THE CHICAGO LAW JOURNAL line of business find here the very best of is published on the first of each month and mailed to subscribers at the low price of $1.50 per annum, postage paid. facilities for learning Bookkeeping, Penmanship, Phonography, Type-writing and Telegraphy. But it is to the Law Department We will continue to give from sixteen to we would call special attention. The faculty eighteen pages of reading matter in each in this department consists of Wm. Hoynes, issue, which will consist chiefly of brief John Gibbons, O. J. Egbert, J. G. Ewing digests of recent decisions of the Court of and T. E. Howard, men of known ability last resort of the several states, and of the in the legal profession Daily lectures are delivered by the faculty. We qnote from the catalogue referring to this department as follows: "The regular course has been extended to a period of three years; the standard of studies has been raised to the most approved plane; and the lecture system has been substituted for the compulsory use of text United States, carefully selected, with a view to their practical importance, REPORTED ESPECIALLY FOR THE JOURNAL, or in American Law Periodicals, giving a syllabus of each case, together with the name, page and date of the Journal or RECORD where a full report of the case may be found. The purpose is to advise our patrons of questions decided in the books. It may now be confidently claimed latest cases of importance, and HOW and WHERE complete reports of the same may be obtained. Subscriptions may commence with any month in the year. TERMS. One copy one year, in advance... $1.50 Stu that no Law School in the country offers superior facilities for acquiring a thorough and practical knowledge of the law. dents of the Law Department pass through a course that qualifies them to undergo the most searching examination for admission 2.00 to the Bar in any part of the Union. No special preparation is requisite for matriculation. Any person who is 17 years of age, and has a fair English education, is eligible. Young men may enter the Department as students at any time during the year; though, of course, it is more disirable to do so at the beginning of a session. The diploma admits, without examination, to the Bar of .20 We continue to send THE JOURNAL to all subscribers until all arrears are paid and we are requested to stop it. CHICAGO LAW PUB. CO. THIS PAPER may be found on file at GEO. P. ROWELL & CO'S NEWSPAPER ADVERTISING BUREAU (10 Spruce Street), where advertising con tracts may be IN NEW YORK. Indiana." made for it The total expens, per session is stated to Federal Courts. Held that a discharge by be only $150. Having access to a large a State Court is no bar to an action by a Library in the institution, thus saving the creditor who is a nonresident of the State expense af text-books, these exceptional and has had no notice of or took no part in advantages are brought within the reach of the proceedings.-Rhodes v. Borden-Filed almost any one. May 5, 1885. -O OF SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA. SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO. MEDICAL BOOKS---WHEN ADMISSABLE AS BOND OF PUBLIC OFFICER-NEW DUTIES EVIDENCE-SCIENTIFIC AND HISTORICAL IMPOSED ON CITY CLERK-LIABILITY BOOKS.-Medical books are held not admis- HIS BONDSMEN.-Where the collection of sible as evidence in an action for personal license money was not within the scope of injuries, to show the extend and effect of the city clerks duties when he entered upon such injuries. Scientific and historical his office and gave his bond, but was subsebooks are prima facie evidence of facts of quently imposed upon him by ordinance of general notority. Where a medical expert the council, his bondsmen are liable for his is called as a witness and refers to certain default in these new duties imposed the books, the books may subsequently be ad- same as if they had been originally a part of mitted to contradict him.-Gallagher v. his duty.-Orman v. Pueblo.-Filed May Market St. R. R. Co.-Filed May 6, 1885. 8, 1885, SLANDER-SUFFICIENCY OF ALLIGATIONS IN THE COMPLAINT EXCESSIVE DAMAGES— SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA. refusal of a court to allow a general question is not material, if the facts sought to be discovered by it are brought out by other questions, and a judgment will not be reversed except for material errors. Where the complaint alleges the falsly REVERSAL OF JUDGMENTS--WHAT ERRORS and maliciously speaking the words "you are SUFFICIENT - GENERAL QUESTIONS.-The a thief; you make your money by stealing" this is sufficient. Such words are actionable per se. Plaintiff, in aggravation of damages, may show that he is a married man and has a family. Where there were strong mitigating circumstances $3000 is held to be excessive damages.-Rhodes v. Noglee-Filed April 29, 1885. ON A contract partly written and partly oral is held to be merely an oral contract, yet the written part may be introduced as evidence the same as any other writing tending INSOLVENT LAW-EFFECT OF DISCHARGE to establish the contract.-Tomlinson v. DEBTS DUE IN OTHER STATES. - In Briles-Filed May 13, 1885. AN Penniman v. Meigs, 9 Johns. 325; it was held that a discharge under the insolvent laws of New York was a bar to any action MORTGAGE-EFFECT OF CANCELING in that State, no difference where the con- OLD MORTGAGE AND SUBSTITUTING A NEW tract was made. In Blanchard v. Russell ONE-Upon the maturity of a mortgage it is 13 Mass. 1, it was held that a discharge agreed, by the parties thereto, that it shall be under the insolvent law of the State where extended, and in doing so the old mortgage the contract was made was a bar to an is canceled and a new one executed instead. action upon the same contract in another Held that the cancellation of the old and State. In Suydam v. Brooduox 14 Peters substitution of the new are contemporaneous 67. Held that a discharge under the insol- acts and that he lien acquired by and under vent law of a State cannot be pleaded to an the old mortgage is continued.-Pouder v. action by citizen of another State in the Ritzinger-Filed May 12, 1885. SUPREME COURT OF IOWA. excluded, when it feel upon sunday, applied PRACTICE-MOTION TO COMPEL ELEC- only when something was required to be TION-AUTHORITY OF WIFE ΤΟ EMPLOY done on the last day. In this case, nothing DOMESTIC.-The question of granting or being required to be done it should be inrefusing a motion to compel the plaintiff to cluded and the motion to dismiss was proelect between an allegation of an agreed perly overruled.-Conklin v. Marshalltown. price and an allegation of reasonable value-Filed April 24, 1885. of services, is within the discretion of trial court. Where a wife, living with her SALE-FAILURE TO DELIVER GOODShusband, employed a servant for ordinary MEASURE OF DAMAGES.-Where defendants domestic services, it will be presumed that contracted to deliver 9000 bushels corn she had authority to do so, without any within a specified time and only delivered a express authority from her husband-Wagner part, Held that in an action for damages v. Nagel-Filed May, 8, 1885. the plaintiff was entitled to recover and that the measure of damages was the difference between the purchase price agreed on and the highest price at which it might have been sold between the date when it should have been delivered and the commencement of this action.-Gilman v. Andrews.-Filed April 24, 1885. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE-INDICTMENT BA SED ON MINUTES OF TESTIMONY BEFORE A COMMITTING MAGISTRATE.—Where an indictment was found by a grand jury without the witnesses being produced and sworn, but simply by producing the minutes of the testimony taken before the committing magistrate, the defense objected to the testimony of those witnesses on the trial. The To WIDOW BY PROBATE COURT-Where the objection was overruled and the testimony admitted. Held that the testimony was properly admitted. That under Sec. 4273 of the code 1873 the indictment was good. -State v. Kepper-Filed April 21, 1885. ANTENUPTIAL CONTRACTS ALLOWANCE probate court construed and affirmed an antenuptial contract and made an order for the payment of money to her in accordance therewith. Held that if was error. The enforcement of an antenuptial contract belongs to a court of equity and not the probate court.-In Re Estate of Collins.— Filed April 24, 1885. SALE-WARRANTY--FALIURE TO EXAMINE RAILROAD COMPANY - LIABILITY FOR DAMAGE FROM WANT OF FENCING THEIR TRACK.—Where it Is the duty of a railway company to fence their track and they neglect to do it, they are liable for the killing GOODS.-Where a party purchased a kiln of of swine or cattle running at large, even though the swine are running at large contraly to law. Lee v. M. & St. L. R. R. Co.Filed April 24, 1885, brick and the seller warrants them "to be good brick and all right," and where the purchaser could not have learned of the bad condition of the brick without going on top of the kiln, Held that the purchaser was entitled to rely upon the waranty of the seller, and may offeset a claim for damages for breach of the warranty in an action to recover for the price of the brick.-Meikley v. Parsons-Filed April 23, 1885. PRACTICE-FILING A PETITION TEN DAYS BEFORE THE TERM EXCLUDING SUNDAYWhen the term commenced on the 10th day of December, and the 9th day of December fell upon sunday, a petition being filed on the 29th day of November, a motion was made to dismiss on the ground that it had not GAMBLING CONTRACTS-No INTENTION been filed ten days prior to the term. Held TO DELIVER GOODS sold-NotE GIVEN FOR that the statute requiring the last day to be MARGINS-VOID.-Parties doing business on EX the Chicago Board of Trade purchase provi- RAILROAD COMPANY RIGHT TO sions upon the order of and for a customer, CAVATE AND REMOVE sand from the right and the customer gives his note for amount oF WAY.-Where land has been deeded to required as margin. The deal being a loosing the company for a right of way and "for all one to the customer he refuses to pay the purposes connected with the construction, use note at maturity, and this action is brought to recover. Held that as neither party intended that the property purchased should be delivered, but a settlement had only in margins, the contract is illegal and void and no recovery can be had on the note.-1st Nat. Bank v. Oskoloosa Packing Co.-Filed they are liable to the owner for the damages. April 23, 1885. BAILMENT-DEPOSIT OF MONEY-LOSSLIABILITY OF BAILEE.-Where money was deposited with Merchants simply for safe keeping and a receipt given for the same, the money being stolen from the safe of the merchants, and an action brought by the depositor to recover payment, it is competent for the bailee to produce evidence that he held it only for the accommodation of the owner.-Keen v. Beekman.-Filed July 22; 1885. RAILROAD COMPANY-INJURY TO EMPLOYE -NEGLIGENCE OF CONDUCTOR.-Where the conductor of a freight train failed to give the usual signal to the engineer when passing a station, the engineer in looking out for the signal, was struck by an attachment to a wather-tank and was killed. Held that the company was not liable, as the negligence of the conductor was not the proximate cause of the accident.-Gould v. C. B. & Q. R. R. Co.-Filed July 22, 1885. and occupation of said railroad," the company is not authorized to take sand therefrom for the purpose of building a round house without compensating the owner there for. Where a meadow is destroyed by fire started through the negligence of a railwaycompany, The measure of damages is the amount of actual damage sustained. Vermilya v. C. M. & St. P. R. R. Co.-Filed July 22, 1885. SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS. OBLIGATION OF RAILROAD COMPANY TO FENCE THEIR TRACK-WHEN RELEASED FROM THE OBLIGATION.-A railroad company will be released from obligation to fence their track, where some paramount interest of the public intervenes, rendering it improper to fence the road, but no private interest will relieve them of the duty.4. T. & S. F. R. Co. v. Shaft.—Filed May 8, 1885. CRIMINAL LAW-CHARGING TWO OR MORE FELONIES IN ONE INDICMENT.—Two or more felonies may be joined in one indictment but they mustbe in separate counts. Where the defendant was charged with taking away a female under 18 years of age, from her father for the purpose of prostitution, there is a, joinder of two distinct offenses in one count, and the indictment is not good.-State v. Goodwin.-Filed May 8, 1885. RAILROAD COMPANY--INJURY TO EMPLOYE -LIABILITY OF COMPANY.-Where a brakeman about to uncouple cars in a moving train, was struck by a post which had been SALE IN FRAUD OF CREDITORs--Vendee's erected by the station agent for his own use, KNOWLEDGE OF THE TENDOR'S INSOLVENCY and of which the brakeman had no know--FRAUD IS NOT PRESUMED.-Where an ledge and was injured, it is held that the company was liable, as it was guilty of negligence in allowing the post to remain there. Kearns v. C. M. & St. P. R. R. Co.-Filed July 22, 1885. effort is made to set aside a sale on the ground of fraud, the mere fact that the vendee had knowledge that the vendor was largely in debt, will not vitiate the sale, although the vendor may have intended the Fraud will them, unless he can show express authority proven by of the president to sign said notes.-Mcburden of Lellace v. Detroit File Works-Filed May sale in fraud of his creditors. RAILROAD COMPANY LIABILITY FOR PERSONAL INJURY.-The plaintiff, a child MUNCIPAL CORPORATION--LIABILITY FOR two and a half years old, goes upon the track INJURY-SIDEWALKS KNOWN ΤΟ BE OUT and is injured by a passing train. Held that OF REPAIR.—The fact that a person travel- a child so young cannot be held to be a ling on a street knows that the sidewalk is trespasser in the sense that will forfeit his out of repair, does not bar his right to recover right of redress-Further, that it was proper for an injury sustained by reason of the bad for the jury to take into consideration the condition of the sidewalk. He is required how-fact that the railroad company had failed to ever to exercise care commensurate with the fence the track as required by law. The circumstances and avoid danger if possible, question of the negligence of the parents was but he is not bound to keep off the street a proper question for the jury.—Keyser v. because of the bad condition thereof. In- Chicago & G. T. Ry. Co.-Filed May 6, corporated cities are bound to keep their 1885. streets and sidewalks in reasonably good and safe condition.-Emporia v. Schindling.- SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA. 8, 1885. PRACTICE-BRACH OF CONTRACT-COUNTER CLAIM.-In an action for the breach of SUPREME COURT OF MICHIGAN. a contract, where the defendant pleads a PRACTICE- PROBATE COURT FILING counter claim his plea is a bar to the claim CLAIM AFTER THE LIMITATION OF THE that defendant has not performed the conSTATUTE HAS RUN.-Where the time limited tract. Where it is agreed between the parties by statute for filing claims against the estate to a contract that a third party shall decide of a decedent has expired, but where the when the contract is executed, the bona fide estate has not been settled and closed up, decision of that party is binding.—Trainor it is held error to deny a motion to revive v. Wouman.-Filed June 27, 4885. the commission on claims and allow a petitioner to present his claim against the estate.-Hart v. Judge-Filed May 6th Grantee-Devise--ReformatiON OF DEED 1885. MISDESCRIPTION IN DEED-DECEASE OF -In the conveyance of 40 acres of land in the deed it was described as the East 40 cuted. The mistake is not discovered until after the death of the grantee. In his will a like mistake was made, in which he devised the West 40. Upon a hearing, all parties in interest being present, it is ordered that the deed be reformed to conform to the intention of the parties.-Christman v. Colbert.— Filed July 8, 1885. CORPORATION-POWER OF PRESIDENT TO when it should have been the West 40. A SIGN PROMISSORY NOTE-CONSIDERATION—like mistake was made in the mortgage exeA partnership bussiness is transfered to a corporation formed for the purpose, and the partners become the principal stockholders in the new corporation, and one of the partners becomes president. After the corporation is duly formed and commenced business the president takes up some notes heretofore made by the firm, which were not yet due, and makes the note of the corporation instead. Held that the party taking the corporation 'notes cannot recover on SALE FOR TAXES-PAYMENT FOR ALTERNATE YEARS.--Where the taxes on land are |