The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-05-10
NOVEL POINTS OF THE LAW.

a.
handed down by the Supreme Court OF
Illinois In People vs.. Pfanschmidt In
which the identification of the defendant
depended not alone upon the direct fol-
lowing OF his scent but Of following .
horse he owned The master of the /
bloodhounds testified that the animals :
have a natural instinct for nothing but !
the human scent. and that they must he /
trained to follow the scent of n horse or .
other animal In excluding such evidence /
the Illinois court said:
Furthermore, we have reached the
conclusion that testimony as to the trail
ing OF either a man or an animal by
bloodhound should never be admitted IN
evidence in any case. 4 bloodhound may
be used to track down a known fugitive
from justice. II the dog In fact takes
up and follows the trail Of known fu-
gitivc and finds him or aids his pursuers
to find him there can be no mistake
as to whether or not he Is the party
sought. His guilt or innocence of given
crime. however. should be established by
other evidence. Neither court nor jury
can have any means of knowing why the
dog does this thing or another In fol-
lowing In one direction instead OF an
other; that must be left to his instinct
without knowing upon what 1t IL based
The information obtanablc ON this sub
icct. scientific. legal or otherwise is not
| OF such n character as to furnish any
! satisfactory basis or reason FOR the adj
| mission of this class OF evidence. We
| agree fully with the statement in Brott
| vs. state coz y. w. 5g3) that the con-
illusions of the bloodhound are generally
4 too unreliable to lac accepted NJ evidcnc"
/ In either civil or criminal cases The
admission OF this evidence by the trial
court was a reversible error"
An Interesting case involving claim
for damages for physical discomfort ana
/ mental suffering was before the supreme
Court Of Michigan In Mcconnell ~ the
I United States Express Company, IN which
1 II appeared that the plaintiff. woman
OF middle age who had planned an ocean
| voyage for her health. contracted with
the express company to ship her steamer
trunk from Michigan to New York ia
time TO he placed on the steamer -" IN
tended to take. The trunk contained
suitable clothing FOR the voyage worth
$500. but IL was not delivered In time
and the plaintiff had nothing except tho
clothing she wore on board. ana WAS
unable to participate in IN" social ACTIVE
ties ON the trip The jury gave verdict
for s55S. which included damages for
mental suffering. ana II was affirmed ~
the majority Of the court The court said
in its opinion
We have. then the situation or an I'M
telligent woman past middle life, just ie-
covering from AN Illness. VINO mad planned
5 long in advance an ocean voyhe" know
ing from previous "Npcri"nc" IN" di'"n'
tsges she might reasonably "Npe't from
2 il, planning in great detail for ward
: robe and other articles Whi'h VOL" sup
!; ply her necessities and provide for hei
comfort and pleasure. making am "'r"n'
diture therefor Of approx Iuai"N N'''
She had also made Ike eNpend tur" i'I
E tickets that would enable h"r to 60 win
0 n party of congenial people Nl'h"u
9 fault OF hers, and because Of the itilur'
~ defendant company 10 carry out III
contract Mrs. Mcdonnell At the outs"
: of her ocean trip found her plans al ru
, aside and herself in condition whrr
e she necessarily was practically prisone
In her stateruom for ten DAY, ana WI
deprived Of her Wardrobe urth after ~
return home u Is not surprising tina
u She should say she was disappointed AM
ILL.,"
o
= 4 f.lon caused bv an accidental hru =
e upon IN. finger of IN, holder of an acct
den, insurance r,olicv ~ held In the We.
I ,ront case Of Robinson " Masonic I'ro
tar,lv. Asso - H. ~ - go Z
IA. ,,tr-.. tr.. .'tI4. az ;.. ;.t.... tr,
: ,..a.. .,,,.,,..-..... ...... f.... ..t..
10 resulting i-,.a ~...u ..,i..t. ..>... 1901
d