New-York tribune., 1894-04-22

SIR CHARLES RUSSELL.
.,o bar IN 1859. He became Queens |
.a"rss IN 1872. and the Attorney-tieneral un
e0u".. 1, administrations of Mr.. Gladstone. lie Is
s.a u'' among his fellow-lawyers as somewhat
".,s and oyerbearng, and in social gatherings
49, I, ukelv TO absorb the conversation hlHisel'
Vie snun-box MS eye-glass' ana ms 'eu pVONe
.audtarcbief. which are displayed freely "h''e Ne
:, examining witnesses or making MS arguments
ada to the pcturesQueness OF MS pe'so""'a'' n.m
so,r, The salary. nearly 10000 whlch ne NIL
eoto eour.. az Lord Of Appeal must he conslderaipy
re- han the amount which ne earns N pn 'hc
,n eos .' Years Of his life be adequate conpensa'iOn
for any loss Of income Since ne nas rtsriction on
manG t9rTi he Law, officers Of the Crown 10 receive
fees in private Cas-S'
,.s 11a,rsn who was formerly one OF the
-. - Arneal and who recently died. was con-
roctad with several cases in when Sr ""' is
pusse,l was one Of the counsel lie presioeu "' '"'
nroceedincs before the Parnen Commission ""eie
Civ Charles Russell was one OF the pI'hop". .'9
o. 90 ard he represented England in the Behrns
sss commission His service as Lord oi Appear
,os.ad only two years but for sixteen years "e
hod haon a Judge in the Probate. Divorce ana
Admiralty Division Of The queen b~"O". 90
nresident OF that division he settled nuch OF 'H'
nrac,ice and tried many notable cases. ne "as
equally at home in any bTancn OF '"e JUu'O'H'
work As presiding judge OF the farhe" No"'-
,o,ssion he showea great frmncss and GOOD tenn
nar although II was said that he was naturally
Of an irritable temperament. and maj ne ~ -
his impaHenGe only S T ,be F1gsh law papers
more enthusiastic than those usually gwen 10
Judges at their death
The Court Of Appeals decisions last week were
few in number. and several Of them were on mo
tons made before the courts The decision OF
largest political importance was that Affirming the
writ of mandamus. compelling the clerk OF the
Board Of Supervisors OF Kings County TO place on
the roll the name Of the Supervisor elected In
Flatlands last fall. The decision which will have
most interest lawyers is that in reference 70 the
appraisal OF the property OF Clarissa H. curtis
under the Inheritance Tax law. The surrogate
Court has in several instances endeaVored 10 hN the
tax on remainders and other contingent inter-
ests in property left by will. The General Term
has more than once reversed the Surrogates de-
eson in this matter and the Court Of Appeals
has now affirmed the decision Of the General Term
In the Curtis case The judges at the General
Term held that there was no present GIT ana 'na'
the value Of the property to pass 10 the a,
ing the tax. When the contingency proVlded lot IN
the will had happened the amount OF , tne M saG "a !
to the benehciaries other than those who received
gifts at once.
A case Of much importance to Clearing House
banks was decided few days ago by the Gencrai
Term Of the Supreme Court Levi c. Lathrop ana
his partners endeavored 20 recover from the re-
ceiver Of the ST. Nicholas Bank the amount OF
checks over $4,000 which had been drawn by them
and most Of which were certified on the day pre-
ceding that on which the bank closed its doors.
II the checks were not paid Mr.. Lathrop asker
that the deposits made on that day be returned
10 his firm. At the trial court the receiver was
directed 10 pay the amount OF the cAecKs
certified on the day before the failure and
cboo he
sal Term has reversed that judgment as to
the certified checks. and does not require the
receiver TO pay the amount OF any OF the checks
John NJ Bowers. OF P,att Bowers, who IS the
counsel for Hugh J. Grant. the receiver OF the
bank successfully prosecuted the appeal. one ol
the interesting points OF the decision is that WIT
respect TO certified checks the persons to whom 'heS
are drawn acquire special lien upon or equitable
assignment Of any special fund or particular portion
Of the assets Of the bank and that deposits &c
not by being sent to the Clearing House for collec
uon become appropriated 20 the payment OF chrch i
Certified on the day when the deposits are are s nleu :,
me custom OF the Clearing House was he.u ~ ~ =
control the relations between the payees oa W. W.
enecks and the bank in reference TO matters 10
drought TO the attention OF the payees'
The Pennsylvania courts have recently decided
cases OF interes, TO the exemption from taXauoi
o. Charitable institutions The Masonic Home
Philadelphia was taxed. but the lawyers represent
:
under law passed pursuant to the constitutions
peovision allowing the exemption OF institution
of purely public charity" The majority OF IN
Pennsylvania Supreme Court holds that the Masoni
Home Is not an institution OF purely public charity
The home is designed especially for aged and indi
gent Masons. The Court says that the pubic re
oulrement Is that aged and INDECENT men shall b
cared for but there is public requirement 10
The relief Of aged and INDECENT Masons alone II
person were excluded because he was not d mem
Der OF some special organization, then the charity
was held. was not purely public and Its prop
sty must under the Constitution be taxed IN
nages said that inclination would prompt them I
we're allowed to interfere but under the law the
sh sSsh find no ground for exemption Two OF IN IN
~ that the home was purely public; chari'S
eser sssoer similar provision OF the CONSTITUTION on -
is occupied for church uses. a part OF tne puAo
nf, @5 was leased to the city OF Phliadeiphia for
sns Pennsylvania Supreme Court he'd that N
,sss,npton OF church property was limited only
mai In actual use and occupation and that sue
ose must be exclusive and not the source OF neon
vSs tSsvenue i was he'd that the anh2r,es IN me, <,
npl one part OF II which was not USED as n sourC
The English law OF libel has become somewhi
""pleated by recen, decisions as to what Is ''Du'
"Saton' OF libel. 1t has been he'd that ma
WOO dictates letter to a shorthand clerk and ha
= copied in letier-press book. publishes the lib
70 third person. 1t has recently been decide
"o"ever. that solicitors not liable when the
t'o,e defamatory letter which was communcats
sss nelr clerk In the ordinary course OF their Dus
not otnerenant and lawyer because merchant ca ca
Ter ordinarily be called on to write defamaiory ma
na,cso n,ory statements, and 4 he does SO without an
make me ne Is not held liable II man wishes
ES under these decisions find II safer 10 have
"s~ write the letter for him.