Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

BATIES.
9. Contributory negligence of a person
Bee CONFISCATION, 3, 4; CONSTITUTION- killed on a railroad crossing is so conclusively
AL LAW, 1; EXTRADITION; PRIVATE shown that there is no question for the jury,
LAND CLAIMS, 8, 10.

TRIAL.

POSSESSION.

where the undisputed facts are that he was familiar with the crossing and could not have failed to see the train if he had looked

Question for Jury, see also ADVERSE for it while 40 feet distant from the track, but drove slowly upon the track without apSee also APPEAL AND ERROR, 2; CONSTI-pearing to see or look for the train until just TUTIONAL LAW, 10, 27; CRIMINAL LAW, as it struck him. Northern P. B. Co. v. 1; JUDGMENT, 10. Freeman, Instructions.

1014

1. Trial by jury under the Constitution 10. The modification of a requested inmeans a trial by a jury of twelve men in the struction which assumes the credibility of a presence and under the superintendence of a judge empowered to instruct them on the witness, by stating that the weight to be law and to advise them on the facts, and (ex-given his testimony is a question for the cept on acquittal of a criminal charge) to jury, does not improperly discriminate set aside their verdict, if, in his opinion, it against him. Davis v. Coblens,

is against the law or the evidence. Capital

Traction Co. v. Hof,

873

[blocks in formation]

3. A common-law trial by jury in a court of record upon appeal from a judgment of a justce of the peace in a civil action after giving bond with surety to prosecute the appeal and to abide the judgment of the appellate court, is sufficient to satisfy the constitutional right of trial by jury. Id.

4. The right of trial by jury is not unduly obstructed by enlarging the civil jurisdiction of justices of the peace to $300, and requiring every appellant to give security to pay and satisfy the judgment of the appellate court in order to obtain a trial by a common-law jury on appeal.

Id.

5. A statutory proceeding before a special tribunal, to determine claims against a city which has no legal obligation, is not a suit at common law, within the meaning of U. S. Const. 7th Amend. Guthrie Nat. Bank v. Guthrie, 796

Questions for court er jury.

6. The question of the acceptance of a trust by creditors may be left to the jury, notwithstanding their positive oral testimony to the acceptance, where this question is closely connected with a question of their participation with the debtor in defrauding other creditors. Sonnentheil v. Christian Moerlein Brew. Co.

492

7. The knowledge of local creditors who have accepted a deed of trust, that it is fraudulent, may be left to the jury, where the debtors are shown to have remained in practical control of the business, obtained credit on false representations to commercial agencies, and made large purchases of goods on credit just before an assignment, while the rumors of their insolvency could hardly have escaped the ears of such creditors. Id.

8. The authority to act for another party is a question for the court to decide, if only one inference can be drawn from the evidence, and that is want of authority. Washington Gaslight Co. v. Lansden, 543

1147

in a prosecution under U. S. Rev. Stat.
11. In answering a question of the jury

5208, for unlawful certification of a check,
when they come in after consultation and
ask for the law as to certification when no
money appears to the credit of the drawer
and the court assumes to answer it by ref-
erence to that section, its failure to explain
the meaning of "wilful violation" as used in
§ 13 of the act of Congress of 1882 when de-
fendant's counsel requests it is error which
is not cured by mere reference to the original
charge. Spurr v. United States,
TROVER.

1150

See also BANKS, 1; PUBLIO LANDS, 11.

The rule that a mere trespasser cannot defeat the right of the plaintiff in trover by showing a superior title in a third person, without showing himself in privity or connecting himself with such third person, has no application to cases wherein the plaintiff has shown no prima facie right to bring the action. United States v. Loughrey,

TRUSTS.

420

[blocks in formation]

2. An offer to repay the money loaned is not necessary in order to obtain the cancelation of a contract for usury under Minn. Gen. Stat. 1894, § 2217, providing that such contracts shall be canceled and given up. Missouri, K. & T. Trust Co. v. Krumseig, 474

3. A contract under which $1,970 is actually received by a borrower who gives ten notes of $360 each, payable in monthly instalments of $30 each, with a proviso that in case of his death all the debt remaining unpaid shall be released if he is not then in default,-is a scheme or colorable device to cover usury. Id.

VEIN.

See MINES, 4.

VERDICT.

of waters in respect to which the United States has jurisdiction, within the meaning of the prohibition of the act of Congress of September 19, 1890, does not mean simply an obstruction in the navigable portion of the stream, but includes anything, wherever done or however done, which tends to destroy the navigable capacity of one of the navigable waters of the United States. Id. Rights of public.

6. The dominion and propriety in the Potomac river and the soil under it passed to Lord Baltimore by grant from Charles I. in

See CRIMINAL LAW, 2; JUDGMENT, 10. 1632 as part of the prerogative rights an

VESTED RIGHTS.

See APPEAL And Error, 3.

WAGES.

See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 14, 22. WAIVER.

See ACTION OR SUIT, 3.

WAR.

See BLOCKADE; GUARDIAN AND WARD. WAREHOUSEMEN.

See CARRIERS, 1; CLOUD ON TITLE, 2. WARRANT.

See EQUITY, 4.

WAR REVENUE.

See INTERNAL REVENUE, 2.

WATER POWER.

See CANALS.

WATERS.

See also APPEAL AND ERROR, 4; BOUNDARIES, 2, 3; CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 24; CONTRACTS, 11, 13; COURTS, 17; DAMS; EMINENT DOMAIN, 2; EVIDENCE, 6, 9; INJUNCTION, 4; MUNICIPAL CORPORA TIONS, 1; PLEADING, 2; STATUTES, 6. 1. The mere fact that logs, poles, and rafts are floated down a stream occasionally and in times of high water does not make it a navigable river. United States v. Rio Grande Dam & I. Co. 1136

nexed to the political powers conferred on him, and were intended to be held by him in trust for the common use of the community about to be established for navigation and fishery, and not as his private property to be parceled out and sold for his individual emolument. Morris v. United States, 946 Land under water.

7. Lands lying beneath the waters of the Potomac and within the limits of the District of Columbia were not subject to sale by the Land Department under the general resolution of Congress of February 16, 1839, authorizing patents for vacant lands, but providing that this should not affect land ceded to or acquired by the United States for public purposes.

Id.

8. Subsequent recession of the waters of the Potomac from land under water at the time of the passage of the general resolution of Congress of February 16, 1839, providing for patents for vacant lands, will not bring such lands within the scope of the statute. Id. Riparian rights.

9. Riparian rights do not attach to lands acquired by the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Company under acts of Congress authoriz ing the location of the canal along the bank of the Potomac river within the District of Columbia.

Water power.

Id.

10. The right of the state to lease such portion of the water power reserved as it does not require for the use of a penitentiary is included in the rights reserved to the state 2. A state cannot by its legislation de- under S. C. act December 24, 1887, authorizstroy the right of the United States as the ing the transfer of a canal, but providing owner of lands bordering on a stream, to that the state shall be furnished, free of the continued flow of its waters, in the ab- charge, 500 horse power of water power sence of specific authority from Congress. "for the use of the penitentiary and for Id. other purposes," and declaring that "the right of the state to the free use of the said 500 horse power shall be absolute." Columbia Water Power Co. v. Columbia Electric Street R. Co. 521

3. The power of the general government to secure the uninterrupted navigability of all navigable streams within the limits of the United States is within the jurisdiction of the general government over interstate commerce and its natural water highways. Id.

Water supply and rates.

11. The inadequacy of the supply of water which renders a contract by a city with a water company voidable does not justify the city in erecting waterworks of its own in violation of the express terms of the contract, without first having the contract annulled. Walla Walla v. Walla Walla Water Co. 341

4. An appropriation of the entire unappropriated flow of a river above the point of navigability so as seriously to affect its nav igability further down is not authorized by the acts of Congress which permit appropriation of water in aid of mining industries and for the reclamation of arid lands. Id. 12. An ordinance granting a right to a 5. Obstructions to the navigable capacity' water company for twenty-five years to lay

See also CRIMINAL LAW, 1.

and maintain water pipes for the purpose | WITNESSES. of furnishing the inhabitants of a city with water does not create a monopoly, or prevent the granting of a similar franchise to another company, especially when there is an express stipulation that the city shall not erect waterworks of its own, but no stipulation against granting another franchise.

Id.

13. An opportunity to be heard upon the question of water rates fixed by ordinance is not denied where they are conferences between the officers of the corporation whose rates are fixed and the municipal authorities, although these officers are not allowed to be present at the final meeting when the ordinance is passed. San Diego Land & T. Co. v. National City, 1154 14. The losses from distribution of water to consumers outside of the city are not to be considered in fixing the rates for consumers within the city by ordinance. Id.

WHARVES.

See also CARRIERS, 1, 2; CLOUD ON
TITLE, 2; EMINENT DOMAIN, 2; EVI-
DENCE, 9.

1. A wharfinger is bound to exercise reasonable diligence in ascertaining the condition of the berths at his wharves, and, if there is any dangerous obstruction therein, to remove it or give due notice of its existence to vessels about to use the berths. Smith v. Burnett, 756

2. The right to erect and maintain permanent wharves could not be acquired under Md. act December 19, 1791, authorizing_licenses for wharves in the waters of the Po

tomac and the eastern branch to be given by commissioners "until Congress shall exercise jurisdiction and government within said territory." Morris v. United States, 946 WILLS.

1. A codicil which makes the testator's intent reasonably clear may be given effect though it is not so free from ambiguity as the provisions of the will which are affected by it. Home for Incurables v. Noble,

486 2. A codicil revoking a "bequest" to a home for incurables, and bequeathing to a friend "the $5,000 (heretofore in my will bequeated to said Home for Incurables)," does not revoke the provision in the will by which all the residue and remainder of the estate, of whatever kind, is given (using the words "devise and bequeath") to the Home for Incurables, but does revoke a bequest of $5,000 to a certain hospital, which is the only bequest of that amount in the will, both these gifts being declared to be for the establishment of beds in memory of a son of the testatrix.

Id.

MAR 3

The extent and manner of the crossexamination of a witness outside of the matter connected with his examination in chief is within the discretion of the court. Davis v. Coblens,

WRIT AND PROCESS.

See also GARNISHMENT, 1.

1147

[blocks in formation]

3. A nonresident agent of a foreign insurance company who comes into a state to investigate a claim for a loss, with power to compromise it within stated terms, leaving him a certain discretion as to the amount, when he is not a mere special agent for that particular case but is employed generally, sufficiently represents the company for the on a salary, to act in all cases of that kind, service of process in an action on the claim he is investigating, where the company is doing business within the state.

Id.

[blocks in formation]
« iepriekšējāTurpināt »