Permitting a drunken passenger who has been removed from a street car for turbulence and assault upon a fellow passenger, to return to and remain upon the car although his turbulence continues, is held, in United Railways & E. Co. v. State, Deane ([Md.], 54 L. R. A. 942), to render the street car company liable for injuries inflicted by him upon a passenger.

A man's heirs-at-law are held, in Tyler v. Aspinwall ([Conn.] 54 L. R. A. 758), to have no right to maintain a suit to set aside a fraudulent divorce, from a third person, of a woman whom he afterwards attempted to marry, for the purpose of defeating her claims upon his estate, where they were not parties to the divorce proceedings and had no interest therein.

A payee of a promissory note, who sells it to an innocent third person, and afterwards repurchases it for value, is held, in Andrews v. Robertson ([Wis.], 54 L. R. A., 673), to have no better right as against the maker than he possessed in the first instance. The rights of the payee of a note after repurchasing it from a bona fide holder are considered in a note to this case.

it is equally true that the same state of affairs would apply in any proceeding against an insane defendant on any other kind of contract or liability. The court holds that as marriage is a civil contract the decree for divorce should be issued.

A novel holding has been made by the Supreme Court of Rhode Island in the case of O'Rourke v. Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co. (50 Atlantic Re| porter, 834). In this case insurance was taken out by a fifteen year old boy. Certain false answers were made to questions made warranties by the terms of the policy. The court holds that the insured, being an infant, is not bound by his warranties, and that, while a plea of infancy is ordinarily a privilege personal to the infant, a beneficiary in a policy on the life of the infant may plead it in answer to the company's defense of false warranties in the application.

Noon comes at 11.27 o'clock legal standard time in Akron, Ohio, according to a decision just handed down by the Supreme Court of that State. Thomas Meyer took out a fire insurance policy on his saloon at 11.30 o'clock standard time four years ago, the policy being dated noon of that day. At the very

A statute prohibiting the letting of public print-minute he was getting the policy the saloon caught ing to papers which have been established less than a year is held, in Van Harlington v. Doyle ([Cal.], 54, L. R. A., 771), to violate constitutional provisions that all laws of a general nature shall have a uniform operation, and that no citizen shall be granted privileges which upon the same terms shall not be granted to all citizens.

The conviction of a person of a crime which the Constitution requires shall be tried by a jury of twelve, though nine jurors concurring may render a verdict, is held, in State v. Ned ([La.] 54 L. R. A. 933), not to be a legal conviction, though twelve jurors were physically present during the trial, and all concurred in a verdict of guilty, if one of the jurors was in a drunken condition during the trial.

fire and was burned. Ohio law makes standard time legal time and the company refused to pay the $2,000 insurance on Meyer's saloon. The case was fought through to the Supreme Court, which has decided that "noon means the time the sun passes the meridian at Akron, which is at 11.27 o'clock standard time. The court ordered the insurance company to pay.

Application has been made by the attorney general of the State of Wisconsin for leave to bring an action in the Supreme Court to enjoin the destruction, by the receiver, in accordance with an order of the Federal Court, of a railroad lying wholly within the State. Permission to bring such action was granted by the Supreme Court (In re Attorney General, 88 Northwestern Reporter, 912). The question whether a decree for divorce will The court says that the question of the jurisdiction be given against an insane defendant is considered of the Federal Court to order the destruction of a in the case of Harrigan v. Harrigan (67 Pacific Re-public highway in the State is one which requires porter, 506). Divorce is asked on the ground of mature deliberation, and has ordered that the attordesertion for more than one year, and it appears ney general be granted leave to commence his action that the defendant did not become insane until and that the receiver be ordered to desist from tearafter the expiration of this year. The court points ing up the railroad pending such action. The court out that sentence will not be passed upon one who further states that they entertain the highest respect is so unfortunate as to have lost his reason, and for the Federal Court; that they have no intention who is unable, therefore, to establish his innocence, of interfering with its jurisdiction; that they do not but makes a distinction between civil and criminal doubt but what the Federal Court will cheerfully cases. While it is true that defendant may not be recognize that the questions involved should be able, by reason of his insanity, to present some carefully considered; and that the status quo will fact or defense known only to himself while sane, not be changed in the meantime. "But while en

tertaining this belief, it is due to the dignity of silk purses which are borne before the lord chancelthis court to say that, whatever be the attitude lors of England and Ireland were till very recently of the Federal Court, this court will not hesitate to examine and decide such questions in its own way, and will, if necessary, preserve the status quo by the exercise of the powers granted to it by the constitution and the laws."

used for one year only. New ones were provided yearly, and the disused ones became the property of the lord chancellor. A "cheese-paring" treasury, however, has now insisted that the purse of the lord chancellor should not be replaced till it has become worn out or tarnished, and, accordingly, disused purses are not so numerous in the houses of the holders of the great seal as in former times.

Mr. R. Newton Crane, who has been appointed honorary counsel in London to the St. Louis World's Fair, was born in New Jersey, but completed his training at the Wesleyan University, Connecticut. He was first a journalist, and edited papers in Newark and St. Louis. President Grant appointed Mr. Crane United States consul at Manchester in 1874. He held the consularship for four years. Resigning in 1878, he went again to St. Louis, and, being admitted to the bar in 1881, he practiced as a member of the firm of Pattison &

The question as to who has the better right to select the place of burial of a deceased person, as between the wife and children and the brothers and sisters, is considered by the Court of Appeals of Kentucky in the case of Neighbors v. Neighbors (65 Southwestern Reporter, 607).. The court holds that the current of authority is to the effect that there is not a property right to a dead body in a commercial sense, but that there is a right to bury it which the courts will recognize and protect. This includes the right to select a place of burial and to change it at pleasure, and in the absence of testamentary disposition of the body this right belongs to the next of kin. At the conclusion of the opinion the court cites many interesting Crane. Mr. Crane went to England in 1885, and authorities. In addition, we desire to call attention was called by the Middle Temple in 1894. to the case of Enos v. Snyder (63 Pacific Reporter, 110), where the court holds that a man has no property in his body for the purpose of disposing of it by will, and that the custody of a corpse belongs to the next of kin as against the executor.

English Dotes.

Sir J. Rose Innes, the new chief justice of the Transvaal bench, has arrived at Pretoria to take up

his duties.

Mr. Joseph Brown, K. C., has attained his ninetythird year, having been born on the 4th of April, 1809. The venerable gentleman is the oldest of king's counsel. He was taken seriously ill shortly after his birthday last year, and has been confined to his bed ever since.

Humorous Side of the Law.

Many a man complains dat he can't git jestice," says a colored philosopher. "But ef he seen jestice comin' down de big road he'd take ter de woods wusser'n a jack rabbit."— Atlanta Constitution.

The efforts on the part of members of the house to pin one another down to direct answers reminded Representative Capron, of Rhode Island - one of the best story tellers in the house, by the way - of an experience in the last compaign. Mr. Capron was very much bothered while making a speech by a man in the audience, who insisted on asking questions to which he demanded either "yes" or "no"

for an answer.

But there are some questions," finally remarked Mr. Capron, which cannot be answered by 'yes' orno.'"

A writer in the Strand Magazine relates that "the frugal wife of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke in the "I should like to hear one," scornfully comeighteenth century collected enough lord chancel-mented his annoyer. lor's purses, during her husband's long tenure of the "Well," said Mr. Capron, "I think I can prove seals, to furnish a complete set of hangings for her it. Have you quit beating your wife? Answer state bed." The late Right Hon. Sir Maziere Brady, 'yes' or 'no.'" who was lord chancellor of Ireland three times, from 1846 till 1852, from 1853 till 1858, and from 1859 till 1866, utilized the lord chancellor's purses which became his annual perquisites during his period of office, which extended in all over eighteen years, by converting them into magnificently upholstered hangings for the backs of his diningroom chairs. The beautifully embroidered crimson his escape.- Washington Post.

The crowd saw at once that Mr. Capron had the man in a trap. If he said "yes," it was a confession that he had been beating his wife; if he said "no," it was an admission that he was still indulging in the pastime.

"Yes" or "no," shouted everybody in the hall, and in the midst of the confusion the man made

The Albany Law Journal. the court refused to charge that it is not

"Is it negligence, per se, for a person to board a slowly-moving street car?" is a question which was recently decided in the negative by the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First District, this State. The plaintiff in the case was Jacob Lobsenz, who sued the Metropolitan Street Railway Company for damages due to injuries sustained by him while attempting to board one of the defendant's cars at Thirty-First street and Third avenue, New York city.

Lobsenz testified on the trial that he signaled to the motorman to stop, and when the car had practically come to a standstill-or, as he expressed it, was moving "at a snail's pace" and he had one foot on the step of the rear platform, the car suddenly darted ahead, throwing him to the ground. The jury found a verdict against the plaintiff. A reversal of the judgment for the railroad was ordered by the Appellate Division, because the trial court charged a proposition of law applicable to steam railroads, but not to street railways in cities. The trial judge said in his charge that" the usual invitation to us to get aboard of a public vehicle is that it stops, and in all ordinary cases to get aboard of a moving public vehicle is imprudent." Justice Patterson, for the appellate tribunal, says: "The trial judge stated as a matter of law in all ordinary cases to get aboard or attempt to get aboard of a moving public vehicle is imprudent, which was used as a synonym or substituted and equivalent word for neglect. This seems to be apparent from the fact that

VOL. 64.- No. 6.

always negligence as matter of law for a per

son to get upon a street car while it is in motion, so that even if the plaintiff boarded or attempted to board the car while in motion the jury might still find in his favor." Justice Patterson, after quoting several cases to the effect that ordinarily it is perfectly safe to get upon a street car moving slowly, continues: In those cases the court seems to give effect to that which is patent to the observation of every one in a large city, that persons frequently enter upon a street car while it is moving slowly. The act may be a negligent one or an imprudent one, but it is not necessarily so in contemplation of law. In this case the trial judge started with a proposition which was controlling of the whole case, which was stated as a rule of law, and which,

when it was proved that the plaintiff entered upon a moving car, fixed in the minds of the jury that that act in and of itself was what the law declared to be imprudent, and, for the purposes of his case, a negligent act.”

As illustrative of the infinite variety of questions which the courts are compelled to pass upon, that of Festerazzi v. Church, recently, decided by the Supreme Court of Alahama, is peculiarly interesting. Here a decedent had provided for a bequest to a church, to be used for solemn masses "for the repose of the soul." The court held the bequest invalid, not being a direct bequest to the church for its general uses, nor creating a valid charitable use, nor creating a valid private trust for the want of a living beneficiary. The case will be found in 18 Southern Reporter, 394.

THE ALBANY LAW JOURNAL has received from the secretary, Mr. Frederick E. Wadhams, a copy of the proceedings of the 25th annual meeting of the New York State Bar Association, held at Albany, January 21-22, 1902. It makes a handsome volume of some 566 pages, and is embellished with half-tone portraits of the retiring president, Wm. B. Hornblower, of Jules Cambon, French ambassador, who delivered the annual address

on "The Relations of Diplomacy to the De- it came from the cow, which was deficient in velopment of International Law;" and of the fat. Thereupon the vendor was summoned Hon. James M. Beck, assistant attorney-and convicted, and upon appeal that convicgeneral of the United States, who, at the same tion was upheld, Mr. Justice Darling dissentmeeting, spoke on the live topic of "The ing. It was not suggested that the milk was Suppression of Anarchy." The volume throughout shows the painstaking care of Secretary Wadhams. It has all the old features and several new ones, including a complete list of papers read at the annual meetings since the organization of the association. The transactions are becoming more and more valuable each year and some of them are already out of print.

unfit for human consumption, but, owing to a long interval between the morning milking and when the milk in question was taken, the fat had been absorbed in the cow. This milk was undoubtedly new, and it was cows' milk, but it would now seem that when a purchaser demands new cows' milk, he also must be taken to demand milk with a certain percentage of fat. Unfortunately, owing to the inability of the animal to give a written warranty, the vendor cannot crave the protection of section 25 of the Food and Drugs Act, 1875. If a warranty could be otherwise given, we might perhaps have the edifying spectacle of a fine inflicted on the cow under section 20 (6) of the act of 1899.

We publish elsewhere in this issue a notable paper on "Voting Trusts in Reorganizing

The Massachusetts law provides that a customer can recover money paid to a broker with which to purchase stock upon margin, provided the broker had reason to believe that the purchaser had no intention of actually purchasing stock. It therefore became the custom for the brokers to actually purchase stock, requiring the customer to pay but a portion of the purchase money, and furnish- Corporations, and for Other Purposes," by ing the balance themselves, the certificates being delivered to the brokers with a written transfer thereof in blank, signed by the owners. The certificates were often pledged as security for money borrowed by the brokers to raise the balance required to purchase them. In the case of Chase v. City of Boston (62 Northeastern Reporter, 1059), the plaintiffs were taxed as the owners of certain stock held in this way, and sought to be relieved from paying the tax on the ground that they were simply pledgees of the same. The court decides that the broker is the owner of the stock, for he is not bound generally to keep the stock of any one customer distinct, but has the right to take a single certificate in his own name for several customers, and has the power to pledge the whole to a bank for advances.

The recent decision of the majority of the English Divisional Court in Smithies v. Bridge is regarded by our London contemporary, the Law Times, as quite Gilbertian in its way. It records the fact that a purchaser, having asked for new milk, received milk as

the Hon. Robert L. Cutting, of New York city. This is one of the phazes of modern corporation law which possesses a practical, every-day interest, not merely for lawyers, but for business men and financiers. The essay bears every evidence of having been carefully prepared; it will be found to contain a large amount of good corporation law and will go far to elucidate a subject somewhat shrouded in mystery to the general practitioner. Mr. Cutting is entitled to the thanks of the profession and the public for having given so much time and research to the preparation of this essay, which we confidently commend to the profession at large.

Third Assistant Postmaster-General Madden appears to be making herculean efforts to be classed as the watch dog of the post-office department. He is understood to have been engaged for some time past in a "still hunt" for those publishers who systematically violate or evade the post-office regulations regarding the mailing of second and third class matter at pound rates. This has long been known as one of the greatest abuses of the department,

the point at which the greatest "leaks" occur, warmly advocated by a number of the delethe leaks which are mainly responsible for the gates. The Pan-American conference took the heavy deficiency in revenue. THE ALBANY question up at the stage at which it had been LAW JOURNAL has had these facts brought left at The Hague, and, after careful deliberaforcibly to its attention through a recent tion, the nations of the new world bound ruling, in a matter in which it was in- themselves to submit to arbitration a specific terested. While we have no special fault class of legal claims as to which there might to find with this decision, at the same be dispute between them. Thus the way is time we desire to embrace this oppor- opened, should the experiment prove successtunity to direct the attention of the vigilant ful, for widening the scope of arbitration in third assistant to the fact that there is plenty the public affairs of the world. As to the inof work ahead of him yet; that there should ception of the movement that aims at subjectbe no favoritism shown, that a small, weak ing the nations of the world to the dominion publisher is entitled to the same consideration of law, Mr. Taylor says: as a rich and powerful one; that the axe should be swung to the line, let the chips fall where they may. We have deemed it our duty to bring before the assistant postmaster-general the facts of one notorious case which has come within our knowledge, and we cherish the belief that he will deal with it as it deserves. It will be time enough to make public the facts when he has neglected or refused to act. Consistency is so precious a jewel that one does not expect to find it in all the walks of life, but in the conduct and management of governmental affairs it is not unreasonable to hope for it. Do not, Mr. Third Assistant Postmaster-General, make fish of one and flesh of another.

"Not until the ancient and imposing theory of a common and irresistible superior, as embodied in the Medieval Empire, was wrecked by the Reformation, did the emancipated nationalties, which had crouched so long at its feet, begin to realize, first, that each state or nation is sovereign and independent, and as such co-equal with all the rest; second, that territory and jurisdiction are co-extensive. After the establishment of that common basis of equality, the difficulty that remained was how to subject sovereign states, through their own volition, to the yoke of legality. No more novel or difficult problem was ever presented for solution than that which confronted the publicists of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, when they were called upon to furnish rules adequate, by virtue of their intrinsic weight and dignity, to compel the obedience of the freshly emancipated European nationalities, without the coercive force of any recognized central authority. From that day to this, the jurists and statesmen of the world have been striving to complete the vague and imperfect result then reached, by the establisharmed with the power to define the existing system of international rules, and to enforce them against the refractory, through some kind of pressure, moral

ment of some kind of an international tribunal to be

VOTING TRUSTS IN RE-ORGANIZING COR-
PORATIONS AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

Hannis Taylor, whose latest work, "International Law," has been received with much favor, is the author of an article on "International Arbitration and the Pan-American Conference," in a recent number of the North American Review. Mr. Taylor's object is to or legal." show how the cause of international arbitration has been forwarded by the agreements made between the American nations which were represented at the recent convention in The growth and development of modern inthe city of Mexico. He gives a very interest-dustry is largely due to the corporate form into ing account of the development of the idea of which the agencies of production and distribution arbitration and its practical application in the are cast. settlement of international disputes, and reviews in detail the discussions and conclusions of the congress at The Hague upon the subject. These conclusions, he points out, came short of providing for obligatory arbitration for any description of disputes, although rely on the proxies of friends and of the stockobligatory arbitration in certain cases was holders generally for this purpose, there have been

Naturally enough, it is in controlling these vast corporations that lies the power of our so-called captains of industry." But, plainly, such control would be far beyond even their means, did it depend on the actual ownership of the shares of these

corporations.

While it has, in many cases, been sufficient to