The Lake County times. [volume] (Hammond, Ind.) 1906-1933, 1911-02-07
Recent Legal
Decisions

DEATH OF SERVANT CAUSED BY
ACCIDENTAL SHOOTING. An unusual
ground of liability on the part of >
master for death OF a servant is dis
closed in the statement of facts in
Jackson VS.. c.. r., I. & P. Railway
company. IT'S Federal Reporter, ss2.
Plaintiffs intestate was employed as
section hand by the defendant COM
pany The foreman under whom he
worked frequently carried a gun with
him on the hand car for the purpose of
hunting The weapon was not used in
the prosecution of any work whatever
on the part of defendant, but solely
for the convenience and pleasure OF
the foreman himself. One evening as
the section crew was putting away the
hand car the gun which had been lefs
on it was accidentally discharges and
instantly killed plaintiffs interstate.
Action was thereupon Instituted
against the defendant company on the
ground that it was liable for the acts of
the foreman. Judgment went for de-
PENDANT. and was sustained by the cir
cult of appeals on the ground that the
accident was one for which defendant
was in no way responsible, and that,
as 1t had been the custom of the fore
man to frequently carry the gun, de-
cedent assumed all risks of injury.
TWO AND TwO-FIFTHS INCHES
OF GROUND Is MATERIAL The case
OF In re Clement, 124 New York Sup
plement. 1899, is a preceding to revoke
a liquor license issued to Barbara Haas
because of a false statement made in
obtaining it. There is a law providing
that, before the issuance of such certi-
ficate, the applicant must secure the
consent in writing of at least two
thirds of the owners of the total mum
Der of buildings occupied as dwellings
the nearest entrances to which are
within 200 feet, measured in straight
lines to the nearest entrance of the
premises on which traffic in liquors is
to be carried on. There were II build
ings within the distance of 200 feet
from the place where the liquor trafic
was conducted, one of which lacked
only two and two-fifth inches of being
200 feet away. and was not included
IN the applicants statement. The SUI
preme court OF New York holds that the
omission was material. and that the Ii
cense should be revoked. The judge
said: In reaching the conclusion.
am not unmindful of the maxim, The
law cares not for small things but a
failure on the part of the court to
grant this petition and revoke the IL
eense would make the administration
OF the excise law ridiculous, as well
as the violation of the same easy and
Eafe. 1t would encourage still
greater disrespect for the excise law
If that is possible. and such disrespeci
would be aided and sanctioned by the
court. In order to procure
this revocation. il must be done upon
legal grounds. and apparently none
. seemed open to the commissioner other
| than the question of distance. While
on its face. this application. by reason
of the fact that but two and two-f1fth.
inches is the foundation upon which
! this proceeding is presented to the
court, might be deemed frivolous and
oficious under all the facts and cir
cumstances there seems to be no reason
why the court should strain after sus-
taining this license. but every reason
appears why the same should be re-
yoked"