For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same tople and KEY-NUMBER ums due and paid prior to assignment for benefit of creditors held properly rejected.-Id. 353 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Surplus after payment in full of all allowed claims to be disposed of on equitable principles.-In re Lenox, 2 F.(2d) 92. Creditor failing to prove claim within a year held entitled to payment from surplus after all proved claims are paid.-Id. V. RIGHTS, REMEDIES, AND DISCHARGE OF BANKRUPT. 391(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Bankruptcy court may permit rights to be adjudicated in state court. In re By-Products Recovery Co., 2 F. (2d) 664. insurance 396 (3) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Life policy payable to bankrupt's wife held exempt notwithstanding provision for change of beneficiary. In re Weick, 2 F. (2d) 647. Endowment life insurance policy payable to bankrupt's wife held exempt.-Id. and proof showing demand as receiver held not fatal, in prosecution for concealment of assets.-Kalin v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 58. BANKS AND BANKING. I. CONTROL AND REGULATION IN 15 (U.S.D.C.Wash.) Bond securing deposit of bankrupt states held "security for specific fund," within bank deposit guaranty statute; "specific;" "generic."-Republic Casualty Co. v. Scandinavian-American Bank, 2 F. (2d) 113. II. BANKING CORPORATIONS AND ASSOCIATIONS. (D) Officers and Agents. 62 (U.S.C.C.A.Idaho) Instruction in prosecution for misapplication of funds not erroneous.-Deupree v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 44. III. FUNCTIONS AND DEALINGS. and Agents. 396(4) (U.S.D.C.La.) Printer's machinery (B) Representation of Bank by Officers and tools exempt under Louisiana statute; "tools and instruments necessary for exercise of trade or profession."-In re Fox, 2 F. (2d) 374. Exemption exists only so long as property is used for purposes for which it is exempted. -Id. denied 407(5) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Discharge for false financial statement on which credit extended within year.-In re Simon Weltman & Co., 2 F. (2d) 759. 408 (5) (U.S.D.C.Ga.) Discharge not barred by false statement by agent.-In re Maloof, 2 F. (2d) 373. "False statement," to bar discharge, must be personal act of bankrupt.-Id. 414(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Evidence of obtaining credit on false statements held not to warrant refusal of discharge.-In re Tilton, 2 F. (2d) 799. 414(3) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Master's report denying partners' discharge not overruled because they disclaim knowledge of false financial statement. In re Simon Weltman & Co., 2 F. (2d) 759. VI. APPEAL AND REVISION OF PRO CEEDINGS. (A) Superintendence and Revision. 440 (U.S.C.C.A.Ga.) Decree held reviewable by petition to revise.-Westmoreland v. Dodd, 2 F. (2d) 212. 440 (U.S.C.C.A.Md.) Order disallowing claim to lien reviewable by appeal. In re Spanish-American Cork Products Co., 2 F. (2d) 203. 440 (U.S.C.C.A.Miss.) Order dismissing petition to require receiver appointed by state court to turn over property to bankruptcy trustee reviewable by petition to superintendent and revise.-Neely v. McGehee, 2 F. (2d) 853. 444 (U.S.C.C.A.Ga.) Proceedings to revise held insufficient to give jurisdiction.-Wells v. Erwin, 2 F. (2d) 597. 446 (U.S.C.C.A.Tenn.) Finding of referee in contempt proceedings, affirmed by District Judge, will not be disturbed, if supported by any substantial evidence.-Haimsohn v. U. S., 2 F.(2d) 441. (B) Appeal. bank 116(2) (U.S.C.C.A.W.Va.) Creditor held required to credit bankrupt with a payment misappropriated.-Wallace v. Ohio Valley Bank, 2 F.(2d) 53. (C) Deposits. 133 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Until demand for balance of American's deposit in Austrian bank, balance not due and payable.-Zimmermann v. Miller, 2 F. (2d) 629. (D) Collections. 156 (U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) Stipulation in bank book held to entitle bank to charge back against depositor's account amount of dishonored checks.-City of Douglas v. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, 2 F. (2d) 818. 175(2) U.S.C.C.A.Tex.) Depositor's right of action for negligence in collection of check is exclusively against initial bank of deposit, and not negligent bank, to which it is sent for collection.-City of Douglas v. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, 2 F. (2d) 818. IV. NATIONAL BANKS. 248(1) (U. S. C. C. A. Tex.) Shareholder's payment to receiver of national bank to enable bank to resume business held not defense in action to enforce assessment.-Huff v. Page, 2 F. (2d) 544. subject to stockholders' liability, notwithstand248(1) (U.S:D.C.Tex.) Purchaser of stock ing fraud inducing purchase of stock.-Taylor v. American Nat. Bank of Wichita Falls, Tex., 2 F.(2d) 479. Stockholders' liability available to guarantors of bank's indebtedness to other bank.-Id. Levy of assessment does not absolve shareholders from suit at instance of creditors.-Id. National bank's settlement with debtor, who was stockholder, did not preclude enforcement of stockholder's liability against other stockholders.-Id. 248 (4) (U.S.D.C.Tex.) One who was shown as shareholder on books of bank, and who voted stock, held liable in creditor's action to enforce stockholders' liability.-Taylor v. American Nat. Bank of Wichita Falls, Tex.. 2 F.(2d) 479. 248(5) (U.S.D.C.Tex.) Married woman, holding stock in national bank, liable for assessments.-Taylor v. American Nat. Bank of Wichita Falls, Tex., 2 F. (2d) 479. 250(3) (U.S.D.C.Tex.) Stockholders in national bank, being sued for stockholders' liability, cannot bring cross-action.-Taylor v. American Nat. Bank of Wichita Falls, Tex., 2 F. (2d) 479. 250(5) (U.S.D.C.Tex.) Evidence held insufficient to prove fraud inducing purchase of bank stock. Taylor v. American Nat. Bank of Wichita Falls, Tex., 2 F. (2d) 479. 287(4) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Complaint held to sufficiently disclose receiver's capacity to sue. -Bean v. Stoddard, 2 F. (2d) 62. Specific instructions to commence action not essential to receiver's capacity to sue.-Id. BASTARDS. III. PROCEEDINGS UNDER BASTARDY LAWS. 35 (App.D.C.) Proceeding held within jurisdiction of juvenile court of District of Columbia.-Fillipone v. U. S., 2 F.(2d) 928. 50 (App.D.C.) Information properly presented by corporation counsel of District of Columbia. Fillipone v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 928. 63 (App.D.C.) Child should not be exhibited as evidence of resemblance to putative father, unless old enough to possess settled features and other corporal characteristics.-Fillipone v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 928. 70 (App.D.C.) Credibility of witness for jury, and not court.-Fillipone v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 928. 71 (App.D.C.) Instruction charging jury not to consider incriminating testimony voluntarily given by witness held erroneous.-Fillipone v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 928. Where child is exhibited to establish resemblance, jury should be instructed as to evidentiary value.-Id. BILL OF EXCEPTIONS. See Exceptions, Bill of. BILLS AND NOTES. II. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION. 129(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Ga.) Demand note is due immediately.-American Wholesale Corporation v. Bryant, 2 F. (2d) 31. V. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES ON INDORSEMENT OR TRANSFER. (B) Indorsement for Transfer. 285 (U.S.C.C.A.Ga.) That note was overdue when indorsed does not relieve indorser from liability.-American Wholesale Corporation v. Bryant, 2 F. (2d) 31. (D) Bona Fide Purchasers. 337 (U.S.C.C.A.Ga.) One acquiring mercantile paper before maturity for value acquires good title, notwithstanding knowledge of facts causing suspicion of transferor's rights.-Oliver v. Garlick, 2 F. (2d) 132. 337 (U.S.C.C.A.N.D.) Proof of custom between parties to notes held not admissible to impeach title of indorsees.-Kintyre Farmers' Co-op. Elevator Co. v. Midland Nat. Bank of Minneapolis, 2 F. (2d) 348. Bad faith alone can impeach title of indorsee in due course.-Id. 348 (U.S.C.C.A.N.D.) Demand notes negotiated within 30 days after issue held not dishonored.-Kintyre Farmers' Co-op. Elevator Co. v. Midland Nat. Bank of Minneapolis, 2 F. (2d.) 348. 362 (U.S.C.C.A.Ga.) Purchasers of notes held to acquire good title, notwithstanding seller's knowledge of facts adversely affecting such title.-Oliver v. Garlick, 2 F. (2d) 132. 365(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.D.) Proof that plaintiff is bona fide holder renders evidence of defenses between original parties immaterial.Kintyre Farmers' Co-op. Elevator Co. v. Midland Nat. Bank of Minneapolis, 2 F. (2d) 348. VI. PRESENTMENT. DEMAND, NOTICE, AND PROTEST. portation. 26 (U.S.D.C.Mo.) Demurrage charge held within powers of carrier.-Turner, Dennis & Lowry Lumber Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 2 F. (2d) 291. Reasonable classification may be made for purpose of demurrage charges.-Id. 30 (U.S.D.C.Mo.) Must include demurrage charges in their tariff schedules; "train transportation."-Turner, Dennis & Lowry Lumber Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 2 F. (2d) 291. Publication of tariff is notice to all shippers. Id. 32 (2) (U.S.D.C.Mo.) Additional demurrage charge for prolonged detention of lumber cars held for reconsignment held not invalid as discriminatory.-Turner, Dennis & Lowry Lumber Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 2 F.(2d) 291. 32(3) (U.S.D.C.Mo.) Tariffs may not discriminate to equalize business conditions.Turner, Dennis & Lowry Lumber Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 2 F. (2d) 291. II. CARRIAGE OF GOODS. (C) Custody and Control of Goods. 71 (U.S.C.C.A.S.C.) Identity of marketable commodity immaterial in passing on rights and obligations arising out of mistake in delivery. -Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Hollowell, 2 F. (2d) 674. Tender to carrier in repayment for cotton delivered by mistake of equal quantity of cotton of same grade held good.-Id. What is proper rectification of mistake in delivery, stated.-Id. (E) Delay in Transportation or Delivery. ~100(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Yard held private yard of Hay and Grain Exchange, and not gen 1033 INDEX-DIGEST For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER eral railroad facility, within rules relating to demurrage.-Granger v. Davis, 2 F. (2d) 695. Yard leased by Hay and Grain Exchange for benefit of members was "other than public delivery track" within demurrage tariff.-Id. Cars which yard of Hay and Grain Exchange could not hold held subject to demurrage, though not intended to be unloaded in plugging yard. -Id. Demurrage rule held inapplicable to cars held out of plugging yard because of congestion.-Id. Director General's action for demurrage accrued on cars moved in intrastate commerce held within jurisdiction of district court.-Id. Yards held "private yard" of Hay and Grain Exchange, and not general "railroad facility." -Id. CHATTEL MORTGAGES. See Collision. Collision I. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY. (B) Form and Contents of Instruments. erty held sufficient.-In re Coleman & Brown, 50 (U.S.C.C.A.Ga.) Description of prop2 F. (2d) 254. (C) Execution and Delivery. 63 (U.S.D.C.Del.) Trust receipt reserving title in vendor until payment of purchase_price Rennie Leather Co., 2 F. (2d) 750. held not "chattel mortgage."-In re Ford See Infants. CHILDREN. See Religious Societies. CHURCHES. CITIES. Railroad could not recover demurrage for delay which could have been avoided if cars had been placed in strict order of arrival.-Id. Constructive placement permissible only after physical tender of car or circumstances excusing it.-Id. Rule as to recovery of demurrage where goods were reshipped to consignee's purchaser See Municipal Corporations. in same car after removal of portion for inspection, stated.-Id. See Aliens. CITIZENS. CIVIL RIGHTS. (F) Loss of or Injury to Goods. 131 (U.S.D.C.Minn.) Special damages for loss of goods in transit must be specially plead- See Constitutional Law, 83. ed and proved.-Crail v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 2 F. (2d) 287. CLASS LEGISLATION. 135 (U.S.D.C.Minn.) Measure of damages See Constitutional Law, 233. for portion of shipment lost in transit stated.Crail v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 2 F. (2d) 287. Measure of damages for coal lost in transit stated.-Id. (J) Charges and Liens. 193 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Delivering carrier may collect all charges from consignee, including those of its connections.-Granger v. Davis, 2 F. (2d) 695. 195 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Freight in shipment from foreign country payable at schedule rate in American money.-New York & Pennsylvania Co. v. Davis, 2 F. (2d) 858. (K) Discrimination and Overcharge. 201 (U.S.C.C.A.Ga.) Special damage to plaintiff must be alleged in suit for charging rate in violation of Interstate Commerce Act. -Patterson v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 2 F. (2d) 592. IV. CARRIAGE OF PASSENGERS. (D) Personal Injuries. 307(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Agreement to ob serve employés' rules. held not to affect validity of release.-Allen v. Erie R. Co., 2 F. (2d) 712. 307(6) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Contract between railroad and employé of manufacturer of engine appliance held to release railroad from liability for negligence.-Allen v. Erie R. Co., 2 F. (2d) 712. car com (H) Palace Cars and Sleeping Cars. 411 (U.S.C.C.A.Ala.) Sleeping pany's duty toward passengers stated.-Pullman Co. v. Culbreth, 2 F. (2d) 540, 416 (U.S.C.C.A.Ala.) Negligence of sleeping car company in permitting assault on passenger to be continued held for jury.-Pullman Co. v. Culbreth. 2 F. (2d) 540. 416 (U.S.C.C.A.Ga.) Declaration in action against Pullman Company for negligent placing of ladder against upper berth held to state prima facie case.-Pullman Co. v. Cuttle, 2 F. (2d) 151, Evidence held sufficient to go to jury on question of negligence of Pullman Company's servant.-Id. CLERKS OF COURTS. 61 (U.S.C.C.A.Ga.) Should account for moneys received for paying out money in composition cases in bankruptcy.-U. S. v. Clayton, 2 F. (2d) 150. COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES. 6(5) (U.S.C.C.A.Iowa) College and trustees held not exempt from liability at law or in equity, at suit of cestuis que trust or contractees, for breach of trust.-Schell v. Leander Clark College, 2 F. (2d) 17. COLLISION. III. STEAM VESSELS MEETING OR 38 (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Privileged vessel bound to observe rules.-The West Hartland, 2 F. (2d) 834. Privileged vessel held chargeable with fault for collision.-Id. 38 (U.S.D.C.Cal.) Duty of privileged vessel to maintain course and speed.-The Newport, 2 F.(2d) 255. Privileged vessel held not chargeable with fault.-Id. 40 (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Circumstances indicating faults of both vessels.-The West Hartland, 2 F. (2d) 834. VI. VESSELS IN TOW. 60 (U.S.D.C.Or.) Duty of steamer to exercise extra precaution to avoid collision with unwieldy tow.-The Maine, 2 F. (2d) 605. IX. FOG OR THICK WEATHER. 81 (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Each vessel in a flotilla moored in a fog is required to give fog signals.The Southway, 2 F. (2d) 1009. C82(1) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Steamship held fault for collision with moored vessels in fog. -The Southway, 2 F. (2d) 1009. in X. NARROW CHANNELS, HARBORS, RIV- 94 (U.S.D.C.Cal.) Overtaking steam ves- barge held XII. SUITS FOR DAMAGES. 123 (U.S.D.C.Cal.) Contributory fault must be conclusively shown.-The Newport, 2 F. (2d) 255. (D) Damages, 130 (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Interest not recoverable as matter of right on death and personal injury claims.-The West Hartland, 2 F. (2d) 834. of vessel 140 (U.S.C.C.A.Wash.) Owner surrendered in limitation proceedings cannot claim for subsequent repairs.-The West Hartland, 2 F. (2d) 834. COMMERCE. I. POWER TO REGULATE IN GENERAL. Interstate commerce safety rules exclusive rules of law.-Id. II. SUBJECTS OF REGULATION. Commerce 21 (U.S.D.C.Fla.) Interstate Act not applicable to contract to furnish ships for transportation from Mobile to Pacific Coast. -American Cast Iron Pipe Co. v. Atlantic, Gulf & Pac. S. S. Corporation. 2 F. (2d) 397. 35 (U.S.C.C.A.Ga.) Federal government held authorized to supervise dipping of cattle in county of one state bounded by other state. -Thornton v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 561. III. MEANS AND METHODS oF REGULA TION. 63 (U.S.C.C.A.Alaska) Alaska statute taxing canneries held not unlawful interference with interstate commerce, as applied to foreign corporation.-Pacific American Fisheries Territory of Alaska, 2 F. (2d) 9. IV. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COM MISSION. CONDITIONAL SALES. CONSPIRACY. I. CIVIL LIABILITY. 18 (U.S.D.C.Wash.) A charge of conspiracy is not sustained by an allegation that defendants have brought suit in a court of competent jurisdiction.-Puget Sound Power & Light Co. v. Asia, 2 F. (2d) 491. II. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY. 23 (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Once established, conspiracy may properly be found to continue until abandonment or purpose accomplished.— Nyquist v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 504. 23 (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Reversal of conviction for conspiracy held necessary, in view of insufficiency of evidence to sustain conviction of alleged coconspirator.-Turinetti v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 15. 23 (U.S.C.C.A.Utah) Proof of overt act alone not sufficient.-Bell v. U. S., 2 F.(2d) 543. 24 (U.S.C.C.A.Utah) Overt act no part of "conspiracy."-Bell v. Ú. S., 2 F. (2d) 543. 28 (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Violation of injunction of a federal court is an "offense against the United States."-Taylor v. U. S., 2 F.(2d) 444. 28 (U.S.C.C.A.N.J.) Conspiracy to violate Prohibition Act is offense different from crime which is its object.-Linden v. U. S., 2 F.(2d) 817. 37 (U.S.C.C.A.Ind.) Conspiracy and completed act of transporting stolen automobiles in interstate commerce being both "felonies," doctrine of merger of offenses not applicable.— Waldeck v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 243. 40 (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Persons joining conspiracy after formation guilty.-Nyquist v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 504. (B) Prosecution and Punishment. 43(1) (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Not necessary for indictment to particularly describe objective crime.-Taylor v. U. S., 2 ̊F.(2d) 444. V. 89 (U.S.D.C.Mo.) Court without jurisdiction of action for reparation except on finding of Interstate Commerce Commission.-Turner, Dennis & Lowry Lumber Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 2 F. (2d) 291. 91 (U.S.D.C.Mo.) Order of Commission or regulation of carrier may be set aside by courts only for want of power to make it.Turner, Dennis & Lowry Lumber Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 2 F.(2d) 291. COMMERCIAL PAPER. See Bills and Notes. COMPROMISE AND SETTLEMENT. See Accord and Satisfaction. of contract.2 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Place Schwartzenberg v. Mayerson, 2 F.(2d) 327. 5(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Ark.) Contention that court should have ratified and approved attempt to compromise without merit where compromise was not effected prior to suit.-Road Improvement Dist. No. 1 of Franklin County, Ark., v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 2 F.(2d) 340. held es5(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Creditor topped to deny that check was accepted in full payment of disputed claim.-Schwartzenberg v. Mayerson, 2 F. (2d) 327. CONDEMNATION. See Eminent Domain. of in 43(4) (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Sufficiency dictment. Taylor v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 444. 43(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Ind.) Indictment not defective because failing to charge conspiracy was knowingly entered into.-Waldeck v. U. S., 2 F.(2d) 243. 43(5) (U.S.C.C.A.Ind.) Indictment for conspiracy not bad because overt acts charged constituted completed crime.-Waldeck v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 243. 43(5) (U.S.C.C.A.Utah) Allegation of overt act material.-Bell v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 543. between 45 (U.S. C. C. A. Ga.) Contract state veterinarian and Chief of Bureau of Animal Industry held admissible in prosecution for conspiracy to prevent federal employees from discharging duties.-Thornton v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 561. 45 (U.S.C.C.A.Ky.) Evidence of conspiracy to violate Volstead Act held competent.-Betz v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 552. of inter 45 (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Evidence state thefts of motor vehicles prior to Dyer Act admissible to prove conspiracy under act. Nyquist v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 504. 45 (U.S.C.C.A.Ohio) Evidence of other acts tending to show conspiracy admissible.Westfall v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 973. 47 (U.S.C.C.A.Ind.) Evidence held to show conspiracy to transport stolen automobiles in interstate commerce.-Waldeck v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 243. 47 (U.S.C.C.A.Ky.) Evidence of conspiracy to violate Volstead Act held sufficient.-Betz v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 552. 47 (U.S.C.C.A.Mich.) Evidence held to sustain conviction for conspiracy to violate Dyer Act.-Nyquist v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 504. For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER 47 (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Evidence held insufficient to sustain conviction for conspiracy to violate the Volstead Act.-Turinetti V. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 15. prohibition 47 (U.S.C.C.A.N.J.) National act making possession of liquor prima facie evidence of unlawful purpose held inapplicable in trial for conspiracy.-Linden v. U. S., 2 F. (2d) 817. X. EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAWS. 233 (U.S.C.C.A.Ark.) Road district benefit assessment must not be arbitrary and discriminatory to avoid denial of equal protection of law. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. May, 2 F. (2d) 680. XI. DUE PROCESS OF LAW. 251 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) "Due process" defined. -U. S. v. Ashe, 2 F. (2d) 735. 268 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Double trial for distinct felonies violation of due process of law, and conviction void.-U. S. v. Ashe, 2 F. (2d) 735. 290(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Ark.) Railroad in highway improvement district could not be taxed on mileage basis where other lands were taxed on acreage basis.-Road Improvement Dist. No. 1 of Franklin County, Ark., v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., 2 F. (2d) 340. ~290(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Ark.) Road district benefit assessment must not be arbitrary and discriminatory to avoid denial of due process of law. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. May, 2 F. (2d) 680. V. 308 (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Statute reviving claim for reparations held not unconstitutional as taking property without due process of law.Lakewood Engineering Co. v. New York Cent. R. Co.. 2 F. (2d) 121. 312 (U.S.C.C.A.II.) Provision of National Prohibition Act for abatement of nuisance held not violative of due process clause.-Peter Hand Co. v. U. S., 2 F.(2d) 449. 319 (App.D.C.) Refusal to pay interest on proceeds of sale of securities sold by Alien Property Custodian held not violative of due process clause.-Kny v. Miller, 2 F. (2d) 313. CONTEMPT. See Injunction, 223. CONTINUANCE. See Criminal Law, 590. CONTRACTS. See Bills and Notes; Compromise and Settlement; Sales; Specific Performance; Vendor and Purchaser. I. REQUISITES AND VALIDITY. (A) Nature and Essentials in General. 10(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Rule as to want of "mutuality" stated.-Nebraska Gas & Electric Co. v. City of Stromsburg, Neb., 2 F. (2d) 518. 10(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) Provision against cancellation of coal contracts after shipment held not to make contracts void for want of mutuality.-Boehmer Coal Co. v. Burton Coal Co., 2 F. (2d) 526. 10(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Tenn.) Contract held not invalid for want of mutuality.-Memphis Furniture Mfg. Co. v. Wemyss Furniture Co., 2. F. (2d) 428. 10(4) (U.S.C.C.A.Tenn.) Contract held not invalid for want of mutuality.-Handley-Mack Co. v. Godchaux Sugar Co., 2 F. (2d) 435. (D) Consideration. 53 (U.S.D.C.Mich.) Party who has received lidity for want of consideration.-U. S. v. Trauconsideration for contract cannot deny its vagott Schmidt & Sons, 2 F. (2d) 290. 57 (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Contract having no consideration, save mutual promises. must be bilateral.-Nebraska Gas & Electric Co. v. City of Stromsburg, Neb., 2 F. (2d) 518. 62(1) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Agreement not to engage in pig iron business held supported by consideration also supporting transfer of corporate stock.-Reed, Fears & Miller v. Miller, 2 F. (2d) 280. 82 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Consideration must be stated. Reed, Fears & Miller v. Miller, 2 F. (2d) 280. (F) Legality of Object and of Consideration. 108(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) If contract is within general void class, it matters not that it is free from fraud or corruption.-Horbach v. Coyle, 2 F. (2d) 702. 113(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Contract having as object perpetration of fraud is illegal and void.-Horbach v. Coyle, 2 F. (2d) 702. 113(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Directors' agreement, for secret bonus, to practice deception on stockholders and cause transfer of stock, held illegal.-Horbach v. Coyle, 2 F. (2d) 702. Contract by one occupying confidential relation to use influence for another for secret consideration illegal.-Id. Contract tending to induce corporate officers to disregard interests of corporation and stockholders is illegal.-Id. 117(2) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Agreements in restraint of trade not void when limited in time or partial in operation, and there is consideration.-Reed, Fears & Miller v. Miller, 2 F. (2d) 280. 138(1) (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Equitable rescission of contract held warranted only in event it were found not illegal.-Horbach v. Coyle, 2 F. (2d) 702. Neither party to action on illegal contract is entitled to affirmative relief.-Id. 140 (U.S. C. C. A. Neb.) Notwithstanding prima facie case is established by plaintiffs, defendants may show contract connected with prior illegal contract.-Horbach F.(2d) 702. v. Coyle, 2 Contract growing out of illegal contract is tainted with such illegality.-Id. Contract for purpose of carrying out unexecuted provisions of prior illegal contract is void.-Id. 141(2) (U.S.C.C.A.Neb.) Evidence of illegal agreement, pursuant to which contract sued on had been made, held improperly excluded. Horbach v. Coyle, 2 F. (2d) 702. |