health. The statute clearly demonstrates with regard to such complaints. In burghs, where the population is dense, there exists a prohibition against the accumulations of offensive matters within a certain distance from any dwellinghouse. But otherwise, where the population is sparse, these deposits may be close to a dwelling-house, and the only stipulation is that they be not injurious to health. There is no clause in the Public Health Act, or any other statute, prohibiting the keeping of a pig, with its attendant manure heap. Indeed, the restriction is rather indicative of the lawfulness of such possession, providing it is kept in such a manner as not to be injurious to health. The sub-section (D.) does not apply to the present complaint, seeing it is not set forth that there existed any accumulation of manure or offensive matter, and the reverse was proved. The mere adjacency to a house, especially to the house of the owner, does not come within any clause of the statute. There can be no question but the keeping of such animals affords a valuable addition to the prosperity of a villager, and an economical application of much alimentary stuff which would otherwise be wasted. It would be a sad day if an edict were to go forth in Forteviot, or any other village, that there was henceforth to be a general massacre of the innocents,' and that no person was to keep a pig at his door, and this supported on the mere opinion of one medical gentleman, however otherwise eminent in his profession. H. B."

SHERIFF COURT OF ABERDEEN.

Sheriff DOVE WILSON.

GORDON v. TAGGART.-Sept. 21, 1876.

Landlord and Tenant-Contravention of Lease.-This action was brought at the instance of Mr. Gordon of Manar against the defender, the tenant of the farm of Pollinar, on the pursuer's estate. The action was one for the recovery of £3, 10s. 10d., being the additional rent for 2 roods and 35 poles of land on the farm, on which piece of ground the defender had grown hay seed during the present year, contrary (as alleged by the pursuer) to the regulations of the estate, and in consequence of which the additional rent had now become due. The defence was that the pursuer had no claim, as the defender had not deviated from the rules of good husbandry, and there was no allegation that any damage had resulted from the alleged departure from the regulations of the estate. The hay had been grown but not sold, being raised for producing seed; and it was contended for the defender that the proprietor had no business as to what purpose the hay was applied to, providing it was not sold.

The Sheriff, in giving judgment, said "The printed regulations of the estate which are founded on, after providing what is to be done when a sixshift is adopted, go on to say: When a five-course shift is adopted, the land shall be managed in the same manner, excepting that two years' grass only shall be necessary, and no hay shall be cut, but the land shall be pastured both the years it is in grass.' The defender's lease adopts the five-shift, subject to the modification of the tenant being allowed to cut not exceeding one-half of his first year's grass for hay or green feeding for his bestial, but not for sale.' A penal rent of £5 per acre is stipulated for should the lease be contravened. The defender has allowed about three-quarters of an acre of the hay to ripen, so as to mature the seed and to give him enough to sow his next year's crop. It is contended that the growing of hay seed is so different a thing from growing hay, that this is a contravention of the lease, and that the penal rent is therefore due. It is argued that hay seed is a different crop from hay, just as turnip seed is different from turnips. The cases are not analogous, as the hay, though the seed be ripe, is still hay, though not of the first quality. I am not prepared to say that there may not be cases where growing a crop of hay seed is not a different thing from growing hay. In cases like this, everything turns

on what the parties mean by their contract, and I am not prepared at all to say that leave to grow hay means always leave, for example, to grow the seed for sale. I can easily see that a great deal might be said for the view that that was raising a different crop. But here the tenant is not showing any intention of turning the land to different purposes from those contemplated. What he is attempting is to manage his farm on the system laid down, in the most economical way for himself, and it would require very strict words to prevent that. I find nothing in the words of this lease sufficient for the purpose. It cannot be said that the crop was not a hay crop. Neither can it be said that any of the crop was grown for sale, none of the hay seed being for that purpose. Nor can it be said that any of the crop was not for the bestial.' The words immediately following-being those which provide that the hay is not to be sold-show what was meant to be prevented; and it would be straining the clause to say that it is contravened, seeing that everything which the defender grows on the land in question will sooner or later be consumed by the bestial on the farm. And, lastly, it is not said that the rules of good husbandry have been contravened. I am therefore of opinion that the tenant in this case has not contravened his lease."

Act.-C. B. Davidson.-Alt.-O. Prosser.

SHERIFF COURT OF FORFARSHIRE.
Sheriff ROBERTSON.

COUPAR-ANGUS PAROCHIAL BOARD v. DRON.-Nov. 9, 1876.

Poor Law." Forfar, Nov. 9, 1876.-The Sheriff having heard parties' procurators after taking the proof, and having considered the whole case, finds, in fact, that the defender's daughter is at present an inmate of the Murthly Asylum, being insane Finds that her father, the defender, is an elderly man, about 67 years of age, that his wife is afflicted with paralysis, and is unable to assist her husband or herself: Finds that the defender is earning wages at present at the rate of 13s. 4d. a week; Finds that the pursuer has failed to prove that the defender has any source of income other than these wages: Finds, in law, that although a parent is bound to contribute towards the aliment of a pauper or lunatic child, his liability is dependent on the circumstances of his position in life Finds, in the present case, that the defender is unable to contribute anything towards his daughter's aliment, therefore assoilzies him from the conclusions of the summons, but without prejudice always to the right of the pursuer, on behalf of the Parochial Board of Coupar-Angus, to raise action against the defender hereafter should his circumstances in life alter or be improved: Finds the pursuer liable in expenses; remits to the auditor to tax and report, etc. "ALEX. ROBERTSON.

"Note.-Owing to an inadvertence, the age of the defender is not mentioned in the proof. But the fact is as the Sheriff-Substitute mentions above, and the man's appearance quite confirms what he said as to his age. The point involved is one purely of discretion, and the Sheriff-Substitute has decided accordingly. A. R."

Act.-Gordon.--Alt.-George Thornton.

INDEX OF MATTERS OF ENGLISH, AMERICAN,

AND COLONIAL CASES.