counsel he employs can obtain access to one of the sacred forty. To the curious in the history of book-making these forty voluines stand as a new revelation; for when Congress passed the act of revision to be engrossed, it was discovered that, with all the engrossing clerks at their command, the mere act of engrossing would occupy a number of months, and the parchment laws would fill a moderately large room, giving, it will readily be seen, an extended invitation to fraud or mistake, so that, for expedition and security also, it was thought wisest to have the act printed, and not engrossed. The Congressional printer was summoned ; and he said that, if he should put the whole force of his establishment on the work, he thought he could do it in five days. He was told to proceed; and in three days from the time the copy was given him he produced composed, corrected, printed, and bound - the edition of forty copies, one of which, being signed as a law by the proper officer in each house and approved by the President, was deposited in the archives of government in the office of the Secretary of State. The finished product may well challenge the world. We understand that a large edition, containing an index and marginal annotations, will soon be printed.

CONNECTICUT.

UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT. April Term, 1874. WOODRUFF and SHIPMAN, JJ. William C. Boon v. Etna Insurance Co. - This was an action tried to the court on a policy of fire insurance on a house in Missouri, burned during the war, in consequence of the accidental spread of a fire, set by order of the commandant of the United States military forces for the purpose of consuming a magazine of ammunition, to prevent it from coming into the possession of the Confederate troops, who were about entering the town. The defence was that the loss occurred by means of a military or usurped power." The court held that this phrase in policies is equivalent to "military and usurped," and does not apply where the loss is due to a lawful act of the lawful military authorities, and therefore gave judgment for the plaintiff.

64

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. August Term. SHIPMAN, J. Alfred Todd et al., Assignees v. James M. Townsend. — In this case the court, on a bill in equity by assignees in bankruptcy, set aside a mortgage which was given in good faith, but so drawn as to be voidable by the bankrupt's creditors for constructive fraud; holding that the assignees in bankruptcy had all the rights, in this respect, of attaching creditors.

THREE new judges of the Superior Court were elected by the recent General Assembly Sidney B. Beardsley, of Bridgeport; Roland Hitchcock, of Winsted; and Earl Martin, of Killingly.

A NEW Prize of $100 a year has been founded in the Yale Law School by Hon. J. M. Townsend, of East Haven, Ct., to be annually awarded to the best speaker at the Law School Commencement.

NEGLIGENCE. HIGHWAY. SUPREME COURT OF ERRORS. Baldwin v. Greenwood Turnpike Co. The plaintiff's horse, driven by his servant in his carriage along a public highway, in the exercise of ordinary care, became frightened by the breaking of the carriage, in consequence of a defect for which no negligence was attributable to the plaintiff, and ran furiously, throwing out the driver, soon after which he left the highway and passed over private property to and upon a turnpike road, where, still running furiously, he fell over the side of a bridge, by reason of a defect in the railing, and was injured, such defect being attributable to the negligence of the turnpike company. Held, that the turnpike company was liable for the injury, and that a traveller is not responsible for a secret defect in his carriage or harness, where there has been no want of ordinary care on his part in relation to it. In harmony with this decision is Hunt v. Pownal, 9 Vt. 411; but Davis v. Dudley, 4 Allen, 557, Moore v. Abbott, 32 Me. 46, and Moulton v. Sanford, 51 id. 127, are authorities to the contrary. — Albany Law Journal.

JJ.,

ILLINOIS.

REMOVAL OF SUIT FROM STATE TO UNITED STATES COURT. UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT, SOUTHERN DISTRICT. The People v. The Chicago and Alton Railroad Co. On the 18th of June last an opinion was delivered in this case, – which was heard and decided by DAVIS, DRUMMOND, and TREAT, - to the effect that under the act of Congress of April 20, 1871, passed to carry out the provisions of the fourteenth amendment, a circuit court of the United States had no jurisdiction of a petition to remove to that court a prosecution for a penalty begun by a state in its own courts, against a railroad company, its own citizens, although the act of the state legislature imposing the penalty impaired the obligation of a contract, and might, therefore, deprive the company of rights, privileges, and immunities granted by the Constitution.

BREACH OF PROMISE. — Donnerschlog v. Behrens. — Amelia Donnerschlog brought suit against Augustus Behrens, who had promised to marry her, but failed to keep his word. The plaintiff set her damages at two hundred dollars. The suit came to trial before Mr. Justice BANYON; and Behrens, not denying the principal facts alleged against him, excused himself by saying that the plaintiff insisted, as a condition of the marriage, that her mother should keep house for the young couple, and this defendant could not consent to. "I told her," said he, "that I loved her deeply, and was ready to marry her, but did not wish to marry her mother also, who was a woman of lordly and unpleasant habits, and insisted on feeding me too much on cabbage, a vegetable I always disliked." Mr. Justice BANYON said, "Which would you rather do, marry the lady and take her mother to live with you, or pay two hundred dollars?" Defendant answered, "I will pay two hundred dollars." Judgment was then delivered by the court: "Allow me to shake hands with you. I envy your firmness. There was a period in the life of this court, Mr. Behrens, when it was in circumstances somewhat similar to your own. If it had had the moral

courage which you possess, it would have saved about twenty-five years of misery and unhappiness.

"The alternative was presented to this court whether it would marry a young lady and her mother, or whether it pay one hundred and twenty-five dollars in gold. The court was poor at that time. It was earning an unsatisfactory living at the restaurant business. It yielded. It took the young woman and mother-in-law, and kept the one hundred and twenty-five dollars. For a quarter of a century this court has regretted its hasty action. It is glad to meet a man who cherishes happiness more than he does money. The order of the court is, that the defendant stand discharged, and that the complainant, who has been trying to bring a man into slavery to a mother-in-law, be fined ten dollars and costs.''

EXAMINATION FOR ADMISSION TO THE BAR. Το The judges of the Supreme Court of Illinois have been presiding at an examination of students for admission to the bar, and Mrs. Bradwell has published a pamphlet in which the questions and answers are reported. Some of the answers are not una

musing.

Q. The question is, taking a general view, whether a wager, at common law is lawful.

it?

A. All the Class, in Chorus. It is not lawful.

Q. Out of what do incorporeal hereditaments issue?

A. Out of rents and profits.

Q. Suppose a man should die seised of an estate, and leave no one to inherit

A. Yes, sir.

Q. When is it acquired by forfeiture?

A. It is acquired by forfeiture when the party owning the land owes something to another.

Q. Would an estate for a thousand years be a freehold or less than a freehold?

A. You cannot give an estate for one thousand years; nine hundred and ninety-nine years you may give, and that would be less than a freehold.

Q. How are corporations dissolved?

A. They were dissolved in various ways: sometimes by their own limitation, sometimes by the death of a party, sometimes by act of Parliament, and sometimes by the happening of events, I believe. They were dissolved also by the termination of the event by which they were created.

Q. Would there be no means by which they could be estopped?

A. Yes, sir.

A. They could be estopped by quo warranto and scire facias.

Q. What is the general issue in an action of debt on a specialty?

A. Not guilty.

A. Non est factum.

Mr. Wheeler. Is that the general issue in debt?

A. I think it as near as you can get at it.

Q. How does Blackstone describe the matter of the responsibility of a minister to the House of Commons, and the necessity of the removal of a ministry

and the election of a new Parliament in case there is a conflict between the House of Commons and the king?

A. When an act has passed through Parliament it is supposed to have received the assent of the reigning sovereign. When it is not assented to in this manner, it causes a dissolution.

Q. How many courts of record are described as existing in England? A. At first there was only one court in the feudary; then, afterwards, there were several courts, the Courts of Chancery, Assize, and Courts of Quarter

Sessions.

Q. What are known as the four superior courts?

A. The Court of Exchequer, the Court of Assize, the Court of Appeals, and the Court of Chancery.

Q. Can you state what they are, Mr. Randall?

A. I do not believe I can. There are nine different courts.

Q. I asked for the four superior courts.

A. Nisi Prius, I think, is one, the Court of Common Law, Court of Criminal Law, and Court of Chancery.

A. The Courts of Assize, Nisi Prius, Ecclesiastical, and Chancery.

Q. What is the name of an intermediate court between the King's Bench, Common Pleas, or either of the superior courts, to the House of Lords? A. I think the Courts of Exchequer and Nisi Prius.

Q. Is the Constitution of England written?

A. It is unwritten.

Q. How is it determined?

A. It is determined by the king.

KENTUCKY.

LAWS, NOT MEN. - CHARGE OF MCMANAMA, J., TO THE GRAND JURY OF OWEN COUNTY. - It would seem that the cause of law and order is not without an apologist and defender in this state, and we trust that Judge McManama may convince his fellow-citizens that law is above politics. He is certainly a man of courage and firmness, if we may judge from his address to the Grand Jury of Owen County at their recent session to investigate the disturbances of the public peace in that county, in which he said :—

Gentlemen of the Grand Jury, It is perhaps the first time in the history of Owen County when citizens have ever sat in the court, when there was not a single man that had not concealed deadly weapons upon his person. You have been summoned here to-day on important business, business that affects the people of the whole state, and particularly your own county. It has been heralded throughout this and other commonwealths in the Union that Owen County is in a state of insurrection; that the law in your midst is disregarded; that human life is insecure, and the courts and their officers set at defiance and held in utter contempt. Now, sirs, may I ask you, as the grand inquest of the county, is this true, and if it be, how long will you allow this state of affairs to remain? May I venture to express the hope that you, as one of the co-ordinate branches of the court, will do what is expected of you by the good people of Owen County; that you will rise above all personal considerations and manfully discharge that high trust the laws of your state impose upon you? No

sixteen gentlemen ever had a higher, more exalted position than you occupy to-day as the grand inquest of your county. That the good people every where, with hope and high expectations, are looking to you and your conduct in the discharge of your duty with feelings of pleasure and delight, is a fact of which I need not remind you. Offenders can only be brought to punishment through the action of this grand jury. You are the propelling power; you are the source from which the people can only expect protection; and I now warn you that unless you have come for the purpose of faithfully, diligently, and impartially discharging your duty, better by far you had remained at home. I have been a member of the bar sixteen years, and have never seen the grand jury impanelled in your county when the hotel and saloonkeepers did not send to them whiskey and cigars. This is indeed humiliating; yet there is no purer truth than this record in the Book of books. Not intending wantonly to wound the feelings of any of your predecessors, it is to them a burning shame, and, to say the least of it, disreputable to the fair name of Kentucky courts. I am but one man, and can do only work with the facts which you furnish me; but if any gentleman expects favors or considerations ap rt from a f thful, honest discharge of my duties, let him or them now, and during my official life, be at once undeceived. Law-breakers and malefactors are no associates of mine, and never receive an official smile. While I do not propose to step aside from the line of duty, I do intend to catch and hold to the utmost rigor of the law every one who does not respect, as the chief rule of human conduct, that law in all its truth, and without which you have no society, no protection. I am informed (and being so informed I deem it a duty to state it to you) that nearly a year ago a poor, defenceless boy was shot and killed on the streets of Monterey, in this county, and for which killing the party was duly and regularly indicted for murder by a grand jury of your county. The party so charged at once fled the country, and remained in exile till but two days since, when he returned to the town, armed with deadly weapons, and remained for hours within a stone's throw of this temple of justice, and was permitted by the sheriff of your county, who had in his possession a benca warrant for murder issued on that indictment against him, to walk or ride out of town free as the man against whom the breath of suspicion had never rested; that while said offender was so in your county seat, he, the sheriff, was shown the man, and was told he it was for whom they had a bench warrant for murder, to which your sheriff replied, "I do not want to see him," or, "I have no business with him," or words of similar import; and to-day the offender is running at large, free as any of you. Now, sirs, I invite your attention to the sheriff and his conduct; and if the facts be as stated, and if the Owen-County grand jury won't indict him, I will bring here from another county a grand jury that will, for I say to you in all seriousness and candor, this state of things shall no longer exist in Owen County. Precept after precept issuing from this court, and by the sheriff and his deputies and other ministerial officers are returned "not found." Such conduct will not be tolerated by this court. I intend that all ministerial officers of this court shall do their duty; and if they don't, let them bear, as they shall, the consequences resulting from their own dereliction of duty. I know that all the calamities with which you are now contending are the legitimate results of inefficient officers. I will seek the favor of no community at the sacrifice of my official position. It is an honorable one; and it shall never be disregarded or neglected while I am in its possession, if I have the ability to prevent it.

Gentlemen, you owe it to yourselves, your wives and children, your homes, and the lives and homes of your people, and more still are you adjured by every obligation that each of you have this day taken, to bring to justice every offender and violator of the law. Proud as the people of Owen County are, it is a burning shame