The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1901-03-31

~ the company's lawyers argued Thai ny
receipt given her by the agent was IN INC
nature OF Il special contract imi,iis t.s
company's liability Of ANYTHING happs
ed to the trunk to sioo. the Judges .,i
IDENTIFY share the jury's belief that the
agent did not call Mrs. Springers atlen-
ton to this limitation when ne hahoeu
her that folded slip of paper.
Ills DOGSHIP.
Five wears ago the New. York Leglsla-
turc passed q. dog law. In cities OF Ger,
tain size and containing an incorpoIatt ~
animals. every owner of dogs must yearly
pay to said society 81 license zee per
dog. the money to be used by the soclety
in furthcrance Of its humane MISSION. IN
case of failure to pay the dollar, the So
ciety was empowered to seize the dog ana
to kill or otherwise dispose Of hIm tseli
him, for nstance) il not redeemed WITHIN
forty-eigit hours. Frederick Fox owned
a dog. wouldn't pay the dollar and asked
the courts to restrain the Mohawk and
Hudson River Humane Society from TAX
ing his property without duo process OF
law The Court of Appeals has now pro-
nounced the dog-license act of 1886 I'M
constitutional. The opinion is written by
Judge Cullen. He says that under the
act the humane society enjoys the spe--
cial privilege of keeping dogs without
paying tax on them: and he doesn't see
anything in the act to hinder it from set
ting up kenne! of the largest size lin
from which to sell dogs for its profit"
Mrs. Edwin J. Lockard complained to
the quarter sessions court at Philadel-
phia that her husband was not contrib
uting a cent to her support and the sup
port of their child. Lockard is the bcne-
ticiary of a spendthrift trust under his
fathers will. She had procured a war
rant OF seizure and had attempted to
garnishe his income The quarter sessions
no way, Mt mi oy..6
the trustee to pay a certain sum weekly
to Mrs. Lockard. The Supreme Court of
Pennsylvania reVerSes the judgment and
reyokes the order 1.-The fund.- say the
Justices ''did not originate with the bene-
ticiary; the bequest was made by anoth-
er-the father-who had a right to be-
stow his benefactiOns as he pleased, and.
in this case, he chose. to bestow them
upon his son and upon him alone. There
are methods Of reaching the beneficiary
directly"
QUESTION OF INSURANCE.
In the same city a decision has just
ONeii vs.. The Insurance Clearing Com
psny Of st. Paul. that the mere relation
ship Of father and son does not give the
adult son an insurable interest in his ia
theirs life. Such an interest may exist,
Judge Mcpherson says, when the policy
was taken out for either of two purposes
Ito reimburse the son for payments ac-
tually made or to be made for his IA
the loss of his fathers support when
there is a reasonable expectation that his
father will be of sufficient ability to re-
spond to the call that may be made upon
him.
THE JUDGE SLUMBERED.
a Chicago jury gave Teanlster John An
derson $500 damages for what happen
ed to him when cable car crashed into
him truck at a street crossing. The COM
pany appealed, alleging that while a wit
ness was giving his testimony the trial
iudge-Judge Stein-was asleep on the
bench The Appellate Court finds this
ground Of appeal frivolous and no good.
1t says by the mouth of Judge Adams:
THE trial occupied eight or nine days
and may have been conducted in such a
manner as to exhaust almost any one
compelled to listen to it. Conceding the
irregularity of the presiding judge going
to sleep while a trial is progressing. we
cannot hold the mere circumstance of his
having slept four or five minutes reversi-
Bile error. If the judge was asleep. as GER