The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-05-03
NOVEL POINTS OF THE LAW.

-oad or steamship line came before United
States District Judge Hough In suit
Of the United States against the Erie
Railroad Company In which the Govern
nent asked an injunction under the pro-
Visions of the Hepburn act. In de-
cision on the subject of mutual back
scratching" the court said:
ITO sum this matter up. IL Is plain tNat
the contention Of the Government 10 not
to be found In the letter of the statute.
nor ID II discoverable In the spirit thereof.
because there Is no evidence Of actual In
tent on the part OF the Legisiature--be.
cause viewing the whole act, the phrase
common carrier Ia not and was not In
tended to be synonymous with the phrase
common carrier subject to the provisions |
OF this act-and because there is no rea- |
son shown why Congress should be
thought 20 have given the privilege OF ex- |
changing passes with one kind OF common |
carrier and not with another, when sucN
exchanges are made and always have
been made with all common carriers Tor
the same reasons. viz, desire 20 curry
favor with persons having business 70
place.
III these we'll known reasons no lonsr-
meet approval. 10 mutual backscratching
has become sinful. the remedy Is an
other statute, not stretching the present
one"
IN Penn Mutrol Life Insurance Com
pauy rs. CITY Of Philadelphia the Surreni,
Court OF Pennsylvaria hell unconstitu-
tional a stature au.horiz ng cities 10 ac-
quire private property for the purpose or
extending parks and fairgrounds 7rA then
reseilng part OF she proHert" for resi-
dental purposes. Tho court said
THE ac. does not require TIVE properly
20 be -esold 20 the party from wAom It
has been taken. which might justify the
contention that the only purpose In max
ing the appropriation was "a .Wpos" an
easement for the benefit % the highway,
but Il is TO ne held by the city az a
fee simple owner who can sell 20 whom
soever It pleases. II deprives the owner
OF his right TO accept the restrictions
/ and retai the property on the same terms
as the cty's Nendce would mold II. II
/ empowers the city. at the pleasure of ~
officials. to transfer property on which
| Is business plant owned by one ind-
/ vidual or corporation to another who ~
/ engaged IN the same or another business
one man may be deprived Of his homo
FOR the benefit OF another In view OF
is provisions comforting almost unlimited
discretion on cities or their Officials In
exercising the powers granted ii Is Idle
20 say that the statute furnishes no or
portunty to produce such results or &c
promote a private purpose
A hospital that charges 81 week boart
for patients Is held 10 be n charitable
institution and not liable for the negli
gence of It's doctors and nurses, IN th'
decision OF the Court of Appeals OF New
York in Schloendorff ~. Society OF IN
New York Hospital. The opinion, writer
by Judge Cardozo, says
7 ~ ruling would indeed he an unfor
, tuuate one that might constraiu char.iaol
institutions as a measure Of self -protec
ton to limit their activities \ hospita
OPENS its doors without discriminate
to all who seek its aid. II gathers in II
wards company OF skilled physician
, and trained nurses and places their ser
: vices Mt the call OF the afflicted, withou
scrutiny OF the character or the worth q
, those who appeal 10 ii. looking at nothin
and caring for nothing beyond the fact c
their affiiction. In this beneficent wor
II does not subject itself to liability fc
, damages though the ministers OF healin
whom II has selected have proved ur
!, faithful to their trust
: In Carroll VS.. owen. In the Supren
e Court OF Michican. II WIS mid down IN;
one who rented her house 20 anoth'
e for the winter season had the right 10 II
n form the other who desired 10 reta
some or all of the servants. as TO the
qualifications. morals and habits, provide
- she did so in good taIlI' II Na~' Hp"eN
Va held that whether the defendant h.
y, exceeded hcr privilege under the crcur
y. stances disclosed was question whit
, ough, to have been submitted - the Jur
The Supreme Court OF New Jers'
= holds In Bolton vs.. Bolton thar when
n wife goes into bankruptcy the trust
in bankruptcy is entitled To- TAX posse
sion OF arrears OF alimouy due her +
,s the benefit Of the creditors. The cou
~ said
70 when :, - considered that durn- .
40 period OF nou-paynent tho wifi" has
q all probability been contracting debts T
ar her support on the faith ~ recov"ri
q, these payments and that aNnouy
-. awarded for the EXPRESS purpose ~ e
10 Aiding her to meet the eNpens" OF h
-, support by paying In cash a. She 20
w along, and when Il ls consid rod tdrth
~ that ny her discharge IN bankrupt
these debts are wiped out. i. seems MAJ
ar testify unjust that the creditors shot
Ike have no recourse 70 the very fund III
,v the divorce court provided 20 pay then
&c The extent to which the captain
he a steamship may discipline passenG
he Is passed on by thu Appellate Div!sI,
A Second Department, in Bennett W.. Al
tro- Americana steamship Company.
appeared that the plaintiff was a 5000
cabin passenger on a shin bound from
he port IN Greece to New York y Ian
'er number of the passengers We're diSsa'
he fed with the food furnished them q
the plaintiff went among the ms, "a
Of pisseul,rs To- get signatures tu q oo
plant to b, used on the arrival ~
vessel in New York. The captain
- tered the music room while the plain
~ was there hud .Ged tn" ltt'rr lie
ne d.red the plaintin Ia IcaN" the first rt
ne quarters. aud when tn" u,uutiu r"fu
ne To go until he got IL" letter m, capt
nv had taken tn" captain struck n
u had him removed f1rclhly hy IN" or
and confined until the vessel r'nchci ~
ny The court said that a question of
cal as TO whether IN" captain exceeded
in authority was raised for suhm Sslon
n jury. and In its opinion said:
doubtless the captain had |.
oui power 10 imprison the plaintiff. but
the the circumstances then existing jus
the attempted exercise Of this power
is long day since the Delaying pin
rs marlinspike or knottcd ropes end y
an. not only Instruments but symbols o
,,,s shipmastcrs authority Considering
90, vast steamship traffic of the last half
, /, fury, IL is remarkable how few cases
,x, to he found in tho hooks affecting "A
on captains right To enforce discipline u
oct the passengers on his ship. THIS
speaks in no uncertain way of the
bitual patience OF the shipmastcrs
ara their grave responsibilities
AIDE
The Appellate Division IN Bennett