A

Aikin vs. Kellogg, 119 N. Y. 441, p. 235.

Alger vs. Thacher, 19 Pick. 51, 54, p. 143.

Allen vs. Patterson, 7 N. Y. 478, p. 275.

Allsopp vs. Wheatcroft, 15 Eq. 61, p. 146, 147.

Anheuser-Busch Brew. Asso. vs. Houck (Tex. Civ. App.), 27 S. W. 692, p. 157.

Anthony vs. Glucose Co., 146 N. Y. 407, 413, p. 251.

Armory vs. Delamirie, 1 Stra. 505, p. 12.

Askey vs. Williams, 74 Tex. 294, p. 87.

Avery vs. Langford, Kay, 667, p. 147.

B

Bazely vs. Forder, L. R. 3 Q. B. 559, 565, p. 46.

Beem vs. Milliken, 6 Ohio Ct. Rep. 357, p. 234.

Belknap vs. Bender, 75 N. Y. 446, p. 111.

Blanchard vs. Russell, 13 Mass. 7, p. 115.

Boyce vs. Watson, 52 Ill. App. 361, p. 155.

Bradley vs. Pratt, 23 Vt. 378, p. 87. Budd vs. State of New York, 143 U. S., 517, p. 230. Building & Loan Society, of Absecom, The, vs. Leeds, 50 N. J. Law, 399, p. 425.

Burgess vs. Seligman, 107 U. S. 20, 23, p. 265.

Carpenter's, A. M., Appeal, 29 L. R. A. 145, 170 Pa. 203, p. 234, 442. Carroll vs. Carroll, 16 How. (U. S.) 287, p. 243.

Catt vs. Tourle, 4 Ch. 659, p. 146. Central Vermont R. R. Co. vs. Soper, 59 Fed. Rep. 879, p. 191. Chaddock vs. Van Ness, 35 N. J. Law (6 Vroom), 517, p. 425. Chappel vs. Brockway, 21 Wend. 157, p. 138, 150, 151, 152, 203. Cheever vs. Wilson, 9 Wall. (U. S.) 168, p. 81.

Clingham vs. Mitchelltree, 31 Pa. St. 25, p. 9.

Cohens vs. Virginia, 6 Wheat. (U. S.) 399, p. 243.

Cole vs. Edwards (Iowa), 61 N. W. 940, p. 155.

Collin vs. Blantern, Wils. Part 2, pp. 348, 351, p. 19.

Collins vs. Locke, 4 App. Ca. L. R. 674, p. 142, 145.

Collins vs. Winsor, 20 Wall. 64, p. 137.

Colvill vs. Chubb, 20 N. Y. Civ. Proc. 352, p. 272.

Coulter vs. Richmond, 59 N. Y. 478– 481, p. 426.

D

Davey vs. Shannon, 4 Ex. D. 81, p. 147.

Debs, In re, 158 U. S. 564, p. 8. De La Montanya vs. De La Montanya, 32 Law. Rep. Ann. 82, p. 82.

Delaware & Hudson Canal Co. vs. Pennsylvania Coal Co., 50 N. Y. 250, p. 191.

C

Cardell vs. McNeil, 21 N. Y. 336, p. 111.

Caro vs. Metropolitan Elevated R. R. Co., 46 Super. Ct. (J. & Sp. N. Y.) 138, p. 271.

N. Y. 473, p. 130, 133, 139, 152, 153, 181, 201, 207, 218.

Doe, ex dem. Reed vs. Harris, 6

Adolphus & Ellis, 209, p. 9. Doherty vs. Shields, 86 Hun, 303, p. 275. Dred Scott Case, 19 How. (U. S.) 393, p. 45.

Dudley vs. The Congregation of St. Francis, 138 N. Y. 451, p. 273. Dunlop vs. Gregory, 10 N. Y. 241, p. 150, 152, 199, 200, 206. Dyer's Case, 2 H. V. (Pasch. fo. 5, pl. 26), p. 145.

E

Earle vs. Reed, 10 Metc. 387, p. 87. East India Co. vs. Evans, H. 1684, 1 Vern. 307, p. 149. Ebling vs. Bauer, 17 Week. Dig. (N. Y.) 497, p. 153, 207. Egerton vs. The Third Municipality of New Orleans, 1 La. Ann. 437, p. 293.

Eisel vs. Hayes (Ind.), 40 N. E. 119, p. 156.

Enders vs. Sullivan, 1 N. Y. Month. Law Rec. 46, p. 273.

Ex parte Hall, 48 Cal. 279, 313, p. 342.

F

Fenton vs. White, 4 N. J. Law, 100, p. 86.

Fitch vs. Gardener, 2 Keyes (N. Y.

Ct. of App.), 516, p. 112. Fuller vs. Kemp, 40 N. Y. St. Rep. 672, p. 288; S.C. on Appeal, 138 N. Y. 231, p. 289.

G

Godfrey vs. Roessle, 23 Wash. L. Rep. 129, p. 156.

Good vs. Martin, 95 U. S. 90, p. 425, 426.

Goodman vs. Chase, 1 Barn. & Ald. 297, p. 112.

Gould vs. Cayuga Co. National Bank, 85 N. Y. 75, p. 274. Graham vs. Oliver, 3 Beav. 129, p. 275.

Gravely vs. Barnard, 18 Eq. 518, p. 146.

Great Northern Railroad Co. vs.
Harrison (Excheq. Ch. 1852), 12
Com. Bench, 576, p. 227.
Gruman vs. Platt, 31 Barb. 328,
p. 289.

H

Hartley vs. Cummings, 5 C. B. 247, p. 148.

Hayden vs. Weldon, 43 N. J. Law (14 Vroom), 128, p. 425. Hercules, The, 70 Fed. Rep. 334, p. 53.

Hilton vs. Eckersley, 6 E. & B. 47, p. 141.

Hine, The, vs. Trevor, 4 Wall. (U. S.) 565, p. 53.

Hitchcock vs. Coker, 6 Ad. & El. 438, p. 146.

Holbrook vs. Waters, 9 How. Pr. (N. Y.) 335, p. 151. Horner vs. Graves, 7 Bing. 735, p. 136.

I

In re Debs, 158 U. S. 564, p. 8. In re Fleming, 5 N. Y. App. Div. 190, p. 237.

Ipswich Tailors' Case, 11 Co. Rep. 53 a, 54 b, p. 144.

J

Jennings vs. Grand Trunk R. Co., 127 N. Y. 438, p. 191.

Jones vs. Lees, 1 Hurl. & N. 189, p. 137.

Jones vs. North, 19 Eq. 426, p. 142.

K

Kramer vs. Old (N. C.), 34 Lawy. Rep. Ann. 389, p. 206.

L

Lawrence vs. Kidder, 10 Barb. 641, p. 150, 152, 153, 203. Leather Cloth Co. vs. Lorsont, 9 Eq. Cas. L. R. 345, p. 137, 143, 146, 147.

Legal Tender Cases, 12 Wall. 457, p. 230, 260.

Leslie vs. Lorillard, 110 N. Y. 519, p. 152.

Live Stock Association of N. Y.

(Limited) vs. Levy, 54 Super. Ct. (N. Y.) 32, p. 153, 206, 207. Louisville etc. R. R. Co. vs. Davidson County Court, 1 Sneed (Tenn.), 695, p. 243.

Lucas vs. Tippecanoe County, 44 Ind. 541, p. 243.

M

McCrillis vs. How, 3 N. H. 348, p. 87. McCulloch vs. State of Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, p. 5.

McKinnon Pen Co. vs. Fountain Ink Co., 48 Super. Ct. (N. Y.) 442, p. 152, 206.

Michael vs. Morey, 26 Md. 239, 261, | p. 159. Milliken vs. Cary, 5 How. Pr. 272, p. 275.

Missano vs. Mayor of New York, 17

App. Div. 537, p. 271. Mitchell vs. Reynolds, 1 P. Wms. 181, p. 122, 127, 130, 134, 135, 139, 140, 141, 142, 149, 161, 203, 217, 219, 349, 350.

Moore vs. Cross, 19 N. Y. 227, p. 425. Mouflet vs. Cole, L. R. 7 Ex. 70, p. 148.

Morse Twist Drill & Machine Co. vs.

Morse, 103 Mass. 73, p. 137, 206. Mott vs. Mott, 11 Barb. 127, p. 151. Mumford vs. Gething, 7 C. B. (N. S.) 305, 317, p. 138. Munn vs. State of Illinois, 94 U. S. 113, p. 230.

Mutual Life Ins. Co. vs. Armstrong, 117 U. S. 591, p. 235.

N

459

R

Ragsdale vs. Nagle (Cal.), 39 Pac. 628, p. 155.

Riggs vs. Palmer, 115 N. Y. 506, p. 234, 235, 236, 237, 441, 442. Rogers vs. Parry, 2 Bulst. 136, p. 124.

Rohrback vs. Germania Fire Ins. Co., 62 N. Y. 58, p. 158.

Ross vs. Sagbeer, 21 Wend. 166, p. 150.

Rousillon vs. Rousillon, 14 L. R. Chan. Div. 351, p. 130, 136, 137, 147, 205.

S

Schafer vs. Bank, 59 Pa. 144, p. 425.

Schroeder vs. Post, 3 N. Y. App.

Div. 411, p. 275.

Scott vs. Avery, 5 H. L. Cas. 811, p. 191.

Seymour vs. Spring Forest Cemetery, 144 N. Y. 333, 340, p. 251. Shallenberger vs. Ranson, 41 Neb. 631, reversing S. C. 31 Neb. 61, p. 234, 235, 441, 442.

Shelton vs. Springett, 11 C. B. 452, p. 46. Sommersett's Case, 20 St. Trials, 49, 66, p. 148.

State vs. Young, 29 Minn. 474, p. 342.

Story vs. Livingston, 1 Month. Law Rec. 44, p. 272.

12

Story vs. N. Y. Elevated Railroad
Co., 90 N. Y. 122, p. 271.
Sturges vs. Crowninshield,
Wheat. 332, p. 115.
Swift vs. Tyson, 16 Pet. 1, 19, p. 265.

T

Tode vs. Gross, 127 N. Y. 480, p. 162. Tompkins vs. Smith, 3 Stew. & P. (Ala.) 54, p. 113.

U United States Chemical Co. vs. Provident Chemical Co. (C. C. E. D. Mo.), 64 Fed. Rep. 946, p. 156. United States vs. Debs, 64 Fed. Rep. 724, p. 8.

W

Wallis vs. Day, 2 M. & W. 273, p. 147, 148.

Walters vs. Mace, 2 Barn. & Ald. 756, p. 434.

2 Henry IV. 3 b, p. 118.

2 Hen. IV. 33 a, p. 118.

Ward vs. Bryne, 5 M. & W. 548, p. 138.

Watertown Thermometer Co. vs.

Pool, 51 Hun, 157, p. 153. Western District Warehouse Co. vs. Hobson, 16 Ky. L. Rep. 869, p. 155.

White vs. Ryan, 15 Pa. Co. Ct. 170, p. 154.

Whittaker vs. Howe, 3 Beav. 383, p. 137, 200.

Williams vs. Hayes, 5 How. Pr. 470, p. 275.

Wooden vs. Waffle, 6 How. Pr. 145, p. 275.

5 Moore, 115, 142, p. 124. 2 Leon, 210, p. 124.

pl. 5, p. 118.

2 Hen. VII. 11, p. 119.

7 Hen. IV. 14, p. 119.

3 Hen. VI. 36 b, 37 a, p. 119.

14 Hen. VI. 18 b, pl. 58, p. 119. 19 Hen. VI. 49 a, pl. 5, p. 119. 20 Hen. VI. 34 a, pl. 1, p. 119. 2 Hen. V. 5, p. 124.

21 Hen. VII. 7, 20, p. 125.

1 Rolle Abr. 10, p. 119.

Noy. 98, p. 124.
Owen, 143, p. 124.
2 Keb. 377, p. 124.
Show. 2, p. 124.

1 Saund. 155, p. 124.
W. Jones, 13, p. 124.
Cro. Jac. 596, p. 124.

Blacksmiths' Case, Moore, 242, pl.

379, S.C. 2 Leon. 210, p. 145. Case of Monopolies, 11 Co. Rep. 87 b, p. 145.

Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, 38 & 39 Vict. c. 86, p. 144.

6 Eliz. c. 4, p. 144.

21 James I. ch. 10 (Statute of Limitations), p. 116.

29 Car. II. ch. 3 (Statute of Frauds), p. 102.

Trade Union Act, 1871, 34 & 35 Vict. c. 31, p. 142.

36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, L. R. 8 Stat. 306, 317, 319, p. 71.

27 Henry VIII. ch. 10 (Statute of Uses), p. 67.

United States Constitution, Tenth Amendment, p. 5.

United States Constitution, Art. IV, 6.

§ 4, p. United States Constitution, Art. I, § 8, p. 6.

United States Constitution, Fifth Amendment, p. 363.

United States Revised Statues, § 566, p. 75.

New York Laws of 1882, ch. 410, § 1104, p. 271.

New York Laws of 1886, ch. 572, p. 271.

New

York Code of Procedure (1848), §§ 208, 209, p. 272. New York Code of Civil Procedure, § 1079, p. 74.

New York Revised Statutes, p. 165.
Code Civile of France, § 1780, p. 148.
Code Civile of France, § 1108, p. 177.
Code Civile of France, §§ 1131, 1132,
1133, p. 177.

Civil Code of Louisiana, §§ 1893,
1894, 1895, p. 177.
Italian Code, § 1628, p. 148.
Indian Contract Act, §§ 23, 27, p.

177.

Field's Proposed New York Civil Code, §§ 829 to 836 inc., p. 188.

A

Accessibility, argument for codifica-
tion, 308.

Actions, the forms of, 62.

Adjective law, codification of, 429.
Admiralty law, its rise and jurisdic-
tion, 52, 53; a different system of
rules, 53; based on the Roman law
and sea customs, 71; jury trial in
America in, 95.

America, case law system of, 17;
sources from which the law of the
different States is obtained, 89, 90.
Amos, Professor Sheldon, on codifi-
cation, 27, 263; on the argument
drawn from the results of the
Indian codes, 32; comparison of
English and French law, 266; on
the Field Civil Code, 284; on the
further growth of a code law, 298;
argument against codification, 306;
in favor of codification, 308, 330;
criticism on his argument, 331.
Analogy, the lesson of, as applied

to the construction clause con-
tended for in statutes, 446.
Analogies, conflicting, 286, 323.
Ancient law, in some cases practi-

cally dead and buried, 93; analogy
between, and the Glacial Epoch, 94.
Anglo-Indian codes, the, 211.
Answer, nature of, 83.
Appeal, nature of, 88.
Appearance, effect of, on jurisdiction
of court, 82.

Argument, from the growth of the
common law, 247; for codifica-
tion, 329; and authority, distinc-
tion between case decided in
jurisdiction and out, 338; the
final, 346 et seq.
Arguments and ideas of the codi-
fiers, 260.

Augustine, St., on fossils, 369.
Austin, John, on the forms of law,
23; on codification, 27, 263; on
the argument from success or fail-

ure of French and German codes,
32; his view of international law,
46; on interpretation, 229, 244,
246; on the fundamental differ-
ence between statute and case
law, 244, 245, 316; on the differ-
ence in interpretation, 246; his
idea of a code, 286; on the French
and Prussian codes, 289, 294; on
the general theory of a code, 293 ;
on the definition of a code, 293;
on the further growth of law under
a code, 298, 340; in favor of a law
commission, 298; his statement of
the argument for codification, 315;
his arguments criticised, 316-318;
on the difference between code and
case law, 341; on laws of man and
laws of nature, 381.
Austria, code system of, 17.
Australia, case law system of, 17.
Authority, responses as authority in
the Roman law, 338; the distinc-
tion between cases decided in the
jurisdiction and out of it, 338.

B

Bacon, his complaint of the common
law, 27.

Bail, necessity of, under the old
law, 82.

Bailment, rules as to, 11, 12.
Bentham, Jeremy, his view of the

common law, 26; on codification,
263; his idea of a code, 281; on
case law, 436.

Best, W. M., on codification, 31, 264;
on the bulk of French law under
the code, 339, 340.

Bill in equity, nature of, 83.
Bishop, Mr. Joel P., on codification,
31.

Books of reports and statutes, 15,

77, 92; description of, 94, 95.
Bruno, his martyrdom, 368.
Buffon, his degradation, 369.