The sun., 1898-12-04

bis sisters In orucr to lnncrlt Iheir propeTV -
~, denriyed Of such Inheritance by reason OF
~, crime. and that after he has been hanged
o.. ths murder tho property which he inher-
IA Iron, his sisters must be distributed as a
w., ot his estate. This view OF the law is
,,n,ilsr 10 that taken In ii North Carolina case.
.bore II was held that wife who had been
~ .ocsssory before the fact TO the murder OF
"a, husband was nevertheless entitled to
Iors- II Is radically opposed TO the law Uf
N.U York as laid down 10y the Court OF APP
ro,s In 1889. In the case OF n lad 16 years old
,bo had poisoned his grandfather In order to
ANA into the prouerty left to him by his
,r.nnrstDars will There q majority Of the
o,urt. speaking through Judge Earl. declared
that IL was maxim of the common law that
a ono should be permitted to acquire prop
.ytv by his own crime. and that this maxim.
without any statutory enactment on the sub
iact was operative to prevent any one from
taking an estate by inheritance or will from
an ancestor or benefactor whom he had muir
dared Judges Gray and Dauforth dissented
from this decision. but We think. with Judge
Earl that It would be a reproach TO the iuris-
prudence Of our State to holu that a man could
riys effect and operation to will by COM
hitting a murder. and yet take the property.
II the negligent act of defendant injures a
plAintifTs person and his property at the same
time. has the plaintiff two separate causes OF
action, so that he may prosecute one suit for
the personal injuries and another suit for the
injury to his property. or must he recover all
his damages as for one cause OF action. In
single suit? In the case OF Reilly VS.. The ST.
Gillian Asphalt Paving Company. this oues-
ton has recently been passed upon by the APP
p.late Division OF the Supreme Court In this
ba nj nj xva IN In
ouence OF his carriage having collided with a
heap Of sand negligently left by the defendant
IN the public street. Tho carriage was also
damaged in the collision. The plaintiff brought
a suit in one court for the injury to the car
riage and another suit In another court for the
injury to himself He recovered damages for
the injury to the carriage. and the defendant
paid the Judgment: and the Appellate Division
held that this precluded any recovery In the
suit for personal injuries. as the defendants
negligent act constituted but Il single wrong.
tor which the plaintiff could have but one
cause Of action. In the latest pamphlet num-
her Of the New York Civil Procedure Re-
ports" Mr.. James NJ. Kerr. the editor. points
out that this question was decided the other
way By the General Term Of the City Court Of
Brooklyn, in 1885, and that the decision of
that tribunal was affirmed by the Court OF APP
looked by our Appellate Division. The case
was Mu!liGan VS.. The Knickerbocker Ice Com
pany 1O9 y. Y. Reports. 657l, and the opinion
OF the City Court was written by Judge Ma
thaniel H. Clement.
The Supreme Court OF Illinois has Just pro-
nounced against the validity OF statute
PASSED in 1896 by the Legislature Of that State
for the protection of manufacturers bottlers
a 5an in ali lnua haa md thar
beverages against the loss OF their casks. bar
rels, kegs bottles and boxes. This statute
provides for the issue OF a search warrant,
upon the complaint of the owner Of any cask
larre. keg, bottle or box which has been
marked. stamped and registered as therein
prescribed. stating that the complainant has
reason TO believe that particular person Is
using any such cask. barrel. keG. bottle or box
unlawfully, or has the same secreted upon his
premises and that the complainant does be-
lieve such to be the fact This provision Is
condemned as unconstitutional because it as
sumes to authorize a search without proof by
Atfi 1avit that any crime has actually been COM
mltted. The mere belief of the afilaut cannot
be accepted In lieu OF such proof. and hence
search under this statute is forbidden by that
section Of the Illinois Constitution which de-
eIares that the right Of the people to be secure
against unreasonable searches and seizures
shall not be violated.
Mr.. William A. burlington OF the New York
bar contributes to the Medical Record of Nov.
26. 1899. an interesting and instructive paper
on "Manslaughter. Christian Science and the
Law" In which he discusses many judicial de-
eislons illustrative OF the legal status of per-
sons who profess to cure the sick by means OF
rvha a, l., ~ @
braska case, one Of these practitioners. after
stating that the Bible and a work by Mrs.
Mary B. J. Eddy Of Boston were the Textbooks
OF his faith, went on to say: I'VE never give
any medicine that is entirely contrary to the
teaching OF Christian Science" In New York
We have no statute defining what Is meant by
the practice OF medicine. and 1t may be doubt
ed whether the courts would deem any one
medical practitioner whose system OF treat
ment absolutely forbade the administration
oiany medicine whatever. The General Term
OF the Supreme Court in this city. for example.
decided In 1881 that a person who treated his
patients exclusively by MASSAGE did not come
within the scope OF the statute declaring IL to
be mlsdemeanor for any one to practice med
lcne who was not authorized TO do so by a
license or dip'om from some chartered school.
etate Board Of Medical Examiners or medical
s'cIetF. ne real question IN these So-callod
Christian Science cases would seem to be
whether IL may not sometimes be criminal
negligence 10 withhold all medicines and
medical treatment from the eick.
We are sure that the bar OF this judicial de-
Iartment will receive with genuine regret the
announcement that Judge Morgan j. O'Brien
ha' determined to resign his Office as JUS
lice OF tile Supreme Court. In his very first
year on the bench he demonstrated his fitness
ior the judicial office by the palnstakinG care
with which he disposed OF the business that
came before him. writing clear vet concise
opinions III every doubtful matter. and thus
showing 70 litigants and counsel that their
cases had not been decided without due consid-
elauon 1t was this characteristic care. exer-
eIsed with perfect fairness and mark ell ability.
wien ed to his appointment first on the Gem
era Term and afterward on the Appellate Di-
Nslon. and 1t will not be easy to 4, his place
on the latter tribunal. That he will find the
practlce OF the law far more lucrative than his
sOul g" sation a. Judge no one who Is ac-
9uaihttd with his capacity as IA lawyer can
NJ IE... l..