Page images
PDF
EPUB

Page.

Pa

New Orleans v. M. & T. R. Co....

17 Randall v. Chubb...

Newton v. Weaver .

217 Rathbone v. Un. R. Co..
N. Y. & B. D. Ex. Co. v. Tra. & Mech. Ins. Co... 259 Raymond v. Leavitt..
Nickerson v. Merchants' Steamship Co...

237 Rea v. Holland...

Nichols v. Allen....

283 Reg. v. Gantz...

Nichols v. Standish.

39 | Reg. v. Morley.

Nicholson v. Cook.

399 Reg. v. O'Brien.
Noel v. Drake....

443 Reg. v. Speed..
North Whitehall v. Keller.

458 Reif v. Paige...
Northern Central Ry. Co. v. Husson.

477 | Remele v. Donahue.
Norton v. Willis

317 | Renick v. Boyd..

Noyes v. Blodgett.

19 Reynolds, Ex parte..

Ogle v. Turpin

177 | Reynolds v. Vanderbilt .

Oglesby v. Attrill.

216 Rice v. Comm.

2

Ohlson v. Pierse..

335 | Rich v. Gilkey.

Ordinary v. Dean.

314 Richardson v. Prentiss.

1

Ormerod v. N. Y. W. S. & B. R. Co...

440 | Richmond v. Johnson..

3

Ormond v. Cent. Iowa R. Co...

263 Rizer v. Perry...

2

Ormsby v. Howe

122, 299 | Robbins v. Robbing.

1

Ortman v. Weaver..

117 | Robert v. Corning..

Orton, In re.....

213 Robinson v. Murphy.

4

Robinson v. Natl. Stock Yard Co.

3:

Pace v. State.....

163 | Robinson v. Park..

Palmtag v. Doutrick.

176 Robinson v. Perry.

4

Parker v. Morrill...

412 | Robinson v. State..

18

Parker v.

Wilmington & W. R. Co..

197 | Roche v. Ullman

47

Parkinson v. McQuaid.

157 Rocky Mtn. Nat. Bank v. Bliss

11

Partridge v. Jones.

455 Rogers v. Marshall ......

37

Penn v. Bornman.

232 Root v. Lake S. & M. C. R. Co.

14

Pennock v. Stygles..

279 Rose v. Stephens & Co. Trans. Co

11

People v. Cothran..

163 Rose v. Vertin..

30

People v. Gilmore.

13 | Roth v. Ehman.

People v. Lyon.

63 Rumery v. McCulloch.

23

People v. McKay.

303 Ryan v. Adamson.

28

People v. Miller

359 Ryon v. McGee..

39:

People v. N. Y., N. H. & H. R. Co.

115

People v. Quong..

479 Sage v. Brooklyn..

11

People v. Stevens..
259 Sahlinger v. People.

19

People's Bank v. Kurtz..

398 St. Louis v. Spiegel.

51'

People's Pass. Ry. Co. v. Green.

97 | Sampson v. Mudge..

41

Perce v. Hallett..

132 Samuelson v. Cleveland Iron Mining Co.

53

Percival v. Hughes.

430 Sanborn v. Royce...

41:

Perkins v. Stickney.

135 Sawyer v. Concordia.

354

Perry v. Cross....

338 Scammon v. Germania Ins. Co...

281

Perry v. Mech. Mut. Ins. Co..

400 Scheffer v. Wash., C., Va. M., & Gt. St. Ry. Co.. 115

Philadelphia & R. R. Co. v. Troutman.. 135 Schoff v. Laithe

1:

Phila., Wilm. & Balt. R. R. Co. v. Lehman. 38 Schoregge v. Bishop.

53:

Philips v. Jones..

297 Schwindler v. Lang.

411

Phoenix Mut. L. Ins. Co. v. Doster.

455 Scott v. Sampson

17

Pike v. Neal...

295 Scribner v. Adams..

31"

Pinney v. Cahill..

44 Seaton v. Swem..

29

Pitman v. Universal M. Ins. Co..

379 Seay v. Hunt...

Platz v. Cohoes...

56 Severance v. Judkins

152

Plenler v. State

16 Sewell v. Slinguff....

176

Plummer v. Eastern R. Co

141 Seymour v. Western R. Co...

49:

Pollock v. U. S. M. Acc. Asso..

464 Shafer v. Phønix F. Ins. Co..

200

Pomeroy v. Salt Co..

78 Shaw v. Burney

35'

Post, Petition of..

99 Shaw v. Carpenter.

331

Potomac v. Cannon..

76 Shaw v. Chambers

414

Potter v. Doyle...

218 Shaw v. Clark...

421

Powell v. Waldron..

33 Shaw Stocking Co. v. Mack..

14

Pritchard v. Norton..

491 Sherman v. Scott

16

Providence & S. S. Co. v. Virginia F. & Mut. Ins. Shivers v. Nathan.

Co...

178 Shreve v. Freeman.

314

Pullman Palace Car Co. v. Tex. Pac. Ry. Co. 238 Shubrook v. Tafnell..

33

Sick v. Mich. Aid Asso.

450

Queen v. Martin..

10 Sidenberg v. Ely..

43:

Queen v. Morby

79 Siler v. Gray

288

Quidneck Co. v. Chafee..

356 Silver Spring B. & D. Co. v. Wauskuck Co. 99

Quimby v. Hazen.

314 Simpson v. Westenberger..

451

Quimby v. Penn Ins. Co.

179 Sims v. Street R. Co..

139

Quong'Woo, In re..

183, 379

Sioux City v. Wesse

414

Skalley v. Sht

295

Railroad Co. v. McMillan...

139 Slayton, Ex para

216

Railway Co. v. Henderson...

.78 Sleeper v. Worchester & N. R. Co..

157

Ramsdale v. Foote...

539 Slocumb v. Chic. B. & Q. R. Co...

296

Rand's Estate, Matter of..
402 | Smart y, White....

72

[graphic]
[graphic]

503
Page.

Page. mith, In re. 479 Taylor v. Wait...

415 mith v. Chadwick.. 298 | Taylor v. Ypsilanti.

17 nith v. Fisher.. 357 Teas v. Albright...

454 mith v. Keal. 298 Thatch v. Metropolis Ins. Co.

. 279 mith v. Lincoln. 405 Third Natl. Bank v. Skillings..

. 338 mith v, Robertson. 412 Thol v. Henderson..

79 mith v. Ullman 477 Thomas v. Witheby

223 mith v. Witherick 397 | Thompson v. Dolliver...

135 nell v. Bray... 503 Thoreson v. Minneapolis H. Wks.

458 omerset v. Grt. W. Ry. Co.. 339 Thorpe v. Fowler....

258 onneborn v. Manufac. Ins. Co... 339 Tasker y, Kenton Ins. Co..

20 onoma Val. Bank v. Hill.. 176 Tompkins v. Halleck..

413 bouth W. School Dist. v. Williams.

159
Tompkins v. Heath

23 pinning v. Sullivan..

499
Townes y. Nichols..

295 tate v. Balt. & O. R. Co... 343 Transatlantic Ins. Co. v. Dorsey

318 tate v. Bolton. 260 Tredwell v. Blount..

139 tate v. Boyle... 259 Trimmer v. Hiscock.

163 tate v. Bradley. 158 Trubee v. Miller..

39 Itate v. Drury... 260 | Trumbore, Matter of.

382 ftate v. Eberly. 31 Tucker v. Singer.

243 state v. Eosign. 518 Tufts v. Matthews..

77 štate v. Gray.. 518 Turnbull v. Schroeder...

354 State v. Grear.

408 Turner v.
Killian.

396 state v. Intoxicating Liquors. 158 Turner v. William..

299 state v. Kelsey. 315 Tyler v. Fickett..

198 State v. King...

359 State v. Lewis.. 260, 277 Union Ins. Co. v. Glover..

20 State v. Malster 176 U. S. v. Angell..

137 State v. Mellor 419 U. S. v. Lissner.

391 State v. Milk. 134 U.S. v. Loftis..

144 State v. Nash.. 293 U. S. v, Miller..

378 State v. Nichols... 458 U. S. v. Mobile

354 State v. Parker. 423 U. S. v. Nicholson.

102 State v. Poe.. 303 U. S. v. Smith...

274 State v. Poteet.

82 U. S. v. Taylor..

260, 263 State v. Riverg. 419 U. S. v. Viall..

173 State v. Rogers.. 336 Upton v. McLaughlin...

257 State v. Romaine.

296 State y, Shee. 260 Van Horn v. Burl. C. R. & M. R. Co...

414 State v. Smith.. 358, 396 Van Vechten v. Smith.

414 State v. Spear. 478 Vasser v. Buxton..

336 State v. Stokes . 418 Vaughan v. Prov. & W. R. Co...

217 State v. Stucker... 312 Vaux v. Ald South Society...

413 State v. Towler.. 478 Venable y, Richards...

116 State v. Townsend..

303 State v. Weaver... 358 Wagoner v. Loomis...

· 139 State y. Western Un, Tel. Co.

316
Wagoner v. Watts..

358 State v. Witham... 199 Wallace v. Rappleye.

316 Stebbins v. Cent. Vt. R. Co.. 416 Walser v. Seligman.

454 Steen v. Niagara F. Ins. Co.. 55 | Walsh v. People..

13 Steere v. Tiffany.. 99 Walter v. Greenwood.

354 Sterling v. Peterson..

475
Walton v. Mills..

337 Stern v. People. 177 Wanda, S...

524 Sthulmiller v. Cloughly 104 Wanson, A. H., The..

103 Stilling v. Erie.... 218 Waples v. Hays..

475 Stiness v. Pierce.. 57 Warlick v. White.

197 Stone v. Small..

Warner v. Vaillily

254 Stonestreet v. Doyle... 283 Watson v. Brooks.

454 Stornaway, The... 299 Watson v. Knowles.

357 Storrs v. Scougale...

Webb v. Holt

289 Story v. N. Y. Elevated Ry. Co. 373 Webber v. Lee..

453 Strong v. Lawrence... 296 Webster v, Nichols..

476 Stuhr v. Curran.. 268 Webster Loom Co. v. Higgins..

133 Sturges v. Galindo... 175 Weeth v. New England Security Co.

475 Suffell v. Bank of England. 406 Weiner v. Van Rensselaer..

250 Summit v. State.. 322 Wells v. American Express Co...

136 Summit Grove Meeting Asso. v. School Dist., 263 Wells v. Waight...

482 Sutcliffe v. Atlantic Mills..

Welsh v. McGrath.

540 Suter v. Hilliard.. 338 Werner v. Bergman.

403 Swain v. Frazier..

318 Western Union Tel. Co. v. Burl. & S. W. Ry. Co. 77 Swan v. Manchester & L. R. Co.... 135 Western Union Tel. Co. v. State

229 Swaney v. Hutchins .. 518 Weston v. Sprague..

396 Sykes v. Packer.... 459 Wharton v. Stoutenburgh

317 Whipple v. Whitman.

231 Tappan v. Ayloworth.. 217 White v. Smith

163 Taylor v. Comm.. 64 Whitecross U. & I. Co. v. Savill.

359 Taylor v. Reed. 316 Whiting v. Wellington..

14

476

414

Page.

Pag Whitney v. Martine..

12 Wilson Packing & P. Co.v. Chicago P. & P. Co. 11 Wieman v. Mabee,,

123 Wilton y. Weston

Wixon v. Wiggins Ferry Co. v. Chicago & Alt. R. Co.... 117

Newpoit. Wight v. Gray

158 Wohlfart y. Beckert. Wigsell v. School for Ind. Blind.

79 Wood v. Fowler Wilkinson v. Clauson

354 Wolf v. McCall. Willett v. Pope.. 403 Woodward v. Roberts .

10 William Rogers Mfg. Co. v. Rogers & S. Mfg. Co. 118 Workingmen's Banking Co. v. Rautenberg Williams v. People

260 Wright's Appeal. Williams v. Williams.

.171, 248 Wylie v. Pearson. Williams v. Windley 15 Wyman v. Robinson,

11 Wilson, In re

271 Wilson y. Borstel. 59 Yorton v. Mil., L. S. & W. Ry. Co..

71 Wilson y. Heutges. 416 Young v. Joslin..

39 Wilson v. Pearson

440
Yuengling v. Schile

27 Wilson v. Powell,

15 Wilson y. Southern Pacific R. Co..

279 Zabriskie v. State...

THE ALBANY LAW JOURNAL:

A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE LAW AND THE LAWYERS.

The Albany Law Journal.

[ocr errors]

Ingersoll. We have already alluded to his desire to bet in open court that his clients, the star-routers,

will be acquitted, but he has now developed a very ALBANY, JULY 1, 1882.

unpleasant disposition to fight the opposite counsel.

Some misunderstandings between counsel led the CURRENT TOPICS.

pugnacious colonel to ask the government counsel

not to address him again. But when Mr. Merrick UITEAU’S last hope of escape through judicial responded that he would not allow Col. Ingersoll

action having failed with Mr. Justice Brad- to address him, and would prevent his associates ley's refusal to grant a writ of habeas corpus, the

from doing so, if possible, the colonel briskly rewomen and physicians have taken the matter in plied that Mr. Merrick couldn't do it, “nor a hunhand. The latest phase of the nuisance is a deter- dred like him," and “manifested a desire to settle mined effort on the part of certain physicians, who the matter then and there." But the court interapparently are anxious to advertise themselves, and fered, as the colonel probably foresaw they would, of certain unreasoning and emotional women and and prevented any bloodshed. Now the colonel is clergymen, to induce the President to grant a reprieve, very irrational. Apparently he wants to do all the in order to give these physicians an opportunity to tes- talking. He will not let Mr. Merrick address him, tify that they think Guiteau crazy. These gentlemen but he will address Mr. Merrick just as much as he pronounce the trial a “farce," probably because they pleases, and Mr. Merrick can't help himself. We were not subpænaed to testify. Of course such an think he is correct in this assertion — nothing short inquiry could be addressed only to Guiteau's pres- of death will ever prevent the colonel from talking, ent condition. There is no pretense that he is in and from being an abusive, vulgar, and blasphemous any respect different now from what he was at the brawler. But believing in free speech as the charter time of the murder and of the trial, except that he of our liberties, as he professes, he is very inconseems to act rather more rationally. These physi- sistent in assuming to monopolize the talking. As cians apparently have no interest in the only legal for the "settling” of the matter, if it were not that inquiry pertinent to the case, namely, whether Gui- Mr. Merrick is a gentleman, a Christian, and a lawteau knew he was doing wrong, but are only anx- yer of great learning, whom we cannot spare, we ious to investigate the psychological problem of his should not mind a "settling” between him and the "sanity.” The public and the ministers of justice colonel in any manner that would irremediably prick take no interest in this question. They are satisfied this blatant bag of wind. We should not so much that Guiteau, however insane he may have been, mind an encounter between Col. Bob and Col. Bliss. knew that he was doing wrong, and therefore was But oh, that Col. Cash of South Carolina and Col. legally accountable. We should not care if a post Ingersoll could together have a fair field ! The mortem examination should disclose disease in Gui- | only possible regret would be that one or the other teau's brain; that would not change our conviction or more likely both might survive. that he had reason enough to be legally accountable. We earnestly rejoice that the President and the We are conscious of having devoted a good deal attorney-general have not been warped by these insa- of space of late to Mr. A. Alpeora Bradley, but the tiate scientific-curiosity-hunters from the discharge weather is warm, and the courts are dull, and straw of their duty in the premises — that is, to let Gui- for legal bricks is scarce. We therefore feel justiteau alone. We are in favor of hanging all such fied in announcing that A. Alpeora, now of St. "insane ” men as Guiteau, and of letting the physi- Louis, and Aaron A., formerly of Boston, are the cians squabble over the post mortem to their hearts' It seems that some years ago Bradley had a content. We hope that Guiteau will have been falling out with the Massachusetts courts, and they hanged ere these words reach our readers.

requested him not to practice any more, and he acThere is one other nuisance flourishing in Wash- cordingly desisted. After a time he asked to be ington at the present time, and that is Col. “Bob” “let up," and they thought the easiest way out was

Vol. 26 - No. 1.

same.

“If a

to order him to be examined. He was examined something in reply, and thereupon our colored accordingly, and the examination was published in 27 Law Reporter, 240 (A. D. 1865). The examiners

brother went to an adjoining window, took from it seem to have entered properly into the spirit of the

a pole used in opening and closing the windows, rematter, and the result was quite entertaining: We solemnly asked, “Is dat your verdic ?” The court

turned, and pointing it at every juryman in turn, extract some beauties: “Q. Does a writ of entry ever lie in this Commonwealth to recover land ?

did not spoil the fun. By the way, Mr. Lathrop Ans. I can't fix my mind on any writ by that ex

does not inform us whether A. Alpeora was adpressive name.” Mr. Bradley thought that to hold

mitted on his re-examination, but we assume that an indorser, demand might be made “within a rea

he was not. He probably got in the first time by

"senatorial courtesy." sonable time,” or “until just before six years are out," although in the latter case he concluded that the chance of recovery” would be "slight,” be- Commenting on the recent discussion, in the cause of the laches ; ” but “if you should wait ten House of Lords, on the validity of marriage with or fifteen or thirty or forty-five days, there would be one's deceased wife's sister, the Albany Argus reno doubt at all that you would recover;" but the marks: * Great Britain recognized that marriage question "would depend on the lex loci." "Q. For

was the aim of women. Its system of entail and an assault and injury to the person, would you bring primogeniture, in other words, its system of keeptrespass quare clausum, or trespass de bonis ? Ans. ing landed property in families, and of making the Trespass de bonis, of course." (Meaning trespass on

eldest son the heir, affected marriage in this way: the bones, probably. We once heard of a man who That daughter of a family who married an eldest translated de mortuis

, nil nisi bonum,“ nothing of a son of another house, married rich.' She was cerdead man but his bones.") “If you put in trespass tain either to try to help her sisters to other rich' quare clausum fugit also, you must elect which to pro- marriages, or to have some of them live with her as ceed upon.” He thought“ a deed would convey land companions, wheedling or persuading her husband without a seal,” under “the statute which provides to let them do so. That surrounded the husband that, formality shall not vitiate any thing."

with his wife and with some one or more of her unman has my child and won't give him up, I may married sisters." (By the bye, how can a man be bring personal replevin, but not habeas corpus. The “surrounded ” with his wife?" We do know she latter is brought against officers of the law." Stat- frequently “gets around him.") “The cares of ing the legal ages for marriage at 21 and 18, he said housekeeping and child-rearing would age and marriages under those ages are invalid, and the par- isolate the wife, while the unmarried sisters ties "may separate and marry others provided they would keep fresh, look young, hold their do not cohabit together after they become of proper health, have time for society, and their age. Such cohabitation would make it all right. vanity as well as their gratitude would lead them I have been in a case in which it was necessary to to dress and act to please the brother-in-law, who look this up." (That was the reason he knew.) supported them. The result, in a large number of “ A dowager is only a life-time thing, and is sup- cases, was found to be a conspiracy, between the posed to return to the legitimate heir. A dowager brother-in-law and some sister-in-law, to put the is one-third of the rents and profits of all the es- wife out of the way, so that they could get martate.” “A bill in equity to compel the specific per

ried. Parliament had to take notice of this evil, by formance of a contract to marry” must be brought prohibiting marriage with a deceased wife's sister. " within three years,” but “sooner if there has been It stopped that evil

, and it was an evil of sufficient part performance by their having intercourse to magnitude to need a remedy so absolute.” This gether. A court of equity would certainly compel | very clearly presents the stale, puerile and fleshly him to marry her. I have known of such a suit as argument of the English ecclesiastics who have for that." A common carrier is not liable for goods generations opposed their nasty traditions in the burned up in his house without his fault. It is way of common sense and common decency. If enough if he takes the same care of them that he there is any basis for the argument, it would be does of his own." He defined bailment as

safer to prohibit marriage with any woman who has mon bail bond and bail given in criminal cases.” a pretty sister, or still better, to restrict marriage to The case being put of a pledge, and a loan of the only daughters. It might be well, too, in view of pledge to the pledgor and his refusal to return it, the notorious hostility of the married man to the he was of opinion that would be a swindle. You mother-in-law, to forbid marriage with any except could use force to take it back.” The case being orphan daughters. The statement of the argument put of the sale of 100 barrels of flour, part of a is its sufficient refutation. It is no wonder that the large cargo, not pointed out, he thought " replevin clerics just now only escaped defeat by four votes. would lie because the barrels of four are distinct It is due to them however to say that they put comfrom each other.” “Q. How many witnesses are paratively little stress on the argument above stated, necessary to prove adultery? Ans. One disinter- but plant themselves on the scriptures, which they ested witness to prove he saw the parties in actual avow denounce such marriages. We have heretonaked, physical contact. I heard a judge in Con- fore sufficiently dwelt on this point.

Mr. Bishop necticut lay down the law stronger than that once.” expresses the opinion of most enlightened states(He certainly could not have laid down the parties men and lawyers, when he says: Especially, unany “stronger.") So much for A. Alpeora. Peace der the light of modern days, has it appeared alike to his shade! We never knew of his equal except unjust and impolitic to forbid marriage with the in the person of another colored brother, likewise sister of a deceased wife.

It would be an attorney, who once flourished in Rensselaer difficult to find a person who would object to such county in this State. A jury having returned an a union, or pretend that the laws permitting it had adverse verdict, some one whispered him to demand wrought injury.” (Marr. & Div., $ 319.) The Argus, a poll. So he demanded a polĩ, and the court said we apprehend, is mistaken in assuming that Parhe might poll them. “How do you poll 'em ?" liament ever prohibited such marriages. Arch he whispered to his adviser. His adviser whispered l bishop Parker's table of prohibited degrees, the

com

« PreviousContinue »