RECENT CASES. (133) in Mr. Justice Bradley's diclum. The Titanic case has likewise been adjudicated in England. Ryan v.

Transcription

1 RECENT CASES. AD.117RALTY-TI1E TiTANC-LIMITATION OF Li.D-mi-The owners Titnic filed petition in circuit court for limittion ir libility under lws United Sttes (U. S. Comp. Stt., 190T, pp ) nd Admirlty Rules S4 nd 56. Such lws limit libility " interest such owner in such vessel nd her freight n pending.' This mounted vlue iome fourteen life-bots. On ground tht Titnic ws British registered vessel lost on high ses within terriril wters United Sttes, it ws contended tht lw Gret Britin would pply nd tht this country. Hcld: The owners Titnic cn mintin proceedings in courts United Sttes nd sid courts will pply limited libility lws United Sttes nd lw Gret Britin. Ocenic Stem Nvigtion Co. Mellor, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 754 (1914). The generl proposition tht foreign ships my resort courts United Sttes for limittion libility under Re Stt hs been estblished where collisions hve tken plce between n Americn nd foreign vessel, The Scotlnd, ios U. S. 24 (1881), nd between two foreign vessels, L Bourgoyne. 210 U. S. 95 (907). But see dictum Brdley,., in The Scotlnd, supr, tht if two vessels belonging sme ntion were involved, court would decide cse under lw ship's flg. At first instnce it. would seem tht court hd gone n unnecessry extreme in pplying lw United Sttes principl cse. Fundmentlly lw ntion hs no extrterriril effect, nd where single foreign vessel lone is involved, necessity neutrl court is pprent s where vessels different ntions hve collided. With rre exception, libility in rt between prties is fixed by tht. lw jurisdiction within which wrong is done-i. e., Englnd in cse Titnic. Americn Bnn Co. United Fruit Co., 213 U. S. 347 (19o9). Yet lws for, my refuse enforce this foreign lw if it conflicts with domestic lws. This Congress hs done in limiting recovery in cse loss lives id crgoes on high ses, U. S. Comp. Stt., 19o, supr. On this n, court hs bsed its decision, contending tht it is in ccord with its former decisions nd refusing pply undoubted logic in Mr. Justice Brdley's diclum. The Titnic cse hs likewise been djudicted in Englnd. Ryn Ocenic Stem Nvigtion Co., iio Lw Times, 641 (1914). In Gret Britin libility ship-owners is rrnged ccording nnge ship. Merchnts' Shipping Act, i8g4, 503. It ws held tht cluse on ticket exempting compny from libility for negligent nvigtion ws inconsistent with pssenger's contrct s snctioned by Bord Trde under Merchnts' Shipping Act, supr. - CRMI.AL LAw-Am rme. SuIciDE-An ttempt commit suicide is n ttempt commit felony, nd within provision Hrd Lbour Act, 1822, tht, on n indictment for "n ttempt commit felony," court hs power inflict sentence imprisonment with hrd lbor. Rex. Mnn, IIo Lw Times, 781 (1914). By common lw Englnd, suicide ws felony, punishble by forfeiture goods nd chttels suicide nd n ignominious buril. 4 Bl. Com. i89, 19o; Hles Petit, Plowd. 253, 26z (1563). So lso n ttempt commit suicide ws indictble s misdemenor in Englnd. Reg. Doody, 6 Cox C. C. 463 (1854); Reg. Burgess, 9 Cox C. C. 247 (1862). In Americ. very few cses hve risen involving ttempted suicide, nd decisions hve been somewht ffected by sttutes. In New Jersey, under sttute which mkes ll fences n indictble nture t common lw, nd orwise provided for by ct legislture, misdemenors, n ttempt t suicide ws held be misdemenor. Stte Corney, 69 N. J. (133)

2 134 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW L. 478 (19o3). In New York, North Dkot, nd South Dkot, Code, while Penl providing tht suicide is crime, lso provides who tht one ttempts suicide is guilty felony punishble by imprisonment. Penl Code New York, 2, 173, 174, 178. However, re re convictions no reported for this fence in ny one three sttes. In Msschusetts nd Mine, since, by sttute, degree punishment for mit ttempts fences is com- mesured by punishment prescribed for ech ctully fence, committed, if nd -no punishment is prescribed for suicide, it tht ws held n ttempt commit suicide ws indictble. Com. Dennis, Mss. ios 162 (187o); My Pennell, ii Me. 516 (x1o6). See lso Ahsee King (Hwii), 2 Am. Lw Re 794 (1867). In Pennsylvni, forfeiture for suicide hving been bolished, it ws held tht, since ishment, re re ws ws no no pun- crime, nd tht, s n ccomplished suicide crime, ws n ttempt commit suicide ws crime, in bsence sttute mking it such. Com. Wright, II P. Dist. Rep. 144 (1902). Although it is everywhere recognized suicide ws mon felony lw, t it com- hs been mooted question wher suicide ws murder distinct or felony. See 3 COL. L R. 379 nd 59 U. OF P. L. R. io6, where conclusion reched is tht suicide is murder t common lw. sttes Even in which in those suicide is held be crime, one who counsels nor or ids kill himself nd is present when he does so, is guilty s principl murder in second degree. Blckburn Stte, (1872); 23 Ohio Com. St. 146 Mink. 123 Mss. 422 (1877). In Texs, where suicide is crime, it ws held tht one who furnished mens for or counselled suicide, ws guilty no crime. Grce Stte, 44 Tex. Crim. (1902); Rep. 193 Snders Stte, 112 S. W. Rep. 68 (Tex. i9o8). Thege cses lone stnd mong reported decisions, but ir resoning would seem be logiclly irrebuttble. CRIMINAL LAW-FALSE PRETENCES-WORHLESS CHEQUE-The mere ct giving cheque on bnk in which mker hs no ccount n indictment will support for obtining money by flse pretense if re is pro tht mker hd no resonble grounds believe tht cheque pid would upon be presenttion." Stte Foxn, 147 N. W. Rep. 347 (Iow, 1914). The uthorities re somewht in conflict s wher, versl under sttutes uni- which previl, worthless cheque is flse It pretense is well or settled ken. tht where cheque is ccompnied by flse sttement tht mker hs funds in bnk meet it, conviction will tined. be sus- Foote People, i 7un i218 (N. Y. 1879); Tylor N. W. Wise, Rep i26 (Iow, i9ro). The mjority jurisdictions mere hold tht ct giving cheque on bnk is representtion tht hs mker t time money or credit in 'bnk, nd if, when given, cheque drwer is hs no funds in bnk nd knows cheque be pid will upon presenttion, this is considered flse pretense. Re in Jckson, 3 Cmpbell, 370 (Eng. 1813); People Wsservogle, (1888) 77 Cl. 173 ; Brn People, 135 Ill. 405 (i89o); Stte Hmelsy, (19o8) ; 2 52 Bishop. Or. i56 Cr. Lw, 430; 2 Whrn Cr. Lw (9th ed.), hi7o. But if one who hs n ccount t bnk gives cheque ginst no it, funds though on he deposit hs t time, this lone will support conviction, since cheque might be pid upon presenttion nd n is intent necessrily defrud implied. There must be pro tht merely cheque n is "overdrft." This is held in principl cse. Regin Hzeln, 23 AV. Rep. 139 (Eng. 187*5). But some courts giving refuse worthless consider cheque sufficient constitute flse pretense, though even mker knows it will be pid. These courts ctul require ffirmtive some representtion s its vlidity nd worth. Blckwell Stte, 41 Tex. Cr. Reps. io4 (1899) ; Moxey Stte, 85 Ark. 499 (1908). CRIMINAL LAW-PERJURY-SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENE- The defendnt, bnkrupt, ws convicted hving mde flse oth in bnkruptcy ceeding, pro- in violtion Bnkr. Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, 29, b. (2). Held:

3 RECENT CASES This fense is equl enormity with perjury, nd ncient rule common lw requiring two witnesses convict perjury hs been prcticlly nnulled. Khn United Sttes, 214 Fed. Rep..4 (1914). The old common lw rule ws tht, support conviction for perjury, evidence two "direct" witnesses ws required estblish flsity oth on which indictment ws bsed. 4 Bl. Com. 358; 4 Hwk. P. C.. b. 2. c. 46. io. The reson for this rule cn be found in n current distinction between "circumstntil" nd "direct" evidence. Whrt. Crim. E, 387. But since ll testimony is now considered more or less circumstntil, it hs become well settled tht conviction my be hd on evidence one witness, supported by pro corroborting circumstnces. Willims Com., 9z P. 493 (i879); Stte Fulkner, 175 Mo. 546 (1903). Some cses hold tht corrobortive evidence necessry must be equivlent testimony nor witness. Gudy Stte, 23 Neb. 436 (1888). But generl rule seemns be tht corrobortive evidence is required equl in weight testimony nor witness. United Sttes 'Wood, 39 U. S. 430 (i84o). However, in ll cses, 316 (i9o4). Admissions ccused re sufficient corrobortive evidence. Peterson Stte, 74 Al. 34 (1883); Stte Hunter, Jupr. But see contr, Stte Blize, III Mo. 464 (1892). While rule mjority jurisdictions is s stted bove, re re few decisions which deprt still furr from old common lw rule. It hs been held tht evidence by one witness only contrdicry oths defendnt is sufficient for conviction. Rex Knill, 5 Brn. & Old. 929 e (1822). In West Virginip, it ws held tht mere uncorroborted contrdicry evidence prosectiting witness ws sufficient, where jury 'hd opportunity observe defendnt's demenor while testifying in his own behlf. Stte Miller, 24 W. V. 8o2 (1884). Where icontrdiction cme directly from defendnt by mens written testimony, conviction for perjury ws obtined without id living witness. United Sttes p. Wood, 39 U. S. 43o (i84o). However, in ll cses, flsity defendnt's oth must be estblished by prepondernce evidence nd beyond resonble doubt. Stte Courtright, 66 Ohio St. 35 (192). CONTRACTS--PARTIAL PEMRoRMANCE-IMPOSS1131LITY OF C PLmON-A sub-contrcr greed construct viduct ccording specifictions furnished by city engineer, work be pid for from time time ccording estimtes. When prtly finished structure collpsed becuse defects in specifictions. The sub-contrcr sued for vlue work done nd prits he would hve "relized on completed contrct. Held: He my recover for vlue work done, but for prits. Huetter Wrehouse nd Relty Co., 142 Pc. Rep. 675 (Wsh. x9r4). - The generl principle be regrded in cses impossibility performnce contrcts is, tht when contrct is entire nd for lump sim loss flls on builder. Adms Nichols, 36 Mss. 279 (1837); Tompkins Dudley, 25 N. Y. 272 (1862). but where mount is pyble in instlments, Milske Steiner Mntel Co., 5 L R. A. io5 (Md. 19o6), nr where contrct is perform prticulr prt lrger undertking, recovery cn be hd for prt performed. Hyes Gross, 57 N. E. Rt, 1]12 (N. Y. i896); Elliott on Contrcts, Vol. 3, 19O9. Where impossibility performnce rises out defects in specifictions furnished eir by one letting contrct or third person, decisions re uniform s wher contrcr my recover for prt performed. The decision in such cses depends upon wher or court tkes view tht person furni'hing specifictions wrrnts contrcr tht specifictions, when followed out, will produce result contrcted for. in Englnd nd in some Americn jurisdictions it is held tht re is no such implied wrrnty nd tht contrcr cn recover. Thorn Myor London, L. R. [1876] 1 App. Cs. x2o; Lonergn Lon Assn., io4 S. W. Rep. xo6x (Tex. i9o7). The previling Americn view,

4 136 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW in ccord with principl cse, is tht if work is fithfully performed in ccordnce with specifictions furnished, tlhe contrcr my recover even if result contrcted for is obtined reby. McKnight Flintic Sne Co. Myor. i6o N. Y. 72 (1899); City N. Y. P. Steel Co., -o6 Fed. Rep. 455 (1913) ; Bush Jones, 6 L. R. A. 778 (U. S. x9o6); Miller & Sons Homeopthic Hospitl, 243 P. 502 (1914). CONTRACTS-PROMISE TO PAY DEBT OF ANOTIFR-The defendnt contrcted with third person py ltter's debt plintiff. No ssets, however, were plced in defendnt's hnds for pying tht indebtedness. ttcld: The plintiff cn sue upon contrct. Sweeney Housn, go Atl. Rep. 347 (P. 1914). This cse ffirms Pennsylvni doctrine, tht n greement py debt promisee cn be enforced by credir only when money or property ws plced in promisor's hnds for purpose pying credir. Delp Brewing Co., 123 P. 42 (1888); Howes Scott, 224 P. 7 (I909). But see contr, Clflin Ostrom, 54 N. Y. 581 (1874); Lebow Simonn, 3 Colo. 346 (1877); Shmp Meyer, 2o Neb. 223 (1886). By common lw rule, no one could enforce contrct who ws prty re. Price Esn, 4 B. & Ad. 333 (Eng. 1833); Morgn Rndolph-Clowes Co., 73 Conn. 396 (xgoo); Borden Bordmn, i57 Mss. 410 (1892). But in most Americn sttes person my cquire rights under contrct which he is prty. Kehoe Ptn, 23 R o (goi) ; Bssett Hughes, 43 Wis. 319 (1877); Stein Deutsch, App. 615 (1913) ; First Ntionl Bnk Doherty, 156 Ky. 386 (1913). The cses fll in two groups: those in which plintiff is sole beneficiry contrct, nd those in which contrct is for purpose dischrging some legl obligtion promisee plintiff. If cse does come within eir se two, clsses, strnger contrct cn sue upon it, even though he might be benefited by performnce contrct. Dvis Clinn Co., 54 I. 59 (i88o); Crndll Pyne, 154 Ill. 627 (i8g5);.gte City Bnk Chick, 170 Mo. App. 343 (1913). For furr discussion subject see 6z U. OF P. L. R. 67, nd 6 U. or P. L. R. 53 (No '914). CoNsTrTUIONAL LAw-E ENIcs MARRIAGE LAW-POLICE PowE-A Wisconsin sttute provides tht every mle person on pplying for mrrige lisence, must file with county clerk physicin's certificte tht he is free from ny cquired venerel disese. Wis. -St., 1913, c Held: This ct is constitutionl. Peterson Widule, 147 N. W. 966 (1914). The much tlked eugenics mrrige lw is here held constitutionl s proper mens regulting mrrige reltionship. It is upheld under police power stte. "The police power stte is co-extensive with self-protection. It is tht inherent nd plenry power in stte, which enbles it prohibit ll things hurtful comfort nd welfre society." Lkeview Rose Hill Cemetery, 70 Ill ); Tiedemn on Police Power, 749. The right stte regulte mrrige by legisltive enctment hs been universlly cknowledged nd rrely disputed. The Stte Wlker, 36 Kn. 297 (1887). Sttes hve forbidden intermrrige between persons within certin degrees consnguinity. So sttutes hve been held constitutionl which forbid intermrrige between whites nd blcks, Green The Stte, 58 Al. "9o (1877); The Stte Jckson, 8o Mo. 175 (1883) ; nd between n epileptic nd nor. Gould Gould, 78 Conn. 242 (i9o5). In principl cse decision ws unnimous, two judges dissenting on.ground tht sttute ws n infringement Fourteenth Amendment United Sttes Constitution nd similr provisions in stte constitution. CONTRACTS-WAIVER OF DEFENCE OF STATUTE OF LISI1TATIONs--PuBLIC POLIc Y-A cluse in promissory pote expressly wiving ll rights nd benc-

5 RECENT CASES fits conferred by sttute limittions is ginst public policy. Prchen Chessmn, 142 Pc. Rep. 63 (Mon. 1914). The decisions re t vrince in regrd policy lw with respect greements pled sttute limittions. Some jurisdictions look upon sttute s mere personl privilege which defendnt my or my pled s he chooses, nd se courts uphold greements wive br. Some cses re bsed on gr6und esppel nd some upon force contrct itself. Stte Trust Co. Sheldon, 68 Vt. 259 (i895); Quick Corlies, 39 N. J. L. ii (1876) ; Stte Lon nd Trust Co. Cochrn, i3o Cl. 245 (10oo). Or courts regrd sttute s lw estblished for public benefit, nd hence subject contrvention by privte greement.. Under this view, ll such contrcts wive sttute, re void s ginst public policy. Crne French, 38 Miss. 503 (i86o); Shpley Abbott, 42 N. Y. 443 (1870); Smith Gillette 59 Texs, 86 (1883); Mills Bennett, 94 Tenn. 65x (1895); Union Life Ins. Co. Spinks, ii9 Ky. 26i (igo4). But in some se jurisdictions n greement limiting time within Which n ction my be brought period less thn tht provided by sttute is held vlid. Smith Herd, 11o Ky. 56 (i9o); Riddlesbrger Hrtford Ins. Co., 7 Wll. 386 (U. S. x868). Some courts express doubt s vlidity n greement wive sttute for n indefinite period, but uphold contrcts forego right for specified time. Wells, Frgo nd Co. Enright. 127 Cl. 669 (19oo). Wht is public policy stte depends, upon privte convictions judges, but upon sttutes, nd in bsence legisltion, upon decisions courts. Vidl Girrd's Execurs, et l., 2 How. 127 (U. S. i844); United Sttes Trns-Missouri Freight Assn., 166 U. S. 2.o O8W). DAMAGES-MENTAL SUFFERING-DELAY IN TRANsMissxox of MESSAGE- By reson negligence telegrph compny. messge, informing prent his child's dying condition, ws delivered until fter funerl. Held: Where only injury resulting from negligent dely in trnsmission telegrm is mentl suffering, dmges re recoverble. Corcorn Postl Telegrph-Cble Co., i42 Pc. Rep. 29 (Wsh. 1914). The decision in this cse is in strict hrmony with rule in gret mjority jurisdictions. Western Union Tel. Co. Ferguson, 157 Ind. 64 (19o); Connell Western Union Tel. Co., i6 Mo. 34 (1893); Western Union Tel. Co. Burris, 179 Fed. Rep. 92 (igio). The doctrine governing se decisions rests prtly on ground tht it is difficult scertin truth in cses mentl pin nd nxiety, Western Union Telegrph Co. Rogers, 68 Miss. 748 (i89i), nd prtly on ground tht mentl nguish is lrgely mtter individul temperment nd susceptibility. Frncis Western Union Tel. Co., 58 Minn. 252 (1894); Kester Western Union Tel. Co., 55 Fed. Rep. 6o3 (1893). But Texs,' in x88r, promulgted doctrine, contr rule principl cse, holding telegrph compnies lible for mentl suffering, cused by dely in trnsmission messges relting sickness or deth. So Relle Western Union Tel.Co., 55 Tex. 308 (88i). This decision hs been followed by courts number jurisdictions. Middlen Western Union Tel. Co, 62 So. Rep. 744 (Al. 1913); Mley Western Union Tel. Co., 13o N. W. Rep. Io86 (I. i91i); Chpmn Western Union Tel. Co., go Ky. 265 (i8go). For full tretment "Texs doctrine," its bsis nd ppliction, see rticle "Libility Telegrph Compnies," in 42 Am. LAw REG. (N. S.) 715. EviDENcE-ADMissiiLrrY-1HosPITAL REcolws-In order show tht plintiff, who ws suing for personl injuries, hd ggrvted his condition by misconduct t hospitl, defendnt fered in evidence hospitl record which ws required be mde up every three dys by n interne who bsed entries prtly on his own informtion nd prtly on reports or ttendnts. The ltter 'testified in court, but interne ws t time out ju:isdiction nd unvilble s witness. Held:

6 138 LNII'ERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAWI REVIEW It ws error exclude hospitl record from evidence. Ribs Revere Rubber Co., 91 At. Rep. 58 (R. I. 1914). The court in this cse proceeded on ory tht record consisted entries mde in regulr course n occuption or business, contemporneously with event recorded. By n exception hersy rule, such entries re dmissible in evidence when entrnt is ded or orwise unvilble for testimony in court.. Doe Turford, 3 B. & Ad. o (Eng. 1832) ; First Bptist Church Hrper, i9 Mss. i96 (ipo6); Frncis Perry, 144 N. Y. Supp (1913). The English courts require severl or fcrs render record dmissible. There must be duty superior keeping record. The Queen Worth, 4 Q. B. 132 (Eng. 1843).. The duty must be do, very thing which entry reltes, nd n mke report or record it, t exct time t which it ws ctully recorded. Smith Blkey, L R. 2 Q. B. 332 (Eng. 1867). No collterl fcts recorded, but only fcts which re ws duty record, cn be proved by entries.- Chmbers Birnsconi, I C. & J. 451 (Eng. 1831). The Americn doctrine is, in generl, much more liberl thn English rule, nd does insist on requirements stted bove. Wever Leimn, 52 Md. 7o8 (1879) ; Fisher Myor, 67 N. Y. 73 (1876) ; Kennedy Doyle, io Allen, 16x (Mss. 1865). The entries, however, must be substntilly contemporneous with events recorded. Lne Hrdwre Co., 121 Al. 296 (1898); Bridgewter Roxbury, 54 Conn. 213 (1886). Some courts require fcts entered be within entrnt's personl knowledge. Butchers' Ass'n Bosn, 214 Mss. 254 (1913); Chffee U. S., i8 Wll. S16 (U. S. x873). Or courts dmit record in connection with testimony person who.ctully observed fcts nd reported m entrnt. Myor R. R., 102 N. Y. 572 (1886) ; Stettuer White, 98 Ill. 72 (1881). Still ors dmit record without requiring testimony observer. Hitchner Co. Penn. R- Co., 158 Fed. Rep. Ion (igog) ; Insurnce Co. R. R., 138 N. C. 42 (1905). EVIDENCE-OTHER OFFENCEs-In prosecution for polygmy, evidence showed tht defendnt, fter living with plurl wife for few dys, disppered with her jewelry. Held: Evidence tht defendnt sle jewelry from tle plurl wife, while living with her, ws dmissible show motive for crime chrged. Stte Von Klein, 142 Pc. Rep. 549 (Ore. 1914). Although ll cses re in ccord with finl decision in principl cse. re re two different ories dvnctd support decisions. One ory, which is tht dopted by Mr. Wigmore, proceeds upon fundmentl principle evidence tht ll fcts ffording ny resonble inference s ct chrged re relevnt nd dmissible, including fcts showing design, motive, knowledge, or like, where se mtters re in issue or relevnt. Tht fcts fered consist pst criminl misconduct is immteril. Nor does dmission such criminl misconduct conflict with chrcter rule tht conduct tending nd fered show hd morl chrcter is indmissible s evidence. Evidence fered for such purpose is excluded becuse its criminlity, but becuse its irrelevncy, English evidence lw rule being tht mtter whose only probtive vlue lies in its similrity ct under considertion, is irrelevnt. Hence pst conduct, fered show motive, is relevnt nd dmissible s evidence, wher or such conduct ws criminl. I Wigmore on Evidence, 216; Stte Lpge. s N. H. 245 (x876). However, where fcts fered re both irrelevnt nd criminl, re is n dditionl reson for exclusion, since criminl fcts would prejudice cuse ccused. Stte Sunders, 14 Ore. 300 (1886). Y I The or ory rests upon generl rule ' criminl evidence tht, on tril person ccused crime, pro distinct, independent fense is indmissible. This rule is, however, subject numerous exceptigils. People Molineux, i68 N. Y. 264 (i9oi); Shffner Com., 72 P. 6o (1872); People Cunninghm, 66 Cl. 668 (188.5). So evidence com-

7 RECENT CASES mission nor fense is dmissible when it tends show design or plce, Wllce Stte, 41 Fl. 547 (1899); knowledge, People Hennsler, 48 Mich. 49 (1882) ; intent, Curtis Stte, 78 Al. 12 (x885) ; motive, Thompson U. S., 144 Fed. Rep. i4 (Mss. i9o6); identity, Stte Bren. 66 Tenn. 138 (1874). For cses nd generl discussion this ory, see People Molineux, 62 L. R. A. z93 nd e. Mr. Wigmore contends tht this generl rule hs no ground for existence, but is bsed upon n erroneous conception chrcter-rule, viz., tht rejection pst misconduct under tht rule is due simply circumstnce tht it is misconduct, nd tht, refore, ll misconduct should be rejected. I Wigmore on Evidence, 216. It does pper upon which ory principl cse ws decided. EViDENcE-RES GF.sTA-An injured person recovering consciousness in hospitl fter n ccident ld his mor why he ws in dngerous position nd mor fers this sttement show tht t time ccident her son ws cting within scope his employment. Held: This ws necessry incident litigted ct. necessry in sense tht it is prt preprtions for or emntions trom tht ct. Hobbs Gret Norrn Ry. Co., 142 Pc. Rep. 20 (Wsh. 1914). Res gesle presupposes min fct or principl trnsction nd res geste men circumstnces, fcts nd declrtions which grow out nin fct, re contemporneous with it nd seem illustrte its chrcter, Ilermis Chicgo & G. N. Ry., 8o Wis. 59o (i89i). Sttement ws mde t time nd in view hppening nd seems hve grown directly out hppening nd ws mde immeditely fter it, hence it ws prt res geste. Hnover R. R. Coyle, 55 P. 396 (1867). The true test is wher declrtion is verbl ct, illustrting, explining or interpreting or prts trnsction which it is itself prt or wher merely hisry or prt hisry completed pst ffir. McMhon Chicgo Ry. Co., 239 Ill. 334 (igo9). There seem be two common elements in ll se sttements; contemporneity nd spontneity. The sttement my be seprted in time nd must depend on ct. The sttement must be contemporneous. Keifer Life Insurnce Co., 2ox P. 448 (1902) ; Kyner Mining Co., 184 Fed. 43 (i91o). As interprettion word contemporneous, Rex Bedingfield, 14 Cox C. C. 341 (i879), is leding uthority for strict interprettion rule, nd Insurnce Co. Mosley, 8 Wll. 397 (1869), for rr loose interprettion. Americn cses hve lso recognized sort psychologicl contemporneity. Sc first sttements injured prty fter regining consciousness re treted s contemporneous with ct itself since re ws no ction brin injured prty in mentime. Chrispherson Chicgo. R., iog N. W. Rep (I. 1go6). The length period unconsciousness is immteril. In one cse sttement ws mde eight dys fter ccident, but minute or two fter injured prty first becme conscious. Britn Wshingn Wter Co., 59 Wsh. 440 (i910). Intense suffering, such s mke it improbble for injured prty do ny delibertion, hs hd sme effect s unconsciousness in mking sttement psychologiclly contemporneous. Smith Sner, '243 P. 57 (1914). The sttement must be spontneous s well s contemporneous. Svnnh R. IR Hollnd, 82 G. 257 (1888) ; Pledges Chicgo R. R., 69 Neb. 456 (1903). The inbility n unconscious mn deliberte insures spontneity sttements immeditely upon regining consciousness. An exmintion cses distinguishing between sttements which re.prt res gesle nd those which re mere nrrtive tends show tht distinction is rr in circumstnces surrounding mking utternce thn in subject mtter sttements mselves. Vughn St. Louis Ry. Co., 164 S. W. Rep. 144 (Mo. 1914); Hill Aetn Ins. Co., 63 S. E. Rep. i24 (N. C. i9o8). Where n injured mn hd time deliberte, but being def mute, could communicte his thoughts for hlf n hour. it ws held tht sttements n mde were indmissible, XVdele New York Centrl. g4 N. Y. 274 (1884).

8 140 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW Gin's-CHILD AS Stnmcjr of GinT-A mor gve her child, immeditely fter its birth, defendnt. Some months lter she demnded it bck, but defendnt refused give it up, climing it ws gift nd irrevocble. Held: In no sense cn child be considered s subject mtter for n bsolute nd irrevocble gift. Hrrison Hrker, i42 Pcif. Rep. 716 (Uth, 1914). An greement by which prent surrenders cusdy his child is binding nd he is t liberty revoke this consent nd obtin child by hbes corpus. In re Scrritt. 76 Mo. 58. (1882). Persons who tke over children do cquire n bsolute right such s prents hve, but merely right secondry nturl right prents, nd gift child by prents, itself nd stnding lone, cn mke ir right superior tht prents. Chpsley Wood, 26 Kns. 652 (i881). Hence when controversy rises between such prties, cusdy child will be ssigned persons hving legl right unless it ppers tht y re improper persons tke cre child. Rust Vncter. 9 W. V. 6oe (1876); Commonwelth Briggs, i6 Pick. 2o3 (Mss. 1835); Herrick Richrdson, 40 N. H. 272 (i6o). JUDGMFNT-RES AvJUDICATA-A judgment in x civil suit, dependenz'or its determintion on estblishment fcts mounting crime, for commission which person is lter indicted nd cquitted, is br n ction for mlicious prosecution criminl chrge, in tht plintiff in lst suit is espped deny commission cts nd his guilt in committing m. So when ction is brought on n insurnce policy nd insurnce compny wins on defense tht insured set fire premises, but lter insured is cquitted tle chrge rson, yet judgment in ction on policy is conclusive s between prties s his guilt nd no ction for mlicious prosecution cn lie. Turner Columbi Insurnce Co., 147 N. W. Rep. 114 (Neb. 1914). At first glnce it would seem proper for court hve counterblnced dverse judgment nd cquittl nd llowed prties litigte question from beginning, but ll cses show tht so fr s mlicious prosecution is concerned results conviction nd cquittl re decided on tlly different grounds. Conviction is conclusive evidence probble cuse. Oppenheimer Mnhttn Rilwy Co., j8 N. Y. Supp. 411 (1892); Thick Wsher, 137 Mich. 155 (i9o4). And this is true lthough conviction might be reversed by higher court. Frncisco Schmielk, i56 App. Di 335 (N. Y ); McElroy Ctholic Press Co., i6.s Ill. App. 290 (ioii). Acquittl must be shown before ction mlicious prosecution cn be brought, but is conclusive s cses probble cuse. Hnowitz Gret Norrn Ry. Co., 122 Minn. 24t (1913); Eslule Higgins, i59 Mo. App. 177 (91i); in fct, n cquittl is even prim fcie evidence lck probble cuse, Price Singer -Sewing Mchine Co, 142 N. W. Rep. 377 (Mich. 1913). Does judgment in civil suit hve sme effect s conviction? Independently mlice nd probble cuse, it hs been held tht pro ctul guilt plintiff crime which he ws cquitted is good defense n ction for mliciou3 prosecution plintiff for tht crime Threefoot Nuckls, 68 Miss. xi6 (i89o); Thucher Building & Lon Asso., 118 N. C. 129 (1896). There is -Pennsylvni cse which stnds for sme proposition, but it is robbed much its force by incidentl mention fct tht defendnt in mlicious prosecution suit ws wre fcts estblishing plintiff's guilt, lthough he ws unble procure conviction. Ruffner Hooks, 2 P. Super. Ct. 278 (t896). -A former judgment between two prties binds m s ll mtters on determintion which judgment in former suit depended, lthough second suit is on different cuse 6f ction. Cromwell Sc County. 94 U. S. 35i (1874), followed in Skes Foote, 172 N. Y. 327 (I9o2), nd Union Life Insurnce Co. Drke, 214 Fed. Rep. 536 (1914). As between prties ction in principl cse n, plintiff is espped

9 RECENT CASES deny tht he committed cts nd thus hving dmitted tht re ws itch" judgment ginst him. fce pledings show his guilt, which is defense nd judgment'on demurrer ws properly for defendnt. JURORS-C-IALLENGr-An erroneous overruling chllenge for cuse is rint ground for reversl, even though perempry chllenges re refter exhusted, unless it be furr shown tht n objettionble juror ws forced upon chllenging prty fter he hd exhusted his perempry chllenges. Colbert Jourl Pub. Co., 1 Pc. Rep. 146 (N. M. 1914). This cse 'is in ccord with view dopted in most jurisdictions tht even where perempry chllenges re exhusted, unless n objectionble juror ws forced upon chllenging prty, verdict will be disturbed. Scrgg Sllee, 140 Pc. Rep. 706 (Cl. 1914); Spies People, (1887) ; Johns Stte. 55 Md. 35o (x88o). Mny jurisdictions, however, dopt contrry view, holding tht such refusl is ground for reversl, when ppellnt exhusts ll his perenipry chllenges before jury is drwn. Stte Brown, i5 Kn. 4oo (1875); Trmwy Co. Crson, 123 Pc. Rep. 68o (Colo. 1012). The reson given for decisions in ltter cses is tht prcticl result disllownce chllenge for cuse is reduce number perempry chllenges which ppellnt is by lw entitled, which error my be seriously prejudicil him, It is quite uniformly held tht erroneous overruling chllenge for cuse is "hrmless" error, where ppellnt does use ll his perempry chllernges, nd especilly if juror objected is subsequently dismissed by perempry chllenge. Burt Pnjud, 99 U. S. i8o (1878); Commonwelth Fry, 198 P. 379 (xgoi); Thomson on Trils, vol i, ixu. It hs been held tht no obligtion rests upon prty use His perempry ehllenges exclude juror chllenged for cuse, nd tht error is reversible. Smpson Schffer, 3 Cl. 107 (1853)e LANDLORD AND TENANT-FORFEITURE-BANKRUpTCYc-A court bnkruptcy cting in its equity jurisdiction, will grnt petition lessor enforce forfeiture lesehold for brech condition ginst bnkruptcy, since re is solvent sub-tennt, greeble lessor, using premises s prescribed by tht lessor, re hving been no ttempt on prt bnkrupt estte get hold lesehold nd dispose it contrry lessor's wishes. In re Lckey, 214 Fed. Rep. 867 (19T4). The sub-tennt is bound by forfeiture by his lessor, originl lessee, Eten Suysten, 6o N. Y. 252 (1875); Cushner Westlke, 43 Wsh. 69o (i9o6). So lso ct sub-tennt my give originl lessor right declre lesehold forfeited. Miller Prescott, 163 Mss. 12 (1895). A provision for forfeiture in cse bnkruptcy is vlid. Hunter Gllins, 2 Term R. 133 (Eng. 178); Mitchinson Cotes, 8 Term R. 57, 3oo (Eng. I799). But, when he hs equities, sub-tennt my sk be relieved from forfeiture. Berney Moore, 2 Ridg. App. 31o (Eng. 1791). Equitv will ordinrily lend its id enforce forfeiture. The prties re left ir remedy t lw. Bird Hw!.iiu, 58 N. J. Eq. 229 (1899); Wick Budin, 189 P. 83 (i89g). Exceptions hve been mde where prty seeking forfeiture hs specil equities s in mining leses. Brown Vndergrift, 8o P. 142 (1875); Lurel Creek Col Co. Browning, 99 V. 528 (igoi). The generl Americn rule s relief from forfeiture for brech nonpecuniry conditions tht iourts will -relieve ginst forfeiture if brech ws cused by ccident, mistke, etc., nd re is no ctul loss or loss is redily scertinble in money. Mrtin Osborn, 146 Mss. 39 (z888) ; Henry Tupper, 29 Vt. 358 (1857). A court bnkruptcy hs ll powers court equity in deling with questions before it. It is interesting e tht, without provision for forfeiture on bnkruptcy, bnkruptcy or ny disposition property under bnkruptcy proceedings will be deemed brech covennt ssign. Frnum Hepner, 79 Cl. 575 (1889); In re Bush, 126 Fed. Rep. 878 (io4). An ssignment for benefit credirs constituting n ct bnkruptcy nd

10 142 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW hence void under bnkruptcy proceedings hs forfeiture. been held In re Bush, give supr. rise Ir Englnd, ssignment it does hs work been held forfeiture. tht such Hollnd n 1862). At Cole, i time Hurl. this & cse C. 6 ws (Eng. decided, such ssignment did n ct constitute bnkruptcy nd ws perfectly vlid. MASTER AND SERVANT-TEs r FOR VicE-PRiNCIPAL-An pny ws employee injured by com- negligent ct his orders foremn. Disobedience foremn would be followed mn by ws dismissl. vige-principl Held: nd The fore- compny ws lible. Fibre Gussell Co., -14 Chmpion Fed. Rep: 963 (N. Though C. 1914). n employee injured by negligence recover fellow his mster, servnt Rilwy cn Co. Surrells, n injured 115 Ill. employee App. my 615 (194o), recover negligence mster for injuries vice-principl. resulting Hrris from (N. C. Qurry i9o4). Co., In Englnd, 49 S. E. superior Rep. 95 mnger servnts re lower vice-principls. grde thn Wilson generl Merry, x868). xg L. Under T. (N. Americn S.) 30 (Eng. decisions principl test or wher fellow servnt n employee is is his vice- title or rnk, 5o Neb. Rilwy 555 Co. (1897), Doyle, power M7o. employ 317 A1 (1903), or dischrge, hut Bnc nture Irvine, services 172 he performs.pirce - rc Oliver, 47 N. E Rep. 485 (Ind. App. Olī 1897). A mere Anderson foremn Winsn, ii vice-principl. 3z Fed. Rep. 528 (U. S. 1887); Strnge 5 Clrk, McCormick, io (P. 185o); Under contr, federl Egn decisions Tucker, neir 18 Hun mere 347 superiority (N. Y. x879). Bugh, z49 in U. rnk, S. 368 Rilrod (z892), nor Co. right vnts, Rilrod exercise Co. control Peterson, over or 162 U. ser- S. 346 vice-principl. (1895), will mke But it servnt must be shown tht with he deprtmentl is intrusted control, by his Moss mster Compress Co., 202 nd it is immteril Fed. Rep. wher 657 (1913), or chige. he hs Mining Co. power Wheln, employ nd dis- 12 C. C. A. 225 is converted (1897). in A mere vice-principl foremn when wrds he ssumis workmn dischrge which lw duties imposes Power upon Co., 83 principl, Pc. Rep. Christ 199 (Kn. i9o5). dischrging Though does power constitute hiring vice-principl, nd Rep (P. Csey i9oo), Pving bsence Co., 47 AtL tht.inference power tht is conclusive servnt is ginst vice-principl. P. 246 (i88o). Bridge Co. Under Newberry, "dul cpcity 96 doctrine" injuries resulting mster is lible servnt for from s such, negligence Rilrod Co. vice-principl Atwell, 198 cting Ill. 200 for injuries (r9o), resulting but he is from lible negligent cpcity ct vice-principle co-lborer. cting Ross in Wlker, Remingn, 139 P. 5I 65 (1b9i); N. Y. Supp. Meehn mi16 (i9oo). doctrine. Some Sne sttes Co. do Krft, ccept 31 this Ohio, (1877); Neb. i8o Light (19o). Co. Wher Bldwin, delinquent is be determined employee by ws court vice-principl where fcts delinquent show precisely bore injured reltion employee, (Cl. Clln 1896), by Bull, 45 jury Pc. when Rep reltions ordintes re left delinquent in doubt by his sub- evidence. Mpes Pcking Co., Super. 3z P. Ct. 453 (zgo6). NEGLIGENcE-TnEATRE.A spectr proprier's t tre filure ws injured keep through gurd ril round tre. Held: orchestr The proprier pit his tre diligence is bound put nd use keep ordinry his plce cre nd in sfe gurd condition. ril round Filure orchestr keep pit ws ctionble negligence. Hrtlove, New Thetre go Atl. Rep. 9W This (Md. 1914). is in ccord with well tre estblished is rule. lible The s proprier insurer persons ning ttending Jcobs, 36 performnces, N. Y. Supp. Dun- 453 (i895), tining but plce person public erecting exhibition or min- ssumes obligtion using ll pos-

11 RECENT CASES sible cre provide for sfety those who come re, Agriculturl & Mechnicl Ass'n Gry, 1i8 Md. 6oo (1912), nd if he neglects his duty so tht hll is, in fct, unsfe, his knowledge or ignornce defect is immteril. Currier Bosn Music Hll Ass'n, 135 Mss. 414 (1883). So when stirwy grndstnd t rce-trck fell nd injured plintiff, it ws held tht defendnt ws bound know tht structure ws sfe or t lest exercise highest possible degree cre tht end, collpse structure being sufficient prim fcie evidence negligence. Fox Bufflo Prk, 47 N. Y. Supp. 788 (1897). The chrging dmission crries with it n implied wrrnty tht due cre hs been used by defendnt. Frncis Cockrell, L. R. 5 Q. B. 184 (i87o). And defendnt is relieved from libility by fct tht or ptrons tre contributed bring bout plintiff's injury, s where crowd spectrs pressed ginst defective riling cusing it brek whereby plintiff fell nd ws injured. Schield Wood, 17o Mss. 415 (1898). In or words duty cre tht rests on propriers tres nd show houses is n ffirmtive one nd is only stisfied by evidence positive cre. PNINCIrAL AND AGENT-RATriCATION-An insurnce compny's soliciting gent, contrry provisions policy, received from insured, promissory e in lieu csh for first premium. The policy ws issued nd delivered nd mount premium ws chrged by compny generl gent, who in turn chrged soliciting gent. The soliciting gent negotited e nd bsconded with proceeds. Held: The jury were wrrnted in finding tht ction gent ws rtified by delivery policy nd fct tht it llowed insured retin it for severl months up his deth. Crnsn West Cost Life Insurnce Co., 142 Pc. Rep. 762 (Ore. 1914). Ordinrily, rtifiction n gent's ct is mere mtter intention. Brown Henry, 172 Mss. 559 (899). The ct n gent my be rtified eir by words or conduct his principl. indicting n intention dopt ct s his own. Osborne Durhm, 72 S. E. Rep. 849 (N. C. igir). Thus, knowingly ccepting benefits trnsction indictes intention principl rtify unuthorized ct his gent. Hney School District Co. Highwer Bptist Institute, 113 G. 289 (Igox). An essentil element rtifiction is tht principl hve knowledge ll mteril fcts trnsction. Becon Trust Co. Sour, 183 Mss. 413 (19o3); Thompson Murphy, 6o W. V. 42 (19o6). But principl cn -.urposely or wilfully shut his eyes mens informtion nd seek retin benefits ct nd t sme time repudite ct. Johnson i% Ogren, io2 Minn. 8 (1907). The silence principl, fter receiving ice gent's unuthorized ct, my be fct be weighed on issue wher principl rtified ct. Rtifiction by principl on this ground is bsed upon doctrine equitble esppel in tht principl hs behved in such.vy tht prty deling with gent would be injured if trnsction were repudited. St. Louis, Gunning Advertising Co. Wnmker & Brown, go S. W. 737 (Mo. 1905). Wher mere silence principl nd filure repudite his gent's ct within resonble time fter knowledge re, mounts rtifiction is question for jury. Fifth Ntionl Bnk Iron City Ntionl Bnk, 92 Tex. 436 (8). Pi0CEnURE-FExEctirroNs--TuST EST.TE-A julguent credir ce$suis que trust under mrrige settlement my seize trust chttels on fieri fcis, where whole equitble nd beneficil interest in chttels is vested in judgment debrs. Stevens Hince, 1io Lw Times, 935 (Eng. 1914). At common lw, equitble interests debr were subject execution under fieri fcis, but could be reched only in equity. Scott Scholer, 8 Est, 467 (Eng. i8o7); Cdogn Kennett, 2 Cowp. 432 (Eng. 1776). Section 1o Sttute Fruds (29 Cr. IJ, C. 3), which mde

12 144 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW interest cestui que trust in lnds, tenements, nd hereditments lible execution, did extend personl property. Hence principl cse seems mrk n dvnce in English lw on subject. In United Sttes, however, most jurisdictions, by sttutes vrying effect, llow equitble esttes nd interests be tken on execution. KennedyV Nunn, 52 Cl. 326 (1877) ; Whiteford Hootmn, zo4 I1l. App. 562 (1902) ; Demuth Kemp, 115 N. Y. Supp. 28 (i9o9); Robertson Howrd, 82 Kn (101o). Some sttes hve rrived t sme result without sttute. Flngin Dws, 2 Houst. 476 (Del. 1862); Atwter v: Mnchester Bnk, 45 Minn. 341 (i8gi); Anwerter Mthiot, 9 S. & R. 397 (P. 1823). A few inrisdictions follow common lw doctrines, nd exempt equitble interests from legl execution. Lee Enos, 97 Mich. 276 (1893) ; Strr U. S, 8 App. D. C. 552 (x8g6) ; Tischler Robinson, s6 Fl (I9O8). The common lw rule ws sustined by ory tht t lw only legl interests could be recognized nd enforced. It ws founded on ny tenderness for equitble titles, but rr upon desire ignore m lger. By proceedings in equity, equitble interests could lwys be mde contribute stisfction judgment ginst owner. The modern Americn procedure, by llowing such interests be tken under fieri fis, obvites necessity seprte suit by credir, while it retins ll dvntges re. Freemn on Executions, Vol. 1, zx6 (Ed. i900). PROP.RrTY-AovrsE Poss ssi0 -RIGHT OF WAY-A rilrod cquired lnd for its rodbed under condemntion proceedings, which were void s some owners who were mde prties. Title ws climed under order confirmtion nd rilrod hd full possession premises for forty-five yers. The question rose s wher this uninterrupted use for so long period time hd given rilrod title lnd or simply n esement. Held: A clim rightful possession lnd under such n esement is clerly hostile fee owners, nd is ssertion title which dverse possession will render unssilble. Long Islnd R. Co., Mulry, io5 N. E. Rep. 8o6 (N. Y. 1814). A clim ownership estblish title by dverse possession must be hostile owner fee. Hwk Sensemn, 6 S. & R. 21 (P. i82o). Thus, clims title under lese, Bedell Shw, 59 N. Y ); by tennt twill, Wheeling, etc., Ry. Clelnd, 37 L. I. 466 (P. 1879); by mortggee in possession or purchser tx lese, Gross Wellwood, 9o N. Y. 638 (1882), re ll insufficient s bses clims for title by dverse possession. Such permissive possession cn chnge dverse possession without some evidence ouster, Nicoli Bltimore, ioo Md. 579 (905). There must be some unequivocl ct so done s leve no doubt in minds jury tht it ws brought knowledge true owner. Hood Hood, 2 Gr. 229 (P. 1858). An esement is privilege in lnd existing distinct from ownership soil. Pierce Ken. 70 N. Y. 419 (1877). It is right which one my exercise in or on estte nor. Reeve Dwyer, 144 App. Di 647 (N. Y. 19oi). A rilrod, by proper condemntion proceedings, cquires permnent esenent in lnd. Roby N. Y. C. & H. R. Ry., x4 N. Y. 176 (894) Hd proceedihgs in principl cse been regulr nd ll owners lnd mde prties re, rilrod would hve cquired n esement in ccordnce with this rule. Nothing hving pssed by condemntion, question rose s wht rights rilrod hd cquired by dverse user. Tht re is room for resonble doubt in such sitution is shown by opinion in Scheer Long Islnd R. R. Co., iii N. Y. Supp. s69 (19o8), where it ws sid tht possession ws under clim title, but only use or esement in lnd. PROPERTY-BAILMNENT-DENIAL OF Timr-An owner grin deposited it with wrehousemn. nd received receipt for sme. Afterwrds deposir presented his receipt nd demnded grin. The wrehousemn

13 RECENT CASES 145 refused deliver it. climing tht deposir ws true owner nd tht lie hd delivered grin *rue owner. Held: A bilee cn deny title bilor nd deposir my recover dmges. Street Elevr Co., 146 N. W. Rep (S. D. T914). At erly common lw bilee under no circumstnces could set up defense title in himself or in third prty, in n ction by bilor for recovery goods biled. 9 Henry (431); Kruse Com., 93 P. 8j8 (z88o). Under modern doctrine bilor niy set up only two. defences for non-delivery bilee: tht true owner recovered ' goods by legl proceedings, Bliven Rilrod Co., 36 N. Y. A.o3 (z86i);" Burn Wilkinson, 18 Vt. i86 (846) ; or tht hilee delivered property true owner on his demnd. King Richrds, 6 Whrt. 418 (P. i84o); The Idho, 93 U. S. 575 (1876). In ltter instnce, bilee tkes risk, Pepper Jmes, 67 S. E. Rep. 218 (G. igio), nd hs burden showing tht person whom he surrendered property ws true owner. Trnsp. Co. Brber, 56 N. Y. s44 (x888). To preserve his own possession bilee cn deny title his bilor, Rilwy Co. Spires, I G. App. 22 (1907), neir by sserting title in himself, Thompson Willims, 30 Kn. 114 (1883), nor in third person. Sinclir Murphy, 14 Mich. 392 (1866). A bilee is espped from showing tht subsequent bilment title ws cquired by bilee, Shellhouse Field, 97 N. E. Rep. 94o (Ind. App. 1912); or by third person, Roberts Noyes, -6 Me. 59o (x885), or tht title ws conveyed third person in trust for bilee. Burnett Fuln, 48 N. C. 486 (1856). Tht bilee hd been compelled by legl ction, which bilor hd ice, py true owner for property is vlid defense n ction by bilor. Cook Holt, 48 N. Y. 275 (1872). The bilee my ssert lien on property. Burdict Murry, 3 Vt. 302 (183o). SALES-WARRANTY-EFFCT of DEscRIuroN-A vendor mde written description certin thoroughbred colt which he hd for sle. It ws climed tht this mounted wrrnty tht niml ws s described; refore since colt did conform description, tht vendee might keep him nd recover for brech wrrnty. Held: This ws no express wrrnty but rr condition precedent tht colt should be -is described, nd since vendee ccepted colt nd, though disstisfied with him, expressed his rediness py for him, he ws espped from lter climing dmges for filure on prt vendor comply with description. Brown Dvidson, 142 Pc. Rep. 387 (Okl. 1914). Becuse different libility which ttches it is necessry decide wher prticulr enggement seller is n essentil prt contrct sle nd refore condition, or is collterl mtter nd refore wrrnty. Words description re generlly considered s wrrnty, but merely s condition precedent ny libility on prt buyer. This is becuse qulities described re necessry identity thing sold, nd if s colt does correspond description, vendee is obliged py for wht he did gree buy. Brown Bird, 5 Ok. 133 (1897); Ptrick Lombrd Co., 8I Neb. 267 (igo8); Shmbugh Current, ii I. 121 (xgoo) ; Crlen Ayres & Co., 149 N. Y. 137 (s8g6). It hs been sid s generl proposition tht descriptive sttements constitute wrrnty wher seller mkes m or buyer in ordering goods mkes m. 21 H. L. R. 563 (igo8). Yet this is lrgely true only in cses where prticulr goods re known generlly under certin descriptive trde nmes. Henderson Elevr Co. Milling Co., 126 G. 279 (igo6) ; Abel Murphy, 43 N. Y. Misc. 648 (x9o4); Hfmn Dixon, 105 Wis. 315 (x0oo). TORTs-LIABILITY FOR Vicious DoG KEPT ON PREMIsES-A vicious dog owned nd controlled by seventeen-yer-old girl but kept on premises her fr, with whom she lived, escped nd killed nor dog. Held:

14 146 UNIV ERSITY' OF PENNSYL'VAXIA LAW REVIEW The fr is lible since his dughter, who, though sul juris ws rc.sponsible ge, controlled dog. North Wood, 1o Lw Times, 703 (Eng. 1914). It hs been long well settled both in Englnd nd Americ tht he who keeps dog known be vicious does so t his peril, nd is lible without procf negligence for hrm cused by its escpe. Lverone Mnginti, 41 Cl. 138 (1871); Snders Tepe, 51 L T. 263 (Eng: 1884); Shw Crft, 37 Fed. Rep (1888): Sylvester Mg, i55 P. 225 (1893). Even necessity proving scicnter hs been bolished in Englnd nd in mny sttes by sttute. St Vict., C. 60 (Eng.) ; Mss. Re Sts., c. 58, 113; Brewer Crosby, 177 Mss. 29 (T858); Newn Crdon, 72 Mich. 642 (1888). The gist ction is keeping or hrboring dog, nd ownership is immteril. ldckone Wood, 5 C. & P. 2 (Eng. x83i) ; Keenn Gutt Perch Mfg. Co., 46 Hun 545 (N. Y. 1887); Snyder Ptterson, 161 P. 98 "(z894). The cses re in some confusion s wht constitutes "keeping or hrboring" s required by rule. All jurisdictions gree tht csul presence dog on premises does render occupier re lble s "o-vner or keeper" within mening lw. Sprot Direcrs Poor, 145 P. 598 (1892); O'Donnell Pollock, 170 Mss. 441 (1898). So lso it is settled tht one who hs ctul possession nd control nor's dog on his own premises is lible s keeper. Brrett Mlden Ry. Co., 3 Allen, iot (Mss. i86x); Quilty Bttie, 135 N. Y. 20! (1892). Where owner property llows nor keep dog on premises, though he himself my exercise no control over it, some courts hold him lible on ground tht he should hve permitted dog be kept by nyone on his premises. McKone Wood, supr; The Lord Derby, 17 Fed. Rep. 265 (1883); MeAdms Strr, 974 Conn. 85 (i9o1). Or courts put emphsis upon mount control nd hold tht mere fct tht owner premises permits nor keep vicious dog upon m, does itself mke owner premises "keeper" dog. This rule depends lrgely on ge, employment, nd home rel owner, nd ll circumstnces prticulr cse. Snyder Ptterson, -supr; McCsker Werbee, 1oo Me. 25 (19o5). The fct tht ors shred with defendnt in control dog is immteril. Grnt Ricker, 74 Me. 487 (1883); Lettes Hrning, 22 N. Y. Supp. 565 (1893) ; Hyes Smith, is Ohio Cir. Ct., 30o (x898). TORTs-VIcious DossEsTic ANIMALS-A sckmn, while driving bull, which he hd purchsed, from seller's inclosure, ws ttcked by bull, thrown from his horse nd killed. It ppered tht seller knew bull ws vicious. Held: The owner or keeper vicious niml, who knows its propensity do mischief, is lible for ny injury it my inflict; seller here is lible. Gunderson Bieren, 142 Pc. Rep. 685 (Wsh. 1914). This decision is in ccord with generlly ccepted doctrine tht if niml is vicious, nd tie owner knew it, ie is ccountble for ny injury done by it without pro negligence in restrining niml. The gist ction is negligence in keeping tie niml but keeping him with knowledge his vicious propensity, nd keeper is lible regrdless his endevors prevent mischief. Muller McKesson, 73 N. Y. 195 (1878) ; Hrris Crstens Pcking Co., 86 Pc. Rep (Wsh. i9o6); Gordon Kufmn, 89 N. E. Rep. 898 (Ind. igo). In few jurisdictions, however, it is held tht gist ction is negligent filure properly restrin niml nd tht, consequently, defendnt my relieve himself from libility by showing due cre in restrining niml. Worn Love, 60 Vt. 285 (888) ; DeGry Murry, 69 N. J. L, 458 (19o3). The sufficiency keeper's knowledge vicious propensity niml is question wht is sufficient convince mn ordinry prudence its inclintion commit injuries clss complined. Reynolds ITussey. 64 N. H. 64 (186). The defendnt is excused from libility by fct tlt nilil hs never ctully injurcd nyone before. Rider White, 65 N. Y. s4 (1875); Sltter Sorge, 131 N. W. Rep. 565 (Mich.