The record-union., 1899-01-16
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
SYLLABI.

Is. F., No. S53-Department Two Filed
Decenber 20, 1889
Isaac Minor, respondent; Cyrus Bald
ridge and the California, Oregon and
Idaho Railway Company, appellants
Action for money had and received
Affirmed as to the company; as to the
ether defendant, reversed.
That the common count in assumpsit
may he used in this State is we'll es-
tablished. The common count is good
against a general demurrer.
In the absence of special demurrer,
the common count is sufficient to just
ify the court in receiving evidence, al
though the objection is made that the
facts constituting the alleged fraud are
not set out.
There being no evidence tending to
prove that the one defendant ever re-
ceived the money, or any portion there
of. Held, that a nonsuit In his case
should have been granted.
(sac.. No. Department One Filed
December 20, 1881
Chico Bridge Company, respondent;
Sacramento Transportation Company.
appellant. Damages for injury through
collision of bridge and barge. Affirmed
The power which was taken from
Boards of Supervisors to license toll
bridges over navigable streams by Sec
ton 1872. Political Code, is expressly
conferred upon them by the later Act
of 1851. Held, that the later Act clearly
repeals by implication so much of the
Code as deprived the Boards Of Super
visors of this power
The measure of care against accidents
which one must take to avoid response
bihty is that which person Of or
dinary prudence and caution would use
II his own interests We're to be affected.
and the whole risk were his own. When
a. thing which causes injury is shown to
be under the management Of the de-
fendant, and the accident is such as in
the ordinary course of things does not
happen if those who have the manage
ment use proper care, it affords reason
able evidence, in the absence of expla-
nation by the defendant, that the acci-
dent arose from want of care. See
Judson VS.. Giant Powder Company, 107
CAL, 549, 500.
W. = ANOs OSNo |CCPdA l1llClAl OAAS AAS0
December %. 1S98.)
Henry c. George, respondent; Henry
Pierce ct al. defendants; Henry Pierce,
appellant. Action by party claiming to
be pledge holder for conversion of
pledged property. Reversed.
TO sustain the validity Of a pledge as
against creditors of the pledgor there
must be an open and visible change Of
custody Of the property Secret liens Of
all kinds are abhorrent to the law, and
are not supported.
The statute which deals with the
change of possession sufficient to defeat
creditors does not contemplate writings,
but acts. No writings pertaining to a
transfer Of personal property, regard
less of their number or character, can
create an actual and continued change
Of possession as to creditors of the
pledgor Acts only can do it. A visible,
actual, continued change Of possession
must be had.
Grim, No. 3SS-Department One-Ffled
December 10, 1887
People, respondent; Walter Jones, Rp-
pellant. Arson. Affirmed
Ordinarily the corpus deficit should
be the first point to which the evidence
shall be directed, but the order of proof
is usually in the discretion of the court,
and unless 1t appears clearly that the
defendant has been prejudiced by the
manner in which that discretion has
been exercised, it will not Justify re-
versHl of the judgment.
A conviction cannot be had on the
extra-judicial confessions of the de-
fendant, unless corroborated by proof
alieunde of the corpus delieti; but it is
not necessary that the evidence of the
corpus deficit should itself connect the
defendant with its perpetration in order
to make the confession admissible.
Section 1905 of the Penal Code ex-
preasay authorizes the court to restrict