8. After a partnership had been dissolved by the death of one partner, a judgment was recovered by a partnership creditor against the survivor, and execution issued thereon, which was returned unsatisfied. Held, that the creditor might thereupon sue the executor of the deceased partner, and that the action could not be defeated by proof that the surviving partner had property which might have been taken on the execution. Pope v. Cole, 55 N. Y. 124.

See FRAUDS, Statute of, 2.

PASSENGER. See NEGLIGENCE, 1, 3.

- See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 3.

PAYMENT. See ILLEGAL CONTRACT, 5; RECEIPT.

PENAL ACTION.

In debt for a penalty against three, a verdict was found against two defendants, and for the third. Held, that judgment might be entered against the two, notwithstanding the verdict for the other; it not being necessary, in a penal action, though in form ex contractu, to prove a joint liability. — Chaffee v. United States, 18 Wall. 516.

See BANKRUPTCY, 3.

PERIL OF THE SEAS. See PROXIMATE CAUSE.

See CORPORATION, 1; INDORSEMENT; PARENT; QUO WAR

RANTO.

POWER.

Husband and wife conveyed land in trust, giving the trustee power to sell on the written request of the wife. Held, that on her written request he might mortgage the land. Zane v. Kennedy, 73 Penn. St. 182.

Action by Henry V. Libbart on a judgment recovered by him. The judgment given in evidence purported to be in favor of H. V. Libhart. Held, that the identity of the persons was not to be presumed, and that in the absence of further evidence the plaintiff could not recover. ·Bennett v. Libhart, 27 Mich. 489.

PROMISSORY NOTE. - See BILLS AND NOTES.

PROXIMATE AND REMOTE CAUSE.

Defendants contracted to tow plaintiffs' barge on Lake Erie. After the voyage was begun, defendants voluntarily and without just cause, delayed three days, and then resumed the voyage; before it was finished, a storm came on, and the barge was lost. There was evidence that but for the delay, the storm would probably have been avoided, and the barge would have arrived safely. Held, that defendants were not liable for the loss, their delay being the remote and not the proximate cause of it. - Daniels v. Ballantine, 23 Ohio St. 532.

QUO WARRANTO.

An information to oust certain persons from acting as a corporation, because not duly organized as such, held, bad, because brought against the corporation in its corporate name, and not against the individuals claiming corporate powers. Mud Creek Draining Co. v. The State, 43 Ind. 236.

RAILROAD.

A railroad company, by agreement with the Pullman Car Company, used on its road cars belonging to the car company, furnished fuel and lights, kept them in running order, and received its ordinary fare for transporting passengers therein. The car company kept the furniture of the cars in repair, and received and collected by its own servants the fare for the extra accommodation. Held, that the cars were taxable to the railroad company as part of its rolling stock. — Kennedy v. St. Louis, Vandalia, & Terre Haute R.R. Co., 62 Ill. 395. See CARRIER; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 8; EASEMENT; EJECTMENT; LICENSE; NEGLIGENCE, 1, 2, 3.

RECEIPT.

A receipt was given for a certain sum "in payment of a note which is lost or mislaid." Held, that this payment was not a discharge of the note, but only a payment pro tanto. · Witherington v. Phillips, 70 N. C. 444.

-

RECEIVING STOLEN GOODS.

Indictment for receiving stolen goods. Held, that evidence that the prisoner had before received from the same thief other goods which he knew were stolen, was admissible as evidence of guilty knowledge. Shriedley v. The State, 23 Ohio St. 130.

RECORD. See ESTOPPEL, 1; EVIDENCE, 9, 10; HUSBAND AND WIFE, 2.

REMOVAL OF SUITS FROM STATE TO UNITED STATES COURTS.

Action brought in a state court by a citizen of that state against another citizen and two non-residents. Held, that the non-residents could not remove the cause into the Circuit Court of the United States. (MILLER and BRADLEY, JJ., dissenting.) — Florence Sewing Machine Co. v. Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Co., 18 Wall. 553.

SALE. -See ATTORNEY; BONA FIDE PURCHASER; CONSTITUTIONAL Law, 1, 2; ESTOPPEL, 2; FRAUD; FRAUDS, STATUTE OF, 4, 5; War, 3.

Plaintiff sued defendant for saying of him, "You are a cheat and a swindler, and you defrauded me." Held, (1) that these words did not charge any offence indictable by the law of Iowa; (2) that therefore they were not actionable per se, although imputing an offence indictable at common law. - Lucas v. Flinn, 35 Iowa, 9.

SPIRITUOUS AND INTOXICATING LIQUORS. —See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 6. See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 1.

STAY LAW.

SUBSCRIPTION.

Where the law authorized subscriptions to stock of a railroad corporation in the manner to be provided by its by-laws, a subscription was made before the corporation had adopted any by-laws. Held, that it was not binding on the subscriber, nor made so by the subsequent adoption of a by-law accepting subscriptions theretofore made. ·Carlisle v. Saginaw Valley & St. Louis R.R. Co.,

27 Mich. 315.

Action on a promissory note. Plea, that defendants made the note as sureties, that no consideration moved to them, and that the principal maker was a feme covert, and so not liable, of all which plaintiff had notice. Held, bad. — Davis v. Statts, 43 Ind. 103.

See ESTOPPEL, 2.

TAX.

1. A water company in a city was authorized by its charter to levy and collect assessments in the nature of water-rents on every dwelling in any street where the water-pipes were laid. Afterwards the city acquired the property and all the rights, privileges, powers, and franchises of the company. Held, that whether or not the company could constitutionally exercise the power of taxation given by the charter, the city could. — Allentown v. Henry, 73 Penn. St. 404.

2. The charter of a corporation providing that its property "shall not be subject to taxes or assessments," held, to exempt it from assessment for street improvements. [Court of Errors: reversing judgment of Supreme Court.]State v. Newark, 7 Vroom, 478.

See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 5, 7, 8; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, STATE, 1; RAILROAD.

TENANT IN COMMON. See PARTNERSHIP,

TENDER. See MONEY; WAR, 1.

2.

TRUST.

See CHARITY; DEVISE, 2; FOREIGN JUDGMENT, 1; POWER.
TRUSTEE PROCESS. See FOREIGN ATTACHMENT.

USURY.

1. A builder contracted to build houses for $54,700, payable in annual instalments of $12,000, to bear interest at a rate exceeding that allowed by statute. Held, that if the interest was found by the jury to be part of the contract price of the houses, the contract was not usurious. - Graeme v. Adams, 23 Gratt. 225. 2. A note given for interest upon arrears of interest is not usurious. - Stewart v. Petree, 55 N. Y. 621.

See ILLEGAL CONTRACT, 4.

VARIANCE. -See BURGLARY.

VERDICT.

In ejectment, the jury found a verdict "for the plaintiff in the sum of thirty dollars." Held, good as a general verdict for the plaintiff, and that judgment for possession might be entered thereon. — Daniels v. Chicago & N. W. R.R. Co., 35 Iowa, 129.

VOTER.

Ballots cast at an election differed from those required by statute in the size of paper and print, and in other details of printing, over which the elector had no control. Held, that they should not therefore be rejected. — Kirk v. Rhoads, 46 Cal. 398.

WAR.

1. A note was payable in 1862, in Chicago. When it fell due, the holder and two of the makers of it were without, and the other makers within, the lines of the Federal army. No tender of payment was made at the time and place specified in the note. Held, that interest ran against all the makers from the Yeaton v. Berney, 62 Ill. 61.

time the note fell due.

2. An acknowledgment taken during the war, before the provost-marshal of Newbern, N. C., while that place was occupied by the United States army, held, valid. Paul v. Carpenter, 70 N. C. 502.

3. Promissory notes, and a deed of trust of land to secure their payment, were made in 1860 by citizens and residents of a State afterwards in rebellion. In 1862, the notes being due and unpaid, the land was sold under a power contained in the deed of trust. Held, a valid exercise of the power. - Washington University v. Finch, 18 Wall. 106.

WATERCOURSE.

In California, an action lies by a land-owner against the owner of adjacent lower land for obstructing the natural flow of surface water from the plaintiff's over the defendant's land. — Ogburn v. Connor, 46. Cal. 346.

WILL.See CANCELLATION; CONFEDERATE MONEY; DEVISE, 1; ELECTION; EVIDENCE, 1, 9; MISTAKE.

64

"Described in and conveyed by."- See DEED, 1.

"Fiduciary Character.". See BANKRUPTCY, 1. Guilty of a Fraud in contracting the Debt."-See FRAUD. "House of Ill-fame." — See JURISDICTION, 1.

"Issue of Fact.” - See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, STATE, 3.
"Payable in Canada Currency." —See BILLS AND NOTES.
"Resident Merchant." See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 2.

"Stay Law.". - See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 1.