough. It was contended that deceased could not be regarded as a worker, because under s. 259 of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1920, the Council was not his employer, and was empowered only to arrange with a fire brigade for payment of remuneration by way of gratuity. Held (1) that the provision regarding payment of remuneration by way of gratuity did not operate in respect of a municipal fire brigade, and that deceased was a "worker," and was employed by the defendant under a contract of service; (2) that s. 14 (1) of the Worker's Compensation Act, 1922, had no application to the circumstances of this case, and that the insurance moneys must be deducted from the compensation moneys. LE SCELLE v. DEVONPORT BOROUGH, 1924 N.Z.L.R. 1289. [New Zealand.]

Second Accident-Recurrence of former injury. An injury at the place of a former injury by accident is within the Workers' Compensation Act if it be due to a second accident arising out of and in the course of the injured man's employment, and the legal position is unaffected by the fact that in medical terminology the second injury is a recurrence of the former. RIGGANS v. TAUPIRI COAL MINES LTD., 1924 N.Z.L R. 1226 [New Zealand.]

Workers' Compensation Act, s. 57-Amendment Act 1920, s. 5 Consolidation Act 1922 s. 63 Independent contractors.-The plaintiff was an independent contractor and he was engaged by the defendant to clear a fence line and erect a fence on the property of the defendant at 10/- a chain. The performance of the verbal contract necessitated the moving of loose stumps, partially burnt logs and debris, in order to make it practicable to erect the fence on the agreed line. stumps, except loose ones, were to be removed and the fence was to be erected on a line clear

No

of such stumps. The plaintiff in the course

Accident causing death-Partial dependency -Son working for his father without wages— Working for sawmiller for wages-Earnings not paid to father-Limitation of action. The plaintiff was the father of the deceased and the owner of a small leasehold farm. The deceased entered the employ of the defendant to assist in working his timber mill at a wage of 12/6 a day. The deceased whilst in such employment was killed by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. It was alleged by the plaintiff that the deceased upon leaving shcool took over the working of the plaintiff's property and devoted his whole time and attention thereto up to his death, except that he did on two or three occasions take outside employment and the wages he then earned he gave to his mother and she purchased clothing for him with it. On the occasion upon which the deceased took outside employment he, in his spare time, did what work was necessary upon the plaintiff's property. No wages were ever paid by the plaintiff to the deceased who lived on the property, nor was any remuneration promised him save that the plaintiff supplied the deceased clothes, board and residence, and gave him pocket money. The deceased did not pay any of his sawmills earnings into the family fund. What the deceased gave to his parents was not earnings but services. The plaintiff had neglected to commence an action within the period of six months, his solicitors having overlooked the statutory limit. Held, that as no part of the deceased's earnings at the defendant's mill were paid over to his parents, there was no evidence of dependency and the claim failed, and that the present action was in any event barred by lapse of time. WRIGHT v. EVANS, 1924 G.L.R. 469. Zealand.]

[New

Act, 1916 No. 71, s. 12-Industrial diseaseCompensation-Certificate-Subsequent death -Application by widow-Evidence. An application for compensation was made by a widow claiming that her husband's death was caused by an industrial disease within the meaning of s. 12. The certifying surgeon on the 10th August certified that he was suffering from " arterio sclerosis, and sclerotic kidney, arising from chronic lead poisoning," and he received compensation during his lifetime He died on the 26th November, following. Medical testimony was given on behalf of the employers that his death was due to cerebral hemorrhage brought about by arterio sclerosis and that he did not die from lead poisoning. The Judge said

that he had to decide whether he died from lead poisoning, and as he thought the medical testimony for the respondent deserved the greater weight, he found that death did not result and was not accelerated by lead poison. ing and made an award in favour of the respondents. Held, on appeal, that the certificate was binding on the Judge and the employers, and as the evidence showed that the deceased was suffering from arterio sclerosis at the date of his death, it must be assumed that the arterio sclerosis was due to lead poisoning. SUTTON v. HOWARTH, 24 S.R. 583; 41 W.N. 153. [New South Wales.]

66

Act, 1916 No. 71-Average weekly earningsJockey-Bonus on winning races.-A Jockey had been in receipt of a certain weekly wage from the respondent A., for riding his horses in training, and also received additional sums for schooling a horse over hurdles. In addition, he received from him certain sums as bonus on riding winning mounts. Another trainer, B., also paid him on the same basis, while he also received sums from other trainers for riding their horses in races. He was killed while riding in a hurdle race for the respondent, A. Held, on an application by his widow for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, that he was employed under concurrent contracts of service with A. and B., and that the bonus paid by the latter should be included in his average weekly earnings, but not the fees paid by the other trainers for riding their horses in races. HALDEN v. ABBS, 41 W.N.

125. [New South Wales.]

Act, 1916 No. 71, Sched. I. (5) Child Welfare Acts Compensation-Application to invest-Destitute children.-In an application by a widow on behalf of herself and children for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act in respect of an accident causing the death of her husband, the employers paid into Court £500. The widow now applied under Sched. I (5) of that Act, to be allowed to utilise that sum in purchasing a house for the occupation of herself and children, at the same time undertaking to make a declaration of trust in respect of the house in such terms as would protect the interests of the children. Held, that the children being obviously outside the ranks of destitute children within the meaning of the Child Welfare Act 1923 the application for the order, which would result in making the children destitute, and bring them within the Act, should be refused. Ex parte D'ERREY, 41 W.N. 127. [New South Wales.]