Boroughs of Oxford, Cambridge, Bland- ... Sewage powers of collegiate bodies and Interference with works and property of commissioners of sewers and 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55. s. 6. 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55. s. 335. land drainage, of Admiralty and 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55. ss. 327-334. ... CROSS TITLES. A. ALKALI: Transfer of powers under Alkali Acts? 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55., Sch. V., Part III. (E.) to Local Government Board ANIMALS: ... CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY, supply of water in. See PUBLIC HEALTH (VI.) CHOLERA. See PUBLIC HEALTH (I.) (d.) COMMON LODGING-HOUSES, regulation of. See PUBLIC HEALTH (I.) (c.) (d.) CONTAGIOUS DISEASE. See PUBLIC HEALTH (I.) (d.) F. FACTORIES: Power of sanitary authority to require privy 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55. s. 38. (E.) accommodation for Not under Factory Acts and not kept in cleanly 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55. s. 91. (E.) state to be deemed nuisances... FIRE: Duty of urban sanitary authority to? 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55. ss. 66, 171. (E.) provide fireplugs, &c. ... FOOD, seizure of unsound. See PUBLIC HEALTH (I.) (a.) GAS: Pollution of streams by gas washings G. 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55. s. 68. (E.) Power of sanitary authorities to supply; and of company 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55. to sell their undertaking ss. 161-163 (E.) H. HACKNEY CARRIAGES, regulation of, in urban districts. See PUBLIC HEALTH (III.) HIGHWAYS in urban districts. See PUBLIC HEALTH (III.) HOP PICKERS, lodging of. See PUBLIC HEALTH (VÍ.) HOSPITAL. Powers of sanitary authority. See PUBLIC HEALTH (I.) (d.) I. IMPROVEMENT COMMISSIONERS, incorporation and election of. See PUBLIC HEALTH (II.) IMPROVEMENT OF LAND: Works for supply of sewage to land to be deemed INSPECTOR OF NUISANCES: Compulsory appointment of, by sanitary authorities L. 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55. ss. 189-190. (E.) LOCAL BOARD. See PUBLIC HEALTH (II.), (VI.) LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD. See PUBLIC HEALTH (IV.) ... 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55., Sch. V., Part III, (E.) Publication of general orders of 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55., Sch. V., Part III. (E.) LOCAL GOVERNMENT DISTRICT. See PUBLIC HEALTH (II.) M. MARKET, establishment and regulation by sanitary authority. See PUBLIC HEALTH (III.) MEAT, seizure of unsound. See PUBLIC HEALTH (I.) (a.) MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH: Compulsory appointment of 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55. ss. 189-191. (E.) Power to unite sanitary districts for appointing MILK, seizure of unsound. See PUBLIC HEALTH (I.) (a.) MORTUARY. See PUBLIC HEALTH (I.) (d.) N. NUISANCE. See PUBLIC HEALTH (I.) (a.) INSPECTOR OF NUISANCES. OVERCROWDING: Of houses, schools, and factories s. 286. 0. 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55. ss. 91, 109. (E.) PORT SANITARY AUTHORITY. See PUBLIC HEALTH (VI.) See PUBLIC HEALTH (III.) SANITARY AUTHORITY. See PUBLIC HEALTH (II.) SMOKE. SPECIAL DRAINAGE DISTRICT. See PUBLIC HEALTH (II.) T. TURNPIKE ROADS. See LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD, PUBLIC HEALTH (III.) 513 VI.-SELECT CASES: SCOTLAND. BY HUGH BARCLAY, LL.D., Sheriff Substitute, Perth. Sale Suspensive Condition-Delivery-Bankrupt. A sale of flax was made by sale note. The flax was for. warded by railway and received by the manager, and partly used, but without the buyer's knowledge. On the buyer learning of the arrival, he having at that time resolved to stop payment, directed the goods to be put aside, and declined to accept the bill which was a condition of the sale. Held in a question between the seller and the trustee for the creditors of the buyer, (1st) that the acceptance of the bill was a suspensive condition of the sale, and until implemented the property of the goods did not pass; (2nd) that the sellers had not waived their right to insist on the condition; and (3rd) the sellers were therefore entitled to restitution of the goods. In the discussion numerous English decisions were cited. Per Lord Justice Clerk (Lord Moncreiff): "I am of opinion, in the first place, that until the letter of advice arrived, and the bankrupt had reasonable opportunity of acting on it, delivery was not complete, and might be honestly and properly refused when the resolution to stop was taken; then looking at the terms of the letter of advice, I am of opinion that the sale was one under the suspensive condition, that a bill for the price should be granted on delivery. The bill was not granted, and therefore the property never passed, and the seller is entitled to demand the goods." Lords Neaves, Ormidale, and Gifford concurred. 18 Jan., 1876. Brandt & Co. v. Dickson, 3 S.C., 375. Company Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Act-Transfer of Shares. A year A person executed a transfer of Railway shares. later, his estates were sequestrated under the Bankrupt Statute. After the sequestration the transfer was recorded. Some years after, the trustee claimed the shares as falling to him. Held that the true criterion of the completion of a transference was not mere intimation to the Company, but the reception of the transferee as a partner. Therefore the transferee having completed his title, and the trustee not having done so, the latter could not now claim. Many English cases were cited. Per Lord Justice Clerk (Lord Moncreiff): "That which is essential under the Statute is that the transferee shall be put on the register of shareholders, and the only question precedent to that is whether the title to be put on the register of shareholders has been transferred by a habile deed." "It is quite plain therefore, that an assignation to shares, though intimated, will not make the assignee a partner of the Company." Lords Neaves, Ormidale, and Gifford concurred. 3 Feb., 1876. Morrison v. Harrison, 3 S.C., 406. Ship-Charter-party-Demurrage. A charter-party stipulated that the vessel should "proceed to a loading berth in Leith Docks, as ordered, and there load in ten working days, as customary, a full and complete cargo of steam coals." On 16th April the master intimated to the charterers that the ship then lying at a loading berth was ready to receive her cargo. The charterers entered her in the dockmaster's books for a crane berth, for which the vessel had to wait her turn till 3rd May. In an action of demurrage, Held, that under the charter-party the charterers had the choice of a loading berth, but that the lay days commenced to run from 17th April, when the loading might have commenced. English decisions were cited on both sides, especially Tapscott v. Balfour, L.R. C.P. 46. Per Lord Ardmillan: "The intermediate view, and I think the view taken in the case of Tapscott when rightly understood, is the sound one, that the lay days should be held to have begun from the day the vessel was in the dock, and when notice was given that she was ready to take in her cargo, and demurrage must be awarded accordingly." Lords Mure and Deas concurred. 4 Feb., 1876. Dall' Orso v. Mason & Co., 3 S.C., 419. Reparation-Culpa. A company of ironmasters in course of their trade accumulated large heaps of refuse of combustible materials, which took fire. A neighbouring farmer sued for damages arising from noxious vapours. The Court awarded £200 damages. The English case of Rylands v. Fletcher, L.R. 3 E. & i. App. 330, was chiefly relied on. Per Lord Justice Clerk (Lord Moncreiff): “I think that culpa does lie at the root of the matter. If a man puts on his land a new combination of materials which he knows, or ought to know, are of a dangerous nature, |