« 이전계속 »
cluded. Where a juror is accepted as being impartial' against the will of the assignee. Burbank v. Rockinghe must remain so during the trial. To permit him to ham Ins. Co., 24 N. H. 550; Wyman v. Prosser, 36 accept favors from either party, is to place him under Barb. 368; Wyman v. Wyman, 26 N. Y. 253; Farmers' obligations to such party, the tendency of which is to Ins. Co. v. Graybill, 74 Penn. St. 17; Pierce v. Insurbias his judgment. Nor is it material that such favors ance Co., 50 N. H. 297, 301; Barnes v. Union Ins. Co. were not intended to iufluence the juror, as it cannot 45 id. 21; Hale v. Insurance Co., 32 id. 295; Cumbe determined how far they may have had that effect. ings v. Cheshire Co. Ins. Co., 55 id. 457; Stimpson And such misconduct will vitiate the verdict. In y. Monmouth Ins. Co., 47 Me. 379; Cumings v. HilTomlinson v. Derby, 14 Am. Law Reg. 543, one of the dreth, 117 Mass. 309. Maine Sup. Jud. Ct., May 23, jurors during the progress of the trial expressed an 1883. Grant v. Elliot & Kittery Mutual Fire Insuropinion as to the merits of the case to persons who ance Co., 75 Me. 196. Opinion by Barrows, J. were not on the jury, and the verdict was set aside. The court say (page 515) : “Since the case of Bennett FIRE POLICY WHISKY IN BOND - WHEN TAX INF. Howard, 3 Day, 219, the law of this State has been CLUDED. - An insurance policy is a contract of inthat when a juror has had conversation with a party | demnity, and in the absence of any thing to the connot of the papel respecting the case on trial, it is suffi- trary in the contract, or in the course of dealing cient cause to set aside the verdict, unless it appears between the parties, covers the entire proprietary that the successful party in the suit has not been bene- interest of the assured. A policy upon whisky in fitted by the juror's misconduct or the losing party bond, without reference to the government tax, eninjured. 1 Swift, Dig. 775 ; State v. Watkins, 9 Conn. titles the assured to include the tax in his recovery, in 47; Pettibone v. Phelps, 13 id. 445; Hamilton v. Pease, case of loss, if the assured is liable for the tax. U. 8. 38 id. 115. The whole tendency of the misconduct Circuit Court, Kentucky, Aug. 14, 1883. Hedger v. in this case was to benefit the plaintiff and injure Union Insurance Co., 17 Fed. Rep. 500. Opinion by the defendant, and it is highly probable that it op- Barr, J. erated to enhance the amount of damages the plaintiff recovered. Ensign v. Harney. Opinion by Max- FIRE POLICY - ON GOODS TRANSPORTED-DEFEAT OF well, J.
RIGHT OF SUBROGATION AVOIDING.- Under an open (Decided Dec. 18, 1883.)
policy of insurance on goods while in transit by railroad, it was stipulated that the insurance company should, in case of loss, be subrogated to all claims against the carrier. Certain goods covered by the
policy were destroyed in a railroad collision, having INSURANCE LAW.
been shipped under a bill of lading which provided
that in case of loss, by which the railroad company FIRE POLICY — WAIVER OF PROOFS OF LOSS - TOTAL
incurred any liability, the railroad company should LOSS OF INSURED BUILDING. — (1) The waiver of the
have the benefit of any insurance which might have proofs of loss, required in a fire insurance policy, may be inferred by the act of the insurer, evincing a recog
been effected on the goods. Held, in an action by the
insured against the insurance company, that he could nition of liability or a denial of obligation exclusively for other reasons. Iuland Ius. Co. v. Stauffer, 9 Ca.
not recover, having by the bill of lading defeated the 397; Home Ins. Co. v. Davis, 2 Out. 280; Ben. Franklin
right of subrogation against the carrier to which the
insurance company was entitled. U. S. Circ. Ct., Ins. Co. v. Flynn, id. 6:27. The refusal to pay a loss ou
Maryland, June 4, 1883. Carstairs v. Mechanies & the ground solely of a want of title in the insured, held evidence of a waiver. (2) Where the policy em
Traders' Insurance Co., 18 Fed. Rep. 473. Opinion by
Morris, J. (18 T. R. 473). braced a house alone, which was valued at $700, and the loss was total, and of that loss the company had
LIFE POLICY - FOR BENEFIT OF MARRIED WOMAN full notice, held, under the authority of the Lycoming Mutual Fire Ins. Co. v. Schollenberger, 8 Wr. 259, and
WHEN INTEREST NOT ASSIGNABLE-- NEW HAMPSHIRE Farmers' Mutual Ins. Co. v. Moyer, 10 Week. Not. 129,
STATUTE, -- Under the New Hampshire Statute, a marthat po further notice or proofs of loss were necessary,
ried woman's interest in a policy of life insurance, As a rule the law does not require vain things, and
effected for her use and benefit, cannot be revoked by technical proofs could but restate that of which the
the party procuring the insurance, and assigned by
him for his own benefit. In Gould v. Emerson, 99 company was already informed. Pennsylvania Sup.
Mass. 154, in reference to a similar statute, the court Ct., April 16, 1883. Pennsylvania Fire Insurance Co. 1. Daugherty. Opiuiou by Gordou, J.
say: “The manifest purpose is not only to prevent the
creditors from reaching the fund by proceedings in law FIRE POLICY - ALIENATION OF TITLE NOT AVOID
or equity, but to restrain the debtor from revoking, ING POLICY. – The true construction of a provision in
in a moment of caprice or embarrassment, the trust the charter of a fire iusurauce company, that in case
which he has once created, upon a meritorious, and by
the statute, a sufficient consideration." See, also, the property "be alienated by sale, or otherwise, the
Eadie v. Slimmon, 26 N. Y. 9; Secor v. Dalton, cited policy shall thereupon be void," but may be ratified
in Bliss on Life Ins. 528; Insurance Co. v. Burroughs, and confirmed to him on application to the directors
34 Conu. 305; Charter Oak Life Ins. Co. v. Brant, 47 within thirty days, is, that an alienation makes the policy not void but voidable at the election of the com
Mo. 419; Baker y. Young, id. 453. New Hampshire
Sup. Ct. Stokell v. Kimball. Opinion by Foster, J. pany. If the company choose to waive their right to avoid it, and agree that it shall be good in the hands of
(59 N, H, 13). the assignee, it becomes in substance a new and bind ing contract with him on the basis of the old one for the remainder of the term. And the assignee accept
CORRESPONDENCE. ing it from a mutual company becomes a member thereof, and is liable for the assessments on the
LUCRI CAUSA. premium note, and may maintain an action on the Editor of the Albany Law Journal: policy in case of loss. When an assignment of an in
Amoug the “Notes of Cases," in the last issue of the surance policy has once received the assent of the
LAW JOURNAL, I noticed a brief reference to the caso directors, fairly procured, they canuot withdraw it
of the “ People v. Woodward (31 Hun. 57), in which it
was held that taking a horse from auother's stable, defines larceny to be when “a person, with the intent killing it, and burying it in a pit, does uot necessarily to deprive or defraud the true owner of bis property, constitute larceny. The judges by whom the decision or of the use and benefit thereof, or to appropriate the was established declare that in order to constitute bame to the use of the laker, or of any other person larceny, there must have been a felonious intent takes," etc.; from which it appears that lucri causa is animo furandi, or the lucri causa of the civilians, no more au essential ingredient in the crime of larceny. while Learned, J., in a dissenting opinion, holds that
SEYMOUR VAN SANTWOOD. lucri causa is not an essential to the crime named. TROY, March 11, 1884. The opinion of the latter is without doubt a strong appeal for the reason of the rule contended for, but the weight of common-law authorities is in favor of the decision rendered. Thus the correct definition of
TENURE OF THE NEW JUDGES. larceny has been declared to be “the wrongful or fraudulent taking, etc., with a felonious intent to convert the goods to the taker's own use, and make them
Editor of the Albany Law Journal: his property." Jacob's Fisher's Digest, Vol. III, p. The amendment to Article VI of the Coustitution, 3302, citing authorities. At the same time it would miscalled section 28, and adopted November, 1882, seem that there has always been a tendency of the does not provide for the election of any successors to courts to break away from the rigidity of the common- the additional justices therein authorized. law rule, and while not directly admitting that lucri vides only for au election at the general election next causa is immaterial, they have in effect confessed it to after the adoption of the amendment. The people be so in more than one instance. Thus, where the probably thought that the need of additional justices prisoner, a servant of A. applied for and received at the was temporary. post-office all A.'s letters, and delivered them to A. Section 6, as amended in 1879, provided that the with the exception of one, which the prisoner destroyed, Supreme Court should be composed of the justices in the hope of suppressing inquiries respecting her then in office, with one additional, and of their succharacter, it was held to be a larceny; “ for supposing cessors. This made the number thirty-fonr; and this that it was a necessary ingredient in that crime, that section remains unaltered. it should be done lucri causa (which is not admitted), Thus too, the Legislature made the newly elected tbere were sufficient advantages to be obtained by the justices enter on their office at a different time from prisoner in making away with the written character." that provided for the others; and hold office about six 1 Den. Cr. Cas. 180. A more remarkable case was months less than the fourteen years. where some servants in husbandry, having the care of their master's team, eutered his grauary by means of a false key, and took out of it two bushels of beans, which they gave to his horses. Of eleven judges, three were of opinion that there was no felony; while of the eight judges who were for conviction, some (it is not
COURT OF APPEALS DECISIONS. stated how many) alleged that by the better feeding of the horses, the men's labor was lessened, so that
HE following decisions were handed down Tuesthey took the beans to give themselves ease — which
day, March 18, 1884. was constructively, at least, lucri causa! (Query: whether the dissenting judges, in auswer to this alle
Judgment reversed, new trial granted, costs to abide gation, might not as logically have advanced the argu
the event – Herman Veeder, respondent, v. William ment that by feeding the horses, the servants ought
Mudgett et al., appellants; Thomas B. Holcomb, adminnot rather to expect their labors to be increased - at istrator, respondent, v. Friend H. Holcomb, appellant. least as far as stable work was concerned.) Rus. & R. - Judgment affirmed with costs — Mary McGough, C. C. 307. And when a similar case afterward came administratrix, respondent, v. Thomas R. Sharpe, as to be decided by the judges, it was said to be no longer receiver, appellant; Charles G. Peters, administrator, res integra. And in still another case where the pris- respondent, v. Lewis Edwards, appellant; Ellen Roach, oner having forced open a stable door, took out a administratrix, respondent, v. The Fort Orange Paper horse, led it about a mile to an old coal pit, and there Company, appellant; Winifred Cooper, administratriz, backed it down and killed it, his object being that the respondent, v. The New York, Lake Erie & Western horse might not contribute to furnish evidence against R. Co., appellant.- - Motion to recall remittitur one who was under a charge for stealing it, Thompson, denied, with costs - Susan M. Murray and another, C. B., saved the point; six judges against five holding executors, respondents, v. Phebe Marshall, appellant. it not essential that the taking should be lucri cuusa. Notice to discontinue appeal allowed on the payThey thought a taking fraudulenter, with intent wholly ment of thirty-nine dollars costs before argument and to deprive the owner of the property, sufficient. Rex. disbursements in this court.- The New York, Lake v. Cabbage, Lent Ass. 1815, 1 R. & R. 292; 8. C., Russ. Erie & Western R. Co., appellant, v. The Board of C. & M. 41.
Supervisors of Delaware county, respondent.-- Molu the principal case, the court cited section 654, of tion to recall remittitur denied without costs.- In re the Penal Code, as supporting the proposition that the
Distribution, etc., of John C. Zabst, deceased.- - (1) malicious killing of a horse is a misdemeanor. The
Motion to amend notice of appeal, granted upon pay. thirty-first of Hun, has not yet reached me; can it be pos- ment of ten dollars to appellaut. (2) Motion to dispuiss sible that the crime was committed after December 1, appeal, denied without costs.- James V. A. Davis, 1882, and was therefore subject to the provisions of the
V. Aroratees P. Crandall, appellant.- Motion to dis Penal Code? We are not surprised when our often continue appeal. Grauted on payment by the appelover-worked judges occasionally deliver themselves of lant to the respondants' attorney of ten dollars costs conscientious and elaborate opinions, wbich end in
Hannah Mead, administratrix, appellant, v. Lucretia establishing (?) some apex juris upon a question
C. Smith, executrix, respondent. — Motion to put already settled by plain statutory enactment; but we cause on preferred calendar, denied — William C. Her. calinot be so recreant to our brothers at the bar, as to rick, appellant, v. The Germania Fire Ins. Co., respondbelieve that in this case the district attorney could
ent. Motion for reargument, denied with costs bave overlooked section 5:28, of the Penal Code, wbich In re Estate of Elizabeth McCarter.
importance in our criminal procedure. If, in our fear lest an innocent man may suffer, the law itself,
which is the only protection of innocent men, beALBANY, MARCH 29, 1884.
comes utterly paralyzed, then there is a call for a revision of our methods and our maxims, and the
infusion of a new spirit into our laws. Every judge CURRENT TOPICS.
who will brush aside the hair-splitting devices of HE
on lynch law, entitled “Mob or Magistrate.” conducted with rigor and directness of purpose, If its statistics are trustworthy they show a fright- will deserve, and will be likely to win, the approval ful state of society. It is here alleged that in 1882
of his fellow-citizens.” The remedy is in the hands there were 1,266 murders in this country, and about of every community, and its efficiency is measured 1,500 in 1883. In 1883 there were 93 legal execu
by its love of order. It is probable that the vast tions and 118 lynchings. There can be no just dis-majority of these murders are committed in lawless sent from the following condemnation of lynching: communities. It is bad enough in old and thickly "When a score of men can find no better way of
settled communities, but not so bad as in the new expressing their detestation of murder than by be- and sparsely settled communities, where distances coming murderers themselves, our civilization seems
are great and the executive power is weak. to have reduced itself to an absurdity. Moreover, lynch law is not much more accurate in its measurement and dispensation of justice than the lax Our criminal magistrates all over the land would administration against which it protests. The mob do well, however, to heed these utterances. If is neither judicial nor chivalrous; the weak and criminal justice were everywhere meted out with defenseless are far more likely to suffer at its hands the swiftness and severity that has for many years than the strong and prosperous, as is shown by the distinguished the recorder's court in New York fact that the victims of more than half the lynch- there would be less crime. It is difficult to say, ings reported last year were southern negroes.” practically, how the reform should be brought We fully assent also to the following: “The fact about. Prisoners have a right to the observance of that thirteen out of fourteen murderers escape the legal forms, but magistrates should take care not gallows is the one damning fact that blackens the to give them exaggerated importance. Lawyers, record of our criminal jurisprudence. No Ameri- also, would do well to take heed how they lend can ought to indulge in any boasting about his na- themselves to trifling quibbling in behalf of clients. tive land, while the evidence remains that the laws This is one of the things that is bringing our promade for the protection of human life are thus fession into disrepute. Why cannot our criminal shamelessly trampled under foot. No occupant of trials be as prompt, as swift, and as certain as in the bench, and no member of the bar ought to rest England? If they were, we should not have a quaruntil those monstrous abuses which result in the ter of the murders, nor any lynching. utter defeat of justice are thoroughly corrected." But we cannot go with the writer when he says: "Nevertheless, the failure of criminal justice, which Speaking of the threatened decay of the influence makes room for mobs and lynching, is a greater of the legal profession, we note that the London disgrace than the savagery of the mobs.” This, Law Journal calls attention to the fact that "the according to his own argument, is asserting that office of speaker seems to be falling out of the murder is a less disgrace than inefficient execution hands of the lawyers.
A succession of of the laws.
three lay speakers seems to show either that lawyers
care less for politics, or that politics care less for The Century writer hits the proper remedy for lawyers." We are of the impression that the office this state of affairs: “The only classes of persons of speaker in our National House of Representainterested in maintaining the present state of things tives has not been generally held by lawyers. Perare the criminals and the criminal lawyers, and it haps some of our readers can inform us. is not for their exclusive benefit that society is organized. The contrast between the swift, firm and sure methods of English and Continental courts in In a recent charge to the jury in regard to cremadealing with great criminals, and the tardy, feeble tion, Justice Stephen cited Lucan as speaking of and abortive methods of our own, should sting our the practice. Some one charges the learned judge National pride to some energetic measures of re- with error in this, and avers that he must have form. The people must rouse themselves to de- meant Lucretius. We are informed that both aumand a more vigorous enforcement of the laws, and thors speak of the practice. In Lucan's “Pharsathey must see to it that judges and prosecuting at- lia,” vii, 809, we find: torneys are chosen who have the ability and the
"Nil agis hac irâ : tabesne cadavera solvat will to bring evil-doers to justice. The judges on An rogus, haud refert : placido Natura receptat the bench may well inquire whether the protection Cuncta sinu, finemque sui sibi corpora debent." of the criminal has not assumed disproportionate | And in Lucretius, iii, 883, is the following:
VOL. 29 - No. 13.
"Proinde ubi se videas hominem Indignarier ipsum Children, containing 2,000 names, with their meanPost mortem fore ut aut putrescat corpore posto, Aut flammeis interfiat, maleisve ferarum;
ing and the countries from which they originated." Scire licet, non sincerum sonere, atque subesso The names are arranged in two general divisions of Cæcum aliquem cordi stimulum; quamvis neget ipse
sexes, and alphabetically, under each, but are not Credere se quemquam sibi sensum in morte futurum.',
alphabetically sub-arranged, which is a grave defect. The Law Journal says: “Lucretius, so far as rusty We note some appropriate for forthcoming lawyers: scholarship can follow a crabbed style, appears to Arnold, a maintainer of honor; Aristides, a lover of be dealing rather with the different forms of death
justice; Austin, lover of justice; Brian, having a and ideas of the future than of the disposal of the thundering voice; Harold, a champion; Hector, 3 body, while the passage from Lucan is apposite
stout defender; Hortensius, an orator; Ibzan, s and graceful.” These English judges are quite apt judge; Lycurgus, a lawyer; Marcus, a defender; to be right in their classics.
Othniel, a judge; Allam, Sergius, Torquil, counsel
lor; Solon, lawyer; William, defending many. Mrs. Kilgore tried again for admission to another section of the Philadelphia Common Pleas, and was The Codes have at last got out of committee in refused, Judge Finletter dissenting. The court put the Senate. The Civil Code has been reported favorthe denial partly on the ground of protection to ably, by a majority of one. The revision by Mr. woman, partly on the ground of nature's order, and
Throop is also favorably reported by a majority of partly on the ground of the shock to sentiment. No one. We hardly think the people need both measures. stress seems to have been laid on the phraseology We believe they need the Civil Code, and we think of the statute. The court remarked: “The very much of the Throop revision is well enough, alfact that the employment of woman to do that though as a whole it would be out of the question which by common consent a man only should do if the Civil Code were to be adopted. Now the causes a shock, is an argument of some force from question is just where it ought to be, and we hope nature itself. It is the emphatic assumption of a the lay element in the Senate will assert its judg. general principle. I do not stop to reason by an- ment independently of the lawyers who are so nearly alogy from the lower creation, for there the instinct equally divided in opinion. implanted at once settles the question. The argument drawn from the abuse of power by the male sex does not destroy the principle which is assailed.
NOTES OF CASES. Legislation itself has of recent years largely extended and protected the rights of married women, (N People v. Peterson, 31 Hun. 421, the petitioner and yet any one familiar with the decisions of our own claimed the exemption of $1,500 allowed by Supreme Court has not failed to notice the fact that statute to ministers of the gospel. He was, and recent decisions have curtailed the liberal interpre- since 1830 had been, a minister of the Reformed tation of the laws relating to married women which Church, in America, in good standing ; by reason at first swayed the court, because it was found by of old age and loss of his sight he had for the last experience that that which was properly intended fifteen years withdrawn from the active duties of as a shield had in many cases proved to be a double- his profession, although he had during all that edged sword; and it is a question yet to be solved period performed its functions occasionally as ophow far this inversion, so to speak, of the order of portunities presented themselves. He was engaged nature will not finally produce an unnatural compe- in no secular occupation. Held, that he was entitition between the sexes, and what is worse, a con- tled to the exemption. The court said: “Being a dition of society wherein worthless husbands, minister, and engaged in no other calling, he was fathers, sons and brothers will depend upon the entitled to the exemption, notwithstanding he was exertions of those who ought to receive and enjoy disqualified for active duty by age and infirmity." that protection which nature intended.” This is amusing. “Common consent "— whose "common
In State v. Roberts, 59 N. H. 484, it was held that consent?” Why, that of the men, for a majority of the human race, namely,
a person is liable for catching fish in the prohibited the
season from water, though within his own land, undemand the right to earn their own living, less it be so enclosed as to prevent the free passage in their own way. We are heartily tired of this of the fish. The court said: “The right of the Legisnonsense about competition between the sexes wrought by the ameliorating laws of married women, truction of fish does depend upon the fact that any
lature to enact penal laws to prevent the undue desand if women ask for the right to support their particular body of water does not furnish a supply husbands, fathers, sons and brothers, we do not of fish, but upon the fact that like other wild aniknow why they should not have it. One would mals they are free, and the owner of the soil under suppose these Philadelphia common pleas people the water containing them has not on that account were living forty years back.
any property in them. The fact that the defendant
owned the land around North pond gave him no We have received a very interesting pamphlet, exclusive property in the four trout before they entitled "A Dictionary of Baptismal Names for were caught, unless their natural freedom had been
destroyed by falling under the absolute control offlict punishment to gratify a cruel and revengeful the riparian owner. If the trout were not the disposition: Com. v. Hodgson, Lewis Crim. Law, prolific source of other trout for connecting streams, 103. He may also apply to the Court of Quarter their freedom of passage to and from and through Sessions for the punishment of the apprentice by the pond prevented the defendant, a riparian owner, imprisonment, under the Act of September 29, 1770, from acquiring property in them against the right and in such case, if his complaint be just, the court of the State to preserve them for the enjoyment of ought to and will enforce the law by confining the future anglers. The fact that the fish were in water apprentice as long as may be necessary to accomplish surrounded by the defendant's land, unless the his reform." water was so inclosed as to be absolutely within his control, and the free passage of the fish to and In the case of Spring Valley Water Works v. Supfrom it was entirely and rightfully obstructed, gave ervisors of San Francisco, which appears elsewhere him no more property in them than he would have in this number, the Supreme Court of the United obtained in a wild deer that came upon his land, or States hold that where a corporation framed to supa wild bird that might have alighted upon it. If ply water to a locality and its inhabitants was orthe fish had free passage to and from the pond, ganized under a California statute, which provided their capture out of season by the defendant was that water should be furnished consumers at reasonwithin the prohibition of the statute.”
able rates to be fixed by an impartial tribunal designated therein, but which by reason of a consti
tutional restriction reserved to the State the right In Com. v. Guildhart, Quarter Session of Philadel- to amend and alter the charter of such a corpophia, March 14, 1884, Leg. Int. March 21, 1884, it ration, the State is not forbidden by the Federal was held that an apprentice may be punished for Constitution to confer upon the authorities of the misconduct by imprisonment. The defendant, a locality the power to fix the rates at which the cortanner's apprentice, was imprisoned for twenty- poration shall supply water to consumers. Mr. four hours in the witnesses' part of the county Justice Field dissented from the conclusion reached prison, for willfully quitting work, whereby his by the majority of the court. He declares that the master's skins soured and were spoiled. The court impression which exists in the minds of some lawyers said: “It is to be regretted that the system of ap- and judges, that the reservation in charters of corprenticeship has nearly gone out of use. The rela- porations and in laws authorizing the formation of tion of master and apprentice was one of the most corporations, of a power to alter or repeal such valuable relations in society. Some of the most charters or aws operates as a gift to the State and worthy, reputable and wealthy citizens of this to the Legislature of uncontrolled authority over the country commenced work as apprentices and rose business and property of the corporations, is unto the highest positions in the government. There founded in principle and unsupported by authority. are yet living in this city many excellent persons The reservation applies only to the contract of inwho were apprentices in their youth. A system so corporation, to the corporate existence, franchises beneficent ought not to be suffered to fall into dis- and privileges granted by the State.
With respect use; but it seems that it is being gradually aban- to every thing else it gives no power that the State doned, and we are becoming dependent for skilled would not have had without it. It does not withdraw mechanics upon immigration from foreign countries. the corporation from the guaranties of the Federal A trade education is as important as a college edu- | Constitution. The corporation holds the property cation. If the latter is regarded as a distinction it acquires under the same guaranties which protect worth acquiring, the former is equally so, for it sup- the property of individuals from spoliation. See plies the necessities of society that depend on skill Dartmouth College case, 4 Wheat. 708, 712; Tomand knowledge in the practical business of life. linson v. Jessup, 15 Wall. 458; Railroad Co. v, Maine, Boys who have such an opportunity as this defend- 96 U. S. 510; Detroit v, Howell, Plank Road Co., 43 ant to learn a good trade are to be congratulated. Mich. 140, 147. Applying these principles to the There are thousands of boys, and men too, who case in question, he holds that water collected in would be glad to have such a position. Under the reservoirs, as it falls in rain, is private property and old custom the apprentice lived with his master, cannot be appropriated to public use without comand was clothed, fed and treated as one of his family; pensation to the owner; that such compensation but after a time, a money payment in lieu of domes- must be fixed by an impartial tribunal and not by tic custody and care was substituted, and this met the consumers of water or their agents. It is an the approval of the Supreme Court (Com. v. Conrow, elementary principle of natural justice that no man 2 Barr, 402), and was subsequently authorized by shall sit in judgment where he is interested, no statute (Aet of March 17, 1865). When the indent- matter how unimpeachable his personal integrity. ures are entered into, certain duties and obligations The principle is not limited to cases arising in the arise on both sides, which may be enforced by the ordinary courts of law in the regular administration court. If the apprentice lives with his master, the of justice, but extends to all cases where a tribunal latter may administer proper punishment upon the of any kind is established to decide upon the rights apprentice, and is not liable for unjust punishment of different parties. City of London v. Wood, 12 arising from error of judgment; but he cannot in- Mod. 687; Hall v. Thayer, 105 Mass. 221: Lamsden