EVIDENCE (Continued).

ADMISSIBILITY OF EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE TO EXPLAIN AFFIDAVITS FOR CON-
TINUANCE, see CONTINUANCE, 1; EFFECT OF RECORD OF COPYRIGHT, see
COPYRIGHT, 5; DEEDS, 1, 2; DEPOSITIONS; STATE LAWS AS RULES OF DECIS-
ION IN FEDERAL COURTS, see FEDERAL COURTS, 2; IMPEACHMENT OF VALID-
ITY OF STATE GRANT, see GRANT, 3; OLDEST GRANT CONCLUSIVE, see GRANT,
5, 6; Book ACCOUNT AS EVIDENCE OF PARTNERSHIP, see PARTNERSHIP, 1;
LETTERS, ADMISSIBILITY TO DENY PARTNERSHIP, see PARTNERSHIP, 2;
ADMISSIONS OF JOINT MAKER OF NOTE, see PROMISSORY NOTES, 3; WIT-

NESSES.

EXCEPTION. See ERROR AND APPEAL; RIGHT TO BEGIN AND CLOSE NOT SUBJECT
FOR, See PRACTICE, 2.

EXCHANGE.

DEBTOR AND CREDITOR-PAYMENT-EXCHANGE.

Where a rent is reserved payable

in a foreign coin, it is computed at so much of the coin made current by law, as
at the rate of exchange will be equal in value to the foreign coin in the country
where issued. - Newman v. Keffer, 502.

See DAMAGES, 5.

EXECUTION. See HOMESTEAD, 1, 2.

EXECUTORS. See ADMINISTRATORS AND EXECUTORS.

EXEMPTION LAWS. See HOMESTEAD, 1, 2.

EXPERT EVIDENCE. PROOF OF HANDWRITING, see EVIDENCE, 5.

EX POST FACTO LAWS.

1. EX POST FACTO LAWS-WHAT ARE. — An ex post facto law is one which punishes
as a crime an act done before its passage, which, when committed, was not so
punishable. The term does not apply to acts of a civil nature. - Minge v.
Gilmour, 383.

2. Ex POST FACTO LAWS are laws which affect solely crimes and criminal cases.
The term is not used with reference to laws affecting civil cases. - Evans v.
Robinson, 400.

EXTRA WORK.

-

CONTRACT-EXTRA WORK RECOVERABLE ON IMPLIED ASSUMPSIT. -The plaintiff, by
special contract, agreed to build certain bridges and depots for the defendant
corporation, for which he was to be paid partly in cash and partly in shares of
their capital stock. In the progress of the enterprise it became necessary to do
much extra work and furnish materials not provided for in the special contract.
Held, that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the whole value in money of the
extra work and materials thus furnished, upon an implied assumpsit, and that
the agreement to take pay in shares did not extend to this part of the job.-
Childs v. Somerset & K. R. R. Co, 593.

FAITH AND CREDIT OF STATE ACTS. See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 3.

FEDERAL COURTS.

1. FEDERAL COURTS-EFFECT OF DECISIONS OF STATE COURTS IN. Where the
federal courts have jurisdiction of a suit between citizens of different States,
affecting real property, they will adopt the decisions of the highest State courts

.

FEDERAL COURTS (Continued).

as the local law of real property, whether under a statute or the unwritten law of the State. Newman v. Keffer, 502.

2. STATE LAWS-EFFECT OF IN FEDERAL COURTS.- The State laws of evidence are rules of decision in trials at the common law in the United States courts.— United States v. Dunham, 653.

See JURISDICTION.

FELON. See WITNESSES, 7.

FOREIGN JUDGMENTS. See JUDGMENTS, 1.

FOREIGN MINISTER. See INTERNATIONAL LAW, 3.

FRAUD. LONG ACQUIESCENCE AS A BAR, see DEEDS, 8; EQUITY PLEADING, 1; FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES; GRANT, 2.

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES.

1. EQUITY-FRAUD AS GROUND FOR SETTING ASIDE CONVEYANCE.-Misrepresentations and obtaining a bargain in consequence thereof, disadvantageous to the party complaining, is a ground in equity for setting aside a conveyance, although the party imposed on were of sound understanding, and had time enough to detect the falsehood before he made the contract. But the grantee shall be allowed improvements made on the estate. - McAlister v. Barry, 24.

2. CONVEYANCE FROM CHILD TO PARENT-VALIDITY OF, IN EQUITY.-A conveyance to a parent by a child recently of age is prima facie valid, and it is incumbent on the party attacking it to show undue influence; such a conveyance is not viewed as a sale, but rather as family arrangement, the validity of which does not depend on the adequacy of the price. — Sullivan v. Sullivan, 612.

See DEEDS, 3.

GOVERNMENT OFFICERS. See INJUNCTION, 4; MANDAMUS, 1, 2.

GRANT.

1. GRANT-VOID AND VOIDABLE.-A void grant is one issued entirely without authority, as distinguished from a voidable grant, which, though properly authorized, is irregularly issued. — Polk's Lessee v. Hill, 126.

2. PRESUMPTION IN FAVOR OF GRANT.- Irregularity or fraud in the procurement of a grant does not render it void but only voidable, and the law presumes as between third persons that all prerequisites to the issuance have been complied with. - Id.

3. STATE GRANT - EVIDENCE TO IMPEACH VALIDITY OF. — In ejectment no evidence other than of an entry can be received to impeach the validity of a State grant. - Id.

4. MAP ANNEXED TO GRANT, EFFECT OF.-A plat annexed to a grant is not an essential part of it, and if recurred to, it must be for the purpose of explanation, and not to destroy its validity. — Id.

5. TITLE OLDEST GRANT AS EVIDENCE OF.-The oldest grant is conclusive evidence of title at law, except in the single case of an elder legal entry.—Bass v. Dinwiddie, 190.

6. OLDEST GRANT, CONCLUSIVENESS OF.-The oldest grant is evidence of title at law, and can only be defeated by producing an older entry coupled with a grant. Patton v. Carothers, 207.

GRANT (Continued).

7. GRANT TO DECEASED PERSON-RIGHTS OF HEIRS UNDER. By the common law nothing passes to the heirs under a grant to a deceased person; but under the statute an entry and grant in the name of a deceased person, founded on a removed warrant, will pass the land to the heirs, if the entry be in the lifetime of the grantee. - Dougherty's Heirs v. Edmiston, 194.

8. GRANT-EFFECT OF NORTH CAROLINA CESSION ACT ON. -North Carolina had no power after the Cession Act to issue grants for land in territory ceded thereby, unless some incipient right previously existed. It is therefore competent to inquire whether there was an entry previous to the cession, or whether the warrant was a forgery.- Polk v. Windel, 168.

9. DESCRIPTION IN GRANT-ADJACENT CONSTRUED. — Adjacent does not mean adjoining, it signifies convenient, near to, or in the neighborhood.- Henderson v. Long, 188.

10. GRANT-NATURAL OBJECTS IN A CALL TO GOVERN.-A call in a grant or entry for distance gives way to a call for a natural object or boundary, and the party must go to the natural boundary, though it vary both course and distance.— Simms v. Baker, 205.

See ENTRY; PAROL EVIDENCE TO DENY ENTRY UNDER GRANT, see EVIDENCE, 2; SURVEYS.

GROUND RENT.

1. GROUND RENT - REMEDIES FOR RECOVERY OF.-For the recovery of arrears of ground rent, the plaintiff may proceed by distress, re-entry, ejectment, and action of covenant, and proceedings in one do not suspend the others; the remedies are cumulative. Such actions will lie as well against the administrator, after decease of the covenantor. - Newman v. Keffer, 502.

2. INTEREST-RECOVERABLE ON ARREARS OF GROUND RENT.-Arrears of ground rent will bear interest from the time they become payable. - Id.

GUARDIANSHIP.

GUARDIAN-MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF.-A motion for the appointment of a guardian to an infant party must be in writing, and must state the name of the person proposed, and his consent to be appointed. - Hartshorne v. Sanford, 51.

HABEAS CORPUS.

-

1. HABEAS CORPUS - ENLISTMENT OF MINORS IN THE ARMY.- The enlistment in the army of a minor without the consent of his parent is a ground for discharge, on habeas corpus, at the instance of the parent. - United States v. Anderson, 202. 2. HABEAS CORPUS - JURISDICTION OF FEDERAL COURTS. The federal courts have no jurisdiction, either by common law or by statute, on a petition by an alien to award habeas corpus to bring up the body of an infant daughter alleged to be unlawfully detained. Ex Parte Barry, 533.

HANDWRITING. See EVIDENCE, 5.

HEARSAY EVIDENCE. See EVIDENCE, 8, 9, 1

HEIR.

1. HEIR-LIABILITY FOR DEBTS OF ANCESTOR. If an heir pay debts of his ancestor, so much of the land which descended to him, as is equal to such payments, shall be deemed to have been purchased by the heir. The surplus of such land shall be charged to him at its value at the time he sold it; not what it was worth

HEIR (Continued).

at the time it descended to him. The heir is not liable to other creditors of the ancestor for interest on such surplus. - Gibson v. Williams, 19.

2. HEIR LIABILITY FOR DEBTS OF ANCESTOR. —If the heir in an action against him on the bond of his ancestor plead nothing by descent or devise, and it be found against him, judgment shall be de bonis propriis. - Hamilton v. Simms, 25. 3. SCIRE FACIAS AGAINST HEIR-RIGHTS OF INNOCENT VENDEE.—A scire facias issued against an heir to have execution of the lands of the deceased, but before the scire facias issued the heir sold the lands, and it was held that the purchaser from the heir might, in the name of the heir, be permitted to plead to the scire facias that the executor had assets. - Hamilton v. Jones, 24.

See ESTATE TAIL; GRANT TO DECEASED PERSON, see GRANt, 7.

HIGH SEAS. JURISDICTION OF CRIMES, see JURISDICTION, 8.

HOMESTEAD.

1. EXECUTION - HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION LAWS. -- Where a portion of the defendant's lands, on which is situated a dwelling-house far exceeding the value of the homestead entitled to exemption, is subject to a mortgage nearly equal to the value of that portion of his lands, and the defendant has another parcel, on which is a dwelling occupied by part of his family, of a value within the limits of the statute exemption, he is entitled, upon his request, to have the latter set off and exempted from sale on execution. - Manuf. & Farmers' Bank v. Bayless, 8.

2. STATE EXEMPTION LAWS-HOMESTEADS.-State exemption laws apply to process issued from the federal courts. The homestead of the head of a family is exempt from sale on a judgment rendered by a court of the United States in the same manner as upon a judgment of a State court. - Id.

HOMICIDE.

HOMICIDE- MALICE PRESUMED FROM.-The law presumes malice from the fact of killing, and any circumstances in mitigation or of excuse or justification must be proved by the prisoner. - United States v. Travers, 467.

1. INDICTMENT WILL LIE FOR STATUTORY OFFENSE.- Where a punishment by imprisonment is provided by statute for a public offense, but no mode provided for securing such punishment, it is intended that an indictment will lie for such offense. United States v. Malebran, 426.

2. INDICTMENT-JURISDICTION SHOULD APPEAR ON FACE OF. - The jurisdiction of Circuit Courts in criminal case is confined to offenses committed in the district where the courts sit, if committed on land, and the indictment should distinctly show on its face that the offense was committed within the jurisdiction of the court. United States v. Wood, 456.

3. INDICTMENT - MATERIAL ALLEGATIONS IN MUST BE PROVED. An allegation in an indictment which is not impertinent or foreign to the cause must be proved,

INDICTMENT (Continued).

though a prosecution for the same offense might be supported without such allegation. United States v. Porter, 54.

4. INDICTMENT-VARIANCE BETWEEN PROOF AND CRIME CHANGED. - Where in a prosecution for resisting an officer of the customs the indictment improperly describes the office, the variance is fatal. — United States v. Phelps, 89. DESTRUCTION OF VESSELS, see CRIMINAL LAW, 1; EVIDENCE, 13.

INDORSEMENT. See PROMISSORY NOTES, 1, 2.

INFANCY. See GUARDIANSHIP; HABEAS CORPUS, 1, 2; MINORS.

INFRINGEMENT. See COPYRIGHT, 4, 6; COSTS, 4; PARTIES, 1; PATENTS, 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.

INJUNCTION.

1. INJUNCTION, WHEN GRANTED.-An injunction will not be granted during the pendency of an action unless the parties asking relief in equity will confess judgment at law. Mathews v. Douglass, 196.

2. INJUNCTION TO STAY TRIAL. Where a cause is ready for trial, an injunction will not be granted so as to stay the trial. - Mutter's Exrs, v. Hamilton, 27.

3. MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION- PRACTICE.-A motion for an interlocutory injunction is heard on affidavits alone, without the right of cross-examination.-Day v. Boston Belting Co., 585.

4. GOVERNMENT OFFICERS-POWER OF COURTS TO ENJOIN. -The courts of the United States have no authority to enjoin the officers of the government against performing any merely ministerial act.-McElrath v. McIntosh, 559.

COSTS ON INJUNCTION FOR INFRINGEMENT, see COSTS, 4; INJUNCTION TO
RESTRAIN BREACH OF COVENANT, see COVENANTS; PATENTS, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9;
REMOVAL OF CAUSES.

INSOLVENCY.

STATE INSOLVENT LAW, EFFECT OF DISCHARGE UNDER. A discharge under a State insolvent law does not entitle a defendant, in the custody of the United States courts on mesne process, to be released on common bail.-Gill v. Jacobs, 268. RIGHTS OF BAIL UNDER DISCHARGE IN INSOLVENCY, see BAIL, 2; CERTIFICATE OF DISCHARGE AS EVIDENCE, see EVIDENCE, 12.

INSURANCE.

EFFECT ON CONDITIONS IN.

1. INSURANCE POLICY HELD AS COLLATERAL SECURITY -A clause in an insurance policy that suit shall only be brought at a term of court, next succeeding the loss, applies to members of the company only; not to one who holds the policy as collateral security.-Smith v. Atlantic Mut. F. Ins. Co., 573.

2. INSURANCE-ASSIGNMENT OF POLICY.-Under a clause in a fire insurance policy that the liability of the insurers should cease upon assignment of the policy without their consent, held, that an assignment to a mortgagee from whom the insurers subsequently received the premium for a renewal was by such act ratified by them; but a subsequent conveyance of the fee by the mortgagor to the mortgagee would avoid the policy. A transfer to the mortgagee as collateral security with the assent of the insurers would not convert the contract into a new one on his interest.-Bilson v. Manufacturers' Ins. Co., 290.

See DAMAGES, 3; TRUSTS AND TRUSTEE3, 3.