manager of both roads, and one person is superintendent of both on the division where the accident occurred: Tierney v. Syracuse, B. & N. Y. R. Co., 32 N. Y. Suppl. 627. The Court of Appeals of New York has recently held, in Cameron v. N. Y. Cent. & H. R. R. Co., 40 N. E. Rep. 1, Negligence of that when a servant is competent when employed, but afterwards becomes habitually negligent, and Fellow-ser vant. Notice causes the death of a fellow-servant by his violation of the employer's rules, the employer will not be liable, on the ground of negligence in failing to discover the servant's habitual misconduct, and in omitting to discharge him, if the work of the servant is of such a nature that the employer has no opportunity to learn of his misconduct, and it is not reported by his fellow-servants, although they were under positive instructions to report all violations of rules. Negligence Fellow-ser vant One of the absurd claims ever made in a court of law was lately rejected by the Supreme Court of Indiana, in Abbitt v. Lake Erie & W. R. R. Co., 40 N. E. Rep. 40. Two car inspectors were at work at night, one under the car, changing a coupler, and the other holding a torch to light him, when the employes of another company backed down upon them, without notice or warning, and the inspector under the cars was killed. The attorney for the company asked for an instruction which in effect would have imputed the negligence of the inspector with the torch, in not looking for the backing train, to the one under the car; but this was refused by the trial court, and the refusal was approved by the Supreme Court, HOWARD, J., saying tersely, "It is usually quite enough for a person to be responsible for his own negligence, without being called upon to answer for the negligence of some one else." The Supreme Court of Georgia has recently held, that when a husband has abandoned his wife and child, and failed to provide for them, the wife, while living separate from her husband and having the entire care and custody of the child, may maintain an action. against a railway company for injuries to the child caused by the negligence of the company since the separation took Injury to place, by reason of which she is deprived of his services: Savannah, F. & W. Ry. Co. v. Smith, 21 S. E. Rep. 157. Jury, According to the same court, the following questions: (1) Whether a railway company, having stopped a train immediRailroad. ately after the conductor called out the station, Questions for failed in extraordinary diligence towards the plainNon-sult tiff by not warning him that the station had not been reached, so as to prevent him from alighting in the darkness of the night at an unsafe place; and (2) Whether the plaintiff was negligent in so alighting without first assuring himself that the station had been reached or that the place was safe, are more proper for submission to a jury than for determination by the court on a motion for non-suit: Miller v. East Tenn., V. & G.. Ry. Co., 21 S. E. Rep. 153. The non-suit granted in this case was accordingly set aside. Nuisance, Joint Liability, Release When the water of a natural stream is polluted by the discharge of drainage therein by a city, and also by the discharge of noxious matter from gas works owned by a private individual, to the injury of one through whose lands the stream flows, the city and owner of the gas works, though not joint tort-scasors, are jointly and severally liable in damages; but a release of the owner of the works will not release the city from liability, unless executed in full satisfaction of all the injury sustained by reason of the nuisance: City of Valparaiso v. Moffit, (Appellate Court of Indiana,) 39 N. E. Rep. 909. The son of a clerk of court, acting as his father's deputy, and generally recognized as such, is an officer de facto with Officer de facto, respect to his acts in that capacity; and an affi Minor davit in attachment made before him is not void, although, on account of his minority, he could not have been lawfully appointed as deputy: Wimberly v. Boland, (Supreme Court of Mississippi,) 16 So. Rep. 905. The Court of Appeals of New York has lately rendered a Pensions, Discretion very interesting decision, to the effect that under the statute of that state, (New York Laws, 1885, c. 364.) Retirement, providing for the retirement on pension of members of the police force of the city of New York, who have served twenty years or upward, the police commissioners have a discretionary power to retire members of the force, and cannot be compelled to do so by mandamus: Pro. v. Martin, 39 N. E. Rep. 960. Pardon, The Court of Civil Appeals of Texas has recently held, in accord with the weight of authority, that the governor of a state has power to pardon a person convicted of crime after he has served his term of imprisonment, and that such a pardon will restore the person to competency as a witness on the trial of an action, the right of which accrued before the pardon was granted: Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Howell, 30 S. W. Rep. 98. Removal The Supreme Court of New York, Second Department, has lately ruled, in In re Quigley, 32 N. Y. Suppl. 828, that Police Justice, a police justice, who, during a strike of the emMisconduct ployes of a street railway company, discharged strikers who were arrested and brought before him, charged with throwing stones at the cars and assaulting the main operator of the cars, in spite of the evidence against them, and who stated that the strikers had a perfect right to take men off the cars if they could do so in an orderly way, is guilty of such misconduct as to warrant his removal. Public Contracts, Awarding In Frame v. Felix, 31 Atl. Rep. 375, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has held, that if a board of city commissioners, in specifications for work to be done, fix a minimum price to be paid by the contractor for labor, and award the contract for the work on the basis of those specifications, their action is a violation of a statutory provision requiring such work to be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, and is void, and may be set aside on bill filed by a tax-payer and property owner. Receiver. Assets According to the Supreme Court of Illinois, a receiver appointed by an Illinois court on a creditor's bill to enforce an Illinois judgment may hold the debtor's assets Right to as against an attaching creditor, who is a citizen of Illinois, even though the bill was brought by a citizen of New York; the mere fact that the creditor who brought the bill is a non-resident does not make the enforcement of the judgment a matter of comity, when the ancillary proceedings are brought in the same state: Holbrook v. Ford, 39 N. E. Rep. 1091. Schools, Private, Advance Payments, The Court of Civil Appeals of Texas has just rendered a very interesting decision on the question of the right of a parent whose child has been expelled from boarding school to recover advance payments for tuition, as follows: (1) When the evidence shows that it Recovery on is the understanding between the parties that, in Expulsion case of expulsion of the pupil for misconduct, advance payments should be liquidated damages, and not recoverable, and the rules of the school provide that there will be no reduction in case of withdrawals, and that all payments will be forfeited on expulsion, there can be no recovery; (2) That the conduct of a pupil at a boarding school, in continually playing truant, and finally leaving for his home, is ground for expulsion; especially when the father refuses to permit the teacher to whip his son for misconduct, and takes no steps himself to correct him: Fessman v. Secley, 30 S. W. Rep. 268. Slander, The Court of Appeal of England has recently laid down the broad rule that an action of slander will lie, Misconduct without proof of special damage, for words imputing dishonesty or malversation in a public office of trust, although the office is not one of profit, and whether there is a power of removal from the office for such misconduct or not: Booth v. Arnold, [1895] 1 Q. B. 571. of Public Officer A difference in the punctuation of similar statutes does not Statutes. necessarily indicate a change in the construction; especially when the punctuation is the work of the printer, Punctuation not of the legislature: Griffiths v. Montandon, (Supreme Court of Idaho,) 39 Pac. Rep. 548. See 34 Cent. L. J. 253. Taxation The Supreme Court of the United States has added another laurel to the crown it has of late been so industriously weaving for itself by deciding, by a vote of five to four, that the Income Tax act is wholly unconstitutional, on the ground that an income tax is a direct tax, and therefore must be apportioned according to representation. This result was brought about by a change of heart on the part of one Mr. Justice SHIRAS, of Pennsylvania. Trade Mark. The Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York has lately ruled, in William Rogers Mfg. Co. v. R. W. Rogers Co., 66 Fed. Rep. 56, that the rule that the user Use of Names of a personal name as a trade-mark will not be protected against its use in good faith by a defendant who has the same name, does not apply to the case of a corporation, which selects its own name, especially when that name was selected in order to mislead. The owner of land, across which there is a private way for passage only, has the right to protect his fields by such a gate or other structure as will not unreasonably obstruct the use of the way: Hartman v. Fick, (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania,) 31 Atl. Rep. 342. Ways. Private. Obstruction Condition The Master of the Rolls of Ireland has recently decided, Will. that a gift over of real estate in the event of the devisee marrying a man “beneath her in life, that of Marriage is to say, below her in social position," is good: Greene v. Kirkwood, 1 Ir. R. 130. in restraint In a recent case in the Court of Chancery for Ireland, a |