of the road after allowing for benefits therefrom; Chicago & M. Electric R. Co. v. Mawman, 206 Ill. 183, 69 N. E. 66, holding danger to owner of land from railroad not an element of damage in condemnation; Osgood v. Chicago, 154 Ill. 198, 41 N. E. 40, Affirming 44 Ill. App. 534, allowing benefits to be set off against damages to abutting property from construction of bridge and its approaches. Effect on award of change of plan.

Cited in Chicago & W. I. R. Co. v. Cogswell, 44 Ill. App. 399, allowing additional damages resulting from change of plan for constructing railroad; Maltman v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co. 41 Ill. App. 235, holding further damages recoverable by abutting owners on laying of additional railroad tracks in street.

Distinguished in Kotz v. Illinois C. R. Co. 188 Ill. 583, 59 N. E. 240, holding abutting owner not entitled to further damages on elevation of railroad track. Giving data for estimating benefits.

Cited in Washington Ice Co. v. Chicago, 147 Ill. 334, 37 Am. St. Rep. 222, 35 N. E. 378, requiring data from which estimate of benefits from opening street can be made, to be furnished in some manner.

1 L. R. A. 211, BUTLER v. PEOPLE, 125 Ill. 641, 8 Am. St. Rep. 423, 18 N. E. 338.

Cited in Wohlford v. People, 45 Ill. App. 191, as having been read to jury. Criminal liability for act of another.

Cited in Taylor v. State, 41 Tex. Crim. Rep. 571, 55 S. W. 961, holding train robbers responsible for death of fireman taken by them to place of danger, where killed in exchange of shots between themselves and passenger.

Homicide by killing of person not intended.

Cited in notes (63 L. R. A. 660, 662) on homicide by unlawful act aimed at another than the one killed.

Principal and accessory.

Cited in note (13 L. R. A. 196) on all aiders and abettors being principals.

1 L. R. A. 213, ILLINOIS C. R. CO. v. HOUGHTON, 126 Ill. 233, 9 Am. St. Rep. 581, 18 N. E. 301.

Oral declarations as to possession.

Cited in Knight v. Knight, 178 Ill. 557, 53 N. E. 306, holding admissible as res gestæ oral declarations of ownership by one in possession.

Nature of company's estate in right of way.

Cited in footnotes to Gurney v. Minneapolis Union Elevator Co. 30 L. R. A. 534, which holds railroad company entitled to erect warehouse on land condemned; Kyle v. Texas & N. O. R. Co. 4 L. R. A. 276, which holds owner not estopped to deny railroad company's right to condemn land by permitting it to use same; Narron v. Wilmington & W. R. Co. 40 L. R. A. 415, which holds that railroad company cannot acquire easement by occupation in land taken by right of eminent domain; Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co. v. Smith, 2 L. R. A. 281, which holds covenant running with land not created by deed stipulating for maintenance of fence by railroad company; Peden v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. 4 L. R. A. 401, which holds company liable for breach of covenant as to flow of water; Flickinger v. Shaw, 11 L. R. A. 134, which holds vested right of way acquired by

construction of irrigation ditch under parol agreement; Snell v. Levitt, 1 L. R. A. 414, as to how easements may be lost.

Cited in notes (10 L. R. A. 484) on right by prescription to use of lands of another; (8 L. R. A. 618) on rights of parties in easements; (8 L. R. A. 575) on easement to flowage of water; (8 L. R. A. 472) on right of owner of soil to use of highway; (18 L. R. A. 540) on effect of nonuser of easement.

Acquisition of title to right of way by adverse possession.

Cited in Pittsburgh, C. C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Stickley, 155 Ind. 316, 58 N. E. 192, holding railroad not a public highway so as to prevent acquiring title to right of way by adverse possession; Illinois C. R. Co. v. O'Connor, 154 Ill. 556, 39 N. E. 563, and Illinois C. R. Co. v. Moore, 160 Ill. 16, 43 N. E. 364, holding company's estate in right of way subject to adverse possession; Northern P. R. Co. v. Ely, 25 Wash. 395, 54 L. R. A. 532, 87 Am. St. Rep. 766, 65 Pac. 555, and Northern P. R. Co. v. Hasse, 28 Wash. 358, 92 Am. St. Rep. 840, 68 Pac. 882, holding that title to land granted by Congress as right of way may be acquired by adverse possession; Northern P. R. Co. v. Ely, 25 Wash. 395, 54 L. R. A. 532, 87 Am. St. Rep. 766, 65 Pac. 555, holding that railroad company cannot defeat title of settlers acquired by adverse possession, on ground that right of way granted for public purposes.

Cited in footnote to Southern P. R. Co. v. Hyatt, 54 L. R. A. 522, which holds that title to right of way cannot be acquired by adverse possession.

Cited in note (4 L. R. A. 646) on adverse possession in case of easements and servitudes.

Sufficiency of adverse possession.

Cited in Glencoe v. Wadsworth, 48 Minn. 403, 51 N. W. 377, holding tortious entry on land without color of title may ripen into title; Knight v. Knight, 178 Ill. 559, 53 N. E. 306, holding possession of grantor may become adverse without formal disclaimer of title conveyed by deed.

Cited in notes (6 L. R. A. 833) on sufficiency of occupation to constitute adverse possession; (13 L. R. A. 207) on sufficiency of adverse possession.

— Of right of way.

Approved in Illinois C. R. Co. v. O'Connor, 154 Ill. 555, 39 N. E. 563, holding title to right of way acquired by inclosing with farm lands and cultivating and pasturing for over twenty years; Illinois C. R. Co. v. Moore, 160 Ill. 16, 43 N. E. 364, and Illinois C. R. Co. v. Wakefield, 173 Ill. 569, 50 N. E. 1002, holding title to part of right of way outside of fence constructed by railroad company acquired by adverse possession for twenty years.

Cited in Wilmot v. Yazoo & M. Valley R. Co. 76 Miss. 386, 24 So. 701, holding manifestation of adverse possession of right of way by hostile acts necessary; Chicago & N. W. R. Co. v. Galt, 133 Ill. 671, 23 N. E. 425, holding title by adverse possession not acquired by mere acts of trespass on vacant and uninclosed lands; Vicksburg & M. R. Co. v. Barrett, 67 Miss. 588, 7 So. 549, holding railroad company, to which right of way "not to exceed 100 feet" conveyed, bound by failure to object to grantor's fixing at less width; Ohio River R. Co. v. Johnson, 50 W. Va. 508, 40 S. E. 407, holding adverse possession of land not conveyed confined to land actually occupied.

Cited in footnote to Atchison, T. & S. R. Co. v. Conlon, 53 L. R. A. 781, which holds prescriptive right to use gates and farm crossing not acquired by use under license from company.

1 L. R. A. 216, SMITH v. NIAGARA F. INS. CO. 60 Vt. 682, 6 Am. St. Rep. 144, 15 Atl. 353.

Error as to unanswered question.

Cited in Houston v. Brush, 66 Vt. 340, 29 Atl. 380, holding unanswered question not error; State v. Burpee, 65 Vt. 5, 19 L. R. A. 148, 36 Am. St. Rep. 775, 25 Atl. 964, and State v. Fitzgerald, 72 Vt. 144, 47 Atl. 403, holding improper question unanswered, immaterial; Fuller v. Valiquette, 70 Vt. 503, 41 Atl. 579, and Carpenter v. Willey, 65 Vt. 176, 26 Atl. 488, holding necessary, offer to show what answer to excluded question would be.

Lien on insured property.

Cited in German-American Ins. Co. v. Humphrey, 62 Ark. 350, 54 Am. St. Rep. 297, 35 S. W. 428, holding record of satisfaction of mortgage not essential to its removal as encumbrance; Continental Ins. Co. v. Vanlue, 126 Ind. 413, 10 L. R. A. 845, 26 N. E. 119, holding lien of judgment ceased on payment without entry of satisfaction.

Cited in footnote to Nussbaum v. Northern Ins. Co. 1 L. R. A. 704, which holds deed to secure debt with reservation of balance and right to redeem not alienation avoiding policy.

Cited in note (8 L. R. A. 74) upon breach of condition as to encumbrance in policy.

Effect of warranty.

Cited in footnote to Globe Mut. L. Ins. Asso. v. Wagner, 52 L. R. A. 649, which holds that false statement that none of applicant's brothers are dead will not avoid policy unless known to be false.

Imputing agent's knowledge to principal.

Cited in footnotes to Follett v. United States Mut. Acci. Asso. 15 L. R. A. 668, which holds knowledge by agent of applicant's deafness imputed to company so as to prevent forfeiture; Wheeler v. McGuire, 2 L. R. A. 809, which holds knowledge of agent must have been acquired after relation formed; Birmingham Trust & Sav. Co. v. Louisiana Nat. Bank, 20 L. R. A. 600, which holds corporation chargeable with notice of fact known to agent in prior transaction within scope of authority.

Cited in notes (2 L. R. A. 735) on knowledge of agent is knowledge of principal; (1 L. R. A. 563) on imputing agent's knowledge to principal.

Waiver.

Cited in notes (1 L. R. A. 222) on waiver of terms and conditions of insurance policy; (10 L. R. A. 828) on construction of building contract as to waiver. Authority of agent in absence of provision for indorsing waiver on

policy.

Cited in Merchants' Ins. Co. v. New Mexico Lumber Co. 10 Colo. App. 238, 51 Pac. 174, holding local agent without power to waive forfeiture or breach of warranty after loss; Traders Ins. Co. v. Cassell, 24 Ind. App. 244, 56 N. E. 259, holding authority for agent to issue policy not authorize adjustment of loss.

Cited in footnotes to State Ins. Co. v. Schreck, 6 L. R. A. 524, which holds reformation of policy misdescribing location of property unnecessary when mistake that of agent; Wainer v. Milford Mut. F. Ins. Co. 11 L. R. A. 599, which

holds provision for referring amount of loss waived by absolute denial of liability.

To waive proofs of loss.

Cited in Ruthven Bros. v. American F. Ins. Co. 92 Iowa, 323, 60 N. W. 663, and Ermentrout v. Girard F. & M. Ins. Co. 63 Minn. 310, 30 L. R. A. 349, 56 Am. St. Rep. 485, 65 N. W. 635, holding agent for issuing and countersigning policies and collecting premiums could not waive notice of loss; McCollum v. North British & M. Ins. Co. 65 Mo. App. 309, holding statements of agent without authority to settle loss, and made subsequent thereto, not admissible as evidence of waiver of proofs; McCollum v. Liverpool, L. & G. Ins. Co. 67 Mo. App. 70, raising, without deciding, question whether agent to solicit, issue, and cancel policies could waive proofs of loss; McCollum v. Liverpool, L. & G. Ins. Co. 67 Mo. App. 69, holding adjuster could waive proof of loss; Travelers' Ins. Co. v. Myers, 62 Ohio St. 541, 49 L. R. A. 764, 57 N. E. 458, holding unauthorized agent could not waive written notice of accident and information relating thereto.

Cited in footnote to Steele v. German Ins. Co. 18 L. R. A. 85, which holds policy not avoided by failure to furnish proof of loss within time specified.

Cited in notes (7 L. R. A. 81; 8 L. R. A. 77) upon waiver of proofs of loss; (8 L. R. A. 76) upon waiver of notice and statement of loss in fire insurance. Disapproved in Nickell v. Phoenix Ins. Co. 144 Mo. 425, 46 S. W. 435, holding local agent could waive proof of loss and estop company.

Authority of other than insurance agent.

Cited in footnote to Fay v. Slaughter, 56 L. R. A. 564, which holds authority to indorse checks for deposit not authority to ratify checks with forged transfers on them.

Effect of requiring waiver to be indorsed on policy.

Cited in Parker v. Rochester German Ins. Co. 162 Mass. 482, 39 N. E. 179, holding agent with limited powers could not orally consent to removal of property insured; Liverpool, L. & G. Ins. Co. v. T. M. Richardson Lumber Co. il Okla. 611, 69 Pac. 938, denying validity of waiver not shown to have been made by agent with express authority; Egan v. Westchester Ins. Co. 28 Or. 296, 42 Pac. 611, denying general agent's power to orally consent to chattel mortgage. Authority to waive proofs of loss.

Cited in Ruthven Bros. v. American F. Ins. Co. 92 Iowa, 327, 60 N. W. 663. holding that adjuster could not orally waive proof of loss.

Distinguished in Powers v. New England F. Ins. Co. 68 Vt. 395, 35 Atl. 331, holding promise by company to send adjuster, waiver of requirement of proof of loss; Washburn-Halligan Coffee Co. v. Merchants' Brick Mut. F. Ins. Co. 110 lowa, 426, 80 Am. St. Rep. 311, 81 N. W. 707, holding secretary of insurance company authorized to waive proof of loss without indorsement.

Disapproved in Nickell v. Phoenix Ins. Co. 144 Mo. 425, 46 S. W. 435, where the statement is made that by almost universally recognized doctrine the condition may be waived orally.

Authority to waive condition as to other insurance.

Cited in Northern Assur. Co. v. Grand View Bldg. Asso. 183 U. S. 323, 46 L. ed. 220, 22 Sup. Ct. Rep. 133, Reversing 41 C. C. A. 214, 101 Fed. 84, holding acceptance of premium did not waive condition for written assent to additional

insurance, unknown to company though known to agent upon delivery of policy; O'Leary v. Merchants' & B. Mut. Ins. Co. 100 Iowa, 176, 62 Am. St. Rep. 555, 66 N. W. 175, holding consent to additional insurance not waived by written consent of secretary by letter, without indorsement on policy.

Criticized in Burnham v. Greenwich Ins. Co. 63 Mo. App. 90, holding assent to further insurance might be waived orally, notwithstanding condition of policy.

1 L. R. A. 222, LAMBERTON v. CONNECTICUT F. INS. CO. 39 Minn. 129, 39 N. W. 76.

Provision in policy against waiver by officer or representative without indorsement.

Cited in Burdick v. Security Life Asso. 77 Mo. App. 635, holding general manager with secret limitation on authority could waive breach of warranties in application.

Cited in note (8 L. R. A. 73) upon acts of agent binding insurance company. As to proofs of loss.

Cited in Renier v. Dwelling House Ins. Co. 74 Wis. 98, 42 N. W. 208, holding general agent could orally waive proofs of loss; Ruthven Bros. v. American F. Ins. Co. 102 Iowa, 558, 71 N. W. 574, holding adjuster might orally waive proofs of loss; Phenix Ins. Co. v. Munger, 49 Kan. 195, 33 Am. St. Rep. 360, 30 Pac. 120, holding condition in policy forbidding changes by agents, except upon written authority, too sweeping.

As to other insurance.

Cited in Anderson v. Manchester F. Assur. Co. 59 Minn. 195, 28 L. R. A. 612, 50 Am. St. Rep. 400, 63 N. W. 241, Reversing on rehearing 59 Minn. 188, 28 L. R. A. 609, 60 N. W. 1095, holding delivery of policy with knowledge of other insurance waiver of provision avoiding policy unless consent indorsed thereon; McElroy v. British American Assur. Co. 36 C. C. A. 623, 94 Fed. 998, holding knowledge of solicitor procuring insurance of intention of applicant to effect other insurance estopped company; Kahn v. Traders Ins. Co. 4 Wyo. 464, 62 Am. St. Rep. 47, 34 Pac. 1059, holding local agent's oral consent to additional insurance on delivering policy estopped company; Burnham v. Greenwich Ins. Co. 63 Mo. App. 88, Reaffirming on second appeal 56 Mo. App. 590, holding local agent could orally waive condition as to further insurance.

— As to ownership, alienation, and encumbrances.

Cited in Hozae Ins. Co. v. Gibson, 72 Miss. 64, 17 So. 13, holding local agent could waive sole ownership of property; St. Paul F. & M. Ins. Co. v. Parsons. 47 Minn. 356, 50 N. W. 240, holding agent could orally waive transfer of title and sale on mortgage foreclosure; German Ins. Co. v. Gray, 43 Kan. 506, 8 L. R. A. 77, 19 Am. St. Rep. 150, 23 Pac. 637, holding general agent could orally waive provision respecting encumbrances; McElroy v. British America Assur. Co. 36 C. C. A. 623. 94 Fed. 998, holding knowledge by agent of encumbrance by applicant estopped company; Bosworth v. Merchants' F. Ins. Co. 80 Wis. 396, 49 N. W. 750, holding oral consent by agent procuring insurance, to additional. encumbrance, a waiver of condition.

As to premiums.

Cited in Wilkins v. State Ins. Co. 43 Minn. 178, 45 N. W. 1, holding waiver by local agent of immediate payment of premium not prevented by condition against L. R. A. AU.-VOL. I.-3.