ing an unusual and dangerous movement of the car, which could not have happened except for some defect in the track or car or some negligence in its management. Held, that defendant had burden of explaining the casualty; the machinery and appliances being peculiarly within defendant's knowledge.-Mayne v. Kansas City Rys. Co., Mo., 229 S. W. 386.

16. Champerty and Maintenance — Quantum Meruit. Where an agreement as to an attorney's compensation for services was champertous under Rev. St. c. 124, § 12. the attorney was not entitled to receive the value of his services upon a quantum meruit. -Orino v. Beliveau, Me., 113 Atl. 260.

17. Constitutional Law-Authority of City.If the amendment to the Constitution of Texas in 1912, authorizing cities to adopt new charters, freed such cities from the restriction against binding street railway franchises concerning the rate of fare, that provision is trrelevant, where the franchise in question was adopted before the amendment.-City of San Antonio v. San Antonio Public Service Co., U. S. S. C., 41 Sup. Ct. 428.

18.- -Garnishment. Rev. Code Del. 1915, § 4123, requiring a non-resident defendant, sued by foreign attachment, to give security to the value of the property attached as a condition of the right to appear and defend, which provision was substituted in 1877 for a provision adopted at an early date requiring special bail, as required by the statutes of various other states based on an old custom of the city of London, does not deprive such defendant of his property without due process of law, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, even though in a particular case defendant is unable to give such security.-Ownbey v. Morgan, U. S. S. C., 41 Sup. Ct. 433.

19. "Periods of Limitation."-Transportation Act Feb. 28. 1920, § 206f, providing that "the period of federal control shall not be computed as a part of the periods of limitation in actions against carriers *** for causes of action arising prior to federal control," held constitutional as applied to a cause of action by a shipper against the carrier as to which the period of limitation has expired before passage of the act, where such limitation was not fixed by contract, but by the carrier in its published and filed schedules as permitted by Interstate Commerce Act, § 20, as amended (Comp. St. § 8604a).--Lazarus v. New York Cent. R .R., U. S. D. C., 271 Fed. 93.

20. Public Lands.-The grant of lands to a railroad company by Act July 2, 1864, as modified by resolution of May 31, 1870, to induce the construction of a railroad, becomes a contract or its acceptance by the railroad company and the completion of the line, and the rights thereunder are then within the protection of the due process of law clause of the Constitution.United States v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co., U. S. S. C., 41 Sup. Ct. 439.

to

21. Contracts-Insuring Property in Storage. -Where plaintiff, who had only partially paid the purchase price of furniture, arranged store it in the seller's warehouse, and the seller's credit man agreed to insure the property, both had an interest in the property, and their mutual benefit from insurance was sufficient consideration for the promise to insure.-Siegel v. Spear & Co., N. Y., 187 N. Y. S. 284.

22. Corporations-Withdrawal of Majority.Upon the withdrawal of a majority from an organization or corporation, not for profit, those remaining in the organization or corporation constitute the true association and are entitled to the use and enjoyment of the association's property.-Clearwater Citrus Growers' Ass'n v. Andrews, Fla., 87 So. 903.

cy, and is no ground for divorce, if there is complete power of copulation.-Smith v. Smith, Mo., 229 S. W. 398.

25. Electricity-Degree of Care.-An owner of steel towers carrying high-tension electric lines also owning other wires strung on wooden poles which at one point were within 12 or 15 inches of the corner of one of the towers, was not bound to anticipate that a boy would climb the tower to a height of 30 feet and circle around it on the narrow crossbars and take hold of such wire near the tower in reliance on the fact that it was "padded," though it knew boys played in the field where the towers were, where its employees had never seen boys on the towers, and no other children had ever attempted to perform the dangerous feat in question.Bonniwell v. Milwaukee Light, Heat & Traction Co., Wis., 182 N. W. 468.

26.--Trespasser.-Where an electric power company had a right of way across plaintiff's land, and erected a tower to support its wires thereon, and thereby had a right to use the land immediately under the tower, it might to that extent be said to be the owner of the land occupied by the tower; so that where plaintiff's 14-year-old son, for his amusement, started to ascend the tower, without the permission of defendant or his agents, and was killed by the electric current, the boy was a trespasser.McCoy v. Texas Power & Light Co., Tex., 229 S. W. 623.

on

29. Husband and Wife-Deserted Wife Liable Contracts.-Where a husband deserts his wife and departs from the state, leaving her without maintenance or support, and remains absent therefrom continuously, with an intent to renounce the marital relation, and leaves her to act as a feme sole, and she so acts, she is liable to be sued on her contract, the same as though she were unmarried.-Peterson Bros. & Co. v. Gunnarson, Neb., 182 N. W. 505.

30. Insurance Compliance with Provision.There could be no recovery on a burglary insurance policy requiring insured to keep such books and accounts that the exact amount of loss might be accurately determined, where no books or record were kept indicating what merchandise had been sold during the year previous to the day of the loss, without relying on insured's knowledge of the stock, not contained in books or accounts, or on expert testimony based on comparisons of inventories with the addition of purchases and subtraction of sales in connection with an assumed rate of profit.— Harris v. General Acc., F. & L. Assur. Corp., N. Y., 187 N. Y. S. 291.

31.- -Eligibility.-Where, on death of member of a fraternal organization, a person originally designated as a beneficiary and two other persons subsequently substituted as beneficiaries claimed the amount payable on the certificate, and the order filed its petition for interpleader and deposited the amount of the certificate in court, the substituted beneficiaries cannot raise any objection as to the eligibility of the person first named to be a beneficiary under the bylaws of the order, for such objection could be raised only by the order itself, and by the deposit in court the order waives the objection.Shinholser v. Henry, Ga., 106 S. E. 719.

32. Intoxicating Liquors Unlawful Search and Seizure.-Seizure of liquor from a private residence prior to the taking effect of Const. Amend. 18, on a search made without a warrant by officers armed with shotguns and pistols, although there was invitation to enter and consent to the seizure," held unlawful, and the owner of the liquor held entitled to its return.

-United States v. Marquette, U. S. D. C., 271 Fed. 120. 33.-Warrant to Police Officer.-Under U. S. Rev. St. § 1014, a valid warrant may be issued directed to a police officer of a city to arrest for violation of the National Prohibition Law, commonly known as the Volstead Act.-Harris v. Superior Court, Cal., 196 Pac. 895.

34. Landlord and Tenant-Breach of Contract. -In an action wherein tenant obtained damages for breach of contract to rent land, an assignment that verdict of jury was contrary to the evidence, in finding that landlord breached the contract to tenant's damage, because it was conclusively shown landlord offered to let tenant have another tract of land in every respect equally as good in quality and condition as the tract he did not get, was without merit, since the tenant had a perfect right to insist upon the contract he made.-Huishizer V. Nelson, Tex., 229 S. W. 658.

35.- Lessee's Rights.-A lessee's rights under lease as against innocent purchaser were not affected by the erroneous acknowledgment of receipt lessee's subsequently of returned check by employee of purchaser's agent who had been instructed not to accept check from lessee for rent.-Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Cofer, Va., 106 S. E. 695.

Timber

un

36. Life Estates-Cutting Timber. cut from land in possesion of life tenant authorized to cut such timber, becomes the property of the remaindermen, whether cut by the life tenant or a third person.-Jones v. Sandlin, Ala., 87 So. 850.

37. Master and Servant-Assuming Risk.-A plaintiff who accepted employment as railroad telegraph operator in a box car office, knowing that the place was leaky, cold, and wet, held to have assumed the risk from such exposure. --Newberry v. Central of Georgia Ry. Co., U. S. D. C., 271 Fed. 117.

38.- -Compensation to State.-The provision of Workmen's Compensation Law, § 15, subd. 7, for payment to the state treasurer of $100 in every case of injury causing death, where there is no person entitled to compensation is valid.Watkinson v. Hotel Pennsylvania, N. Y., 187 N. Y. S. 278.

39.- Defective Coupling.-The uncoupling of the end car upon the stoppage of a train being backed is proof under the Safety Appliance Act (U. S. Comp. St. §§ 8613-8615) that the coupling was defective.-Stewart v. Wabash Ry. Co., Neb., 182 N. W. 496.

40.- "Net Profits."-A manager of a merchandise department of a going concern paying him a percentage on the "net profits" of his department at the close of the year was not entitled to credit for profit on unfilled orders which were subject to cancellation, nor was he entitled to have considered as profit the difference between the cost price of goods on hand and their market value, and he was not entitled to credit for an item of expense for shelving and flooring to protect goods from damage which was properly chargeable to "expense"; the term "profits" in a legal sense, as distinguished from speculative or "paper profits," signifying the excess of receipts over expenditures, and "net profits," meaning the difference between "income," what has come in, and "outgo."-Tooey v. C. L. Percival Co., Iowa, 182 N. W. 403.

41. Right to Recovery.-Under Workmen's Compensation Law, § 29, as amended by Laws 1917, c. 705, until there has been an award of compensation to an injured employee, he is free to forego compensation under the Com)pensation Law and pursue his right to recovery of ordinary damages from the true tortfeasors; it not being the electing to claim compensation under the Compensation Law, but the actual awarding of it, which is decisive and binding. --Godfrey v. Brooklyn Edison Co., N. Y., 187 N. Y. S. 263.

merchandise offered by complainant for interstate shipment, on the ground that it was brought to the pier by a transfer company which employed both union and non-union men, and the steamship company refused to receive the shipment because its employees would not handle it, though the transfer company offered to load it, held to constitute an unlawful combination in restraint of interstate commerce, in violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and to entitle complainant to an injunction in a suit in a District Court, brought under Judicial Code, § 24 (23).-Buyer v. Guillan, U. S. C. C. A., 271 Fed. 65.

who

43. Recovery of Penalty--Where the specifications for pavements were drawn so as to require the use of a road binder of which defendant had a monopoly, the contractor bid on the work on those specifications, on defendant's assurance that it would furnish the binder at six cents a gallon may not, defendant having raised the price, recover the statutory penalty provided by Burns' Ann. St. 1914, § 3872, notwithstanding the arrangement between defendant and the board of county commissioners, etc., and others was in furtherance of a monopoly, and so was criminal under sections 3866 and 3868.-Moore v. Barrett Co., Ind., 106 N. E. 649.

44. Mortgages-Deed to Secure Money. A deed absolute in form is, in fact, a mortgage, when given to secure the payment of money, even though the parties may have agreed that, upon default in payment within a fixed time, the deed should become absolute.-McKean v. McLeod, Okla., 196 Pac. 935.

45. Municipal Corporations - Delegation of Power. While Burns' Ann. St. 1914, § 8655, subd. 16, declares that the common council of every city shall have power to regulate the location and management of cemeteries within the city and for four miles without, etc., a municipal ordinance, providing that no cemetery shall be established or used within the city or within four miles of its limits until a plat of the cemetery has been approved by the board of public works and common council, is invalid, being an attempt to confer arbitrary powers on the specified city officers.-Park Hill Development Co. v. City of Evansville, Ind., 130 N. E. 645.

46. Street Improvement.-The courts cannot say as a matter of law that a railroad roadbed or right of way was not benefited by the improvement of an abutting street.-City of Grand Rapids v. Grand Trunk Ry System, Mich., 182 N. W. 424.

47 . Navigable Waters - Obstructions. That artificial obstructions exist in a stream, capable of being abated by due exercise of public authority, does not prevent the stream from being regarded as navigable in law, or take away the authority of Congress to prohibit added obstructions, if, supposing them to be abated, it be navigable in fact in its natural state.-Economy Light & Power Co. v. United States, U. S. S. C., 41 Sup. Ct. 409.

48. Pawnbrokers and Money Lenders-"Wage Broker."-Where a merchant, on an employee's making an assignment of future wages, advanced him moneys to live and pay his bills, and the merchant, though denying that the advances were on the assignment, stated that but for it they would not have been made, the merchant must be deemed a wage broker, within Laws 1911, c. 56, § 3, declaring that any person, company, or corporation giving or loaning money to any wage-earner, on consideration of any assignment of wages, shall be deemed a "wage broker. Costello V. Great Falls Iron Works, Mont., 192 Pac. 982.

49. Poisons-Police Power of State.-Laws Minn. 1915, c. 260, § 2, prohibiting a physician from furnishing drugs to habitual users, though authorizing him to give prescriptions therefor in good faith, does not interfere with the enforcement of the Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act, though the federal act permits the physician to dispense the drugs directly.-State of Minnesota v. Martinson, U. S. S. C., 41 Sup. Ct. 425.

50. Principal and Agent-Renewal of Contract.-A contract gave plaintiff exclusive agency for sale of goods made by defendant in certain territory for a specified term, and provided that it should be renewed for an additional five years, if the net sales "shall have amounted to the sum of $50,000 for the year

It

1915, and shall have increased 10 per cent, each year for the two years following, and thereafter shall have showed 5 per cent net increase annually during the life of the contract." further provided that, in the event of a general depresion in business, "the said second party shall not be required to make the yearly increase in sales as provided herein during the period in which said depression occurred." Held. that the latter provision did not apply to sales during 1915, and that net sales of $50,000 during that year were an essential requirement to the right of plaintiff to a renewal of the contract. Ohio Valley Pulley Works V. Oneida Steel Pulley Co., U. S. C. C. A., 271 Fed. 57.

51. Railroads Injury to Employee of Express Company.-The order of the Director General in requiring actions and suits to be brought against him and not otherwise does not, under Act Cong. March 21, 1918, § 10, authorizing actions against carriers under federal control as then provided by law, prevent an employee of an express company who was injured while the company was under control of the Director General from maintaining an action against the company.-American Ry. Express Co. v. Compton, Ala., 87 So. 810.

52. Removal of Causes-Non-Resident.—-Under Jud. Code, § 29, authorizing removal to the District Court for the proper district of suits which could have been originally brought in the United States District Court, a suit in which both plaintiff and defendant were non-residents of the state in which the suit was brought and of the district cannot be removed to United States District Court by the defendant without the consent of the plaintiff. Coalmont M. Coal Co. v. Matthew Addy S. & C. Corp., U. S. D. C., 271 Fed. 114.

or

53. Sales Divisible Contract. — At common law, prior to the enactment of the Personal Property Law, where a single contract of sale was divisible. as where it embraced kinds grades of goods at specified prices for each, the goods of one kind or grade might be accepted and others rejected by the buyer, in the absence of evidence that the prices were fixed with reference to the entire quantity.-Portfolio v. Rubin, N. Y., 187 N. Y. S. 302.

54. Measure of Damages.-Where a complaint alleged a written contract under which plaintiff agreed to sell to defendant at the city of New York 500,000 French francs, check on Paris, at 8.33 francs per dollar, and it appeared that, within a few days after defendant had notified plaintiff of repudiation, plaintiff sold the franes in the city of New York at 16.56 francs per dollar, crediting defendant with the amount realized, and defendant still remaining indebted to plaintiff for a certain amount, for which judgment was demanded, held, that the measure of damages, in the absence of special circumstances showing proximate damage of a greater amount, was, under Personal Property Law, § 145 (3), the difference between the contract price and the market price at the time when the money ought to have been accepted. -Guaranty Trust Co. of New York v. Meer, N. Y., 187 N. Y. S. 288.

55.---Severable Contract. Where a retail merchant orders from a manufacturer of shirtwaists a number of such waists of different kinds and qualities, a definite price being fixed for each of such different kinds and qualities, such contract is separable in the absence of any circumstances indicating the contrary, and if the seller. in fulfillment of his contract, furnishes some of the different items in compliance therewith, and others which are not of the kind and quality stipulated for, the purchaser will have the right to accept such of said lots as comply with the contract, and to reject such as fail to comply therewith.-Regent Waist Co. V. O. J. Morrison Department Store Co., W. Va., 106 S. E. 712.

56.- Warranty.In an action for damages for breach of such a warranty, negligence of the manufacturer is not an issue, and it is no defense that the tank company used reasonable care in selecting material for the tank and in constructing it.-American Tank Co. v. Revert Oil Co., Kan., 196 Pac. 1111.

57. Street Railroads-Care as to Children.Where it is shown that children were permitted

and accustomed to climb upon the outside of a street car and cling to and ride upon the coupling bar and elsewhere on the outside of the car while the car was making a backward movement on a Y switch, and while the motorman was operating the car from the other end of it, and the conductor had alighted from the car, and when there was no one in front to watch that the children should not be injured. there is evidence of negligence for which the street car company may be liable if one of the children, too young to be guilty of contributory negligence, is injured thereby.-Bellamy v. Kansas City Rys. Co., Kan., 196 Pac. 1104. 58.- -Contributory Negligence.-The

driver

of a wagon has equal rights with the operator of a trolley car in the public highway and can assume that the motorman of the car saw him emerging from the intersecting street and had his car under control, and that the motorman would respect the driver's right to cross the tracks safely.-Wilhelm v. Public Service Ry. Co., N. J., 113 Atl. 239.

59. Taxation Non-Resident. Income tax levied under Tax Law, § 351, on income of a non-resident cotton goods merchant derived from his business carried on in the state of New York, held not a tax on exports, with reference to the merchant's direct export business. in violation of Const. U. S. art. 1, § 10.-People v. Travis, N. Y., 187 N. Y. S. 311.

60. Telegraphs and Telephones-Obstruction of Street.-A telephone company. which SO placed a guy wire in a street as to create a dangerous obstruction. held not relieved from liability for an injury caused thereby, because its line was being operated at the time by the government.-Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Lawrence, U. S. C. C. A., 271 Fed.

61.—Telegram as Interstate Commerce.-The transmission of a telegram from one point in the state to another point in the state by a route taking it outside of the state held interstate commerce within the Carmack Amendment and Act June 18, 1910, § 7, and not intrastate commerce, where the message could not have been transmitted wholly within the state without a physical change in the arrangement of the system of wires and the additional services of another operator, so that the rule of damage in action for negligent delay in delivery was the federal, and not the state, rule.-Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Beasley, Ala., 87 So. 858.

to

62. United States-Extra Compensation Contractors.-A firm which had contracted with the government to remove clay, gravel, sand and boulders from a navigable stream is entitled to extra compensation for the removal of a bed of limestone rock. notwithstanding provisions making the decision of the engineer officer in charge as to the quality and quantity of the work final, and requiring his instructions to be observed by the contractor and the order of the engineer to remove the rock under the contract.--United States v. L. P. & J. A. Smith, U. S. S. C., 41 Sup. Ct. 413.

63. Warehousemen-Public Use. A tobacco buyer is prima facie entitled to attend tobacco sales in public warehouses and to bid therein. and the warehousemen will be temporarily restrained from interfering with such right pending the final trial at which the sufficiency of the warehousemen's grounds for excluding him will be determined.-Gray v. Central Warehouse Co., N. C., 106 S. E. 657.

64.

Wills-Instrument with Reservation of Use for Life Held a "Deed."-- Instrument, desig nated a "deed," whereby owner of land, in consideration of love and affection and the payment of $1, "do grant, bargain, sell, and convey" the land to named persons, reserving to herself the use and control of the land during her natural life, held a deed, and not a will, the operation thereof not being postponed until her death.-Marsh v. Rogers, Ala., 87 So. 790.

65. Intent.--A will giving property to daughter's children, grandchildren, and greatgrandchildren "now living" or "hereafter born" will be construed to exclude children not in esse at testator's death for the reason that it is improbable, unless otherwise clearly expresed, that testator should desire to poptpone the distribution of his estate for so long.--Merrill v. Winchester, Me., 113 Atl. 261.

Central Law Journal.

St. Louis, Mo., July 22, 1921.

NEW UNIFORM ACTS WHICH WILL BE DISCUSSED THIS YEAR BY THE CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS.

Lawyers are becoming more interested every year in the work of the Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. This is illustrated by the number of requests for the Conference's indorsement or assistance in preparing model statutes of various reform propositions. Thus, requests have come for a model "arbitration statute," a "marking and labeling law," a blue sky law, etc.

The Conference endeavors to serve both the reformer and the codifier. With respect to reform measures the position of the Conference is not that of an active propagandist, but rather that of adviser of those legislators who believe they have received a mandate to put a certain reform into action. Thus, the Conference, at the suggestion of those interested and in order that if the proposed reform measures are to be adopted in a particular state, they should be put into proper shape, have prepared the following model statutes, put ting into effect certain well known reforms, namely: Uniform Desertion and NonSupport Act; Uniform Child Labor Act; Uniform Marriage Evasion Act; Uniform Cold Storage Act; Uniform Workmen's Compensation Act; Uniform Foreign Acknowledgments Act; Uniform Land Registration Act; Uniform Act for the Extradition of Persons of Unsound Mind; Uniform Flag Act; Uniform Vital Statistics Act, and the Uniform Occupational Diseases Act. On the other hand, the Conference regards the codification of important subjects of law which affect commerce as its greatest work and it has produced the following celebrated codes, namely: The Uniform Negotiable Instru

ments Law; The Uniform Sales Act; The Uniform Warehouse Receipts Act; The Uniform Bills of Lading Act; The Uniform Conditional Sales Act; The Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act, and the Uniform Partnership Act.

The Conference proceeds carefully and leisurely, so much so that often the patience of zealous reformers is taxed to the utmost. An example of this was seen in the meeting of the American Bar Association itself, when on the floor of the Association meeting a committee was ordered to draw up and put into immediate effect a "declaratory judgments act," to be recommended for adoption. The action was taken at the fag end of an afternoon session. The suggestion that this act was under consideration by the Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws was met with the argument that this law was needed at once. But every lawyer knows that no bar association committee is likely to take the responsibility of drafting an act on such a new and important subject overnight to suit the immediate purposes of certain reformers, and that if they did, it would deserve and receive little consideration from the legislatures.

The character of the work performed by the Conference is illustrated by the five measures which will consume the entire time of the Conference this year for one week in morning, afternoon and night sessions. Nowithstanding this great expenditure of time and energy, it is quite possible that no act will be recommended by the Conference, although one of the tenative acts to be considered has been before the Conference for seven successive years. The following acts will be considered by the Conference at its session at Cincinnati, August 24-30, 1921, namely:

I. The Eighth Tentative Draft of a Uniform Incorporation Act;

II. The First Tentative Draft of a Uniform Fiduciaries Act;