« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
company do not make and maintain such fence, if harbor commissioners of that State, “no contract or their engine or cars shall kill, maim or destroy any obligation entered into by the commissioners, which cattle or other domestic animals, when they stray upon creates a liability or authorizes the payment of money, their line of road where it passes through or alongside is valid and of binding force, unless the same is signed of the property of the owners thereof, they shall pay by all the conimissioners and countersigned by the to the owner or owners of such cattle or other domes- secretary of the board.” Plaintiffs entered into a contio animals a fair market price for the same, unless the tract with the board, the entire board concurring, and owner or owners of the animals so killed, maimed or performed it on their part. The board refused tho destroyed shall be negligent or at fault.” Held, that a payment agreed upon, on the ground that plaintiffs' company owning a railroad is not exempted from lia- claim was an equitable one only. Tho Legislature of bility for the destruction of cattle by the fact that its the State passed a special act authorizing tho board to road is leased. A strictly literal interpretation of the audit and pay such annount as plaintiffs should be statute might exempt both the lessor and the lessee equitably entitled to for their work and materials furfrom liability, as the statute does not in terms provide nished under the contract. Held, that the board for a case in which one company owns and another could, by a majority vote, audit and pay plaintiffs: operates a railroad. The duty, however, of fencing claim, and the concurrence of all three of the commisdevolves upon the company owning tho road; and if sioners was not necessary for that purpose. The auit leases the road in an unfenced condition to be ope- thority exercised by the board in this case was given rated by another company, it is liable within the spirit, to them by a special act, and it is nowhere provided in if not within the letter, of the law to the same extent said act that the concurrence of all three of the memas it would be if its instead of its lessee's engine and bers of the board shall be necessary for the proper cars had run over the plaintiff's cattle. As was said exercise of such authority. In People v. Nichols, 52 N. in Tracy v. Troy & Boston R. Co., 38 N. Y. 437, in | Y. 478, the common-law principle on this subject is reference to a similar statute: "The passage of this stated. In that case the court had under consideraact being induced by public considerations, and its tion an act of the Legislature appropriating $20,000, or purpose being to protect the travelling public and the so much thereof as might be necessary, for the purchase owners of domestic animals along tho line of their of certain relics of George Washington, to be paid road, it sbould receive a liberal construction to effectu- only upon the certificate of three persons named ate the benign purpose of its framers. A rigid and therein. Held, that a certificate signed by two of the literal reading would in many cases defeat the very persons named, stating that the third met with them object of the statute, and would exemplify the maxim but refused to join in the certificate, was sufficient. that 'the letter killeth, while the spirit keepeth alive.' The court say that Grindley v. Barker, 1 Bos. & Pul. Every statute ought to be expounded, not according 229, is in point as to the general rule. Eyre, C. J., to the letter, but according to the meaning. Qui hæret there said: “I think it is now pretty well established in litera hæret in cortice. Dwar. on Stat. 695. And that where a number of persous are intrusted with the intention is to govern, although such construction powers not of mere private confidence, but in some may not in all respects agree with the letter of the respects of a general nature, and all of them are regustatute. Plowd. 205. The reason and object of a larly assembled, the majority will conclude the minorstatute are a clue to its meaning (Dwar. on Stat. 695), ity, and their act will be the act of the whole.” The and the spirit of the law and the intention of its cases hold that arbitrators, to determine controversies makers are diligently to be sought after, and the letter between individuals, are engaged in matters of private must bend to these. 6 Bac. Abr. 384 (6th ed.), London, concern. Green v. Miller, 6 Johus. 39. The same 1807; Kent's Com. 465; Smith's Com. on Stat., 709, principle was recognized by the Court of King's Bench 710. In Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Kanouse, 39 Ill. 272, in the case of The King v. Beeston, 3 T. R. 592, which which was au action against the lessees of the road, arose under the statute of George I, that enables the tho court says: “In the case before us, admitting it church wardens and overseers to contract for the prowas the duty of the first party to the agreement (the viding for the poor. It was held that it was not necescompany owning the road) to fence this road, that they sary that all the churchwardens and overseers should would be liable for this injury had they been sued, concur, as the contract of the majority would bind there can be no question.” And in Toledo, etc., R. the rest. When appraisers act between individuals Co. v. Rumbold, 40 Ill. 143, the same court said, in an and the State, it is a matter of “public concern,” and action against the lessors of the same road: “It was a majority act as the whole when all have met. Ez the duty of appellants to have fenced the road, and parte Rogers, 7 Cow. 526. Tallcott v. Blanding. Opinpublic safety demands that they should be held liable ion by Morrison, C. J. for all damages resulting from the neglect to fence it. [Decided March 10, 1880.] And the same policy would require that the Illinois Central (the lessee) should be held responsible for pre- MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS REsuming to use the road of another company fenceless
PORTS.* and unprotected. Either company would be liable for the injury. Redfield, in a note to Parker v. Rensselaer
CORPORATION & Sar. R. (0., 16 Barb. 315, in which it was held that
- WHEN LIABLE TO OFFICER OF, FOR the defendant, being the lessee of the road upon which
SERVICES. – To entitle a president or director of a corthe injury was committed, was not liable under the poration to recover for services rendered his corporastatute, says the only question in regard to the sound
tion, he must prove an express contract of employment, ness of the decision is, whether both companies were
if the services for which he claims compensation are not chargeable with negligence - the one for suffering within the line and scope of his duties as president
or the road to be used, and the other for using it in that director. But if a president or director of a corporacondition. 1 Redf. on Railw. 618 (5th ed.). Fontain v.
tion renders service to his corporation which are not Southern Pacific Railroad Co. Opinion by Sharp
within the scope of, and are not required of him by stein, J.
his duties as president or director, but are such as are [Decided May 7, 1880.]
properly to be performed by an agent, broker or attor
ney, he may recover compensation for such services STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION - SPECIAL ACT CONTROLL- upon an implied promise. See Angell & A. on Corp., ING GENERAL-MAJORITY OF OFFICIAL BOARD ACT IN $ 317; Chandler v. Monmouth Bank, 1 Green (N. J.), ABSENCE OF DIRECTION OTHERWISE. - By a provision of the general statutes of California relative to the
* Appearing in 49 Maryland Reports.
Union, converting joint tenancies at the common law MR, GODDARD'S original treatise has received
260; Henry v. Rutland & Burlington R. Co., 27 Vt. 435; give the particular shares which the testator had in his Hall v. Vermont & Mass. R. Co., 28 id. 408; New possession at the time, the legacy must be construed York & New Haven R. Co. v. Ketchum, 27 Conn. 181; as general, and not specific. According, then, to well Evans v. City of Trenton, 4 Zabr. 769. Agency for settled rules of construction, in order to constitute a a corporation is not required to be shown by a resolu- specific legacy, it is necessary for tho testator to distion of the board of directors or other written evi- tinguish or identify the stock or thing given by saying dence, but it may be inferred from facts and circum- stock now in my possession, or now standing in my stances. Union Bank v. Ridgely, 1 H. & G. 326; 1 Md. name, or some other equivalent expression, marking Chan. Dec. 398; Elysville Man. Co. v. Okisko Co., 5 the corpus of the stock bequeathed, and showing the Md. 159; N. C. Railway Co. v. Bastian, 15 id. 501; testator meant that identical stock, and no other Bank of United States v. Dandridge, 12 Wheat. 69. should pass to the legatee. See upon the subject: Santa Clara Mining Association of Baltimore v. Mere- Purse v. Snaplin, 1 Atkyns, 414; Bronsdon v. Winter, dith. Opinion by Grason, J.
Ambler, 57 ; Avelyn v. Ward, 1 Vesey, Sr., 424; Sibley HUSBAND AND WIFE - CONVEYANCE OF LAND TO
v. Perry, 7 Vesey, Jr., 522; Webster v. Hale, 8 id. 410; THEM MAKES TENANTS IN ENTIRETY. - By the common
Gillaume v. Adderly, 15 id. 384; Iunes v. Johnson, 4 id. law of England which is the law of this state, except 568. Dryden v. Owings. Opinion by Robinson, J where it has been changed or modified by statute, a conveyance to husband and wife does not constitute them joint tenants, nor are they tenants in common,
NEW BOOKS AND NEW EDITIONS. They are in the contemplation of the common law but one person, and hence they take, not by moieties, but
GODDARD'S LAW OF EASEMENTS. the entirety. They are each seized of the entirety and
A Treatise on the Law of Easements. By John Leybourn the survivor takes the whole. 2 Black. Com. 182; Litt.
Goddard, Esq., of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law. Tenures, $ 291; Coke Litt. 187; Cruise's Dig. 492; 1
Much enlarged from tho second English edition of 1877, Trest. Est. 131, 132; 4 Kent's Com. 362; 1 Washb. Real by Edmund H. Bennett, LL.D., Professor of Law in the Prop. 672; Dias v. Glover, 1 Hoff. Ch. 71; Stuckey v. Boston University. Boston: Houghton, Mimin & ComKeefe's Ex'r, 26 Peun. St. 397. Similar statutes to our pany, 1880. Pp. lviii, 542. own exist in a large number of the States of the
R. into tenancies in common, except where in the instru
high encomiums from the English bench. It
divides the subject into five branches, namely: the ment it is otherwise expressly declared, and the invariable construction has been that they do not apply to
nature of easements, the modes of acquiring them; or affect the peculiar estate taken by husband and
the mode and extent of enjoyment; the disturbance wife, under a deed to them jointly. Rogers v. Ben
and its remedy; how they may be lost and extinson, 5 Johns. Ch. 431; Jackson v. Steveus, 16 id. 110; guished. Each is treated generally, and subsequently, Shaw v. Hearsey, 5 Mass. 5:21; Brownson v. Hull, 16 specifically, as applicable to the different easements of Vt. 309; Thornton v. Thornton, 3 Rand. 179; Diver v.
air, light, support, water-courses, and ways. Mr. BenDiver, 56 Peun. St. 106; 4 Kent's Com. 362; 1 Bish.
nett's additions have been very important, as the
American doctrine as to light and air differs widely Mar. W., S 615; Bates v. Seely, 46 Penn. St. 218; Far. & Mec. Bk. of Rochester v. Gregory, 49 Barb. 155. Mc
from the English. He has added about 100 pages, and Curdy v. Canning, 64 Penn. St. 39. Marburg et al. v.
cited some 500 new cases. His high reputation is a Cole. Opinion by Alvey, J.
guaranty that this labor has been conscientiously and
intelligently performed, and from our own examinaWILL-CONSTRUCTION
tion we find that the ground is well covered. The Courts lean against construing a legacy to be specific,
work stands as the latest on the subject in either and have gone so far as to say that in no case ought a England or America, and this fact alone must recomwill be so construed unless the language imperatively mend it to the practical lawyer. It has moreover the requires it. In case of a bequest generally of stocks, merit of being a critical and excursive treatise, and or of a sum of money in stocks without further ex
not a mere digest. Tho subject is of prime practical planation and without more particularly referring to importance, and beside is one of the most interesting or marking the corpus of the identical stock, the fact to the scholar. The English prescription act is added, that the testator possessed such stock at the time of
and there are an ample table of contents, table of cases the execution of the will is not sufficient to justily cited, and general index. The volume is elegantly the court in declaring the legacy to be specific. In or- printed on fine paper, and well bouud. der to constitute a specific legacy it is necessary for the testator to identify the property bequeathed. A
XVII AMERICAN DECISIONS. testator by his last will and testament bequeathed as follows: "I give and bequeath to Virginia M. Owings, This volume contains selections from 5, 6 T. B. Mon eight thousand dollars in State of Maryland bonds." roe, 6 Martin, N. S., 5 Greenleaf, 1 Bland's Chancery, 6 Among the assets of the testator were found eight Pickering, 4 New Hampshire, 4 Halsted, 7 Cowen, 1 thousand dollars in State of Missouri bonds, and these Devereux's Law, 3 Ohio, 17 Sergeant & Rawle, 4 Mcwere the only State of Missouri bonds owned by testa-Cord, 1 Martin and Yerger. There are important notes tor. Held, not a specific legacy. The general rule to on the following topics: conflict of laws relating to be deduced from the cases is that in a bequest gener- age of majority; effect of executors' covenants in ally of stocks, or a sum of money in stocks, without their own conveyances; waiving tort; compensation further explanation, and without more particularly of trustees; absolute deed and agreement to reconvey ; referring to or making the corpus of the identical when apparent principal may show himself to be a stock, the fact that the testator possessed such stock surety; exemption from seizure under distress; reat the time of the execution of the will is not suficient citals in tax deeds as evidence; acknowledging receipt to justify the court in declaring the legacy to be spe- of consideration in deed; reasonable time, when a quescific. Thus in Robinson v. Addison, 2 Beav. 515, where tion of law; what are fixtures; when conviction of the testator had fifteen and a half of Leeds and Liver- felony bars other prosecutions. The series is now being pool Canal shares, and bequeathed five and a half issued rapidly, and grows in importance with every shares in the Leeds and Liverpool Canal to A, and five volume. Its completion is now assured, and we to B, and five to C, it was held that inasmuch as there do not see how any lawyer can well afford to do withwas no reference in the will showing an intention to out it.
REDMAN'S LAW OF RAILWAY COMPANIES.
NOTES. A Treatise on the Law affecting Railway Companies as Car
riers of Goods and Live Stock. By Joseph Haworth ked- E forgot last week, in connection with our correman, of the Middle Temple, Esquire, Barrister-at-Law.
spondent's letter about “Contracts to SatisfacSecond edition. London: Reeves & Turner, 1880. Pp. tion," ante, 20, to explain ourselves. What puzzled us
was not the position of the appellate court, as reported A neat and concise treatise for quick reference, in 45 Conn., but to see how the trial court, in the face especially adapted to the English market. It contains of the decision of the appellate court, in 44 Conn., the English statutes concerning railway traffic, includ- could have rendered the judgment they gave on the ing that of 1873, and since the former edition two new trial; for it is scarcely conceivable that the facts chapters have been added on Passengers' Luggage and could meantime have wheeled about. Perbaps “T. C. the Liability of Railway Companies as Warehousemen. J." can explain this It will be useful to our lawyers as affording a succinct and late view of English statutes and decisions from
We regret to learn that Mr. Grattan, the old and an English standpoint.
well-known reporter of the Virginia Court of Appeals, is in feeble health. He has completed his labors to Feb. 19, 1880, and announces that these will be his last.
His familiar name and faithful service will be missed. CORRESPONDENCE.
Among other valuable matter, the Virginia Law
Journal for July contains a leading article on ImpeachCAN AN ASSIGNEE FOR CREDITORS SET ASIDE HIS AS- | ment of Witnesses. - Judge W. R. Staples, of the SIGNOR'S FRAUDULENT TRANSFER?
Virginia Court of Appeals, writes us: “I desire to
congratulate you on the ability with which the JOUR-1 To the Editor of the Albany Law Journal:
NAL is conducted, and the reputation it has established Does chap. 314, Laws 1858, give to a voluntary as- throughout the country In this State it stands designee the right to attack for fraud as against credit- servedly high both with the bench and the bar." ors a previous transfer by the assignor? This question is an important one since the repeal of the Bankrupt The most extensive and important enterprise in legal Act, and yet I cannot find that it has ever been de- reporting in this country is that of the West Publishcided by our courts.
ing Company, at St. Paul, Minn. We have received The statute is referred to in Fort Stanwix Bank v. the 1st volume of the new series of their North-western Leggett, 51 N. Y. 552, 554, but this question receives no Reporter, containing 1,089 pages and 337 cases in full
, discussion. Miller v. Halsey, 4 Abb. (N. S.) 28, does being all the decisions of the Supremo Courts of Min-' not touch this point. The dictum, at page 33, relates nesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska avd only to the fraud of the assignor in retaining and con- Dakota, from April 26, 1879, to August 30, 1879. These' cealing assets from the assignee. I am aware that are issued in weekly parts, and give the opinions, as Burrill in his work on Assignments, and Bishop in his soon as filed, at $5 a year. The price of this volume book on Insolvent Debtors, state that this statute ap- is $2.50. In addition, this company issue supplements plies to cases of voluntary assignments, but they cite of the same character, giving tho full opinions of the no authorities supporting it.
Supreme Courts of Ohio, Illinois, Missouri, Indiana, Previous to this statute it was well settled that a Kentucky and Kansas, at $3 a year each, separately, voluntary assignee could not set aside such transfers, or with the Reporter, as follows: Reporter and one nor receive the fruits of them after they were set supplement, $8; Reporter and two supplements, $11; aside by creditors. Brounell v. Curtis, 10 Pai. 211, 219; | Reporter and three supplements, $14; Reporter and six Browning v. Hart, 6 Barb. 91. The reason given is supplements, $15; including indexes, tables of cases that the assignee took only such rights as the assignor and postage. They also issue, in like manner, the had, and of course the assignor could not impeach Federal Reporter, giving the opinions in full of all the such transfers.
Federal Circuit and District Courts througbout the The Legislature, undoubtedly, had the power to give United States, at $10 a year. The editing and publishthis right to voluntary assignees, however unwise it ing are well done, and tho enterprise deserves the may be to exercise that power. But it seems to me success which we are informed it meets. clear that the plain intent of the act referred to is to give this right to those assignees only that are ap- Several days ago a white man was arraigned before a pointed by the court under the insolvent act. 2 R. S., colored justice, down in the country, on charges of p. 21, $ 27. The second section omits the word “as- killing a man and stealing a mule. “Wa'al," said the sigpee," and speaks only of "executors, administra- justice, “de facts in dis case shall be weįghed wid tors, receivers or other trustees" of a “deceased person, kerefulness, an’ if I hangs yer, 'taint no fault ob mine." or insolvent corporation, association, partnership or “Judge, you have no jurisdiction only to examine individual.” A voluntary assignee is nowhere called me." “Dat sorter work ’longs to the regular justice, a “trustee” of an insolvent. On the other hand it but yer see I have been put on as a special. A special was held in Ferriss v. Am. Ins. Co., 22 Wend. 586, that hez de right to make a mouf at Supreme Court if he such an assignee is not a “trustee of a debtor" within chuses ter.” “Do the best for mo you can, judge." the meaning of the statute regulating security for “Dat's what I'se gwine to do. I’se got two kinds of costs; but that an assignee appointed by the court un- law in dis court, the Arkansaw an' de Texas law. I der the insolvent act is such a trustee.
generally gives a man de right to choose fur hisself. If this statute applies to voluntary assignees, what a Now, what law does yer want, de Texas or de Arkantemptation it holds out to debtors to make fraudulent saw?” “I believe I'll take the Arkansas." transfers of property, then make a general assignment den, I'll dismiss you fer stealing de mule “Thank to an assignee of their own choosing who will lend you, judge.” “And hang you fer killing de manhimself to the trick of bringing suits, ostensibly to set “I believe, judge, that I'll take the Texas." " Well, them aside, but really to procure a decision upholding den, I'll dismiss you for killing de man —-" “You them, and which shall be conclusive on the creditors have a good heart, judge.” “An' hang yer for steal(4 Barb. 232), except they can prove the conspiracy be- ing de mule. I'll jus take de 'cashion here to remark tween the assignor and assignee.
B. dat de only difference 'tween the two laws is der way UTICA, July 1, 1880.
yer state de case.”- Little Rock Gazette.
The Albany Law Journal.
freedom from such connections, and says that if we are wise (though, as an American, he would be
proud to see us all under the Stars and Stripes), we ALBANY, JULY 24, 1880.
will remain unannexed as long as the corruption of public morality and the betrayal of high office to
ambition and gain continues as he has represented CURRENT TOPICS.
it and as Mr. Frost's case proves it to be.” The THE London Law Journal says of the recent de- American gentleman who could seriously utter such cision in the Tichborne claimant's
case: “It nonsense as this did well in carrying his wares to a can hardly be said that Regina v. Castro decides foreign market. Let not the hysterical editor of much, except, as Lord Justice James compendiously the high latitudes be alarmed. We have foolish citiexpressed it, that there is ‘nothing in the objec
zens enough without wishing to annex him. On the tions taken to the indictment. We think that there subject of annexation, Canada is always as nervous was something in' at least one of the points taken;
as the elderly lady at the siege in Don Juan, who and at all events, the argument is of interest to law- inquired, “when will the ravishing begin ?" Let yers, as going over very obscure ground seldom
the Gazetteer hide his fevered and timorous brow in traversed by so high an authority.” “We confess
the snows of Labrador, and shout his compatriot's that the judgment of the Court of Appeal on this
grievances to the inhabitants of the north pole, who point is disappointing in its tone. The reductio ad may possibly think him right. An esteemed correobsurdum seems to us to have been out of place.” spondent, who sends us this amusing extract, a law"It is not unreasonable that there should be a disyer of experience and high standing in Canada, tinct trial for every imposition of a distinct seven
writes us: “You will be better able to deal with it years." "It is fairly open to argument that the
than I, whose only means of judging are the expractice is in some cases hardly fair to the prisoner.” ceptionally learned and able opinions of the New The Solicitors' Journal says: “It does not seem to
York bench which appear in your columns." We us altogether absurd to contend that under these
assure our friend it is no more possible to deal seriwords there can be only one sentence on one con
ously with such midsummer madness as this, than viction, and that there can only be one conviction
with the ravings of a lunatic who should complain for this purpose at one and the same trial.” The
that the man in the moon was making faces at him. Law Times does not commit itself to an opinion, but says, “the lords justices were unusually severe
The Honorable George McCormick, attorney-genupon the principle upon which that case proceeded ” eral of Texas, has transmitted to the governor an - meaning the Tweed case. In the next breath it interesting report concerning the enforcement of the says, “it does not appear, indeed, that the ratio criminal law in that State. We extract the followdecidendi of that decision was clearly stated.” ing comparative statements of indictments aad con
victions for four years: The fool-killer should go at once to the office of
Indictments: 1875. 1877. 1878. 1879. the Montreal Gazette. In the issue of that precious
331 398 newspaper of July 13th is a long article, entitled
549 344 " Justice in the State of New York.” The text of
2,260 2,371 Arson.
30 26 24 19 the article is the pretense of one Frost, a native of England and a naturalized citizen of the United
100 82 90 79
53 53 States, attorney and counsellor of this State and
34 resident in New York city, that he has been unlaw
48 51 49 47 fully imprisoned on civil process for four years, and
99 85 258 155 Burglary.
176 175 that the judges have connived at the injustice, and
154 183 persistently denied him the writ of habeas corpus,
3,548 2,942 and issued stays and prohibitions and injunctions most wickedly. Frost does not tell why he is imprisoned, but he ought to know that every judge
Convictions: 1875. 1877. 1878. 1879. refusing him the writ of habeas corpus, when legally Murder.
88 71 122 115 applied for, is liable to forfeit $1,000 to him for Theft.
471 558 651 every refusal. We advise Frost to set this machinery Arson ..
5 in motion, and if he is unlawfully imprisoned, we Perjury.
1 10 will furnish him a lawyer to vindicate his rights. Rape...
9 16 But the Gazette continues: “An American gentle- Robbery.
8 13 24 9 man of position, probity and intelligence, says that Forgery.
9 17 19 in the State of New York almost every judge is a Burglary.
70 58 61 82 huckster who sells his decisions for money, for favor or for political influence, that few decisions are un
799 907 purchased and that were one-tenth of the rascality practiced by the judiciary told, it would not be " It will thus be seen," says the attorney-general, credited. In conclusion he congratulates us on our “that for the eight species of crime named there
VOL. 22.- No. 4.
were, in 1875, 4,515 indictments presented, and 1,177 The heathen Chinee has scored another victory. convictions had, being about one conviction to every In the cases of Ah Chong, Wong Hoy, Ah You, Foo four indictments. In 1877 there were 3,130 indict. Hoy, Foo Hee, and Ah Mee, in the Federal circuit ments and 641 convictions, being about one convic- for the district of California, 5 Pac. C. L. J. 451, it tion to every five indictments. In 1878 there were was held that a statute of California prohibiting all 3,548 indictments and 799 convictions, the ratio of aliens, incapable of becoming electors of the State, convictions to indictments being about the same as from fishing in the waters of the State, is unconstiduring the preceding year. For the year just past tutional and in conflict with the treaty with China. there were only 2,942 indictments for these crimes, The court distinguish McCready v. Virginia, 94 U. while there were 907 convictions, being nearly one
S. 341. They say: “Citizens of other States havconviction for every three indictments. This state- | ing no property right which entitles them to fish ment shows not only a decrease as to the number of against the will of the State, a fortiori, the alien, crimes committed, but also a corresponding increase from whatever country he may come, has none whatin the number of convictions had, and argues well
ever in the waters or the fisheries of the State. for those charged with the execution of the law, Like other privileges he enjoys as an alien by perbesides showing that crime is greatly on the decrease mission of the State, he can only enjoy so much as in our State.” It is noteworthy, however, that the the State vouchsafes to yield to him as a special decrease is mainly in the crime of theft. Murder privilege. To him it is not a property right, but in has not decreased, but comparing the last two years the strictest sense, a privilege or favor. To exclude with the first two, it has greatly increased, showing the Chinaman from fishing in the waters of the 893 as against 729. Is it possible that there is some State, therefore, while the Germans, Italians, Engfoundation for the colored judge's remark, which lishmen, and Irishmen, who otherwise stand upon we published last week, that in Texas they hang a the same footing, are permitted to fish ad libitum, man for stealing a mule, and only imprison him for without price, charge, let, or hindrance, is to premurder ? The convictions for murder of late, how
vent him from enjoying the same privileges as are ever, have more than kept pace with the increase of 'enjoyed by the citizens or subjects of the most the crime, and there can be no doubt that the good | favored nation;' and to punish him criminally for men of the State are seriously trying to render life fishing in the waters of the State, while all aliens of and property safe there.
the Caucasian race are permitted to fish freely in the
same waters with impunity and without restraint, It will interest the members of the profession in
and exempt from all punishments, is to exclude him
from enjoying the same immunities and exemptions this State to know that, at a recent meeting of the
"as are enjoyed by the citizens or subjects of the trustees of the State Library, a subject-index cata
most favored nation;' and such discriminations are logue of the law library was directed to be made.
in violation of articles V and VI of the treaty with The matter was brought to the attention of the trustees by a communication from Mr. S. B. Gris: privileges which are granted to other aliens, by
China, cited in full in Parrott's case. The same wold, the law librarian, in which he states that “there are at the present time upon the shelves of
treaty or otherwise, are secured to the Chinaman by
the stipulations of the treaty. Conceding that the the law library 13,500 volumes, and 2,500 trials and law pamphlets, which are not embraced in any cata
State may exclude all aliens from fishing in its logue available for use by readers in the library.
waters, yet if it permits one class to enjoy the privMr. Griswold proposes that the new catalogue “shall ilege, it must permit all others to enjoy, upon like contain not only the treatises and reports, but also
terms, the same privileges whose governments have civil and criminal trials, essays, opinions, arguments
treaties securing to them the enjoyment of all privand leading articles in the standard law periodicals, ileges granted to the most favored nation.” properly classified and arranged under their respect ive subjects.” It is also his intention to include in
NOTES OF CASES. the catalogue an index to the more important official reports on leading topics of legislation that are con- THE Vienna “ Juristische Blaetter " reports an imtained in the 14,000 volumes of State papers which portant decision on insurance law. A. had obform a part of the law library collection, thus ena- tained an insurance on the roofs of certain buildbling members of the Legislature to consult these ings, clothes, bedding, corn and household goods. volumes which now stand upon the shelves unused. Each item was insured for a certain amount, sepaIt is estimated that it will take the librarian two rately, but only one policy was issued. A fire ocyears to prepare the proposed catalogue. In view curred, and A. was afterward convicted of fraud of the increased labors of the librarian, Mr. H. E. attempted against the company, by concealing artiGriswold has been appointed an assistant in the law cles which he had saved, and claiming insurance library. The preparation of this catalogue could therefor, and by stating that other articles were not have been committed to more competent hands, destroyed, which he never possessed. One of the and the scheme proposed by Mr. Griswold is unique conditions of the policy (§ 26 ) was, that the same in usefulness. There is a vast amount of interest- should be wholly avoided, and the holder should ing and important matter now practically inaccessi- lose all claim for compensation, if he should be ble in legislative reports and law periodicals. found guilty of fraud in regard to the object in