CONNECTING LINES-Continued.
Injuries to employes. See MAS-

TER AND SERVANT.

WA-

Parent and auxiliary companies.
Liability for negligence. See
NEGLIGENCE; NUISANCE;
TERS AND WATERCOURSES.
Passengers. See that title.
Purchase of stock in. See STOCK
AND STOCKHOLDERS.

CONSOLIDATION.

Missouri statute providing for,
operates dissolution of old com-
panies and not merely merger
of one in another. State v.
Keokuk & W. R. Co. (Mo.) 694.
Consolidation under Missouri

statute abrogates exemption
from taxation contained in char-
ter of old company. State v.
v. Keokuk & W. R. Co. (Mo.),
694.

Effect of, upon exemption from
taxation. 702 n, 706 n.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

Burden of proof, in cases of con-
tributory negligence, placed by
statute on defendant, held to
impair no vested right. Wal-
lace v. Western N. C. R. Co. (N.
Car.), 212.

Special scheme for collection of
tax upon railroads in more than
one county in Cal. Pol. Code, is
special legislation and invalid.
People v. Central Pac. R. Co.
(Cal.), 653.

Statute imposing tax upon rail-
road raises the question wheth-
er exemption affected, and
whether obligation of contract
impaired and gives jurisdiction
to the federal court. Yazoo &
M. V. R. Co. v. Thomas (U. S.).
599.
CONSTRUCTION. See SURFACE WA-
TERS.

Absence of bunters on side track
to prevent cars from running
upon street held sufficient to
show negligent construction.
Shaw v. New York & N. E. R.
Co. (Mass.), 547.

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE.
See CROSSINGS; MASTER AND
SERVANT; PASSENGERS; TRES-
PASSERS.

Assuming dangerous position in
attempt to save life is not.
Peyton v. Texas & P. R. Co.

(La.), 550.

Burden of proof placed by statute
on defendant held to affect only
remedy and to impair no vested
right. Wallace v. Western N.
C. R. Co. (N. Car.), 212.
Boy 10 years of age upon railroad
track without right held to be a
trespasser and that no recovery
could be had although he could
not be guilty of contributory
negligence. Pennsylvania R.
Co. v. McMullen (Pa.), 505.
Of infants, 507 n.
Gross negligence only overcomes
contributory negligence when it
is wanton, reckless or inten-
tional. Carrington v. Louis-
ville & N. R. Co. (Ala.), 543.
Question of contributory negli
gence held properly submitted
to jury in view of plaintiff's age.
Whalen v. Chicago & N. W. R.
Co. (Wis.), 558.

Question held to be for jury where
deceased walked alongside of
track on bank of snow support-
ing himself upon the side of
cars upon track. Adams v. Iron
Cliffs Co. (Mich.), 414.
Instruction directing verdict for
plaintiff upon the facts stated,
if deceased was injured without
negligence on his part, held not
to be erroneous as ignoring
question of deceased's contribu-
tory negligence. Grube v. Mis-
souri Pac. R. Co. (Mo.), 357.
Pleadings. General averment
that intestate exercised due care
held not to have been overcome

by specific allegations of com-
plaint as to the cause of the ac-
cident. Pennsylvania R. Co. v.
O'Shaughnessy (Ind.), 479.
COUPLING. See MASTER AND SER-
VANT.

DAMAGES.

Personal Injuries-Continued.

(Tex.), 100.

Attorney's fees and expenses in
attending court not alleged or
included in evidence; request
to charge as to held properly re-
fused. Missouri Pac. R. Co. v.
Mitchell (Tex.), 224.

Cause of injury. Instruction that
jury should consider only such
injuries as were caused by de-
railment. Further instructions
unnecessary. Texas T. R. Co.
v. Johnson (Tex.), 122.
Exemplary.

Liability for depends on gross
negligence, indifference, or dis-
regard for passenger's safety.
Texas T. R. Co. v. Johnson
(Tex.), 122.

Injuries caused by running at ex-
cessive speed on poor track, in
violation of rules, not attributa-
ble to gross negligence or indif-
ference. Texas T. R. Co. v.
Johnson (Tex.), 122.
Exemplary damages as applicable
to common carriers; doctrine
not definitely sanctioned in Lou-
isiana. Rutherford v. Shreve-
port & H. R. Co. (La.), 129.
For injuries to passengers arising
from negligence, 132 n.
Passenger alighting from moving
train. Absence of injury, 171 N.
Wanton and malicious act of serv-

ant; company not liable in ex-
emplary damages unless it au-
thorized or ratified the act.
Ricketts v. Chesapeake & O. R.
Co. (W. Va.), 42.

Recovery of, for torts of servant,
48 n.
Injuries

caused by overhead

DEATH.
Generally.

Collateral kindred cannot recover
for death by willful neglect un-
der statute. Conley v. Cincin-
nati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. (Ky.),
537.

Action for benefit of collateral.
kindred. Kentucky statute,
543 n.
Jurisdiction of action, 521 n.
Statute imposes liability for pen-
alty although death caused by
negligence of subordinate, and
not of superior in command.
Rine v. Chicago & A. R. Co.
(Mo.), 555.
Presumption, in absence of eye-.
witnesses of accident, is that
deceased exercised due care and
caution in attempting to cross
railroad track. Adams v. Iron
Cliffs Co. (Mich.), 414.

Opinion evidence as to whether
deceased person was generally
a careful man is incompetent.
Southern Kan. R. Co. v. Rob-
bins (Kan.), 316.

Rights of distributees need not be
specified in action to recover for
benefit of next of kin. Howard
v. Delaware & H. Can. Co. (C.
C.), 473.

Collateral kindred of deceased can
recover only nominal damages

DEATH.

Generally-Continued.

when deceased was past middle
age and had accumulated no
property. Howard v. Delaware
& H. Can. Co. (C. C.), 473.
Elements of damage for death of
son, 369 n.

Extent of deceased's means can-
not be given in evidence. Hunn
v. Michigan Cent. R. Co. (Mich.),
452.
Expectancy of life. Admissibility
of scientific work, 463 n.
Mortality tables held admissible for
purpose of proving expectancy
of life. Hunn v. Michigan Cent.
R. Co. (Mich.), 452.
Conflict of Laws.
Action for wrongful death is gov-

erned by lex loci. McMaster v.
Illinois Cent. R. Co. (Miss.), 486.
Statute of state where suit brought
conferring right of action upon
plaintiff, does not authorize suit
for death by accident in another
state. Usher v. West Jersey R.
Co. (Pa.), 508.
Statute conferring right of action

upon administrator for benefit
of next of kin is not part of
remedy, and is not superseded
by the lex fori. Usher v. West
Jersey R. Co. (Pa.), 508.
Widow cannot maintain action in

Pennsylvania under statute of
foreign state which confers right
of action upon administrator for
benefit of widow and next of
kin. Usher . West Jersey R.
Co. (Pa.), 508.

Statutes have no extra-territorial
effect, 514 n.

Suits in sister states under statute
of state where accident occurred,
515 n.

Penal actions, 515 #.

Existence of similar statute in state
where suit brought essential,
516 n.

Proof of foreign statute.

Pre-

sumption of law, 518 n.
Who may maintain action, 519 n.
DEDICATION.

Use of road forming only means of
communication between two vil-
lages for 20 years, held sufficient
to require submission to jury of
question of dedication to public
use. Adams v. Iron Cliffs Co.
(Mich.), 414.

GERS, Regulation of Accommoda-
tions.

DRAINS AND DITCHES. See SUR-
FACE WATERS.

Assessment of railroad right of
way for cost of establishing
drain, under Ind. act. Balti-
more & O. & C. R. Co. v. Ket-
ring (Ind.), 10.
Establishment.

Application of
rules of practice to proceedings.
Necessity of motion for new
trial. Baltimore & O. & C. R.
Co. v. Ketring (Ind.) 10.

Jury trial; right of legislature
to dispense with in proceedings
to establish drain. Baltimore
& O. & C. R. Co. v. Ketring
(Ind.), 10.

Lakes; act as to establishment of
drains not intended to provide
system for drainage of. Only
applicable to marshes, ponds,
etc. Baltimore & O. & C. R.
Co. v. Ketring (Ind.), 10.

EVIDENCE,
Generally.

Attempt to entrap or corrupt wit-
ness. Charge to jury on ques
tion as to whether authority of
person was pure or impure.
Savannah, F. & W. R. Co. v.
Holland, (Ga.), 196.
Demurrer to evidence held not.
waived by defendant's putting
in evidence. Weber v. Kansas
City C. R. Co. (Mo.), 117.
Deposition, taken in absence of
party, held admissible where
witness afterwards cross-exam.
ined by party. Southern Kan.
R. Co. v. Robbins (Kan.), 316.
Judicial notice will be taken of
human stature. Hunter v. New
York, O. & W. R. Co. (N. Y.),
248.
Injuries to employes. Sufficiency
of evidence in absence of eye-
witnesses, 428 n.
Presumption, in absence of eye-
witnesses of accident, is that
deceased exercised due care and
caution in attempting to cross
railroad track. Adams v. Iron
Cliffs Co. (Mich.), 414.
Privileged communication. Phy-
sician. Privilege held waived
by plaintiff's attorney calling
physician as witness. Alberti
v. New York, L. E. & W. R. Co.