4. Owner.] A statute imposing upon the owners of factories and work.
shops the duty of providing fire-escapes is not applicable to the owners of
premises in possession of lessees. Lee v. Smith (42 Ohio St. 458), 839.
5. Rates of freight.] A statute authorized railroads to charge for freight "not
exceeding the rate of fifty cents per hundred pounds per hundred miles.”
Held, that they might charge fifty cents for less than one hundred pounds.
Murray v. Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co. (63 Tex. 407), 650.
6. "Strongly corroborated."] Under the statute which permits a convic
tion of perjury on the testimony "of one credible witness corroborated
strongly by other evidence as to the falsity," the other evidence may be
circumstantial merely, but it must relate to a material matter, and taken
together it must produce a deep conviction upon the minds of the court
and jury. Hernandez v. State (18 Tex. Ct. App. 134), 295.
7. Sale or gift by wife to husband constructive fraud.] A statute
forbidding a sale by a wife of her separate property to her husband
does not prevent a gift of the same, but such a gift is voidable for con-
structive fraud. Cain v. Ligon (71 Ga. 692), 281.
8. "Sell and convey 93 - lease.] A statutory power to a married woman to
"sell and convey" her lands, as if unmarried, authorizes her to lease them,
and she may lease them in conjunction with her husband. Warren v. Wag
ner (75 Ala. 188), 446.
9. Licensing sale of liquors
discrimination.] The County Court having
the discretion to grant or refuse to grant license to sell intoxicating liquors
in a particular locality, having licensed some applicants may not arbitra-
rily refuse others in the same locality, who are of good moral character
and comply with the statute. Ex parte Levy (43 Ark. 42), 550.
10. Repeal-non-user.] A statute cannot be repealed by mere disuser, but
only expressly, or by a subsequent statute necessarily so repugnant that
the two cannot stand together. Homer v. Commonwealth (106 Penn. St.
221), 521.
See CARRIER, 661; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 259.
STATUTE OF FRAUDS.
See GIFT, 37.
1. Conversion- damages.] Conversion of an unindorsed certificate of stock
is not a conversion of the stock itself, and justifies only nominal damages.
Daggett v. Davis (53 Mich. 35), 91.
2, Fraudulent transfer — attachment.] A transfer of stock to hinder, delay
and defraud creditors is void as against creditors and the stock is liable to
attachment. Beckwith v. Burrough (14 R. I. 366), 392.
corpus.] New shares of corporate capital stock, constructed
out of surplus earnings and distributed to stockholders, are not income,
and do not go to a life tenant. Petition of Brown (14 R. I. 371), 397.
See MANDAMUS, 794.
SUNDAY.
See CARRIER, 584.
Release of one.] A release of one of two sureties releases the other from one-
half the debt. Gordon v. Moore (44 Ark. 349), 606.
See WATER AND WATER-COURSE, 424, 715.
1. Exemption-assessment.] A cemetery association, exempt from taxation, is
not thereby exempt from assessment for a street improvement. Lima v.
Cemetery Association (42 Ohio St. 128), 809.
church lots.] Vacant lots bought by the authorities of a church
and held in private ownership, in anticipation of the increase of
the city, and with the intention of possibly erecting thereon a church,
school, or hospital when needed, are not exempt from taxation as a “place
of public worship," or a "charitable institution," or property used for
colleges or other school purposes." Enaut v. Tax Collectors (36 La. Ann.
804), 14.
Damages - cipher dispatch.] For non-delivery of a cipher dispatch, the mean-
ing of which is not known or explained to the company, a telegraph com-
pany is liable in the same damages as if its purport had been apparent, and
where such dispatch directs the sale of goods owned by the sender, the
measure of damages is the difference in the market price between the time
when they would have been sold if the dispatch had been delivered and
the actual sale. Daughtery v. American Union Telegraph Company (75
Ala. 168), 435.
Imitation - clean hands.] The complainant made and sold "Morse's Com-
pound Syrup of Yellow Dock Root," in bottles in paper wrappers.
defendant subsequently set up the sale in bottles, without wrappers, of
"Dr. Morse's Celebrated Syrup,” those words being blown in the glass,
with labels inscribed “Dr. Morse's Improved Yellow Dock and Sarsapa-
rilla Compound." The bottles were exactly similar in size and shape but
the labels were different. The complainant made his preparation under
one trade name and sold it under another, and advertised it as "sold only
in quart bottles," whereas the bottles, although known in the trade as
quart bottles, held substantially less. Held, that complainant was entitled
to an injunction and account of profits. Alexander v. Morse (14 R. I. 153),
369.
Entry by owner to expel occupant of land.] The owner of land may expel,
with reasonable force, a wrongful occupant, without being liable to any
civil action, although he may be liable for breach of the peace or for
forcible entry. Souter v. Codman (14 R. I. 119), 364.
See NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT, 536; SALE, 59.
Delivery - transfer of receipt.] The transfer of a warehouseman's receipt
for goods on storage carries title, without notice to him or agreement by
him to hold for the transferee. Durr v. Hervey (44 Ark. 301), 594.
1. Percolation — reservation.] A. purchased land subject to the reservation
of the right in B. to conduct water from a spring thereon to his adjoining
land. A. in good faith dug a well on his own land, some forty feet from
the spring, and the subterranean supply of the spring was thereby cut off.
Held, that A. should not be restrained. Lybe's Appeal (106 Penn. St. 626),
542.
2. Surface water-collecting.] An upper land-owner may not collect the
surface water in channels and drains and turn it in increased volume on
the land of a lower owner to his detriment, and the latter may defend his
land against it by dam or embankment. Crabtree v. Baker (75 Ala. 91), 424.
ravine.] A land-owner may protect his land by an embankment
against surface water flowing through a ravine which ordinarily is dry.
Lessard v. Stram (62 Wis. 112), 715.
See LANDLORD AND TENANT, 154.
1. "Heirs and next of kin "— husband.] The husband is not the "heir or
next of kin" of the wife, within the ordinary meaning of a will. Ivins'
Appeal (106 Penn. St. 176), 516.
widow.] A widow is not the "heir" of her husband within
the ordinary meaning of a will. Dodge's Appeal (106 Penn. St. 216), 519.
3. "Issue."] A devise to the male issue then living of testator's son" in-
cludes all male lineal descendants of that son, then living, whether of the
same generation or not, and whether tracing descent through males or
through females. Wistar v. Scott (105 Penn. St. 200), 197.
4. Legacy-interest on.] A pecuniary legacy for support and maintenance
draws interest from the testator's death. Townsend's Appeal (106 Penn.
St. 268), 523.
Infant-competency.] The fact that a female child of seven years of age
was held incompetent to testify on a prosecution for attempt to have carnal
intercourse with her does not affect her competency on a new trial, when
she is above eight years old. Kelly v. State (75 Ala. 21), 422.
See CRIMINAL LAW, 303; PARDON, 330.
Banking powers."] See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 851.
"Child."] See STATUTE, 293.
"Contained in."] See INSURANCE, 364.
"Contract."] See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 263.
"Deadly weapon."] See CRIMINAL LAW, 628.
"Device."] See ELECTION, 646.
"Emoluments."] See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 205.
"Extreme cruelty."] See MARRIAGE, 86, 161, 732.
"Heirs and next of kin."] See WILL, 516.
"Heirs."] See WILL, 519.
"Issue."] See WILL, 197.
"Owner."] See STATUTE, 201, 839.
"Sell and convey."] See STATUTE, 446.
"Strongly corroborated."] See STATUTE, 295.
"Taken in act of adultery."] See CRIMINAL LAW, 322.
|