« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
as the legislative discretion may devise. That discre- contained a stipulation that the insurance might be tion can no more be bargained away than the power terminated at any time at the request of the assured, itself. Boyd v. Alabama, 94 U. S. 650.
the company only retaining customary short rates; Since we have already held, in the case of Bartemeyer also, that if any change took place in the title or posv. Iowa, that as a measure of police regulation, looking session, the policy should be void. Without the to the preservation of public morals, a State law pro- | knowledge of the company, the owner sold and conhibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating veyed the property and satisfied the mortgage. Held, liquors is not repugnant to any clause of the Constitu- that a subsequent assignment of the policy by the tion of the United States, we see nothing in the pres- mortgagee to the purchaser, and a verbal agreement ent case that can afford any sufficient ground for dis- between the latter and an agent of the company, harturbing the decision of the Supreme Court of Massa- ing power to make contracts and issue policies, that chusetts.
such assigned policy shall have the force and effect of Of course, we do not mean to lay down any rule at a new policy to the purchaser, will bind the company. variance with what this court has decided with re- Amazon Insurance Co. v. Wall (Court). Decided June gard to the paramount authority of the Constitution 4, 1878. and laws of the United States relating to the regula
SLANDER. tion of commerce with foreign nations and amongst 1. Evidence: charge of want of chastity: specific imthe several States, or otherwise. Brown v. Maryland, moral acts.-In an actiou of slander by a woman, 12 Wheat. 419; License Cases, 5 How. 504; Passenger where the alleged defamatory words impute to her a Cases, 7 id. 283; Henderson v. Mayor of New York, 92 want of chastity, specific acts of sexual intercourse U. S. 259; Chy Lung v. Freeman, id. 275; Ruilroad Co. by her cannot be given in evidence, for any purpose, v. Van Husen, 95 id. 465; etc., etc. That question under the issue made by a general denial. Duval v. does not arise in this case.
Davey (Com.). The judgment was affirmed.
2. Generul reputation of plaintiff for unchastity may be shown.-Where the slanderous words set out in the
petition charging the plaintiff, a female, with a want RECENT AMERICAN DECISIONS.
of chastity, under such issue it is competent, in mitiSUPREME COURT OF OHIO. SUPREME COURT COM
gatiou of images, to show that plaintiff's general MISSION OF OHIO.*
reputation for chastity at and prior to the speaking of the words was bad. (Dewitt v. Greenfield, 5 Ohio, 225,
overruled.) Ib. Decided May 29, 1878. 1. Equity will not relieve against mere moral urong.
STATUTE OF LIMITATION. -The fraud against which equity will grant relief, notwithstanding the statute of frauds, consists in the
Does not apply to foreign judgment.—The limitation refusal to perform an agreement upon the faith of,
of ten years prescribed by the 18th section of the Code which the plaintiff has been misled to his injury, or
of Civil Procedure is not applicable to an action the defendant has secured an unconscionable advant
brought on a judginent rendered in another State or age, and not in the mere moral wrong involved in a
Territory. Fries v. Mack (Com.). Decided June 5,
1878. refusal to perform a contract, which, by reason of the statute of frauds, cannot be euforced by action. Wat801 v. Erb (Com.).
RECENT BANKRUPTCY DECISIONS. 2. Failure to fulfill verbal agreement as to purchase of land: where equity will not interfere.-A, in pursuance
ACTION. of a parol agreement for that purpose with B, who de
To obtain possession of property: inability to give sired to become the owner of a certain tract of land
bonds : injunction.—The assignee cannot maintain a adjoining his, and for personal reasons was not to be
suit in equity to obtain possession of property alleged known in the transaction, but was to save A harmless
to belong to the estate; the remedy is at law. Where from all loss or trouble, purchased the land, made a
the party in possession claims title to the property, cash payment thereon, took the title in fee to himself
the inability of the assignee to give the requisite as per the agreement, and gave to the seller his own
bonds in an action of replevin will not entitle him several promissory notes and mortgage back, to secure
to an injunction to prevent its removal. U. S. Dist. the deferred payments. After contracting for the
Ct., Oregon. In re Oregon Iron Works, 17 Nat. Bankr. laud, but before making the cash payment, or receiv
Reg. 404. ing the title, A repudiated his agency and gave notice
CONFLICT OF LAW. to B that he would purchase for himself with his own
Promissory note negotiated through broker: sale to money, and refused to receive from B the money to make the cash payment, but consummated the pur
party in another State. --The bankrupts made cer
tain notes for the accommodation of W. & Co., who chase for himself. Held, that the breach of the ver
placed them in the hands of brokers for sale as busibal contract to convey to B is not such a fraud upon him as authorizes a court of equity to decree a trust
ness paper. The brokers then wrote to the New Ha
ven Trust Company, inclosing the notes and asking in the land and compel its execution. Ib. Decided
if it would take them. The Trust Company returned June 5, 1878. FIRE INSURANCE.
a check on a bank in New York for the amount of the
notes less a discount of ten per cent. Held, that the Condition avoiding policy in case of change of posses
notes were governed by the law of New York; that sion may be waived by verbal contract of company's
they had their inception when negotiated to the Trust agent.-A policy of insurance issued to a mortgagee
Company and are usurious and void. U. S. Dist. Ct.,
S. D. New York. In re Dodge, 17 Nat. Bankr. Reg. * To appear in 30 and 31 Ohio St. Reports. From E. Dewitt, Esq., State Reporter.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT ABSTRACT. Entries on books of bankrupt: making notes payable
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. to another party: claim proved against estate.-Entries
Cily ordinance forbidding steam on railroads in city: of accommodation notes in the books of the bank
validity of.-A railroad company chartered by the State rupt against the payee will not estop the bankrupt nor
of Virginia, and permitted by the common council of his trustee from disputing the claim of a holder of
Richmond to construct its road into said city and to such notes. The making of notes payable to another
use locomotives propelled by steam thereon, and party has never been held to be such a representation
which had made certain improvements asked for by as estops the maker from showing that they were ac
the city as a condition and consideration for the concommodation paper, even in favor of one to whom
struction and use of its road, thereafter changed its the payee has represented them to be business paper
main line to another route. Thereafter the common and who took them in good faith on such representa
council passed an ordinance forbidding the use of tions. The trustee is not estopped from disputing the
steam by said company in certain parts of the city. claim of the holder of the notes, by reason of his hay
The charter of the company in terms subjected it to ing proved them against the estate of the payee in
the government of the city in respect to the use of the bankruptcy, where the holder has not upon the faith
road when constructed. Held, that the ordinance was thereof parted with his money or changed his position
not invalid either as impairing the obligatious of a as to such notes. U. S. Dist. Ct., S. D. New York.
contract or as depriving the company of its property In re Dodge, 17 Nat. Bankr. Reg. 504.
without due process of law, or as denying the com
pany of the equal protection of the laws. Judgment FRAUD.
of Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia affirmed. Sale by one partner to another where firm is insolvent, Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Co., not.-At the advice of one of their creditors, V. sold
plaintiff in error, v. City of Richmond. Opinion by out his interest in the firm to his partner B., B. agree
Waite, C. J. ing to pay all the firm debts and giving V. his notes for
CRIMINAL LAW. $300. This was done upon the representation that the 1. Indictment under R S., $ 3.266, for illicit distilling creditor would in that event give time. Instead of so Under the provision of section 3266 of the United doing, however, he immediately entered judgment States Revised Statutes, an indictment charging that upon a warrant of attorney held by him, and levied the defendant “did kuowingly and unlawfully cause on the goods in B.'s possession. Afterward B. was and procure to be used a still, boiler, and other vessel, adjudicated bankrupt at the petition of the firm cred
for the purpose of distilling, within the intent and itors and V. Another creditor, G., who had obtained meaning of the Internal Revenue Laws of the United a judgment against the firm then levied upon the goods States, in a certain building, and on certain premises, held by the sheriff under the former levy. The as
where vinegar was manufactured and produced, against signee afterward recovered possession of the proceeds
the peace of the Uuited States and their dignity, and of the property levied upon. In a suit by G.'s as
against the form of the statute of the said United signee to establish a lien by virtue of his levy, held,
States in such case made and provided,” is insufficient; that the levy having been made after adjudication, no
it is not enough to charge the offense in the words of lien could attach unless the sale to B. was fraudulent
the statute. Held, also, that it is not essential to aver in fact, or by necessary construction of law, so that
in terms that the spirits distilled were alcoholic. On a the goods still remained firm assets and firm property.
certificate of division from U. S. Circuit Court, E. D.
United A sale of his interest for a valuable consideration by
New York. Judgment against defendant. one partner to the other, where the firm is insolvent,
States v. Simmons. Opinion by Harlan, J. does not of itself constitute fraud. U. S. Dist. Ct.. 2. Indictment under Revised Statutes, $ 3281.- One W. D. Michigan. Russell v. McCord, 17 Nat. Bankr.
count based upon section 3281 of the United States Reg. 508.
Revised Statutes charged that the defendant "did knowingly and unlawfully engage in and carry on the
business of a distiller, within the intent and meaning Debt due State.-The warden of the Clinton State
of the Internal Revenue Laws of the United States, Prison sold to the bankrupts certain merchandise
with the intent to defraud the United States of the which at the time was the property of the State, and
tax on the spirits distilled by him, against the peace,” proved the claim as a debt due him as agent and war
etc. Held, that this count contained an arerment of den of the prison. Held, that the debt was in fact a debt to the State and as such entitled to priority. U.
an unlawful act and was sufficient to authorize judg
ment thereon. Ib. S. Dist. (t., N. D. New York. In re Miller, 17 Nat.
DEFENSE. Bankr. Reg. 402.
Payment of debt due citizen of United States to Con
federate government not.- In an action for goods sold Expunging claim tainted with : accommodation paper : in 1861, the defendant set up that from 1861 to 1865 burden of proof.-Where an assignee in bankruptcy plaintiff was a resident of Pennsylvania, one of the moves to expunge a claim on the ground of usury, al. United States, and defendant was a resident of Virleging that a promissory note on which the claim is
ginia, which was under the government of the Coufounded was made or indorsed by the bankrupt for federate States, a belligerent at war with the United the accommodation of another person and took its in- States. That, by a law of the Confederate States, ception in the hands of the present holder, who ob- plaintiff's debt was sequestrated, and defendant, under tained the same at a discount of more than the lawful a penalty, compelled to pay the same to the Confederrate of interest, held, that the assigneo must show ate government. Held, no defense to the action. clearly that the note was accommodation paper. U. Order of Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia reS. Dist. Ct., S. D. New York. In re Many & Marshall, versed. Williams, plaintiff in error, v. Bruffy. Opinion 17 Nat. Bankr. Reg. 514.
by Field, J.
COURT OF APPEALS ABSTRACT.
not be held an acquiescence in an invisible line continued in the same course. Ib.
3. Adverse possession: mere claim of title does not constitute.-An owner of land claimed continually that the building of a neighbor was located over ou to his land. Held, not an adverse holding of the land built on. Ib. [Decided May 21, 1878. Reported below, 4 Hun, 428.]
To Court of Appeals of case ini olving less than $500: case involving title to real estate.-In order to authorize an appeal to the Court of Appeals, where the amount in controversy is less than $500, on the ground that the action is one affecting the title to real property or an interest therein, it is not sufficient that the action relates to real property, or in some way affects it, it must itself affect the title or an interest therein. Therefore an action to have an assessment on real property declared void does not affect the title to the property, and if the amount involved is less than $500 an appeal is not allowable. Appeal dismissed. Nichols v. Voorhis. Opinion per Curiam. !Decided May 21, 1878. Reported below, 9 Hun, 171.]
1. Judgment of, in courts of domicile of parties : decision of State court as to vulidity of its laws under its own Constitution conclusive. - Where a court of Louisiana authorized by valid statutes of that State to entertain actions for divorce under a law of that State, passed in 1870, gave judgment of divorce for acts committed in 1869, held, that the courts of this State would not pass upon the question whether the law mentioned was in valid under the Constitution of Louisiana and hold the judgment void. Judgment below affirmed. Hunt v. Hunt. Opinion by Fol
Discharges attachment by operation of law: attached debt paid may be recovered by assignee.-Under an attachment in a suit against one Yerkes, a debt due from defendant to Yerkes was seized. Bankruptcy proceedings had been commenced against Yerkes, but plaintiff knew nothing of them and paid the debt to the sheriff who levied the attachment. The bankruptcy proceedings were commenced within four months of the issue of the attachment. Held, that the bankruptcy proceedings dissolved the attachment by operation of law, and without any order of the court that the payment of the debt by defendant did not relieve him from liability therefor, and that the assiguee in bankruptcy of Yerkes could recover the amount of the debt from him. Judgment below af. firmned. Duffield, assignee, v. Horton. Opinion by Allen, J. [Decided April 2, 1878. Reported below, 10 Hun, 140.)
2. Jurisdiction : State courts judges of jurisdiction under their own laws.-Of their own jurisdiction, so far as it depends upon municipal laws, the courts of every country are exclusive judges. In pronouncing a judgment they of necessity decide in favor of their jurisdiction. It is conclusive if they have jurisdiction of the subject-matter. Ib.
3. Construction of statutes of a State: decision of State courts binding on other courts.-The decisions of the tribunals of State as to the true construction of the laws of their own sovereignty are binding on the Federal courts and upon the courts of other States. Ib.
CORPORATION. Liability of stockholder: extinguishment of .-Where a stockholder in a manufacturing corporation formed under the act of 1848, loaved money upon an indorsed note of the corporation to the extent of the amount of his stock, which note was prosecuted to judgment and an execution was returned unsatisfied, held, that the liability of the stockholder for the debts of the company was extinguished. Judgment below affirmed. Agate v. Sands. Opinion by Miller, J. [Decided May 21, 1878.]
4. Judgmenti in divorce against one domiciled in State valid without personal service.-In a suit for divorce a valid judgment in personam so as to effect the dissolution of the marriage contract which shall be prevalent everywhere may be rendered against a defendant not within the territorial jurisdiction during the progress of the suit, if that be the place of his citizenship and domicile, though process be served upon him only in some method prescribed by the laws of that jurisdiction as a substitute for personal service and though he has not voluntarily appeared. Ib. [Decided January 29, 1878. Reported below, 9 Hun, 622.]
ESTOPPEL. Giving undertaking for re-delivery in replevin estops denying possession -Some stone were lying upon ground leased by plaintiff. Defendants sent men who commenced work cutting and carving the stone. Plaintiff thereupon commenced a replevin action, and the sheriff took possession of the stone. Defendants gave a statutory undertaking in which it was set forth that the stone had been taken from their possession, and asking a re-delivery of them, and they were re-delivered. Held, that by giving the undertaking defendants were estopped from setting up that the stone had not been in their possession. Judgment below affirmed. Diossy v. Morgan. Opinion by Rapallo, J. [Decided May 21, 1878.]
1. Construction of: clause controlling details of description.-After particularly mentioning the boundaries, etc., of a tract of land conveyed, the description in a deed closed thus: “ The premises hereby intended to be conveyed being the east half- part of the farm whereon Johnson Babcock, now deceased, formerly lived," etc. Held, that this clause would have a controlling effect on the details of the description, and the deed would not convey any more than the east balf of the farm mentioned. Judgment below affirmed. Ousby v. Jones. Opinion by Folger, J.
2. Adverse possession: fence off of line.-Where a division fence was built off the true line, but did not extend along the whole line, and there was no fence or other visible line of demarkation between the adjoining premises, held, that an acquiescence by the adjoining owners in the location of the fence could
Conditions in policy as to description: reference to application not in company's possession.- A policy of fire insurance upon buildings contained a provision
TJEfe 18wing decisions were handed down Tuesday,
that applicants for insurance must state "the position, transact intelligently such business as he had to do, etc., of all contiguous buildings," and that the “survey, held, that a want of testamentary capacity was not description and representations shall be taken and shown. Judgment below affirmed. Horn v. Pullman. deemed to be a part of the policy and a warranty on Opinion by Andrews, J. the part of the insured.” The policy, after stating the
2. Undue influence: change of testamentary intention. several amounts insured upon different buildings, and
A change in testamentary intention, if made upon a the place where situated, added, “As per application
reason satisiactory to the testator, although it may on tile, No. 1:231." There was no application on file in
seem inadequate to a court investigating the question the insurance company's office, but in the office of the
of undue influence, furnishes of itself no ground for company's agents who issued the policy there was an
setting aside the will. The question in all such cases old application made by the owner of the property for
is, was the will the free act of a competent testator. insurance in another company of which they were also
An old man who lived with his grandson became imagents. The company issuing the policy in question pressed with the idea that his children did not wish never had the application and knew nothing of it.
him to live with them. His children very seldom Held, that the reference in the policy did not render
visited him, and his grandson and wife took care of the insured bound by the statements in the old appli
him. He frequently expressed great gratitude for his cation, and the company could not claim that the
grandson's care and attention and in his will gave the policy was void because of misstatements in such appli
bulk of his property to the grandson. So far as cation. Judgment below affirmed. Vilas v. New appeared he acted freely in what he did. Held, that York Central Ins. Co. Opinion by Miller, J.
there was no ground for refusing to admit the will to [Decided February 22, 1878. Reported below, 9 Hun,
probate. Ib. 121.]
[Decided January 29, 1878.] NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT. Extending time of payment: what is not: indorse
COURT OF APPEALS DECISIONS. ment: renewal notes.- Where it appeared that renewal notes were left by the maker at a bank for the purpose HE of taking up an indorsed note not yet due, held by the June 18, 1878: bank, and the bank officers objected that the renewal
Carroll v. Waydell, No. 257, judgment affirmed; on not indorsed by the indorser of the
opinion of court below.- Demarest v. Mayor, etc., other, and the maker told the bank officers to keep the
of New York, No. 246, judgment affirmed; opinion by notes and the indorser would come in in a day or two
Earl, J.-Dunlop v. Paterson Fire Ins. Co., No. 417, and indorse, and the note was accepted on that con
order affirmed; opinion by Folger, J.-Doyle v. dition. Subsequently a second renewal note, to take
Sharp, No. 241, judgment affirmed; opinion by Miller, the place of the first renewal note, was left with the
J.- Hawks v. Winans, No. 276, judgment affirmed; bank, the same promise made and the note accepted
no opinion. —Higgins v. Murray, motion for re-arguthereunder. No indorsement was made on the
ment, with $10 costs, denied; no opinion. - Huun v. renewal notes. Held, not an extension of the time of
N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co., No. 233, judgment afpayment of the indorsed note, nor a suspension of the
firmed; on opinion of court below.- - In re applicaright to prosecute the same so as to discharge the
tiou of Attorney-General v. Atlantic Mutual Life Ins. indorser. (Place v.Mcllwain, 38 N.Y. 96, distinguished.
Co., No. 402, order affirmed; costs out of the fund to Judgment below affirmed. Auburn City National
each party appearing at argument; opinion by FolBank v. Hensiker. Opinion by Miller, J.
In re petition of Rector, etc., of St. Mark's [Decided January 29, 1878.]
Church, No. 407, order affirmed; no opinion.SET-OFF.
Keilsy v. Dusenbury, motion to dismiss appeal denied; Right of municipality to set off claim that the people of no opinion. - Pfohl v. Simpson, No. 155, judgment the State may sue on.- Chapter 49 of the Laws of 1875 affirmed; opinion by Folger, J. – Randolph v. Bosdoes not deprive a municipality of the right to set off ton & Albany R. R. Co., No. 266, judgment affirmed; on an action a claim against the plaintiff although it no opinion.—Stuart v. Palmer, No. 141, judgment may arise out of a transaction which might be the sub- | affirmed; opinion by Earl, J.- Weller v. Hersee, ject of a suit in behalf of the people. The act gives a No. 256, judgment affirmed; no opinion. -Wbiton right of action to the State in certain cases, but it v. Spring, No. 253, judgment reversed and new trial does uot deprive a municipality of a right to bring an ordered, unless plaintiffs stipulate to reduce their reaction in the courts of this State to recover its funds covery in the sum of $566.21, and interest thereon or property unlawfully diverted, although proceedings
from June 6, 1872, in which event judgment as so in its behalf may be stayed under the provision of 2d modified affirmed, without costs to either party in this section. Judgment below affirmed. Wood v. Mayor court. Deductions to be made ratably from the sevof New York. Opinion by Andrews, J.
eral recoveries; opinion by Earl, J. [Decided May 21, 1878. Reported below, 7 Hun, 164.]
The following order was handed down on Friday, WILL.
June 14, 1878; 1. Testamentary capacity: old age and infirmities Ordered, That this court take a recess ou the 21st incident thereto not want of.- There is no presumption day of June instant, until Monday, the 16th day of against a will because made by a man of advanced age, September next, at 10 A. M., and that a new calendar nor can incapacity be inferred from an enfeebled con- be made for the session then to be held. The cases dition of mind or body. Therefore, where a testator undisposed of on the present calendar will be transof eighty-three was shown to have been subject to ferred to the new calendar without further potice; in disease for some time before making his will, to have other cases notice of argument must be filed with the had poor sight and a weakness of memory, but could clerk on or before the second day of September next.
NOTES OF RECENT DECISIONS. CONFLICT OF LAW: STATUTES HAVE NO EXTRA-TERRITORIAL FORCE.-Acting under authority of a statute
PROCEEDINGS OF THE REVISION COMMITTEE
OF THE SENATE.
of Arkansas, a probate court of that state ordered Aa meeting of the special committee of the Sen
ate of this State on the revision of the statutes, held in this city on the 17th inst., there were present Senators Samuel S. Edick, Edwin Hicks, and Charles Hughes, who constitute the entire committee.
On motion of Senator Hicks the following resolution was passed unanimously:
Resolved, First, That in the opinion of this committee it is not expedient that a new Code of Civil Procedure be enacted; but it is expedient that the Code of Civil Procedure now in force, as sought to be amended by the Legislature at the session which has just closed, be retained, with such further amendments, if any, in matters of detail, as may appear to be necessary upon a careful examination and review thereof, or as the result of the practical experience of the bench and the bar thereunder.
Secondly, That in the opinion of this committee the said Code of Civil Procedure should be completed so that it will contain the entire revised legislation of the State upon the subject of procedure in civil causes, and thereupon that the former statutes upon that subject should be repealed; for which purpose this committee will report at the next session of the Legislature a bill containing the vine supplementary chapters reported to the Legislature at the session which has just closed by the commissioners to revise the statutes, with such amendments as may appear to be expedient upon a careful examination and review thereof.
Thirdly, That for the purpose of assisting this committee in preparing such bills as may be necessary to carry out the objects above stated, the members of the bench and of the bar of this State are requested to furnish to any member of this committee any suggestions which may occur to them for amendments, either to the thirteen chapters of the Code of Civil Procedure now in force, or to the bine chapters proposed to be added thereto.
SAMUEL S. EDICK,
Chairman of the Committee.
and adjudged that the disability of non-age of G. be removed, “ so far as to authorize him to demand, sue for and receive all moneys belonging to him in the State of Missouri, in the hands of his curator or any other person, and to execute releases therefor in the same manner as if he was of full age." In a suit brought by G., in Missouri, against his curator, held, that the statute of Arkansas was inoperative in Missouri, and that the infant could not sue in his own name. Sup. Ct., Missouri, October Term, 1877. State v. Bunce (Cent. L. J.).
CONTRACT: PROMISE TO PAY DEBT WHEN ABLE. -A debt due plaintiff from defendant was barred by a discharge under the insolvent laws of Massachusetts. Thereafter defendant wrote plaintiff this: “Your account will certainly be paid if I live.” Held, to be no more than a conditional promise by defendant to pay when he was able, and no action was maintainable without proof of ability to pay. Sup. Jud. Ct., Massachusetts, March, 1878. Randidge v. Lyman.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW : INJURIES TO STOCK BY RAILROADS: ACT UNCONSTITUTIONAL WHICH IMPOSES LIABILITY WITHOUT REGARD TO CIRCUMSTANCES OF KILLING.-An act which tixes an absolute liability on a corporation, to make compensation for injuries done to property in the prosecution of its lawful business, without any wrong, fault or neglect on its part, when under the general law of the land, no one else is liable under such circumstances, is not
of law, and is, therefore, void. Sup. Ct., Alabama, Dec. Term, 1877. Zeigler v. S. & N. R. R. Co.
CRIMINAL LAW: INDICTMENT: VARIANCE.-An indictment for the theft of a gelding is not sustained by proof of the theft of a ridgling, or partly gelded horse. Ct. App., Texas, May 15, 1878. Brisco V. State (Tex. L. J.).
CRIMINAL LAW: RAPE: FORCE NECESSARY TO CONSTITUTE.-The taking of improper liberties with a female, whereby her sexual passion is excited so as to render her unable to resist the solicitations of a man with whom she is, to allow carnal intercourse with her, no actual force being used, is not rape. Sup. Ct., California, April, 1878. People v. Royal (Cal. L. Rec.).
CRIMINAL LAW: ROBBERY: VENUE.-The defendant committed a robbery in Fayette county while being taken to Shelby county as a prisoner in charge of an officer, and the property was recovered from him in the latter county. Held, that he carried the property voluntarily into and could be lawfully indicted and tried in the latter county. Sup. Ct., Tennessee, April, 1878. Margerum v. State (Cent. L, J.).
CRIMINAL LAW: TRIAL: IN MISDEMEANORS WHEN PRISON ER NEED NOT PERSONALLY APPEAR: BAİL.In misdemeanor cases punishable only by fine, the defendant, if he has given bail, may appear by counsel, and the trial may proceed without his personal presence; and his counsel are not required to bring into court the money “to pay the fine and costs" to entitle him to a trial in his absence. Where a party charged with a misdemeanor punishable only by fine, appears by counsel, and not in person, a forfeiture of his bail bond cannot be legally taken. Ct. App., Texas, April 18, 1878. Neaves v. State (Tex. L. J.).
NEW BOOKS AND NEW EDITIONS.
ORDRONAUX'S JUDICIAL ASPECTS OF INSANITY. Commentaries on the Lunacy Laws of New York, and on
the Juutioial Aspects of Insanity at Common Law and in Equily, incluing Procedure. By John Ordronaux. LL. D., State Commissioner in Lunacy, Professor of Medical Jurisprudence in the Law School of Columbia College, etc. Published by John D. Parsons, Jr. Albany, 1878. E have here, in a neat octavo volume of five hun
dred pages, a manual suitable as a text-book for students, and convenient as a work of reference on its particular topic to members of both the professions, of Law and Medicine. The book may be consulted, with profit by all who have occasion to deal with questions of mental incapacity, either in the domain of civil or of criminal responsibility, or who desire, on behalf of the aflicted, to intelligently avail themselves of the restraints and safeguards which the laws of this State, in a spirit of almost paterual benevolence, throw around the persons and property of those who may be suspected or adjudged incapable of the assertion, maintenance or exercise of their own rights, or of the due observance of the rights of others, amid the excitements of every day life.
The work appropriately opens with an introduction and digest of adjudicated principles in the law of Insanity, a thing we believe never before attempted by any writer. It consists of a series of maxims of the first importance, fortified, where of a scientific nature, by citations of high medical authority, and where of a legal nature, by reference to the cases wherein the principle laid down has been judicially determined. A