LIST OF LEADING ARTICLES IN VOLUME 67 No. 1. May a State in the Exercise of the. Police Power, Prohibit the Use of the National Flag for Advertising Purposes? No. 2. The Malicious Use of One's Property. No. 3. Canons of Professional Ethics Submit- ted by Special Committee of the Ameri- No. 4. A Review of the Great Case of Had- dock v. Haddock. By Marion Griffin, 66. No. 5. The Advisability of a Longer What Liability Does a Bank Assume as to the Quality and Quantity of Goods Described in a Bill of Lading In- dorsed by it. By J. T. Woodruff, 105. No. 7. Liabilities of Heirs and Estate of Co- sureties for Breach of Bond. By John No. 8. Validity of a Statute Providing that Acceptance from Relief Association Shall be No Bar to an Action for Damages. By No. 9. Will a Mechanics' Lien Lie Against the Property of the Jamestown Exposition Company? By Thos. W. Shelton, 163. No. 10. Trust Bursting Under the Common Law. By George D. Talbot, 181. No. 11. The Effect Upon the Exercise of the Right of Eminent Domain of the Inter- mingling of a Private with a Public Use. No. 12. The Sanction of International Law. No. 13. The Standard Oil Rebate Case. By Regulation of Rates to Be Charged by Public Service Corporations. I. Mis- cellaneous Enterprises Affected with Public Interest. By O. H. Myrick, 299. No. 17. Regulation of Rates to Be Charged by Public Service Corporations. II. Rail- road Companies. By O. H. Myrick, 317. No. 18. The Breach of an Unconditional Con- tract Between a Shipper and a Carrier to Transport and to Deliver an Emergency Shipment at a Specified Destination by a Stated Time is Not Excused by Inevitable Accident or Necessity, and Such Uncondi- tional Contract Is Not Abrogated by or Merged in a Writing Subsequently Made, Purporting to Waive Such Contract, With- out a New and Independent Consideration. No. 19. Are Natural Water Powers Public Property? By W. A. Coutts, 356. No. 20. General and Special Agents-Is There any Distinction as to Liability By R. L. No. 21. The Law in Its Relation to the Child. No. 22. Property in Running and Falling No. 23. The Defense in Actions for Personal Injury when There has Been a Violation of Statutory Regulation by the Defendant. No. 24. The Trust Relation Between Corpo- rate Officers and Stockholders Buying of, TABLE OF CASES. This list includes only those cases comme nted upon editorially or in our Notes of Import- ant Decisions, or in full annotated. The abbreviation Ed., indicates editorially-R. D., cases commented upon in our Notes of Important Decisions, and ann. case, annotated case. Ainsworth v. Munoskong Hunting & Fishing Club (Mich.) Injunction-To Prevent Inter- Alerding v. Allison (Ind.) Judgment-Distinc- tion Between Law of the Case and Res Ad- Allen-West Commission Co. v. Grumbles (U. S. Anderson v. Aupperle (Oreg.) Evidence-Ad- Barthell v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. (Iowa) Lien for Attorneys' Fees-Enforcement- Settlement by Client, R. D. 123. Bashford v. Wells (Kan.) Adultery-Is Cohabita- Batson v. Fidelity Mut. Life Ins. Co. (Ala.) In- Baumgartner v. Hodgdon (Minn.) Assault and Bennett v. Ware (Ga.) Physicians and Surgeons Bovaird v. Bovaird (Kan.) Is a Cause of Ac- Bucklev v. Buckley (Wash.) Marriage-Right to City of Independence v. Knoepfker (Mo.) Collins, Ex parte (Cal.) Criminal Law-Stay of Connell v. Iowa State Traveling Men's Associa- Corea v. Higuera (Cal.) Easement-What is a Cunha v. Gallery (R. I.) Statute of Frauds-Suf- ficiency of Writing-Contents of Memoran- dum and Description of Land, R. D. 102. Cunningham v. Castle (N. Y.) Is an Automobile District of Columbia v. Robinson (Dist. of Col.) Enforcement of Obsolete Laws, Ed. 141. Dole v. New Orleans Railway & Light Company Dunham v. Public Service Corporation of N. J. Crowded Condition of Cars, R. D. 180. Fay v. Lambourne (N. Y.) Trade-marks-In- French v. Transportation Co. (Mass.) Carriers- Validity of General Clause Exempting Rail- Gillespie v. First National Bank (Okla.) Bills Hahn v. Conreid Metropolitan Opera Co. (N. Y.) · Master and Servant-What Constitutes a Safe "Place" to Work, ann. case, 305. Hawley, Ex parte (S. Dak.) Judicial Notice- Nursery Regulations-Constitutional Law, Henderson v. State of Florida (Fla.) Pardon- Assumes the Canon City v. Manning (Colo.) Injunction-Re- Charge to Grand Jury. In re (U. S. D. C., S. D. Citizens' Bank v. City of Spencer (Iowa) It is Necessary for one Contracting with a Board of Aldermen to see that the Preliminary Wills-Presumption Johnson v. Tennessee Oil, etc., Co. (N. J.) Cor- porations-Payment for Capital Stock in Overvalued Property, R. D. 83. Johnson v. Western Union Telegraph Co. (S. Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. Gardiner Dairy Co. Kruger v. Kruger (I.) Divorce-Conditional Lee v. Western Union Telegraph Company (Ky.) Lehr v. Murphy (Wis.) Corporations-Creditors' Suit-When Maintainable-Foreign Corpora- tion Defendant, ann. case. 152. Lin Hop Fong v. United States (U. S. S. C.) Ap- Lunnun v. Morris (Cal.) Appeal and Error-Pre- Martin v. Veana Food Co., Ltd. (Mich.) Corpora- Mayfield Water & Light Co. v. Webb's Admr. Mead v. Baum (N. J.) Husband and Wife-Right Motley, Green & Co. v. Detroit Steel & Spring Nelson V Johnson (Minn.) Innkeepers-Who New York Life Insurance Company v. Hardison, Off & Co. v. Morehead (Ill.) Constitutional Law -Bulk Sales Law of 1905 Held Void, ann. Peese v. Gellerman (Tex.) Superior Right of Parent to Custody of Minor Child, Ed. 197. People v. Knickerbocker Trust Company (N. Y.) Excessive Allowances to Receivers of Defunct Banking Institutions a Reproach to the Administration of Justice, Ed. 233. People v. Ranney (Mich.) Criminal Law-Cor- Pere Marquette R. Co. v. Strange (Ind.) Carriers Portland Company v. Hall & Grant Construction Rockmore, In re (N.. Y.) Is a Reflection on Trial Court's Motives in Rendering Decision Ground for Disbarment? Ed. 355. Rumble v. Cummings (Oreg.) Agency-Burden Rush v. Oregon Power Co. (Oreg.) Master and Salmen Brick & Lumber Co. v. Peterson (La.) Sauers v. Smits (Wash.) Physicians and Sur- Scott v. University of Michigan Athletic Assn. (Mich.) Theaters and Shows-Liability of Smedley v. Speckman (U. S. C. C. of App. Third Smith v. Blank (Kan.) Property Retained by Smith v. North Carolina R. Co. (N. C.) Carriers Standard Supply Co. v. Carter (S. Car.) Damages -Earning Capacity and Anticipatory Pro- Starr v. Bankers' Union of the World (Neb.) State v. Campbell (Mo.) The Failure of Amer- State v. District Board of School Dist. No. 1 State v. Fabrick (N. Dak.) Courts-Original Jur- isdiction of Supreme Courts Limited to Questions Publici Juris Affecting the Sov- ereignty of the State or the General Wel- State v. Gerbing (Fla.) Right of a State to Con- vey Title to Tide Lands or Exclusive Priv- ilege to Plant Oysters, or to Conduct any Other Private Enterprise Thereon, Ed. 179. State v Kenner (Okla.) Courts-Supreme Court -Jurisdiction-Injunction, ann. case, 324. State v. King (Wash.) Criminal Trial-Com- ments of Judge on Giving Instructions, R. State v. Lipp (Mo.) Weapons-Right to Use Gun in Threatening Manner to Resist a Trespass, Supreme Lodge Knights of Honor v. Hahn (Ind.) Tomlinson v. Armour & Co. (N. J.) Negligence- United States v. Atchison. Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. (U. S. C. C. of App., Eighth Cir- cuit) Extent of Railroad's Liability for Fail- ure to Comply with Provisions of the Fed- eral Safety Appliance Act, ann. case, 476. United States v. Standard Oil Company of In- diana (U. S. C. C. of App.. Seventh cuit) The Standard Oil Rebate Case, Ed. 101. Ward v. City Trust Co. of New York (N. Y.) Bills and Notes-Notice to Transferree- Corporate Paper-Transfer by Officer, ann. Williams v. Goldberg (N. Y.) Landlord and Ten- ant-Personal Injuries due to Defective Central Law Journal. ST. LOUIS, MO., JULY 3, 1903. THE ARREST OF HIS PRINCIPAL BY THE BAIL MAY BE MADE IN ANOTHER STATE THAN WHERE THE BOND IS GIVEN AND THE BAIL MAY TRANSFER HIM THERETO WITHOUT INFRINGING HIS RIGHT UNDER THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION TO DUE PROCESS OF LAW. The relationship of a bail and his principal arises out of the relationship the parties have established between them selves, and not by a court process, so that, a bail making the arrest of his principal anywhere he finds him, in the United States, is justifiable. An interesting case of this sort is that of In re Von der Ahe, 85 Fed. Rep. 959. Chris Von der Ahe is a picturesque character in St. Louis; gained great notoriety as the president of the victorious "Brown Sox" base ball team, captained by Charles Comiskey, now president of the "White Sox" team of Chicago. It seems that Chris got into trouble in Philadelphia whereby an action of trespass for malicious prosecution was brought against him under the laws of Pennsylvania, in Allegheny County. Chris was arrested by virtue of a capias and taken into custody. To procure his release, he secured one, Nimick, to "go his bail." The condition of the bond was that he (Von der Ahe) "shall satisfy the condemnation money and costs, or render himself into the custody of the sheriff of Allegheny County, or in default thereof, that said W. A. Nimick, the above named bail, will do so for him." Chris was released, but the case went against him, and was finally affirmed in the supreme court. Under the Pennsylvania practice, it is notable that the bail may discharge themselves by a surrender of the principal at any time prior to fourteen. days after the service of the scire facias, or summons, issued after the termination of the action, and upon the execution of sur the the the bond, "it shall be lawful for the bail therein, to have, from the officer by whom it is taken, a bail price," etc. Chris, having failed to pay the judgment or surrender himself to the sheriff, Nimick, the bail, on February 3rd, 1898, took out a bail piece, duly and properly certified. By indorsement thereon, Nimick authorized Bendell, the respondent, to execute same, and in his "behalf, to take, seize and surrender to the sheriff of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, said Chris Von der Ahe." In pursuance of such authority, Bendell subsequently came to St. Louis, having secured assistance, seized Von der Ahe on the street, and by main force, put him into a hack and, despite Chris' cries for help, he was carried to the depot and placed on the cars. Several attempts were made on the way to Pennsylvania to take Chris from the bail, but were futile, and he was, by main force, delivered to sheriff of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Thereupon Chris sued out a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that he was a citizen of the state of Missouri, "that no legal proceedings, if any such, could have been had, were begun to warrant any such arrest in the state of Missouri, and that contrary to article 5 of the amendments to the constitution of the United States, he was deprived of his liberty without due process of law. The court said: "Of late years we have grown so accustomed to the proceedings by requisition that we have come to regard it as the only means by which a person can be removed from one state to another. An examination of the authorities, state and federal, shows, however, that, under certain circumstances, bail have the right to arrest their principals, wherever they find them, and remove them from the forum from which they have been released, and to which they have obligated themselves to surrender. these authorities it would seem settled that when one is arrested, and bail is given, such principal is regarded as delivered to the custody of the bail; that the bail has a right to arrest or take the principal into By |