GOVERNOR.

See MANDAMUS, 76.

GRAND JURY.

See CRIMINAL LAW, 818.

GUARANTY.

Continuing.] A guaranty in the following words: "Messrs. Morgan, Root &
Co. The bearer, Mr. H. A. Bowlus, is visiting your city, buying a few
goods in your line, and any thing you may be able to sell him will be paid
promptly as agreed on, which I herewith guarantee," is not a continuing
guaranty. Morgan v. Boyer (Ohio), 454.

HIGHWAY.

Obstructions - passing over adjoining land.] If a highway is rendered con-
tinuously and notoriously impassable by washouts, snow and ice, the
traveller is not bound to remove the obstructions, but if there is no other
way reasonably available, may pass over the adjoining land. Morey v.
Fitzgerald (Vt.), 811.

Obstructing.] See CRIMINAL LAW, 175; NEGLIGENCE, 211.

1 Moving house along street railway track.] An injunction will not issue
to restrain the actual or the threatened occasional moving of a house along
the line of a street railway. Fort Clark Horse Railway Company v. Ander-
son (Ill.), 545.

2. Waste-timber.] Where a farm of ninety acres contains but seventeen
acres of wood land, and this is necessary to the proper use of the farm and
for the shading of a contemplated house, many of the trees being large
and old, a threatened cutting of such trees by a naked trespasser may be
enjoined. Powell v. Cheshire (Ga.), 572.

See NUISANCE, 272.

INSANITY.

Contract.] A mortgage made by a wife, while insane, to secure a loan to her
husband, she continuing insane all her life, cannot be enforced although
she was apparently sane, was never judicially declared insane, never dis-
affirmed the mortgage, and the plaintiff had no notice of her insanity and
took the mortgage in good faith, and the husband is insolvent. North-
Western Mutual Fire Insurance Company v. Blankenship (Ind.), 185.

See WIDOW, 582.

INSURANCE.

1. Accident - poison.] An accident policy excepted death or injury where
there was no external and visible sign, and by taking poison. Held, that
this covered the case of taking poison by mistake.
States Mutual Accident Association (Penn.), 204.

2.

Pollock v. United

66
"voluntary exposure walking or being " on railway.] An
accident policy excepted death or injury by voluntary exposure to
unnecessary danger," and while walking or being on the road-bed or
bridge of any railway." The insured stepped off a railway train stopped
at a drawbridge at night, fell through a concealed hole in the bridge and
was killed. Held, not within the exceptions. Burkhard v. Travellers'
Insurance Company (Penn.), 205.

3. Death in violation of law.] A life insurance policy was conditioned to be
void if the assured should die "in or in consequence of the violation of
the laws." The assured and his brothers planned an assault upon B.,
and in pursuance thereof, one of them seized and held him while the as
sured beat him. B. drew a pistol, and the assured seeking to escape was
killed by its discharge. B. testified that the discharge was accidental.
Held, that the policy was avoided. Murray v. New York Life Insurance
Company (N. Y.), 658.

4. Interest.] A son-in-law has no insurable interest in the life of his mother-
in-law. Rombach v. Piedmont and Arlington Life Insurance Company
(La.), 239.

5. "In trust or on commission."] A fire policy insured a stock of music and
musical instruments, 66
his own or held by him in trust or on commission.”
It also provided that goods held on storage must be separately and spe
cifically insured. The insured received a piano from the owner to be
forwarded to another city for repairs. Held, that the piano was covered
by the policy to the extent of its value. Lucas v. Insurance Company
(W. Va.), 383.

6. Soliciting agent

mistake by, in filling up application.] An insurance
company is chargeable with the mistake of its soliciting agent in filling
up an application. Insurance Company v. Williams (Ohio), 474.

7. Suicide.] A policy of life insurance, conditioned to be void if the insured
"shall die by his own hand, under any circumstances," is not avoided by
his suicide when insane, although he understood the act and intended the
result. Schultz v. Insurance Company (Ohio), 676.

8. Warranty

agent filling up application.] The agent of a fire insurance

company filled up an application. To the question as to incumbrances,
the applicant answered that he had given a note, but did not know
whether it had been entered up or not. The agent asked him whether he
should put it down incumbrance or no incumbrance. He replied that he
might put it down as he pleased. The agent said he would put it down
no incumbrance. The applicant made no reply, and the agent so put it
down. The answer proving untrue, and being a warranty within the
policy, held, that the policy was void. Blooming Grove Mutual Fire
Insurance Company v. McAnerney (Penn.), 209.

INTEREST.

After maturity.] Interest after maturity of a contract is recoverable at the
contract rate, although it differs from the statute rate. Kellogg v. Laven-
der (Neb.), 339.

See NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT, 5; USURY.

JUDGE.

Liability for act without jurisdiction.] A justice of the peace, committing a
prisoner on a complaint showing on its face that the offense is barred by
the statute of limitations, is liable in a civil action of damages. Vaughn
v. Congdon (Vt.), 758.

JURISDICTION.

See JUDGE, 758.

JURY.

•Misconduct.] On the adjournment of a trial over Sunday, two of the jurors
borrowed a horse and wagon from one of the attorneys to go home and
return. Held, that a verdict for his client must be set aside. Ensign v.
Harney (Neb.), 344.

See CRIMINAL LAW, 171; TRIAL, 334.

LANDLORD AND TENANT.

1. Rent payable in crops - title.] Under a lease of a farm for years, the
rent payable in a portion of the crops, the title to the crops until delivery
is in the tenant, and he may maintain an action for trespass thereto
against the landlord's grantee of the land. Chicago and West Michigan
Railway Company v. Linard (Ind.), 155.

2. Sub-letting-renewal.] If a tenant for a year, with the privilege of re-
newal if the lessor does not sell the premises, sub-lets beyond the end of
the first year, such sub-lease is terminated by the lessor's sale of the
premises. Southerland v. Goodnow (Ill.), 560.

LARCENY.

By cards.] See CRIMINAL LAW, 754.

VOL. XLVIII — 106

LEASE.

See LANDLORD AND TENANT; WATER AND WATER-COURSE, 528.

LEGACY.
See WILL.

LIBEL AND SLANDER.

1. What is.] A newspaper publication of the suicide of a man, falsely charging
in effect that it was induced by the exactions of his wife, and by her
fraudulent conduct in taking wages for her son which he had not earned,
is libellous per se. Bradley v. Cramer (Wis.), 511.

-

2. Of coroner and physician — what is not.] The defendant published a
newspaper article stating in substance that the body of a man, apparently
frozen to death, had been found in a highway; that the plaintiff as coro-
ner was proceeding to hold an inquest on it, when a physician, after a
careful examination, pronounced the man alive, and after some twenty-
four hours' labor restored him to consciousness. The plaintiff was also a
physician, but the article said nothing of his professional character. Held,
not actionable per se. Purdy v. Rochester Printing Company (N. Y.). 632.
3. Justification— quantum of proof.] In an action of slander for words imput-
ing a crime, where a justification is pleaded, it need not be proved beyond a
reasonable doubt. Bell v. McGinness (Ohio), 673.

LIEN.

See ATTORNEy and Client, 821.

LIMITATION.

Payment by joint debtor.] A payment upon a promissory note by a joint-.
maker, before the statute of limitations has run against it, without the
other maker's knowledge and assent, does not extend the life of the note
as to the latter. Miller v. Miller (Dist. Col.), 738.

LOTTERY.

What is not-foreign bonds with prizes.] The Austrian government, to
obtain a loan, issued bonds for principal and interest, and any prize in
money which the holder might become entitled to under a drawing to be
had as provided therein. Held, not an illegal lottery. Kohn v. Koehler
(N. Y.), 628.

See CRIMINAL LAW, 171.

MANDAMUS.

To governor.] Mandamus does not lie to the governor.
dian Railroad Company v. Lowry (Miss.), 76.

MARITIME LAW.

See SHIP AND SHIPPING, 199.

Vicksburg and Meri

MARRIAGE.

Ante-nuptial settlement — evasion.] By an ante-nuptial settlement it was
covenanted that the wife should receive at the husband's death, one dwell-
ing-house, absolutely, in lieu of dower and all other interest in his estate.
Shortly before his death the husband became estranged from his wife,
and so left her by will only a leasehold dwelling-house of small value and
incumbered, instead of a more valuable house which he had designed
for her, and gave his entire estate of about $100,000 to others. Held,
that the widow might renounce the provision, and demand a house suita-
able to his fortune and position in society, or a sum of money equivalent
to the value of such house. Bussey v. McCurley (Md.), 117.

-

MASTER AND SERVANT.

1. Defective machinery -- promise to repair.] Where the servant of a manu-
facturing company is employed upon defective machinery, and notifies
the foreman of the defect, and he promises to have it repaired, it is not
necessarily negligent for the servant to continue to use the machinery in its
defective condition. Manufacturing Company v. Morrissey (Ohio), 669.
2. Negligence — dangerous employment — fellow-servants.] The plaintiff,
in the employ of a railway company, went under a car standing alone on
a repair track, by order of his foreman, to repair it, and was there injured
by the starting of the car by an advancing train. The track was usually
protected. There was no proof of any precautions to protect it on this
occasion. Held, that a nonsuit was improper. Luebke v. Chicago, Mil-
waukee & St. Paul Railway Company (Wis.), 483.

3. Servant summoning outside assistance.] Where an employee of a railroad
company, engaged in its service, summons his son, eleven years old, to his
temporary assistance, and the son, while so assisting, is injured by the
negligence of another railroad company, the latter is liable to the son
therefor. Pennsylvania Company v. Gallagher (Ohio), 689

Of chattels -

-

See STATUTE, 601.

MEASURE OF DAMAGES.

attachment.]

See DAMAGES, 548.

MORTGAGE.

Mortgaged chattels in possession of the mort-
gagor are not subject to attachment for the mortgagor's debts. Jennings
v. McIlroy (Ark.), 61.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION.

1. Adverse occupation of street.] Adverse possession of a city alley for the
statutory period gives title to the occupant. City of Fort Smith v. Mc Kib.
bin (Ark.), 19.

2. Liability for acts of officers.] A city is liable in damages for the seizure
and sale of property by its officers to pay a void assessment for a street
opening. Durkee v. City of Kenosha (Wis.), 480.