takes to do business in Pennsylvania without comply. ing with the requirement of the second section of act April 22, 1874, that a statement showing the title and object of the corporation, the location of its officers, and names of its agents, etc., shall be filed in the office of the secretary of the commonwealth, is invalid.MCCANNA & FRASER Co. v. Citizens' TrusT & SURETY CO. OF PHILADELPHIA, U. S. C. C. of App., Third Circuit, 76 Fed. Rep. 420.

25. CORPORATION-Foreign Stock Corporations-Certificate.-The act of May 19, 1894 (91 Ohio Laws, pp. 355, 356), which provides "that no foreign stock corpora. tion, other than a banking and insurance corporation, shall do business in this State without first having procured from the secretary of State a certificate that it has complied with all the requirements of law to authorize it to do business in the State," etc., and that no such "corporation doing business in this State without such certificate shall maintain any action in this State upon any contract made by it in this State until it shall have procured such certificate," etc., does not apply to a foreign corporation whose business within the State consists merely of selling through traveling agents, and delivering goods manufactured outside of the State.-TOLEDO COMMERCIAL CO. V. GLEN MANUFG. Co., Ohio, 45 N. E. Rep. 197.

25. CORPORATIONS - Insolvency-Fraudulent Convey. ances.-A corporation is not insolvent, so as to render a mortgage of its property fraudulent, so long as it has property on hand, which, if converted into money at market prices, would be sufficient to meet liabilities. -SILVER VALLEY MIN. Co. v. NORTH CAROLINA SMELTING CO., N. Car., 25 S. E. Rep. 954.

27. CORPORATIONS-Officers.-One who seeks to hold a corporation liable on its general manager's guaranty of a third person's note must show special authority on the part of such officer to make the guaranty.DOBSON V. MOORE, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 243.

28. CORPORATIONS- Receivers' Certificates-Priority of Liens.-In the case of an insolvent private corporation the court will not order receivers' certificates to be issued for the purpose of raising money to pay in. terest on the bonds of the company, thus displacing existing liens.-NEWSON V. EAGLE & PHOENIX MANUF'G Co., U. S. C. C., N. D. (Ga.), 76 Fed. Rep. 418.

29. CRIMINAL EVIDENCE-Homicide-Res Gesta.-Deceased was shot and mortally wounded by a police officer while attempting to escape from arrest. After being wounded, and while still lying in the street, the deceased, in the presence of the defendant, said: "I am dying. I did no wrong:" Held, that the declara. tion was admissible as part of the res gesto.-MORAN V. PEOPLE, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 230.

30. CRIMINAL LAW-Confessions.-Whether or not admissions made by a person accused of crime relate to Independent facts, proof of which would be admissible as circumstances tending to establish the hypothesis of guilt, or of themselves amount to an indirect confession of guilt, is a question of fact for the jury; and the court, having in effect so instructed them, did not, in either view of the matter, err in submitting for their consideration the weight of such admissions.-BRYANT V. STATE, Ga., 25 S. E Rep. 927.

31. CRIMINAL LAW-Examining Magistrate. The powers and jurisdiction of the officials designated by Pen. Code, §§ 807, 808, as magistrates, while acting as such, are not derived from the statutes relating to their several offices, but from such sections and from Const, art. 1, § 8, authorizing the prosecution of indictable offenses by information after examination and commitment by a magistrate; and a police judge in a city, being er officio a magistrate, possesses jurisdiction to conduct such examinations, without regard to whether or not it is, in terms, conferred by the statute creating his office.-PEOPLE V. CRESPI, Cal., 46 Pac. Rep. 683.

32. CRIMINAL LAW-Instructions-Reasonable Doubt. -While, in charging a jury trying a criminal case as to

the sources from which they should arrive at the truth, the judge may appropriately refer both to the sworn evidence and the statement of the accused, yet, where the statement suggests no theory favorable to the accused which is in conflict with or explanatory of the evidence, an instruction that, in determining the guilt or innocence of the accused, the jury are to look to the evidence submitted to them, is manifestly not cause for a new trial.-BURNEY V. STATE, Ga., 25 S. E. Rep. 911.

33. CRIMINAL LAW-Larceny-Stealing of Note.-Under the provision of Code 1892, § 1176, that "if any pershall steal any note, the money due thereon shall be deemed the value of the article stolen, without proof thereof," a defendant shown to have stolen notes can. not be permitted to show the insolvency of the makers and their refusal to pay the notes as a defense, or to reduce the value of the property stolen. -McDow. ELL V. STATE, Miss., 20 South. Rep. 864.

34. DAMAGES-Breach of Contract.-In an action for corn delivered by the plaintiff to defendants, it ap peared that plaintiff left it with defendants under an agreement that whenever he desired to sell he should receive five cents less than the price in the Chicago market at that date; that when plaintiff determined to sell, the market reports for that particular day were not received by defendants; that plaintiff referred to a morning paper, giving the quotations for the closing market of the evening before, and that the prices given by such paper were reliable authority: Held, that it was not error to permit the jury to use such price as a basis in the computation of plaintiff's damages.-NASH V. CLASSON, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 277.

35. DEEDS-Execution.-A deed purported to have been signed by 20 grantors, the last signature being that of HC H. The signatures of two witnesses, one of whom was the notary taking the acknowledgment of HC H, appeared, the one beneath the other, inclosed in brackets, and between them and the signature of H C H were the words "Attest as to," so as to read, together with the signature, "Attest as to H C H." There were acknowledgments by other grantors before notaries in other States, but there were no other subscribing witnesses: Held, that the restricted character of the attestation was conclusive, and excluded any presumption that the deed was duly witnessed as to all the grantors, as required by Rev. St. § 2216, and entitled to be recorded.-HARASS V. EDWARDS, Wis., 69 N. W. Rep. 69.

36. DOWER-Lease.-A widow cannot lease her dower interest before it has been assigned to her.-UNION BREWING CO. v. MEIR, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 264.

37, DRAINAGE Discretionary Power.-The commissioners of a drainage district, being vested by the statute with a discretion as to the location and manner of construction of drains, are not bound by the plans and estimates of the engineer, and a change in such plans does not vitiate an assessment, as their discretion cannot be controlled by the courts.-SISSON V. DRAINAGE COMR'S OF DIST. No. 1, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 215. 38. ELECTION-Removal of County Seat.-The county being an indispensable party to a bill to contest an election for removal of the county seat, the bill will be dismissed on failure to make the county a party within the time within which contests of elections are required to be filed.-VILLAGE OF METAMORA V. VILLAGE OF EUREKA, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 209.

39. EQUITY-Legal Relief.-Complainant filed a bill for specific performance of covenants in a lease whereby, it was alleged, respondents became bound to restore part of the leased land, which was washed away by a flood in the Mississippi river. In lieu of specific performance the bill prayed for damages for breach of the covenant, and also for a decree for installments of rent due: Held that, though specific performance was refused, there was such a showing of equitable cognizance that the cause should be retained for the pur. pose of affording other relief, even purely legal in

character, if justified by the proofs.-WAITE V. O'NEIL, U. S. C. C. of App., Sixth Circuit, 76 Fed. Rep. 408.

40. ESTOPPEL IN PAIS.-One who contracted with a waterworks company, through persons interested in it, and professing to represent it, and by virtue of such contract and a lease to him by such persons got posses. sion of the waterworks property, and held it until the lease expired, was estopped from denying that the waterworks company was properly incorporated and officered, and that it was the owner of the property leased.-FAYETTEVILLE WATERWORKS CO V. TILLING HAST, N. Car., 25 S. E. Rep. 960.

41. EVIDENCE-Expert Testimony.-In an action by one employed to take care of defendant's daughter while sick, to recover damages on the ground that the daughter was ill of typhoid fever, that defendant con. cealed such fact, and that plaintiff contracted such disease, it was not error to permit medical experts called by plaintiff to answer hypothetical questions purporting to state the facts testified to by plaintiff, and inquiring on such facts and on all of plaintiff's testimony when and where, in their opinion, plaintiff contracted the disease, where all of such experts, except two or three, testified that they had heard all of plaintiff's testimony, and the others stated that they had heard all but a portion of the re-cross-examination, which appeared to develop nothing of import. ance.-KLIEGEL V. AITKEN, Wis., 69 N. W. Rep. 67.

42. EVIDENCE-Proof of Handwriting.-Under Hill's Ann. Laws, § 765, providing that evidence as to handwriting may be given by a comparison by a skilled witness, or by the jury, with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party against whom the evi. dence is offered, it is competent for a party to introduce letters admitted to be in the handwriting of the adverse party, but not bearing on the controversy in issue, for the purpose of showing, by a comparison of handwriting, that a material letter was written by such adverse party.-MUNKERS V. FARMERS' & MERCHANTS' INS. Co., Oreg., 46 Pac. Rep. 850.

43. EVIDENCE-Statements by Third Persons.-In an action by an attorney to recover fees, conversations between defendant and an other attorney, who was associated with plaintiff in the case in which the services were rendered, are inadmissible against plaintiff, such conversations having taken place in the absence of and without the knowledge of plaintiff.-CHAPMAN V. NEARY, Cal., 46 Pac. Rep. 867.

44. FEDERAL COURTS-Citizenship.-Allegations that defendant has left the United States, and become permanently domiciled in the Dominion of Canada, and now resides there, and intends to become a naturalized citizen of that country, does not show his alienage for the purpose of conferring jurisdiction on the federal court.-BISLOP V. AVERILL, U. S. C. C., E. D. (Wash.), 76 Fed. Rep. 386.

--

45. FEDERAL COURTS State Taxation of National Bank Stock.-A federal court has jurisdiction of a suit to enjoin State taxing officers from enforcing collection of a tax upon shares of stock in a national bank, where the protection sought is based upon the ground that the State statutes under which such officers are proceeding in making their assessment is in violation of the fourteenth amendment to the constitution, and of Rev. St. § 5219.-THIRD NAT. BANK OF PITTSBUrg v. MYLIN, U. S. C. C., E. D. (Penn.), 76 Fed. Rep. 385. 46. FRAUD False Representations.-Defendants solicited complainants to join with them in the purchase of a tract of land, representing that the price of the land was $14,000, to which each should contribute an equal share. In fact, the purchase price was only $10,500, and by means of the false representations com. plainants were induced to and did pay more than their share: Held, that the transaction was a fraud on the part of the defendants, for which they were liable to the extent of the excess so paid.-BUNN V. SCHNELLBACHER, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 227.

47. GARNISHMENT-Proceeds of Exempt Personalty.The proceeds of a sale of exempt personal property,

designed for reinvestment in other exempt personalty, to take the place of that sold, are not subject to gar nishment in the hands of the purchaser.-CULLEN V. HARRIS, Mich, 69 N. W. Rep. 78.

48. HOMESTEAD Sale under Execution.-Where premises occupied as a homestead are levied on under an execution against a judgment debtor, and the sheriff does not appraise and set off the homestead, as required by Rev. St. ch. 52, §§ 1, 10, a sale for an inade quate price will be set aside, on the petition of the debtor, where the amount for which the premises were sold, with interest, is deposited in court for the benefit of the purchaser.-BACH V. MAY, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 248.

49. HOMESTEAD What Constitutes.-Testator bequeathed his homestead to his wife for life, directing that the remainder of his property be divided between his wife and children. The testator owned a part of a block, which had been divided into sublots, but without streets or alleys. On one corner of the block was a house, with outhouses and well, rented by testator for business purposes. On the other corner was a dwelling house occupied by testator and his family, with outhouses. The family used the well appurtenant to the other house: Held, that the term "homestead," as used in the will, must be construed as includ ing only that portion of the block occupied exclusively by the dwelling house and its appurtenances.-SMITH V. DENNIS, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 267.

50. HUSBAND AND WIFE-Action on Note.-Code, art. 45, § 2, declaring that a married woman may be sued jointly with her husband on any note, bill, contract, or agreement which she may have executed jointly with him, includes only contracts wholly reduced to writing, and signed by both husband and wife.-HAR VARD PUB. Co. OF NEW YORK V. BENJAMIN, Md., 35 Atl. Rep. 930.

52. INSOLVENT LESSEE Receiver.-A receiver was appointed for an insolvent corporation having the concession of an allotted space within exposition grounds for restaurant purposes in consideration of a percentage of its gross receipts. Half of the term remained, and the concession was of itself the principal thing of value to the creditors. Under an order of the court, the creditors consenting, the receiver conducted the business which the insolvent had been unable to continue. There was no act of disaffirmance, or notice that the receiver would not be bound by the contract of concession. He completed the term, and received the profits: Held, that he could not repudiate the contract at the end of the term, and pay the exposition company on the basis of a quantum meruit only. SPENCER V. WORLD'S COLUMBIAN EXPOSITION, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 250.

53. INSURANCE Conditions of Policy.-It is the settled law of the State that, under provisions in an insurance policy that it shall be void in case of a change made in the property increasing the hazard, if such changes are made but the policy has not been declared forfeited, and the changed conditions cease to exist, leaving the risk no more hazardous than before, the policy again becomes in force.-TRADERS' INS. Co. v. CATLIN, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 255.

54. INTERPLEADER.-A bill to require defendants to interplead with each other in reference to certain property must show that all the adverse titles or claims are dependent or derived from a common source.-KYLE V. MARY LEE COAL & RAILWAY CO., Ala., 20 South. Rep. 851.

55. INTOXICATING LIQUORS-Illegal Sale.-This being an indictment for a misdemeanor against two persons,

upon which they were jointly tried and convicted, and the only question for review by this court being whether or not the verdict was contrary to the evidence, and it appearing that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction of one of the accused, but not that of the other, the judgment as to the former is affirmed, and as to the latter reversed.-COOK V. STATE, Ga., 25 S. E. Rep. 919.

56. JUDGMENT-Conclusiveness-Infancy.-An infant who sues by his next friend is as much bound by the judgment of a court having jurisdiction of the parties and subject-matter as if of full age.-KANSAS CITY, FT. S. & M. R. Co. v. MORGAN, U. S. C. C. of App., Sixth Circuit, 76 Fed. Rep. 429.

57. JUDGMENT-Enforcement-Equitable Relief.-In a suit in equity in aid of a social execution issued on a judgment rendered in attachment, where it alleged by a cross bill, and admitted by demurrer, that the judg ment therein was recovered on a fictitious demand, by the fraud of plaintiff, in the absence of defendant, and without his knowledge, and on constructive service merely, equity will interfere to prevent the enforcement of the judgment.-SCHROER V. PETTIBONE, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 207.

58. LIBEL Privileged Communications.-A person who, as agent of another, swears to the truth of a petition, to obtain an attachment as for a contempt because of an alleged violation of an injunction, is so far a witness in such proceeding as that affidavits, filed by the defendant in support of his answer, tending, by proof of bad character, to impeach the credit of such agent, are privileged, and matters therein recited pertinent to that point are not libelous, and cannot be made the basis of an action for libel, either as against an attorney offering such affidavits in evidence, the defendant, or the witnesses making such affidavits.CONLEY V. KEY, Ga., 25 S. E. Rep. 914.

59. LIS PENDENS

Purchase Pendente Lite-Certiflcate. The purchaser of a tax certificate, pending a suit, to which his vendor is a party, to annul the certificate, is bound by the judgment, though no lis pendens was filed. Rev. St. § 3187, providing for filing a lis pendens, applies only to the cases therein provided for. -BROWN V. COHN, Wis., 69 N. W. Rep. 71.

60. MANDAMUS-Duty of Drainage Commissioners.— Laws 1885, p. 83, § 17, providing that on the organization of a drainage district the commissioners shall determine upon a system of drainage which shall provide main outlets of ample capacity for the waters of the district; and section 41, declaring that, if the com. missioners find the lands are not drained as contemplated, they shall use the corporate funds to carry out the original purpose,-are mandatory; and a person who receives no benefits from the improvement, by reason of an error in constructing the drain, may compel the commissioners, by mandamus, to alter such drain so as to properly carry off the water from his land.-PEOTONE & MANTENO UNION DRAINAGE DIST. No. 1 v. ADAMS, III., 45 N. E. Rep. 266.

61. MARRIED WOMAN-Partnership with Husband.— There is no law or public policy in this State which forbids a married woman from engaging in business with her busband as a copartner; and where a partnership between them is formed, and she is held out to the world as one of its members, she becomes liable to one who deals with the firm upon the faith of her membership therein.-BURNEY V. SAVANNAH GROCERY 00., Ga., 25 8. E. Rep. 915.

62. MASTER AND SERVANT - Assumed Risk.-An employee working in a place lighted by an electric lamp, which, as he knew, had been out of repair and the light intermittent for several months, during which he continued to work without objection or promise of remedy, assumed the risk of injury incident to the defective light, though he was told on the particular night when he was injured, by another employee in charge of the lights, that they were all right; it not ap pearing that such employee was authorized or as

sumed to speak for the employer, or that the light had been repaired.-COLORADO FUEL & IRON Co. v. CUMMINGS, Colo., 46 Pac. Rep. 875.

63. MASTER AND SERVANT-Contributory Negligence. -A workman who voluntarily goes to work on a scaffold which he knows to be unsafe cannot recover for injuries caused by its fall.-Nuss V. RAFSNYDER, Penn., 35 Atl. Rep. 958.

64. MASTER AND SERVANT-Defective Machinery-Assumption of Risk.-In an action by a servant against his master for injuries from defective appliances, a complaint alleging knowledge both on the part of the servant and the master as to the existence of the defect, and a promise on the part of the master to remedy the same is demurrable, where it fails to show that the master, after such knowledge and promise, had a reasonable time before the accident to remedy the defect.-BURNS V. WINDFALL MANUGF. Co., Ind., 45 N. E. Rep. 189.

65. MASTER AND SERVANT - Negligence of Master.-A guy rod supporting a crane ran through a brick wall into a cast-iron plate extending down from the top of the wall. The plate through which the rod ran cracked in the center, in sound iron, letting the rod through the wall, and causing the crane to fall and injure plaintiff. There was evidence that long before the accident the wall had bulged where the rod went through, and that the bulging was visible, and that timbers had been put up to strengthen it: Held, that the question of defendant's negligence was properly submitted to the jury.-ASHLEY WIRE Co. v. MERCIER, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 222.

66. MASTER AND SERVANT Railroad Companies-Relief Associations.-In an action against a railroad company by one of its employees to recover damages for personal injury through negligence, a plea that the employee had accepted benefits as a member of a relief association organized by the company, under agreement that he thereby relinquished his right of action, does not constitute a good defense when the plea fails to show that, if the association was at any time short of funds to meet its obligations to a member, such member could maintain an action against the company, or fails to set out the arrangement be tween the company and its employee with such full ness and certainty that the court may be able to see that the arrangement is fair and reasonable, and not against public policy, nor voidable for want of valuable consideration.-CHICAGO, B. & Q. R. Co. v. MILLER, U. S. C. C. of App., Eighth Circuit, 76 Fed. Rep. 439.

V

67. MASTER AND SERVANT Vice-principal — Negli gence.-A servant directed to take other servants, to be selected by him, and unload heavy machinery from a dray by means of a crane, may act in such work as a vice-principal, though he has no authority to discharge the servants under him.-FRASER & CHALMERS v. SCHROEDER, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 288.

68. MORTGAGES Foreclosure.-A purchaser at a foreclosure sale acquires only the title of the mortgagor, as against a cotenant of the mortgagor, though the mortgage assumes to convey the entire fee.MCMAHILL V. TORRENCE, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 269.

69. MORTGAGE-Foreclosure.-A second lienholder is not entitled to a reversal of a decree foreclosing the first mortgage because it includes excessive interest, or other erroneous items, where the property has been sold, leaving a deficiency on the first mortgage debt greater than the amount of such items.-PRIMLEY V. SHIRK, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 247.

70. MORTGAGE--Innocent Purchasers-Notice.-That a mortgage is taken as security for a pre-existing debt does not prevent the mortgagee being an innocent purchaser, he having, at the time of taking it, released other security, and extended time of payment.-ALSTON V. MARSHALL, Ala., 20 South. Rep. 850.

-

71. MORTGAGES Trustee's Sale of Personalty.-By a sale under a trust deed which embraces both real and

personal property the title to the personal property passes to the purchasers without a written transfer, and a bill of sale made subsequently by the mortgagor is a nullity.-GARNETT V. CHAPMAN, Miss., 20 South. Rep. 863.

72. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS City Council-Rules. - A rule of a city council provided that, when a question should have been indefinitely postponed, the same subject should not be acted on again, or consid ered, during the session: Held, that such rule prevented further action on a subject or scheme which was substantially the same as that contained in an ordinance indefinitely postponed.-ZEILER V. CENTRAL RY. Co., Md., 35 Atl. Rep. 932.

73. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS-Intoxicating Liquors -Effect of Annexation.-It is within the power of the legislature to provide that, where any incorporated town, village, or city is annexed to another town, vil lage, or city, any ordinance in force in the town, vil lage, or city, etc., annexed at the time of the annexation, prohibiting or regulating the licensing of dramshops within the territory so annexed, shall be continued in force.-SWIFT V. KLEIN, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 219. 74. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS-Local Improvements -Laying Water Mains.-An ordinance authorizing the construction of a system of waterworks by a city pro vided that so much of the improvement as related to the laying of water mains and the appurtenances thereto, but not including hydrants, reservoir, or pumping station, should be paid for by special assessment: Held, that the improvement contemplated was a local improvement, within the statute allowing special assessments for local improvements.-HUGHES V. CITY OF MOMENCE, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 300.

75. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS Ordinance.-A city ordinance providing that no person shall allow or permit any indecent, loud, or boisterous noise, or any fighting or other disturbance, in or about his house or tavern, inn, saloon, cellar, shop, office, or other resi dence or place of business, or permit drunkards or per sons having the reputation or name of being prostitutes to congregate, visit, or remain therein, is unreasonable, as not limited in its application to such assemblages or to such places of business as are properly within police control, and consequently void.CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS v. NEWTON, Mich., 69 N. W. Rep. 84.

76. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION-Public Improvements. -A city expressly authorized to levy and collect a gen. eral tax for the construction of waterworks cannot make a special assessment to pay for the standpipe, reservoir, and pumping apparatus, since these do not constitute a "local improvement," for which alone a special assessment is proper.-HUGHES V. CITY OF MOMENCE, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 302.

77. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS-Public Improvements -Assessments.-Act June 21, 1895 (Laws 1895, p. 100), amending Act April 10, 1872, and granting a trial by jury, in proceedings for confirmation of an assessment, to determine whether the assessment for a city improvement was excessive or not, applies to proceedings pending at the time the act went into effect. -ILLINOIS CENT. R. Co. v. CITY OF WENONA, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 265.

78. NEGLIGENCE Contributory Negligence.-Where the defendant pleaded that plaintiff's intestate was guilty of contributory negligence in standing where he did at the time of the accident, and one witness testifled that deceased was not standing in a proper place, while another testified that he was standing just where he should stand, under the requirements of his duties, held, that the evidence did not warrant a nonsuit on the ground of contributory negligence.-MCALPINE V. LAYDON, Cal., 46 Pac. Rep. 865.

79. NEGLIGENCE-Icy Sidewalks - Contributory Negligence. In a suit for injuries resulting from a fall caused by slipping on an icy sidewalk, the fact that plaintiff saw the ice, and attempted to cross, does not

prove such contributory negligence as warrants the withdrawal of the case from the jury.-MANROSS V. OIL CITY, Penn., 35 Atl. Rep. 959.

80. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT - Action on Note.Where, in an action by a firm to recover on a note made by defendants to a third person or order, and by him indorsed to plaintiffs, defendants plead that the note was procured by fraud, of which plaintiffs had knowledge at the time of the indorsement, the testimony of one partner "that the firm was not aware of any fraud" is inadmissible, since he can only testify as to his own want of knowledge.-MCCOSKER V. BANKS, Md., 35 Atl. Rep. 935.

81. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT Action on NoteDuress.-As a general rule, a promissory note, executed under the duress of the principal by legal imprisonment, is not void as to a surety thereon, if the latter, being under no duress, and knowing of the duress of the principal, nevertheless voluntarily signed the note; and, though knowledge of the fact of the principal's imprisonment does not necessarily involve knowledge on the part of the surety of its want of legality, a plea by the latter, alleging that the prin cipal signed under duress of imprisonment, even if in other respects good, ought to allege that the impris onment was illegal, or, if legal, was used for an Illegal purpose, and that the surety was ignorant as to its real character, and therefore ignorant of the duress.GRAHAM V. MARKS, Ga., 25 S. E. Rep. 931.

82. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT — Action on Note-Assignment.-Where the principal of a promissory note was made payable a given number of years after its date, with a stipulation in the note for the payment of the interest annually, the contract to pay interest was severable from that to pay the principal, and a suit for interest past due could be maintained without regard to the time when the note matured as to principal. This being so, it follows that the payee of such a note could lawfully, in writing, assign to another the prin cipal thereof, and reserve to himself the interest, with the right to collect the same.-SCOTT V. LIDDELL, Ga., 25 S. E. Rep. 935.

83. OFFICERS

De Facto Officers- A de facto board cannot create a de jure officer. - MAYOR, ETC., of JERSEY CITY V. ERWIN, N. J., 35 Atl. Rep. 948.

84. PRINCIPAL AND AGENT-Instructions-Liability of Agent.-Complainant was agent of an insurance company, under instructions to report all matters to the company for approval. The company notified him of its intention to go into liquidation, instructing him to let the business in force stand, as it would soon be reinsured. In violation of these instructions, complainant called in and canceled all policies issued by him, repaying the premiums pro rata: Held, that he was not entitled to recover the amount so paid on policies canceled on his own motion.-EQUITABLE FIRE INS. Co. v. WILDBERGER, Miss., 20 South. Rep. 859.

85. PRINCIPAL AND SURETY-Performance of Contract. -In an agreement for the construction of a sewer, the contractor undertook to "furnish all labor, materials, and tools necessary to execute the entire work," and gave a bond with sureties for the faithful performance of his contract: Held, that the sureties were not bound to pay third parties for materials used in per forming the contract.-CITY OF STERLING V. WOLF, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 218.

86. PUBLIC LANDS-Patent - Cancellation. - The fact that the mortgagee of the holder of a patent certificate may not have had notice of the proceedings to cancel such certificate, or any opportunity to be heard therein, does not render void the action of the land de partment in canceling such certificate, but merely entitles him to a hearing on the question of the legality of the original entry in a proper action in court. In such action the burden of proof is upon him to make out a prima facie case, the certificate after cancellation being no longer any evidence to support his claim.GUARANTY SAV. BANK V. BLADOW, N. Dak., 69 N. W. Rep. 41.

87. QUIETING TITLE. - Where a deed to land is proeured from the owner by fraud, and he thereafter conveys the same land to another grantee, such second grantee can file a bill to set aside the first deed for fraud.-PRINCE V. Du Puy, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 298. 8. RAILROAD COMPANIES Competing Lines - Exchange of Traffic.-A contract between railroad companies whose roads approach their point of connection almost at right angles, so that they cannot become competitors, to interchange traffic and cars, sell coupon passenger tickets, make through bills of lad ing, and apportion their earnings, is not unlawful.CUMBERLAND VAL. R. Co. v. GETTYSBURG & H. RY. Co., Penn., 35 Atl. Rep. 952.

89. RAILROAD COMPANIES - Ejection of TrespasserServant's Authority. In an action against a railroad company for injuries, it appeared that plaintiff got on a box car to steal a ride; and he testified that after the train started he was kicked off by one of the trainmen, and was injured: Held that, though plaintiff was a trespasser, if he was given no reasonable opportunity without exposing himself to danger, but was forced to leave the train while it was in motion, by force exercised by defendant's employees within the scope of their employment, and in so leaving; he received his injuries, defendant was liable.-CHESAPEAKE & O. R. Co. V. ANDERSON, Va., 25 S. E. Rep. 947.

90. RAILROAD COMPANIES - Defects in Foreign CarsFellow servants. Where a railroad company receives in its yard a car of another railroad, and such car is examined, and notice given that it is defective and is to be returned, the company has fulfilled its duty in regard to the car, and is not liable for injuries resulting from such defect, which an employee receives while the car is being shifted about the yard; the neg. ligence in such case, if any, being that of his fellowservants.- - ATCHISON, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. MEYERS, U. 8.0. C. of App., Seventh Circuit, 76 Fed. Rep. 443. 31. RAILROAD COMPANIES - Liability of Lessor. railroad company which allows other companies to run trains over its track is jointly liable with such other companies for injuries caused by their negli gence. - CHICAGO & E. R. Co. v. MEECH, Ill., 45 N. E. Rep. 290.

A

32. REAL ESTATE AGENTS-Commissions.-Plaintiffs, as real estate agents, were authorized to sell certain lands at not less than five dollars per acre, but such anthorization was not exclusive. Subsequently plaint. iffs had some negotiations with a broker who offered to get a purchaser at less than the amount stipulated, upon a division of commissions. This offer plaintiffs refused. Some months later the broker obtained authority from defendants to sell the lands at five dollars, at a certain commission, and, under such au thority, negotiated a sale: Held, that the fact that plaintiffs had negotiated unsuccessfully with the broker did not connect them with the sale, so as to entitle them to commissions. DOUVILLE V. COMSTOCK, Mich., 69 N. W. Rep. 79.

3. RECEIVERS-Interlocutory Order-Pleading.-An Interlocutory order appointing a receiver will not be reversed because of the insufficiency of the complaint to state a cause of action, as the complaint is still pending in the trial court, subject to amendment.GRAY V. OUGHTON, Ind., 45 N. E. Rep. 191.

94. RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES Action to Recover Donation-Parties.-Information will not lie by the attorney general, on the relation of the trustees of an unincorporated religious society, to recover funds donated for the erection or repair of the church building, since such society is a definite body, capable, under Pab. St. ch. 39, § 9, of maintaining suit itself for the right to hold and use gifts in the manner intended by the donors. ATTORNEY GENERAL V. CLARK, Mass., 45

N. E. Rep. 183.

5. REMOVAL OF CAUSES-Actions at Law - Equitable Defenses.-Where, by the statutes of a State, equitable defenses may be made to an action at law, and such an

action is removed into the federal court, matters in law and matters in equity must be separated, and equi table relief must be sought in a separate suit.-IN RE FOLEY, U. S. C. C. D., (Nev.), 76 Fed. Rep. 890.

96. REMOVAL OF CAUSES-Local Prejudice. - Defendant railroad company submitted affidavits showing that a few years previously there was a bitterly con. tested litigation between its predecessor in the pos session of the road and the city in which the cause was to be tried; that during this litigation there was almost a riot; that several of the servants of such predecessor were arrested in consequence of the litiga. tion, and that litigation still existed between itself and said city; and a number of respectable and disinterested witnesses testified that defendant could not ob tain justice in that county, and that a prejudice against corporations existed there: Held, that it was proper to order the removal of the cause under Act March 3, 1887, though a number of witnesses testified that defendant could obtain justice in that locality.-HERNDON V. SOUTHERN R. CO., U. 8. C. C., E. D. (N. Car.), 76 Fed. Rep. 398.

97. SALE-Collateral Warranty.-Where a warranty is part of a transaction of sal, no separate considera. tion is necessary to support it. -STANDARD UNDERGROUND CABLE CO. V. DENVER CONSOL. ELECTRIC CO., U.S. C. C. of App., Third Circuit, 76 Fed. Rep. 422.

98. SALE Damages for Breach. The measure of damages for refusing to accept and pay for the subject of a contract of sale is the difference between the contract price and the market value at the time when it should have been accepted, less expenses which the seller was saved by such refusal.-NEWARK CITY ICE Co. v. FISHER, U. S. C. C. of App., Third Circuit, 76 Fed. Rep. 427.

99. SALE-Passing of Title-Warranty.-Where all the terms of a sale of personal property which has been identified are agreed upon, and embodied in a writing signed and delivered, such delivery of the writing operates to pass title to the purchaser. Accordingly: Held, in the case of a sale of a mare, when the writing so made and delivered contained a stipulation that the sale was made without any warranty, that an oral warranty of quality, made an hour after the delivery of the writing, and made only as an inducement to the purchaser to accept and keep the mare, could not be enforced as a contract, such oral warranty being without consideration. FLETCHER V. NELSON, N. Dak., 69 N. W. Rep. 53.

-

100. SALE OF UNINSPECTED FERTILIZERS. The seller of commercial fertilizers, which had not been inspected as the law requires, cannot maintain against the buyer an action for the price of the same.-GOULD. ING FERTILIZER Co. v. DRIVER, Ga., 25 S. E. Rep. 922. 101. SALE TO AGENT- Liability of Principal. Although the value of goods sold to an agent upon his own credit alone may, under certain circumstances, be recovered from the principal when disclosed, this, under the facts of the present case, could not be done unless the principal actually received and used or in some way got the benefit of such goods.-MICKLEBERRY V. O'NEAL, Ga., 25 S. E. Rep. 933.

102. SCHOOLS-Contract with Teacher.-A teacher's certificate, issued for three years, cannot be legally extended, by being changed to read for four years, by the secretary of the board of examiners who issued it, after he has gone out of office.-BRYAN V. FRACTIONAL SCHOOL DIST. No. 1 OF SHELBY AND STERLING TPS., Mich., 69 N. W. Rep. 74.

103. TAXATION-Valuation of Property.-A contract by a mill corporation, by which it agreed, for a certain length of time, to discharge a sufficient quantity of water from its reservoir through its dam to maintain a certain flow in a stream below, where it bound the corporation to do no more than it was required to do by its charter in equalizing the flow of the stream, cannot be considered such an incumbrance that a sale of the stock of the corporation during the existence of