all towns in a like condition.-Strange v. Ocon- | to the giving of bonds by public officers, is void
to Land Co. (Wis.) 1023.
*The rule that statutes must be uniform pre-
sumes a reasonable classification.-Strange v.
Oconto Land Co. (Wis.) 1023.
§ 3. Subjects and titles of acts.
Acts 32d Gen. Assem. (Laws 1907, p. 153) c.
155, authorizing the consolidation of all the
territory in certain cities of the first class into
one independent school district, even if given
a certain construction, held not in violation
of Const. art. 3, § 29, requiring the subject of
an act to be expressed in its title.-State v.
Grefe (Iowa) 13.
Acts 32d Gen. Assem. (Laws 1907, p. 153) c.
155, providing for the consolidation of all the
territory in certain cities of the first class into
one independent school district held as to its
title not in violation of Const. art. 3, § 29, re-
quiring the subject of an act to be expressed
in its title.-State v. Grefe (Iowa) 13.
because the matter sought to be added by the
amendment is not germane to the subject of the
section as enacted.-Prowett v. Nance County
(Neb.) 996.
§ 5. Repeal, suspension, expiration, and
revival.
Acts 32d Gen. Assem. (Laws 1907, p. 153) c.
155, authorizing the consolidation of all the ter-
ritory within certain cities of the first class into
one independent school district, if the voters
shall so determine, held not to repeal by impli-
cation Acts 31st Gen. Assem. (Laws 1906, p.
99), c. 136, § 10 (Code Supp. 1907, § 2793).-
State v. Grefe (Iowa) 13.
*A repealing statute, though absolute
terms, may continue for some purposes and to
some extent the provisions of the statute
pealed.-State v. Payton (Iowa) 43.
§ 6. Construction and operation.
The amendment by Laws 1901, p. 370, No. statute is to ascertain the legislative intent,
*The sole object in the construction of a
238, adding a new section relating to street and to arrive thereat the several sections are to
railways, at the end, held a violation of Const. be considered as a whole and harmonized if pos-
art. 4, § 20, as not germane to the subject ex-sible.-Coggeshall v. City of Des Moines (Iowa)
pressed in the title of the original law.-Ecorse
Tp. v. Jackson, A. A. & D. Ry. (Mich.) 89.
An infirmity in Pub. Acts 1877, p. 186, No.
177, amending Sess. Laws 1873, p. 504, No. 198,
§ 9 (Comp. Laws, § 6234), on the ground that
subdivision 7 (page 506) thereof relating to
maximum carload freight rates, was invalid as
not included in the title, was cured by the
subsequent amendments of section 9 by Acts
1883, p. 107, No. 116. Acts 1887, p. 286. No.
230, Acts 1889, p. 280, No. 202, Acts 1891, p.
101, No. 90, and Acts 1907, p. 56, No. 54, none
of which materially changed subdivision 7, and
all of which complied with the constitutional
requirements.-Robinson v. Harmon (Mich.) 661.
*The title of Loc. Acts 1901, p. 485, No. 439,
held sufficiently broad to cover a certain provi-
sion so as not to violate Const. art. 4, § 20.-
Fortin v. Bay City Traction & Electric Co.
(Mich.) 741.
Drainage Act, c. 89, art. 1. (Comp. St. 1907,
$$ 6178-6205) held not void as in contraven-
tion of Const. art. 3, § 11, requiring the ob-
ject of the act to be expressed in the title.
Omaha & N. P. R. Co. v. Sarpy County (Neb.)
the end that its object may be effectuated.-
*A statute is to be liberally construed
Coggeshall v. City of Des Moines (Iowa) 309.
*In construing a statute effect will be given,
if possible, to every word and clause therein.-
Robinson v. Harmon (Mich.) 661.
Comp. Laws. § 6235, requiring railroads to
transport freight under a penalty, held not a
penal statute, but remedial.-Robinson v. Har-
mon (Mich.) 664.
In construing a statute, the legislative intent
may often be ascertained from the provisions
of the sections in the immediate connection in
which it occurs.—In re Corby's Estate (Mich.)
906.
*An act should be given that meaning which
it is apparent from the language used the Leg
islature had intended.-State v. Hansen (Neb.)
Before a statute is construed as having extra-
territorial effect, legislative intention to give
such effect should clearly appear.-Lanham v.
Lanham (Wis.) 787.
*The mischief intended to be prevented by a
statute may be considered in construing it.-
Minneapolis Threshing Mach. Co. v. Haug
(Wis.) 811.
*St. 1898, § 2316a, relating to sales by chat-
tel mortgagees, held highly penal, and subject
Mach. Co. v. Haug (Wis.) 811.
to strict construction. Minneapolis Threshing
*A statute should be read with reference to
the leading idea thereof, that being regarded as
limitation on particular words or clauses and ex-
State v. Railroad Commission (Wis.) 846.
pansion of others within the scope thereof.-
*Rule for construction of statute declared.-
State v. Railroad Commission (Wis.) 846.
*The legislative intent in passing a law gov-
erns as to the scope thereof.-State v. Railroad
Commission (Wis.) 846.
1882, p. 111, ch. 118.... 668
1898, p. 55, ch. 100......1091
1902, pp. 84, 86, 87, 98,
1849, p. 294, No. 223. Re-
pealed by Loc.
Laws
1905, pp. 329, 408, Nos.
455, 492
1873, p. 504, No. 198, § 9.
Amended by Laws 1877,
p. 186, No. 177; Laws
1883, p. 107, No. 116;
Laws 1887, p. 286, No.
230; Laws 1889, p. 280,
No. 202; Laws 1891, p.
101, No. 90; Laws 1907,
p. 56, No. 54.
1877, p. 186, No. 177.
1889, p. 280, No. 202..... 661
1891, p. 101, No. 90.... 661
1893, pp. 388, 393, 391, No.
206, §§ 70, 78, 80, 84..
1895, p. 358, No. 193, §§
257 Art. 15, § 16.
279 Art. 18, § 2.
COMPILED LAWS 1897.
.1116 Ch. 164, art. 2, § 51. Add-
ed by Laws 1901, p. 370,
No. 238
1899, p. 140, No. 97. § 144 745
1899, p. 310, No. 200.... 203
1899, p. 342, No. 221.... 193
32 $ 669
988 § 670
264 681
3100
982 § 3173
22 § 4319
964 §§ 4436, 4437
983 § 5007
298 § 5381
Corporate stock, see Corporations, § 3.
Of railroad company, see Railroads, § 1.
Of unincorporated associations, see Joint-Stock
Companies.
Of corporations, see Corporations, § 4.
Of national bank, see Banks and Banking, § 3.
Of unincorporated associations, see Joint-Stock
Companies.
STOLEN GOODS.
See Receiving Stolen Goods.
As employers, see Master and Servant, §§ 3, 6.
Carriage of passengers, see Carriers.
Estoppel to deny corporate existence, see Cor-
porations, § 1.
Subjects and titles of statutes, see Statutes, § 3.
Use of city street by, see Municipal Corpora-
tions, § 7.
§ 1. Establishment,
maintenance.
Under Comp. Laws, c. 164, § 51, art. 2, as
amended by Laws 1901, p. 370, No. 238, the
fact that the consent of two adjoining property
owners for the use of a public highway by an
interurban railroad was obtained by fraud held
not to affect the company's rights, if the con-
sent of the requisite number of owners was
properly secured.-Ecorse Tp. v. Jackson, A. A.
& D. Ry. (Mich.) 89.
A contract between a street railway company
and a city held not ultra vires.-City of Niles
v. Benton Harbor-St. Joe Ry. & Light Co.
(Mich.) 937.
A transaction between a city and two street
railway companies held to amount to a com-
plete novation binding one of the companies to
pay to the city a part of the cost of paving a
street.-City of Niles v. Benton Harbor-St. Joe
Ry. & Light Co. (Mich.) 937.
and the negligence of defendant.-Heidmann v.
St. Paul City Ry. Co. (Minn.) 226.
*In an action for injuries by being struck by
a street car, railway company's negligence held
for the jury.-Morris v. St. Paul City Ry. Co.
(Minn.) 500.
*The rule making it the absolute duty of a
person approaching a railway crossing to look
and listen held not to apply to street_railway
crossings. Morris v. St. Paul City Ry. Co.
(Minn.) 500.
*In an action for injuries in being run down
by a street car, whether the person injured was
guilty of contributory negligence held for the
jury.-Morris v. St. Paul City Ry. Co. (Minn.)
See Highways; Municipal Corporations, 88
7, 8.
Subrogation is never allowed in favor of one
who would thereby reap advantage in any way
from his own wrongdoing.-Brown v. Sheldon
State Bank (Iowa) 289.
Subrogation is not allowed in favor of a per
son who is himself personally liable for what he
discharges by payment.-Brown v. Sheldon
State Bank (Iowa) 289.
A county treasurer, delivering to a bank a
receipt for taxes due from the bank and se-
curing credit for the amount of the taxes on his
deposit account in the bank, held not subrogated
to the claim of the county for taxes on his
settlement with the county for the amount of
the deposit on failure of the bank.-Brown v.
Sheldon State Bank (Iowa) 289.
in a bank in violation of Code,
A county treasurer depositing county funds
1457, held not
subrogated to the rights of the county as a
preferred depositor on his payment to the county
of the amount lost by the failure of the bank-
Brown v. Sheldon State Bank (Iowa) 289.
A street railway franchise held to require the To corporate stock, see Corporations, § 3.
company to be relieved from a burden to show
a certain fact.-City of Niles v. Benton Harbor-
St. Joe Ry. & Light Co. (Mich.) 937.
A franchise to a street railway company con- See Waters and Water Courses, § 2.
strued, and held to give to the city the option
to terminate the rights of the company, and,
the city not having exercised the option, it may
hold the company on its agreement to pay a
part of the cost of paving a street.-City of See Action.
Niles v. Benton Harbor-St. Joe Ry. & Light Co.
(Mich.) 937.
An acceptance of an ordinance granting a
franchise to a street railway held prima facie
an acceptance by the company.-City of Niles
v. Benton Harbor-St. Joe. Ry. & Light Co.
(Mich.) 937.
§ 2. Regulation and operation.
SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS.
Collection of taxes, see Taxation, § 5.
Recovery of possession by landlord, see Land-
lord and Tenant, § 6.
Where a statute regulating the operation of
electric cars is obviously for the benefit of the See Process.
public in general, a failure to comply with the
mandatory requirements of the act is at least
evidence of negligence in any action by an in-
dividual for injuries.-Fortin v. Bay City Trac-
tion & Electric Co. (Mich.) 741.
*In an action to recover for personal injuries
caused by collision between street car and plain-
tiff's buggy, evidence held sufficient to go to the
jury on the question of contributory negligence
Keeping saloon open on Sunday see Intoxicat-
ing Liquors, § 4.
Mandamus to prevent violation or Sunday law,
see Mandamus, § 1.
Right to recover on quantum meruit for goods
sold on Sunday, see Sales, § 1.
*Point annotated. See syllabus.
*Courts refuse to entertain actions on con-
tracts made in violation of Sunday statutes, be-
cause one who has participated in violating a
law cannot be permitted to assert any right
founded upon the illegal transaction.-Collins v.
Collins (Iowa) 1089.
*A note executed on Sunday, in violation of
Code, § 5040, held merely voidable.-Collins v.
Collins (Iowa) 1089.
*A note held valid, though executed on Sun-
day.-Collins v. Collins (Iowa) 1089.
*Contracts made in violation of the statute
forbidding business on Sunday are void, and
cannot be made the basis of a recovery, nor
can they be subsequently ratified.-King v.
Graef (Wis.) 1058.
*Where defendant agreed on Sunday to sell
plaintiff a car load of potatoes, and on Monday
the potatoes were weighed and examined, if the
acts on Monday were mere incidents of the
Sunday transaction, they would not prevent it
from being void, under the statute prohibiting
business on Sunday.-King v. Graef (Wis.) 1058.
*Where defendant agreed on Sunday to sell
plaintiff a car load of potatoes, which were
weighed, delivered, and paid for on Monday,
the transaction on Monday was a complete
contract of sale and delivery on that day, and
the void Sunday transaction would not bar a
recovery thereon.-King v. Graef (Wis.) 1058.
SUPERVISION.
Of gas company, see Gas.
SUPERVISORS.
Power of board of supervisors to levy road tax,
see Highways, § 2.
Right to construct cattleway over highway, see
Highways, § 1.
SUPERVISORY CONTROL.
See Certiorari, § 1.
SURETYSHIP.
See Principal and Surety.
Of insurance policy, see Insurance, § 4.
SURRENDER VALUE.
Of insurance policy, see Insurance, § 4.
SURVIVING PARTNERS.
See Partnership, § 3.
Of benefit insurance, see Insurance, § 11.
Duties of township tax officers, see Towns, § 1.
Of public lands, see Public Lands, § 1.
Parties entitled to raise constitutionality of tax
law, see Constitutional Law, § 1.
Payment of taxes by mortgagee, see Mort-
gages, § 1.
Payment of taxes to sustain adverse possession,
see Adverse Possession, § 1.
Power to levy road tax, see Highways, § 2.
Presumptions as to assessments, see Evidence,
§ 2.
Presumptions as to residence of grantee in tax
deed, see Evidence, § 2.
Special or local laws relating to inheritance
taxes, see Statutes, § 2.
Tax laws as impairing obligation of contract.
see Constitutional Law, § 4.
Tax title as constituting color of title, see Ad-
verse Possession, § 1.
Local or special taxes.
See Drains, § 2; Schools and School Districts,
§ 1.
Assessments for municipal improvements, see
Municipal Corporations, § 5.
Occupation or privilege taxes.
See Intoxicating Liquors, § 3; Telegraphs and
Telephones, § 2.
§ 1. Constitutional
restrictions.
![[blocks in formation]](https://books.google.co.kr/books/content?id=Kxs8AAAAIAAJ&hl=ko&output=html_text&pg=PA1218&img=1&zoom=3&q=action&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U2wb2cmfE_WvGuCAm6A60vkrAvVxg&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=745,579,213,24)
A provision in an ordinance imposing an occu-
pation tax on telephone companies, held not in
violation of Const. art. 9, § 6, because not uni-
form in respect to telephone companies with-
in the city. Nebraska Telephone Co. v. City of
Lincoln (Neb.) 284.
*An occupation tax measured by a percent-
age of the gross earnings of a telephone compa-
ny whose franchise is also taxed held not to tax
the same property twice.-Nebraska Telephone
Co. v. City of Lincoln (Neb.) 284.
St. 1898, § 1152, providing for an assessment
and collection of taxes in a town which fails to
elect officers, held not violative of Const. art. 8.
$ 1. providing that the rule of taxation shall be
uniform, because there was no board for review
of an assessment made under the act.-Strange
v. Oconto Land Co. (Wis.) 1023.
§ 2. Liability of persons and property.
Where a soldier was claiming an allowance
on his own tax assessment under Code Supp.
1902, § 1304, the burden was on the defendant to
show that he was not entitled to the exemp-
tion because his wife had property of the value
of $5,000, if such was the fact.-White v. City
of Marion (Iowa) 254.
On appeal to the district court from the rul-
ing of a board of review refusing a soldier's ex-
emption allowance from taxation, plaintiff's pe-
tition held sufficient to confer jurisdiction on
the district court without a transcript of the
proceedings before the board.-White v. City of
Marion (Iowa) 254.
Facts held sufficient to show that petitioner
made a claim for a soldier's exemption allow-
ance before a board of review and that the same
was denied.-White v. City of Marion (Iowa)
254.
Soldier's property held of the value of more
than $5,000, so that he was not entitled to a
soldier's exemption granted by Code Supp. 1902,
§ 1304.-White v. City of Marion (Iowa) 254.
A soldier is not deprived of his exemption
from taxation provided by Code Supp. 1902, §
1304, by the fact that he and his wife jointly
own property of the value of $5,000 or more.-
White v. City of Marion (Iowa) 254.
A soldier's life estate in land should be con-
worth of property, and is therefore not enti-
*Point annotated. See syllabus.
Acquisition of tax title by mortgage, see Mort- sidered in determining whether he has $5,000
gages, § 1.
|