TABLE OF CASES. REPORTED, NOTED, ABSTRACTED AND DIGESTED. 258 299 418 220 Adarson v. Paterson.. Alexander y. McNear. Allen v. O'Donald Anglo Californa Bank v. Ames Application of Thirty-fourth street Ry, Co., In re. Archer v. State Arniel v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. Arnold v. Greene.. Aronson v. Fleckenstein. Atkins v. Sherbine.. Avery v. Creigh... Bains v. Syracuse, etc., R. C... Ballis v. Drake.. Baltimore & Y. Turnpike Co. v. Leonhardt. Bank for Savings in the City of New York v. Grace. Bank of America v. Shaw. Barber v. Abendroth.. Barnett v. Mayor, etc., of Paterson Barth v. Lines Bartholomew v. New York Cent. R. Co. Beadleston v. Beadleston Beardsley v. Selectmen of Bridgeport Beason y. Kurz. Beckett, In re Will of. Belden v. State Belleville Savings Bank v. Boruman Belter v. Lyon. Bentley v. Lamb. Best v. Flint.. Biddle v. Hestonville, In. & F. P. Ry. Co Bigelow Wire Works v. Sonel Binzel v. Grogan Blackburne v. Vigors.. Blair v. Chicago & A. Ry. Co. Blake v. Baldwin Bomberger v. Union Mutual Aid Society Borough of Carlisle v. Brisbane. Boston Rubber Co. v. Peerless Wringer Co. Bowen v. Webber Boyd v. Meigham. Brennan v. Merchants and Manufacturer's Bank Bridge v. City of Oshkosh. Bristol v. Bristol. Bristol Manf'g. Co. v. Barnes Bromley, Re. Bronson v. Estate of Phelps.. Brown v. Mausur. Brown v. Mansus. Brown v. Spaulding Brown v. Weaver Brock v. Dole. Brundage v. Village of Portchester. Bullard v. Boston and Maine Railroad. Butiz v. Northern Pacific R. Co.. Bunch v. Great Western Ry. Co. Burchett v. Commonwealth. Burns v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co Burr v. De La Vergne.. Burton v. Burton 298 15 455 58 516 Page. Page. 373 Cogswell v. New York, New Haven and Hartford Ry. Co .. 471 297 Cole v. McKay.. 404 299 Collins v. South Boston R. Co 293 92 Cominissioners of Excise v. Merchant. 395 54 Commissioners of State Reservation at Niagara, etc., In re... 195 50 Commonwealth v. Briant 440 517 Commonwealth v. Hall 439 Commonwealth v. Kostenbauder 277 193 Commonwealth v. Richardson. 18 76 Conselyea v. Blanchard. Converse v. Hobbs 415 Cook v. Prentice. 375 93 439 Corse v, Peck. 177 Corson, Appeal 464 257 County of Howard v. Kyte. 57 54 Crandall v. Grow 197 219 Crawford v. Rambo 86 73 Crisp v. Crisp... 299 456 Cummock v. Institution for Savings in Newburyport 208 139 Cushing's Will, Matter of.. 97 56 39 Darley Main Colliery Co. v. Mitchell 247 374 Davey v. Kelley. 357 416 Davis v. Gay 59 354 Davis v. Wabash, St. L. & P. R. Co.. 293 138 Dawson v. Buford 178 Day v. New England Mut. Life Ins. Co. 479 117 17 Deimer v. Franz. 155 239 Dickinson v. State 316 138 Marston v. Marston 417 Dixon v. Allen. 57 519 Donk v. Alexander 137 431 Driggs v. Phillips. 415 317 Drovers Nat. Band of Union Stock Yards, III., v. AngloAmerican Packing and Provision Co.. 106 Dunlap v. Thomas 507 Dupoyster v. Gagoni 237 Dwinelle v. Edey.. 37 76 98 Eliot Five-cent Savings Bank v. Commercial Union Ass. Co. 118 140 Elliot v. Small 277 454 Emerson v. Cochran. 139 Engle v. Fischer 36 Eno v. Diefendorf 195 Ensign, In re 425 269 Equitable Co-operative Foundry Co. v. Hersee.. 354 297 Evans v. Mason. 374 375 Everett v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. 77 55 Exhaust Ventilator Co. v. Chicago M. & St. P. Ry. Co 138 77 37 Fanning v. D. M. Osborne & Co. 55 74 Farnham v. Pierce 386 Farrall v. Farnan. 297 515 Felton v. Chicago, etc.,Ry. Co Fergus v. Wilmaith 452 119 357 Fields v. Hartford, etc., Horse R. Co.. 518 Fifth Nat. Bank v. New York Elevated R. Co °38 238 73 Fisher v. National Bank of New Jersey. 79 219 Fitzsimmons v. City of Brooklyn.. Fletcher v. People. 96 I 20 Folds v. Allardt 17 Follman v. City of Mankato. 358 148 Formwalt v. Hylton.. 391 336 75 Flagg v. Town of Hudson. 518 Freeman y. Easley 279 178 French v. Creswell. 38 31 Fuller v. Connelly. 198 337 Fuller v. Lumbert 199 349 Gadsden v. Woodward 38 Gage v. Parry 397 515 Gallaher v. Herbert. 479 98 57 Gannon v. Wilson 219, 239 Gates v. Nellis. 238 158 Geismer v. Lake Shore and Michigan Southern R. Co. 138 Gibbons v. Farwell.. 150 497 53 Gille v. Hunt 158 220 Gould v. Eastern R. Co.. 118 378 233 376 212 III 120 158 Cady v. Walker Camp v. Crocker Canning v. Farquhar Carbee v. Mason Carney v. Carney Carpenter v. Osborne. Caves, Torre Chapin v, Freeland. Chapin v. Wright. Cheney v. Dunlap. Chicago R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Londergan. Choctaw Nation v. United States Christopher v. Christopher.. Churchill v. Bradley Clark v. Sargeant Cleaver v. Bullock. Clute v. Knies.. Coburn v. Middlesex Co. VOL. 34. 516 200 177 200 450 356 356 130 95 97 138 200 358 457 Page. Page. Grand Lodge of the Independent Order of Good Templars of Massey v. Mutual Relief Soc. of Rochester, N. Y. 116 the State of California v. Farnham. 279 Maught v. Getzendanner Granger v. Parker 272 218 Mayor, etc., of New York v. Eden Musee. Green Bay and Mississippi Canai Co. v. Hewitt.. 36 352 Mayor, etc., v. Second Avenue R. Co.. Griffin v: Long Island R. Co.. 137 Memphis Bell Telephone Co. v. Hunt Griswold v. New York and N. E. R. Co.. 239 13 Menacho v. Ward 44 Merchants' Union Barbed Wire Co. v. Rice 452 Hackney v. Welch. 335 Messenger's Appeal.. 79 Haley v. Case. 191 Metropolitan Trust Co. v. Tonawanda Valley, etc., R. Co 439 Hall v. Westcott.. 227 Micklethewait v. Newlay Bridge Company, limited. 466 Hall v. Whitehall Water Power Co.. 354 154 Hamilton v. State. 18 128 Hamilton v. Thames and Mersey Marine Ins. Co.. 109 Miner v. Markham. Harbeck v. Harbeck. 304 97 Morgan v. City of Binghamton. 91 Harden Star Hand Grenade Fire Extinguisher, Limited Co., Moore v. Lambeth Water Works Company Re.. 328 213 Moore v. Phænix Fire Insurance Co 369 Harper v. Shoppell... 374 95 233 Hart v. Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co. 417 Morrison v. Porter. Hastings v. Weber. 197 Morey v. Sohier 39 Haynes v. Rudd. 54 Morrill v. Phillips 220 Hecksher v. Trotter.. 279 Moyer, Appeal of. 316 Henning v. Raymond.. 336 Muhlenbrinck v. Pooler 47 Hendricks v. Bd. of Co. Com’rs of Chautauqua County. 232 Mulcairns v. City of Jaynesville. Hess v. Muir 280 Mulligan v. Commonwealth Hewlett v. Elmer. 393 Munson v. Syracuse, Geneva & Corning R. Co. Hewlett v. Western Union Tel. Co 260 Murchie v. Gates Hickey v. Morrell. 68 Murray v. Beard Highland v. Dresser Murtfeldt v. New York, W. S. & B. Ry. Co. Hinchliffe v. Shea. 397 Mutual Fire Ins. Co. of Montgomery Co. v. Dehaven Hoar v. Merritt. 156 House v. Eisenlord 73 Houson & T. C. Ry. Co. v. Carson Nason v. West 38 219 Hoyt v. Ketcham Neslie v. Second and Third streets Pass. Ry. Co 298 417 Hutchinson v. Parker. Nevin v. Spieckeman. 56 377 Hutkoff v. Demorest. New England Mortgage Securiety Co. v. Vader. 274 475 New Haven Horseshoe Nail Company v. Linden Spring Co. 175 Ikerd v. Beavers... Newman v. Jones.. 66 277 Jacksonville, P. and M. R. Co. v. United States. Noel's Ex'r, v. Gill 496 James v. City of Newton.. Norris v. Atkinson. 325 334 Jefferson, Matter of.. Norcross v. Griffiths 119 39 North v. State Jewell v. Gilbert.. 131 374 Jochem v. Robinson North Hudson Co. R. Co. v. May 155 Johnson, In re, Petition of Norton v. Cowell.. 58 394 Johnson v. Barnes Nugent v. Jacobs.. 451 355 Nutt v. Norton Jonas v. Hunt 198 139 Jones v. Farris. 454 Jones v. Low 259 415 Jordan v. Westerman. Ottoman Cahvey Co. v. City of Philadelphia 59 Owen v. Weston Kalbfleisch v. Long Island R. Co. 116 Kalis v. Shattuck Paddock v. Kircham. 333 Kauffman v. Breckenridge. 158 75 Kent v. Dunham. 147 Paige v. Warning. Kessinger v. Vanatta Pandorf v. Hamilton. 155 Kidd v. Horry.. 371 Pardee v. Markee. Kiff v. Weaver Peck v. Clerk 449 50g People v. Anderson. L. & N., & G. S. R. Co. v. Katzenberger 215 People v. Arensberg - 77 125 Landis v. Saxton.. People v. Clark 70 237 Lane's Appeal People v. Com'rs. of Fire Department. 377 475 Lang v. Straus. 152 195 Langley v. Hill. 440 88 Larned v. Briscoe. 199 95 Laughlin v. Street Ry, of Grand Rapids 134 470 Lavender v. Atkins People v. Gage 99 Lawrence v. Warwick. 09 155 Leeper v. Neagle.. People v. Jaehne 372 Lennig v. Ocean City Association. 99 People v. Laidlow Leonard v. Commonwealth 177, 195 People v. Loew 53 Lewis v. Adams 375 People v. McCarthy Lewiston Steam Mill Co. v. Androscoggin Water Power Co., 57 People v. McClave 73 Lichtenberg v. Herdíelder. 415 People v. Mondon. Liddy v. Long Island City. 195 People's Passenger Ry. Co. v. Lauderbach. Limmerland v. St. Paul, etc., R. Co. 237 People v. Rome, Watertown, etc., R. Co Lindroth v. Litchfield. 372 People v. Townsend. 64 Linnard, Appeal of 316 Perrine, Alleged Lunacy of, In re. 295 298 Lombard v. Batchelder. 258, 358 Petition of the N. Y., L. E. & W.R. Co., etc., v. Bennett, Long v. Stafford. In re. 415 Long v. Straus. Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Frissel. 71 Lorillard v. Pride. Phenix Ins. Co. of Brooklyn, N. Y., Ex parte. Lyon v. Hersey Phenix Ins. Co. of Brooklyn v. Lamar. 49 Pierce v. Harrington.. 376 24 McGinn v. Tobey 97 Plum v. Studebaker.. McGraw v. Whitson. 100 59 Poertner v. Poertner McKee v. Coffin.. 259 Pope v. Porter McLeod v. Conn. & Pass. R. Co. 35 384 Post v. Kreischer McLewee v. Hall. 355 415 Potter v. Douglas County. Madeira, Appeal of 234 19 Potter v. Gronbeck Maguire v. Selden 415 Powers v. Canada Mahin v. Pfeiffer 155 Priest v. White Mansheld Machine Works v. Lowell Common Council 239 Providence Coad Co. v. Providence, etc., k. Co. Marion v. State Pullen v. Pullen Mark v. Hudson River Bridge Co. 337 373 Pynchon v. Day. Market Nat. Bank v. Pacitic Nat. Bank. 35 Martin v. Carver's Adm'r. 240 Queenan v. Palmer.. 118 98 216 393 488 140 498 II 156 476 416 40 Page Page. 78 456 119 127 74 76 179 396 237 119 76 Raub v. Smith 278 .... 336 Teal v. Fissel 157 334 77 389 454 307 417 337 317 267 515 99 454 450 397 196 23 356 196 18 418 55 253 75 178 418 Saginaw Gas-light Co. v. City of Saginaw. 412 Sampson v. Freedman.. 35 Sanders v. Bromley. 379 Sanders v. Wheeburg. 107 Seive v. Stein reide. 480 Selliger v. Bastian. 335 Sensenig v. Perry 138 Schwartz v. Weber 477 Schwenck v. Naylor. 137 Schulz v. Sweeny. 120 Shamburg v. Abbott. 157 Shattuck v. Bill 16 Sheeley v. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. Co. 178 Shenfield v. Nashawannuck Manuf. Co. 119 Shultz v. Mayor, etc., of New York 415 Siegrist v. Schmoltz. 455 Smith's Appeal. 497 Smith v. Memphis & A. C. Packet Co. 199 Smith v. Sherwood 119 Smith v. Smith. 156 Smith v. State. 453 Smith v. Swan Snyder, Matter of 394 Somerset Mutual Fire Ins. Co. v. Usaw 277 Sonneborn v. Libbey 177 Springer Transp. Co. v. Smith 258 Spinning v. Spinning 192 Stanchfield v. City of Newton 157 Stanhope v. Stanhope. State v. Archer 374 State v. Beaudet 7 Suate v. Clark 297 State v. Clarke 56 State v. Davis 424 State v. Hughes 439 State v. Jones. 317 State v. McDermott. State y. Smith. Staten Island, etc., R. Co. to Acquire Lands, Application of.: 415 Stevens v. Castel 454 Stevens v. Citizens' Ins. Co. 454 Stephens y. State. 228 Stevens y, State 37 Stewart v. Garrett. Stewart v. Long Island R. Co. 333 Stewart v. Schall. 98 220 230 Wabash, St. Louis and Pacific Ry. Co. v. People of the State of Illinois -406, 427 Wagner v. State 197 Wait v. Oxford. 452 Wallace v. Wallace. 454 Warren Glass Works Co. v. Keystone Coal Co.. Wasson v. First Nat. Bank. 311 Watt's Appeal. 155 Weatherhead v. Stoddard 280, 378 Wheeler v. Lawson. 373 White y. Western Assur, Co. 455 Whitney v. Butler 444 Wilcox v. St. Paul and N. P. Ry. Co 316 Wilds v. St. Louis, A. and T. H. R. Co.. 54 Willett v. Rich. 240 Williams v. Flood. 494 Wilmerding v. McKesson. Wilson, Matter of Will of. Winchell v. Coney. Winchester v. Capron... Wing v. Ansonia Clock Co Wistar v. City of Philadelphia. 139 Wiswell v. Wiswell.. 357 Witcomb v. Starkey 75 Witherell v. Stewart 373 Wood v. State 334 Wright v. Boston and Albany R. Co.. 33 238 Zimmerman v. Township of Conemaugh. 118 THE ALBANY LAW JOURNAL: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE LAW AND THE LAWYERS. The Albany Albany Law Journal. tracts from it. They sum up the chief causes in the following words: Complex procedure, inadequate judiciary, procrastination, retrial, unreasonable apALBANY, JULY 3, 1886. peals, uncertain law. The latter they propose to remedy by codification, which, curiously enough, met with strenuous opposition among the members CURRENT TOPICS. of the association, so much so that its discussion was postponed to the present year." We fear that UDGE SEYMOUR D. THOMPSON, of St. Louis, the Times people are to be ranked among the "code fellows." The New York City Bar Association Association, has addressed a circular to the members, ought to appoint and send a committee over to corasking their opinion on the following subjects: Codi- rect them. fication; trial by jury; relief of appellate courts; delays and uncertainties in administration of criminal In an article of the last number of the American law; legal education; the selection of judges; Law Review entitled “Hints about Trials,” Judge champertous engagements by attorneys. Many Brown of Detroit laments the prolixity of jury trials specific questions are asked under each head. in this country and contrasts it with the rapidity of Among the most interesting is the question whether them in England. He says very truly that " a case the State ought not to have the right to put the that ought to be finished in a day or two is dragged prisoner on the witness stand and interrogate him, on for a week.” Hours are wasted in taking testibut without the power of compelling answers; mony upon immaterial points, or in the unnecessary whether the prosecuting attorney ought not to be multiplication of witnesses to the same fact. Days allowed to comment on the prisoner's failure to tes- are consumed in examining plaintiff's witnesses tify where he has the right; whether judges should only to find that he has made no case a fact be elected or appointed; for what term; and whether which ought to have been discovered when he made they should be re-eligible; whether the “contin- his opening to the jury. And finally, if the trial be gent fee business" is injurious to justice, and closely contested, the chances are that the jury will whether the defendant should be allowed to show disagree, or the verdict be set aside because an insuch an agreement if it exists. This circular is an- advertent question was asked, or a word was misticipatory of a report to the association at the next spelled in the indictment. The consequence of all meeting this is that the judicial force of the country is out of all proportion to the amount of work done, and the The London Law Times takes notice of the report cost to the public for jury fees and other court exof the eighth annual meeting of the American Bar penses is something enormous." He admits that Association; after stating that one of the professed the English celerity is somewhat offset by the diffiobjects of the association is to “ encourage cordial culty of getting a case at issue there. He makes intercourse among the members of the American several suggestions for improvement. First, that Bar,” it observes: “It is with the latter, among after the plaintiff has opened, the defendant should other objects, we presume, that a 'collation,' fig- be required to state his case, so as to see if the ures in the programme of the meeting." It com- cause cannot be disposed of as a question of law, mends the style of the discussions, and particularly Second, that cumulative testimony should be exof Mr. Biddle's paper on the Proper mode of Trial. cluded. Third, that counsel should be required to It also observes: "Facile princeps, however, is the re- stand in examining witnesses. Fourth, that questions port of the special committee upon the delay of judi- of admission of testimony slıould not be discussed cial administration, bearing the honored names of much. Fifth, that counsel should be limited in David Dudley Field and John F. Dillon. It is in every time for argument. Eighth, that personalties should way excellent, but space forbids any copious cr- be prohibited. Ninth, that requests to charge Vol. 34 No. 1. |