READ THE FOLLOWING EXPRESSIONS OF APPROVAL. From JNO. BARTON PAYNE, Attorney and Counselor. CHICAGO, Feb. 25, 1886. GENTLEMEN: I have examined the CHICAGO LAW JOURNAL, and am much pleased. with the plan you have adopted. Your Journal places before the profession in a compact and convenient manner, the cream of the current decisions of the courts of last resort, in the important states of the union. I hope you may be abundantly successful. Respectfully, JNO. BARTON PAYNE. From JOHN GIBBONS, Attorney at Law. CHICAGO, Feb. 25, 1886. GENTLEMEN: As a reader of your LAW JOURNAL, it affords me great pleasure in commending it to the profession as a publication which should be liberally patronized. Its reviews of recent decisions are excelled by no other journal with which I am familiar. To a lawyer actively engaged in the practice, one number is worth the subscription price for a whole year. Very truly yours, JOHN GIBBONS. From HON. HENRY BOOTH, L. L. D., Dean of the Faculty of the UNION COLLEGE of Law. CHICAGO, Feb. 25, 1886. GENTLEMEN: Having examined several numbers of your LAW JOURNAL, I can cheerfully bear testimony to the excellence of your plan. The current decisions of the courts of last resort, in a majority of the states of the union, are given under appropriate heads in alphabetical order, for easy reference. A publication which renders this service for the profession monthly, at the trifling cost of $3.00 per annum, deserves, and will doubtless receive due encouragement. Very truly,. HENRY BOOTH. From COL. H. F. VALLETTE, Attorney and Counselor. CHICAGO, Feb. 26, 1886. GENTLEMEN: I have examined with great care the numbers of the CHICAGO LAW JOURNAL, heretofore issued by the Chicago Law Publishing Company, and have had to refer to it for index to cases that I was otherwise unable to find. The JOURNAL serves as a complete index to all the cases recently decided in the several states, which are of importance to a lawyer in active practice. It is well worthy of the patronage o the legal profession.. H. F. VALLETTE, firm of VAN ARMAN & VALLETTE. From DEWITT C. JONES, Attorney at Law. CHICAGO, Dec. 10, 1886. GENTLEMEN: I have carefully examined the December number of the CHICAGO LAW JOURNAL, and I verily believe such a publication will soon be regarded as an actual necessity by every practicing lawyer. In reading this number, I find a case announcing a principle which I have searched for in vain elsewhere, and being exactly in point, in a case I heve now in hand, its value to me at this time can hardly be estimated. It would be almost impossible for a lawyer to read your monthly collection of recent decisions without finding, in the course of a year, important cases which would be worth more than ten-fold the price of the Journal. Yours etc., DEWITT C. JONES. From W. L. SNELL, Attorney at Law. CHICAGO, Dec. 28, 1886. GENTLEMEN: Since subscribing for the CHICAGO LAW JOURNAL, the more I examine it the better I am pleased. In searching for authorities on any given subject, it is of great value, as it brings in review a large number of decisions in such brief space. I know of no publication so comprehensive and useful and yet so cheap. Resp'y, W. I. SNELL. From THOMAS E. WILSON, Attorney at Law. GENTLEMEN: Please send me which I have in some manner lost. numbers. January SANFORD FLA., March 15, 1886. number of the CHICAGO LAW JOURNAL, much of the JOURNAL to lose one of the Yours truly, THOMAS E. WILSON. From CHARLES L. FREDERICK, Attorney at Law. GENTLEMEN: I have examined March number much pleased with it. Such enterprise must succeed. FOND DU LAC Wis., Mch. 15, 1886. The Chicago Law Journal. CHICAGO, MAY, 1886. THE CHICAGO LAW JOURNAL, is published on the first of each month, and mailed to subscribers at $3.00 per annum, postage prepaid. ministrator to again render his account, and a redistribuiion may be made.—In Re Estate of Leavins.-Filed March 16, 1886.Wis. ADULTERY-INDICTMENT FOR-DISMISSAL OF ACTION UPON MOTION OF DEFENDANT AND AFFIDAVIT THAT THE ACTION WAS COMMENCED UNDER DURESS.-It is not necessary that in an indictment for adultery it should be set out that the indictment was found at the inIt is within the plan stance of the husband or wife, and because and purpose of the JOURNAL, to advise it is alleged that the act of adultery was its patrons of the chief points decided by committed at several different times and the courts of last resort, in all the states places, does not render it demurrable on the named on the title page, and HOW and ground of charging more than one offense. WHERE the full text of any decision Such action can not be dismissed on motion may be speedily and cheaply obtained. of defendant supported by an affidavit that Each number of the JOURNAL will conplaintiff commenced the action under duress. tain notes of from 250 to 300 cases, filed-State v. Briggs.-Filed March 19, 1886. within the last month preceding the publi cation. Subscriptions may commence with any month in the year. TERMS. One copy, one year in advance.. AGENT-ADMISSIONS OF APPLICATION OF FACTS.—Where a horse driven by an .$3.00 agent ran away, and the horse and wagon 3.50 was injured, the runaway and accident con.25 stitute the res gesta and admissions and declarations of the agent relative to the accident may be admitted as part of the res gesta.-Edmonds v. Curtis.-Filed Jan. 29, We continue to send THE JOURNAL to all subscribers until all arrears are paid and we are requested to stop it. CHICAGO LAW PUBLISHING Co. 1886.-Colo. AGENT FOR SALE OF REAL ESTATEACQUIREMENT OF RESIDENCE-WHEN A WHEN COMMISSIONS ARE EARNED.-When QUESTION FOR JURY-WRONGFUL ASSESS- an agent has been employed to procure a MENT OF TAXES.-Where the question of purchaser for real estate, and having proone's residence is in issue and the evidence cured such purchaser, who is able, ready, leaves the question in doubt, it is properly and willing to make the purchase on the submitted to a jury. Where an action is terms offered, the agent is entitled to his brought for the recovery of taxes wrongfully commission, even though the owner refuse assessed and paid, it appearing to the court to convey the property as it was agreed.— that the assessment was illegal, the court Hamlin v. Schulte.—Filed March 1,1886.— may continue the case long enough to allow Minn. another assessment to be made.—Johnston v. City of Oshkosh.—Filed March 16, 1886. -Wis. AMENDMENT AFTER FINAL JUDGMENTPENDING APPEAL.-Where a demurrer is interposed to a complaint and sustained, ADMINISTRATOR-OBTAINING AN ORDER and the plaintiff refuses to amend but takes OF FINAL SETTLEMENT FRAUDULENTLY. an appeal, the judgment of the lower court Where an administrator fraudulently obtains being affirmed, it is too late for plaintiff to an order of final settlement, the county amend his complaint. During the pendancy court may vacate such order upon obtaining of an appeal, no amendment of the pleadnotice of the fraud, may require such ad-ings can be made in the trial court.-Kirby v. Superior Court.-Filed Feb. 25, 1886.- state what the question is, is insufficient.— Cal. Bradenberger v. Regler.-Filed March 17, 1886.-Ia. APPEAL QUESTIONS OF FACT-TENANT HOLDING OVER AFTER NOTICE TO QUIT OR PAY RENT.—The supreme court will not review a question of fact coming to it from the appellate court, but will review the evidence, bearing upon instructions given to the jury; a party who continues to occupy premises after notice to quit or pay rent is bound to pay rent therefor.-I. C. Ry. Co. v. Thompson.-Filed Jany. 25, 1889.-Ill. APPEAL-FINDING OF APPELLATE COURT FINAL-JOINT OBLIGATION.-The finding of the appellate court on a question of fact cannot be aeviewed by the supreme court. All joint obligations and covenants shall be taken and held to be joint and several obligations and covenants.-Tully v. Excelsior Iron Works.-Filed Jan. 25, 1886.—Ill. APPEAL JURISDICTION-Assessment of court APPEAL FINDING OF FACTS-PRINCIPAL BANK SHARES- -PLEADINGS.--This AND AGENT.—The findings of a court on a has no jurisdiction where the amount in question of fact will not be disturbed on ap- controversey is less than $100 in the absence peal unless clearly wrong. An agent who of a certified question of law involved. The has authority to carry on a lumber business pleadings must show that the amount is less for his principal, including the right to file a than $100. Bank shares may be assessed mechanic's lien, will be held to have the to the owners thereof, and the owner havpower to waive the right to file a mechanic's ing appeared before the board of equalizalien.- White Lake Lumber Co. v. Stone.- tion in opposition of the assessment, cannot Filed March 24, 1886.-Neb. plead want of notice.-Henkle, et al v. Town of Keota.-Filed March 18, 1886.—Ia. APPEAL WHEN IT MAY BE TAKEN TO THE SUPREME COURT AND WHEN TO THE APPEL APPEAL-RULE AS TO THE ORDER OF LATE COURT—When a bill was filed seeking PRESENTINC ARGUMENTS BY COUNSEL.-On to restrain a board of education from main- appeal the order of argument by counsel taining a school: (1) from renting a build remains the same as in the trial court withing in which to hold school; (2) from hold-out regard to which party is the appellant. ing the school in a place not authorized by The plaintiff in an equity case makes the a vote of the district; and (3) because the opening argument. The appellant must board was maintaining a sectarian school, a file an argument on the merits, or the case demurrer was interposed and sustained and will be dismissed.—Devore v. Adams.-Filed the bill dismissed. The plaintiff appeals March 19, 1886.—Iadirectly to the supreme court. Held, dismissing the appeal, that the appeal should have gone to the appellate court; that the supreme court has no jurisdiction.-Millard v. B'd of Ed'n-Filed Jan. 25, 1886.-Ill. APPEAL ORDER TO PERFECT JUDGMENT -JUDGMENT ENTERED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OF TIME ALLOWED.—A defendant is allowed sixty days after verdict to perfect judgment. Judgment entered at the inAPPEAL AMOUNT OF JUDGMENT-SUF- stance of plaintiff before the expiration of FICIENCY OF JUDGE'S CERTIFICATE.-Where sixty days, is unauthorized and not appealthe amouut in controversy does not exceed able. The appeal being premature it will $100 exclusive of costs, the supreme court be dismissed.-Haye, Administrator v. C.& has no jurisdiction, unless the trial judge N-W. Ry Co.-Filed Feb. 2, 1886.-Wis. certifies a question of law to be determined. A cetificate which merely states that there APPELLATE COURT'S FINDING OF FACT is a question of law involved, but does not PROMISSORY NOTE—ALTERATION—Where a promissory note is signed by two parties Smith.-Filed March 3, 1886.—Ind. ASSAUIT-INTENT TO COMMIT RAPE-INTENTION MUST BE SHOWN.-In an action for an assault with intent to commit rape, the purpose of defendant to commit the crime by whatever force is necessary, must be shown in order to convict.-State v. Canada. Filed March 19, 1886.—Ia. ATTACHMENT-PERSONAL PROPERTY UNDER CHATTEL MORTgage—Mortgagee sumMONED AS TRUSTEE.-Personal property subject to the lien of a chattel mortgage may be attached as though there was no lien upon it, and the mortgagee may be summoned as tinstee. If the attaching creditor pays the mortgage lien, the property may be taken on execution and sold.-Loomis v. Lewis.-Filed Oct. 24, 1886.—Mass. ATTACHMENT-INTENT TO DEFRAUDQUESTION OF LAW EVIDENCE.- -Where the affidavit on which an attachment issues, alleging that defendant disposed of his property to defraud his creditors, is traversed, the question of intent on the part of defendant is a question for the court, and the intention of the party who purchased the property of the defendant is not of the issue. The finding of the trial court in such case will not be reversed on appeal, unless the evidence ASSIGNMENT-Certificate of ACKNOWLedgement-SuFFICIENCY OF.--Where an insolvent debtor made an assignment for the benefit of creditors, and in acknowledgment of the same the notary public certifies as follows: "On the twenty-first day of February, 1882, before me personally appeared is very clear and conclusive.-Miller v. Mcto me personally known to be the individuals described, and who executed the same and who acknowledged to me that they executed the same for the purpose therein mentioned," Held, although ambiguous it is sufficient, and the assignment is valid.-Smith v. Boyd.-Filed March 2, 1886.-N.Y. ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR-NOT INCLUDED IN RECORD EVIDENCE.-Where an action wes commenced and a demurrer interposed to the complaint, and the ruling on the demurrer was excepted to, the case was subsequently dissmissed, a settlement having been agreed upon. The defendant having failed to perform the agreement of settlement, another action was commenced in another court for the same cause. After judgment an appeal was taken and inter allia the exception to the ruling on the ddmurrer was relied upon. As that exception was taken in the court where the case was first commenced, it did not appear in the record Nair.-Filed March 16, 1886.-Wis. BILL OF EXCHANGE-ACCEPTED BY AN and could not be considered.-Smith v. EXECUTOR-PERSONAL LIABILITY.--Where an administrator or executor makes or accepts negotiable paper, he will be held personally liable on the same, although he adds to his own name the name of his office. Because a special fund is mentioned out of which a draft is payable does not take away from it the character of commercial paper. Schmittler v. Simon.-Filed March 9, 1886. -N.Y. BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE-ACTION FOR TESTIMONY OF PLAINTIFF.-In an action for breach of promise of marriage and seduction, the plaintiff cannot show that she suffered a miscarriage. such evidence and for the jury to allow additional damages in consequence, is error. A verdict in such case rendered on plaintiff's uncorroberated testimony, cannot be set aside on that ground.-Giese v. Schultz.— Filed March 16, 1886.—Wis. ductor of the train to stop at another way station and take or additional stock for the same party, in an action for the loss of some of the stock, it is competent for the shipper to prove what number of stock was loaded at the way station, and although he never received a bill of lading for the same, there is an implied contract on the part of the company to deliver the stock at the destination to which they are consigned.—Aiken v. C.B.&Q.Ry Co.-Filed Mch 18, 1886.—Ja. COMMON CARRIER-LOSS OF GOODSTo submit EVIDENCE ESTABLISHING THE VALUE.—In an action to recover for the value of jewels lost by a common carrier, it is competent to allow the plaintiff to select jewels which in his judgment correspond in value to those lost, and exhibit the same to the jury, and then to call upon an expert to testify as to the value of the jewels thus exhibited to the CARRIER OF passengers-REFUSAL TO jury.-Berney v. Dinsmore.-Filed Jan. 12, PAY FARE, AND OFFER TO PAY AT THE LAST 1886.-Mass. MOMENT IN BEING EJECTED.—A passenger who, not having a ticket, refuses to pay his fare on a railroad train, and persists in his refusal until the conductor has forced him to leave the train, and at the moment he is being landed on the ground from the car, he offers to pay and it is refused, the company is not liable for damages for ejecting him.-Pease v. D. L. & W. Ry Co.-Filed Feb. 9, 1886.-N. Y. CITY LICENSE OF OCCUPATIONS-MAY LI CENSE A LAUNDRY ACCORDING TO THE NUM CONTEMPT OF COURT-INHERENT POWER OF COURT TO PUNISH FOR-Legislature CANNOT ABRIDGE THIS POWER.-Disorderly conduct or a disobedience of its orders in facie curiæ, constitute a direct contempt. Every court of general jurisdiction has inherent power to punish for contempt, and this power cannot be abridged by the legislature.-Holman v. State,-Filed March 5, 1886.-Ind. CONTINUANCE-ENGAGEMENT OF COUN BER OF PERSONS EMPLOYED.-A City which SEL-DISCRETION OF COURT.—The granting by its charter is authorized to license occu- of a motion for continuance of a case on pations, may provide that laundries shall be licensed and shall pay according to the number of persons employed therein.-Ex. Parte Le Protti.--Filed Feb. 26, 1886.Cal. the ground that counsel are engaged in another court, rests in the sound discretion of the court. Where such a motion is made and refused and it appears that the counsel was engaged in attending the call in another COMMON CARRIER-IMPLIED CONTRACT court. Held that such refusal was not an -ACTION FOR LOSS OF LIVE abuse of the discretionary power of the Where a party shipping live stock, loaded court.-Culver v. Colehour-Filed Jan. 25, a car in part at one station and took a re- 1886.-Ill. ceipt for the stock thus loaded, and at his request the station-agent instructed the con- VENUE-TERMINATION OF STOCK. CONSOLIDATION OF CAUSES-CHANGE OF LEASE,-Where |