jury, within section 2033.-State v. Carpenter
(Mo.) 255.

An applicant for a marriage license, who
testifies falsely, and under an oath administer-
ed by the recorder, that the girl's parents have
consented, held not guilty of a misdemeanor
under Rev. St. § 2036.-State v. Carpenter
(Mo.) 255.

§ 2. Prosecution and punishment.

An indictment for subornation of perjury held
insufficient in not containing allegations that
the false testimony was material.-Miller v.
State (Tex. Cr. App.) 908.

On a prosecution for subornation of perjury,
held error to charge that matters alleged in the
indictment as inducement need not be proved.—
Miller v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 908.

PERPETUITIES.

In particular actions or proceedings.
See "Attachment," §§ 1, 4; "Ejectment," § 2;
"Equity," § 2; "Malicious Prosecution." § 1;
"Mandamus," § 3; "Specific Performance,'
§ 1; "Trespass to Try Title," § 2; "Trover
and Conversion," § 1.

Action for breach of contract, see "Contracts,"
§§ 2, 3.

Action for breach of warranty of goods sold, see
"Sales," § 5.

Action for damages for wrongful execution, see
"Execution," § 5.
Action for recovery of value of property ex-
changed, see "Exchange of Property.'
Action for rent, see "Landlord and Tenant,"
§ 3.

Action on appeal bond, see "Appeal and Error,"
$ 15.

Action on bond of indemnity against mechanics'
liens, see "Mechanics' Liens," § 5.
Action on note, see "Bills and Notes," § 4.
Action to construe will, see "Wills," § 4.
Action to enjoin sale of homestead, see "Home-
stead," § 7.

A will providing that, 25 years from testa-
tor's death, his estate should be divided among
his children then living and the heirs of such
as may be dead, and that during the 25 years
none of the children should have power to dis-
pose of his interest, is void.-Coleman v. Cole-Action to set aside deed, see "Deeds," § 1.
man (Ky.) 832.

Action to enjoin sale under execution, see “Ex-
ecution," 2.
Action to establish mechanic's lien, see "Me-
chanics' Liens," § 4.

PERSONAL INJURIES.

See "Assault and Battery," § 1; "Negligence."
Measure of damages, see "Damages," § 3.
To employé, see "Master and Servant," §§ 2-7.
To passenger, see "Carriers," § 5.

To person on or near railroad tracks, see
"Railroads," § 2.

To traveler on highway, see "Highways," & 4;
"Municipal Corporations," § 8.

To traveler on highway crossing railroad, see
"Railroads." § 2.

To trespasser, see "Railroads," § 2.

PHOTOGRAPHS.

As evidence, see "Evidence," § 8.

PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS.

As expert witnesses, see "Evidence," § 13.
Employment at hospitals, see "Hospitals."

PLEA.

Attachment of property fraudulently conveyed,
see "Fraudulent Conveyances," § 2.
Election contest, see "Elections," § 5.
Foreclosure, see "Mortgages," § 4.

Indictment or criminal information or

com-

plaint, see "Indictment and Information."
Pleas in criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal
Law," § 6.

Proceeding to remove disabilities of infant, see
"Infants," § 1.

§ 1. Form and allegations in general.
The averment in a reply that one-fifth of a
tax levied will not be collected is but a con-
clusion of the pleader, and therefore insufficient
to present an issue.-City of Lexington v. Board
of Education of City of Lexington (Ky.) 827.
§ 2. Plea or answer, cross complaint,
and affidavit of defense.

In an action against a city and others to test
the validity of an ordinance, it was not an abuse
of discretion to refuse to permit the city to file
an answer 11 months after the petition was
filed, and after issues had been formed between
plaintiff and another defendant, and the case
submitted by agreement.-City of Lexington v.
Home Const. Co. (Ky.) 1.

Where the defendant, having affirmatively
pleaded self-defense and accident, and elected

In criminal prosecution, see "Criminal Law," to rely upon the defense of accidental shooting,
§ 6.

PLEADING.

Amendment of pleadings after limitation, see
"Limitation of Actions," § 2.
Conformity of judgment to pleadings, see "Judg-
ment," § 3.

his answer stood as an admission that he did
not do the shooting in self-defense.-Hollings-
worth v. Warnock (Ky.) 163.

Under Ky. St. § 4. giving a right of action
to the widow and minor child of a person killed
by the careless or malicious use of firearms
"not in self-defense," evidence that the killing
was in self-defense or was accidental is ad-
missible under a common traverse of the peti-

Allegations as to particular facts, acts, or tion.-Hollingsworth v. Warnock (Ky.) 163.

transactions.

See "Adverse Possession," § 3; "Damages,"
$ 5: "Estoppel," § 3; "Judgment," § 13;
"Release," $ 2.

Nonjoinder of parties, see "Parties," § 2.
Statute of limitations, see "Limitation of Ac-
tions," § 4.

In actions by or against particular classes of
parties.

See "Carriers." §§ 2, 3, 5; "Corporations," § 4;
"Municipal Corporations," § 10.

Banks, see "Banks and Banking," § 2.
Employers, see "Master and Servant," § 7.

3. Demurrer or exception.

A defendant who answers over after his de-
murrer is overruled is not thereby precluded
from demurring to an amended petition filed
after his answer is filed.-Beattie Mfg. Co. v.
Gerardi (Mo.) 1035.

Where, on exceptions to plaintiff's petition
being sustained, he amends, any error in such
ruling is waived.-Barrett v. Independent Tel.
Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 1128.

§ 4. Amended and supplemental plead-
ings and repleader.

It was not an abuse of discretion to reject an
amended answer which did not materially add

Insurance companies, see "Insurance," §§ 5, 6. to the defense.-Duis v. Fisher (Ky.) 337.

In action for the price of goods, held error
to admit evidence and instruct in support of a See "Bail," § 1; "Criminal Law"; "Extradi-
counterclaim arising under an alleged verbal
contract, not pleaded.-Bloch Queensware Co.
v. Metzger (Ark.) 929.

Where a creditor of a corporation by an agree-
ment with its officers took charge of the corpo-
ration for the purpose of applying the profits to
his debt, he did not waive a lien on property
pledged to him by a stockholder to secure the
same debt.-Weiscopt v. Newman (Ky.) 808.

In an action to subject stock pledged to se-
cure a debt, the court properly refused to re-
quire plaintiff to subject real estate held by
him as security for the same debt.-Weiscopt
v. Newman (Ky.) 808.

Of municipality, see "Municipal Corporations,"
§ 6.

Procedure of particular courts, see "Courts."
Prosecution of actions in general, see "Ac-
tion," § 2.

The sheriff held entitled to compensation
from the county for keeping prisoners senten-
ced to the workhouse under commitments from
the justice between their conviction and their See "Bills and Notes."
transfer to the workhouse.-Knox County v.
Fox (Tenn.) 404.

davit filed with the complaint cannot be the Service of process, see "Process," § 1.
basis for a warning order.-McMahan

warning order against unknown heirs, the com- See "Counties," § 2; "Municipal Corporations,"
plaint must allege that the heirs are unknown

1207

PUBLIC LANDS.

Mineral lands, see "Mines and Minerals," § 1.
§ 1. Disposal of lands of the states.

Act 1888, applicable alone to Pulaski county,
containing certain provisions protecting the
rights of junior patentees within grants that
were void for uncertainty, does not apply to
valid senior grants; but, even if it was intend-
ed to so apply, it would be void, as a patent
issued by the state is a grant in the nature of
a contract between the patentee and the state,
which cannot be invalidated by any subsequent
act of the state.-Kidd v. Central Trust & Safe
Deposit Co. (Ky.) 355.

A patent is not void for uncertainty in the
location of previously patented lands recited as
excluded.-Kidd v. Central Trust & Safe De-
posit Co. (Ky.) 355.

A patent was not void for uncertainty,
though one of the calls did not designate the
course; it appearing that the course can be
found by retracing one of the lines.-Kidd v.
Central Trust & Safe Deposit Co. (Ky.) 355.
Land embraced in a void patent cannot again
be patented as vacant or unappropriated land.
Eastern Kentucky Land Co. v. Ferguson
(Ky.) $30.

Under Act April 16, 1895, § 8, a settler on a
section classed as dry grazing lands held not en-
titled to purchase additional sections of pastoral
land of the state.-Terry v. Dale (Tex. Civ.
App.) 51.

Act April 16, 1895, authorizing the purchase
of state lands, held repealed by Act Aug. 20,
1897, and a purchaser under the former stat-
ute, who did not take the steps required to per-
fect his purchase until after such act, acquired
no title.-Terry v. Dale (Tex. Civ. App.) 51.

Facts in trespass to try title held to show
plaintiff entitled to the land in question.-Ham-
ilton v. McAuley (Tex. Civ. App.) 205.

Laws 1889, p. 48, § 1, relating to acquiring
title to unappropriated public land, held in
conflict with Const. art. 14, § 6, relating to
homesteads.-Yoacham v. McCurdy (Tex. Civ.
App.) 213.

PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

See "Schools and School Districts," § 1.

In civil actions, see "Trial," § 5.

$ 19.

QUIETING TITLE.

§ 1. Right of action and defenses.

Under Rev. St. 1899, § 650, action may be
maintained during intervening life estate to
determine interest in land of remainder-men
and advancements made during life of the
common ancestor.-Garrison v. Frazier (Mo.)
229.

§ 2. Proceedings and relief.

in a suit to determine the interest of remainder-
A remainder-man who disclaims any interest
men is not a
Frazier (Mo.) 229.
necessary party.-Garrison v.

to rents and profits and an injunction restrain-
ing defendant from interfering with the remov-
Plaintiff held not entitled to an accounting as
al of houses from certain property in an action
to determine title, under Rev. St. 1899, § 650.
Seidel v. Cornwell (Mo.) 971.

QUO WARRANTO.

Necessity of judgment in quo warranto to en-
title contestant to office, see "Officers," § 1.

RAILROADS.

See "Taxation," § 3.

Apportionment of railroad tax among schools,
As employers, see "Master and Servant,"
Carriage of goods and passengers, see “Car-
see "Schools and School Districts," § 1.

riers."

Garnishment of railroad, see "Garnishment,"
Liability of railroad property to local taxation
$ 1.
by cities, see "Municipal Corporations," § 9.
§ 1. Right of way and other interests
in land.

right of way, depot grounds, and a Y, to
hold so long as used for the railroad, it did not
Where a railroad company purchased land for
lose its right to any part of its purchase by
Graham v. St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co.
permitting the vendor to use it until needed.
(Ark.) 1048.

certain plank crossings held not to work a for-
Failure of a railroad company to construct
feiture of the right of way under the terms of
the grant.-Gratz v. Highland Scenic R. Co.
(Mo.) 223.

§ 2. Operation.

Verdict against railroad company for killing
a horse held not justified.-St. Louis, I. M. &
S. Ry. Co. v. Cline (Ark.) 427.

It is not the absolute duty of persons running
a train to stop it to avoid an injury, even if it
can be done.--Arkansas & L. Ry. Co. v. San-
ders (Ark.) 428.

an instruction that all the employés of the com-
In an action for a horse killed by an engine,
pany must keep the lookout required by stat-
ute, and making the company liable for the
neglect of any of them, is erroneous.-Arkan-
sas & L. Ry. Co. v. Sanders (Ark.) 428.

Railroad company is under no obligation to
keep its right of way cleared of obstacles, so
that animals can pass over and across its track
freely. Arkansas & L. Ry. Co. v. Sanders
(Ark) 428.

In an action to recover damages for death at
a railroad crossing, the court should have in-
structed that, though defendant, in charge of
the train, did not exercise ordinary care as de-
fined in the preceding instructions, still if de-
ceased knew of the approach of the train, and
with this knowledge undertook to pass over the
crossing ahead of the train, he assumed the

In criminal prosecutions, see "Criminal Law," risk, and defendant was not liable.-Illinois

Cent. R. Co. v. Jackson's Adm'r (Ky.) 342.

In an action against a railroad company to
There can be no conviction under Rev. St.
recover damages for injuries sustained in at- 1899, § 1838, where the sexual connection was
tempting to board a moving train, an instruc- procured by force.-State v. Hamey (Mo.) 946.
tion that, though plaintiff were a trespasser, Evidence held insufficient to support a con-
it was the duty of defendant's servants to as-viction of rape.-State v. Hamey (Mo.) 946.
sist plaintiff, without any reference to his being
in imminent and known peril, held erroneous.
-Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Mills
(Tex. Civ. App.) 74.

Where injury occurs by reason of the viola-
tion of a city ordinance regulating the speed
of railway engines, such violation is negligence
per se, though recovery therefor may be de-of age, it is error to permit a child which is
On a trial for rape of a girl under 15 years
feated by contributory negligence.-Chicago,
R. I. & T. Ry. Co. v. Erwin (Tex. Civ. App.)