litical rights on account of religious belief.-
Pfeiffer v. Board of Education of City of De-
troit (Mich.) 250.

§ 4. Vested rights.

Code, § 1898, as amended by Acts 27th Gen.
Assem. c. 48, providing that interest on loans by
building and loan associations previously con-
tracted should not be deemed usurious, per-
tains to the remedy only, and hence does not im-
pair vested rights.-Iowa Savings & Loan Ass'n
v. Heidt (Iowa) 1050.

Lot owners held to have no vested right to
construct a tar walk partially completed, when
an ordinance was passed including them in
the stone-walk district.-Scribner v. City of
Grand Rapids (Mich.) 699.

Laws 1895, c. 326, extending the time for
redeeming from an execution sale, held not to
impair vested rights as against prior judgment
creditors.-Dunn v. Dewey (Minn.) 793.

§ 5. Obligation of contracts.

Laws 1897. c. 334, § 3 (1 Rev. St. 1898, §
1694a), providing that an assignment for cred-
itors shall dissolve a levy on the property as-
signed, impairs the obligation of contracts as
to debts previously contracted.-Eau Claire
Nat. Bank v. Macauley (Wis.) 176; Hale v.
Same, Id.; Wickham v. Same, Id.; Winter-
botham v. Same, Id.

§ 6. Class legislation.

Code, 1898, as amended Acts 27th Gen.
Assem. c. 48, providing that interest on loans
by building and loan associations to members
shall not be deemed usurious, held not uncon-
stitutional as class legislation.-Iowa Savings &
Loan Ass'n v. Heidt (Iowa) 1050.

Seed-grain acts (Laws 1893, cc. 225, 226) held
unconstitutional as appropriating public money
for a private purpose.-William Deering & Co.
v. Peterson (Minn.) 568.

§ 7. Equal protection of laws.

2 Rev. St. 1898, § 3072, making payment of
costs a condition precedent to prosecuting suit
in certain cases, held not obnoxious to Const.
art. 1, § 9, entitling every person to free jus-
tice. Christianson v. Pioneer Furniture Co.
(Wis.) 174.

§ 8. Due process of law.

Act providing that, where offender is brought
before municipal court without process, the
court shall enter a brief statement of the of-
fense, which shall stand as a complaint, held
not unconstitutional. State v. Messolongitis
(Minn.) 29; Same v. Santrizos, Id.

§ 9. Remedies for injuries.

Though the legislature can reasonably re-
strict the privileges of habeas corpus, it can-
not wholly deprive the supreme court of the
exercise of its original jurisdiction.-Carruth
v. Taylor (N. D.) 617.

CONSTRUCTIVE TRUSTS.

See "Trusts," § 1.

CONTEMPT.

Violation of injunction, see "Injunction," § 3.
§ 1. Proceedings.

A contempt proceeding against a party who
disregarded an order of the circuit court after
it had been affirmed, and while it retained the
original papers, should be initiated in that
court.-Fitzsimmons v. Board of Canvassers of
City of Detroit (Mich.) 632.

CONTINUANCE.

In criminal prosecution, see "Criminal Law,"
§ 5.

11.

ance.

Specific performance, see "Specific Perform-
Subrogation to rights or remedies of creditors,
see "Subrogation."

Contracts of particular classes of parties.
See "Carriers." § 2; "Corporations," § 4; "Hus-
band and Wife," § 1; "Municipal Corpora-
tions," $§ 4-10; "Schools and School Dis-
tricts," § 1; "States," § 2; "Warehousemen."

Contracts relating to particular subjects.
See "Intoxicating Liquors," §7; "Waters and
Water Courses," § 2.

Ground for mechanics' liens, see "Mechanics'
Liens," § 1.
Transportation of passengers, see "Carriers,"
§ 2.

Particular classes of express contracts.
See "Bills and Notes"; "Bonds"; "Covenants";
"Guaranty"; "Insurance"; "Landlord and
Tenant"; "Master and Servant"; "Partner-
ship"; "Principal and Agent"; "Sales"; "Ven-
dor and Purchaser."

Employment, see "Master and Servant."
Stipulations in actions, see "Stipulations."

Particular modes of discharging contracts.
See "Compromise and Settlement"; "Payment."
§ 1. Requisites and validity.

A contract to sell lambs, wherein the buyer
agrees not to purchase any lambs in certain
counties prior to the agreed date of delivery, is
void, under 3 How. Ann. St. § 9354j.-Bingham
v. Brands (Mich.) 940.

tracts containing an agreement to restrict free
3 How. Ann. St. § 9354j, making void all con-
competition in the production or sale of any com-
modity produced by agriculture, is constitution-
al.-Bingham v. Brands (Mich.) 940.

Agreement by trustee of savings bank to se-
cure election of another to the office for a con-
sideration held void on the ground of public pol-
icy.-Dickson v. Baker (Minn.) 820.

It is essential to a binding contract that the
minds of the parties meet at every point.-
Krum v. Chamberlain (Neb.) 665.

To create a contract, there must be a con-

currence of minds.—McGavock v. Morton (Neb.)

785.

A disadvantage to the promisee is a sufficient
consideration for a contract, though the_prom-
isor derives no benefit.-Faulkner v. Gilbert
(Neb.) 1072.

Contract giving privilege of cropping certain
land held based on a sufficient consideration.-
Peoples v. Evens (N. D.) 93.

Taking possession of building held not an ac-
ceptance by the owner as having been erected
according to contract.-Anderson v. Todd (N.
D.) 599.

$2. Construction and operation.
Grant v. City of Detroit (Mich.) 307.
Held error to submit construction to jury.-

A contract granting a right to remove certain
timber construed, and held to give two years
within which to remove the timber.-Oconto Co.
v. Lundquist (Mich.) 950.

Contract by which plaintiff furnished money
to defendant to be used in his business con-

A judgment in favor of creditors of a corpo-
ration against stockholders held erroneous on
finding that property conveyed in payment of
stock was overvalued, but that stockholders

acted in good faith, and without attempt to de-
fraud.-Penfield v. Dawson Town & Gas Co.
(Neb.) 672.

Where promoters bought property for $20,-
000, giving a mortgage for the entire price,
and conveyed it to the corporation for paid-up
stock for $60,000, held, that it was for the
jury whether the property was purposely over-
valued.-National Bank of Merrill v. Illinois &
W. Lumber Co. (Wis.) 185.

Rule as to good faith in exchanging prop-
erty for the stock of a corporation, so as to
make it fully paid up as to creditors, laid down.
-National Bank of Merrill v. Illinois & W.
Lumber Co. (Wis.) 185.

3. Officers.

A contract between a corporation and its of
ficers for the payment of salaries will be closely
scrutinized.-Church v. Church Cementico Co.
(Minn.) 548.

A stockholder and president cannot bind the
corporation by contract to pay him a greater
salary than his services are reasonably worth.-
Church v. Church Cementico Co. (Minn.) 548.
§ 4. Corporate powers and liabilities.
A creditor of person who transfers property to
corporation in payment of its claim cannot com-
plain that officer receiving transfer was without
authority. First Nat. Bank v. Garretson (Iowa)
856; Beloit State Bank v. Same, Id.; North
Granville Nat. Bank v. Same, Id.

Secretary and treasurer of company held to
have power to consent to conveyance from debt-
or to creditor of company in satisfaction of both
debts. First Nat. Bank v. Garretson (Iowa) 856;
Beloit State Bank v. Same, Id.; North Gran-
ville Nat. Bank v. Same, Id.

How. Ann. St. c. 281, does not authorize in-
tervention by general creditor in action by stock-
holder against company for accounting.-Smith
v. George T. Smith Mfg. Co. (Mich.) 308.

The fact that some of the obligations of its
predecessor have been paid by a corporation does
not tend to establish that it has assumed the
predecessor's debts.-Church v. Church Cemen-
tico Co. (Minn.) 548.

Power of corporation to confess judgment de-
termined. Solomon v. C. M. Schneider & Co.
(Neb.) 65.

In suing corporation, summons need not de-
scribe it as such.-German Ins. Co. v. Frederick
(Neb.) 1106.

Petition after answer on the merits is not

open to attack because not alleging corporate
character of defendant.-German Ins. Co. v.
Frederick (Neb.) 1106.

Where plaintiff alleges that it is a corpora-
tion, its existence is not put in issue by de-
fendant's denial on information and belief.-
Board of Education of Webster Independent
School Dist., No. 101, v. Prior (S. D.) 106.

§ 5. Insolvency.

An insolvent corporation may make payment
preferring one of its creditors over others.-First
Nat. Bank v. Garretson (Iowa) 856; Beloit State
Bank v. Same, Id.; North Granville Nat. Bank
v. Same, Id.

An executor does not make himself personal-
ly liable on corporate stock by having it trans-
ferred to himself as executor pursuant to a di-
rection in the will.-Markell v. Ray (Minn.)
788.

Where a stockholder who was a creditor of
the corporation assigned for creditors, and aft-
erwards the corporation became insolvent, held,
that the corporate debt should be set off against

the stockholder's liability. - Markell v. Ray
(Minn.) 788.

Under Gen. St. 1894, § 5927, an action to
charge the distributees of an estate of a de-
bility held not barred in one year after the cor-
poration went into insolvency.-Markell v. Ray
(Minn.) 788.

ceased stockholder with the stockholder's lia-

were held by two persons, held, that such per-
Where the corporate books show that shares
be held for more than one-half of the stock-
holder's liability.-Markell v. Ray (Minn.) 788.

sons were tenants in common, and neither could

for price of stock issued to defendant, he cannot
In action by assignee of insolvent corporation
set off debt due from corporation.-Richardson
v. Merritt (Minn.) 968.

Where plaintiff obtains judgment to collect a
note due from one defendant, his right to pro-
ceed is not affected because another defendant,

his surety, will be released by enforcement by
plaintiff of his right to payment.-Solomon v.
C. M. Schneider & Co. (Neb.) 65.

An insolvent corporation, in absence of fraud.
may prefer some creditors to exclusion of oth-
ers.-M. A. Seeds Dry-Plate Co. v. Heyn Photo-
Supply Co. (Neb.) 660.

A corporation cannot prefer a debt owing to
a corporate officer.-M. A. Seeds Dry-Plate Co.
v. Heyn Photo-Supply Co. (Neb.) 660.

An officer of a corporation that was never
in a condition to pay its debts in full can-
not prefer himself as a creditor by giving a
mortgage to his wife on the property of the
corporation.-Rowe v. Leuthold (Wis.) 153.
86. Foreign corporations.

Foreign corporation not having statutory au-
thority to do business held capable of suing in
the state court a nonresident under a contract
executed and to be performed in another state.
-Ware Cattle Co. v. Anderson (Iowa) 1026.

In action by foreign corporation, that it has
not complied with law in reference to obtain-
ing certificate is matter of defense.-Lang-
worthy v. Garding (Minn.) 207.

CORRECTION.

Of irregularities and errors at trial, see "Trial,”
$ 8.
Of judgment, see "Judgment," § 6.
Of record on appeal or writ of error, see "Ap-
peal and Error," § 14.

COSTS.

See, also, "Appeal and Error," § 30.

In particular actions or proceedings.
Foreclosure, see "Mortgages." §§ 9-19.
Probate proceedings, see "Wills," § 3.
§ 1. Persons liable.

In equity, unless a person has been called into
court by another or prejudiced by him in the ac
tion, the court cannot mulet such other in costs
therefor.-Menz v. Beebe (Wis.) 913.

§ 2. Security for payment.

Where a nonresident judgment defendant serv-
ed by publication applied to have the judgment
vacated, held, it was not an abuse of discretion
not to require him to give security for costs.—
Moss v. Robertson (Neb.) 403.
§ 3. Items.

Where a defense cannot be made but through
a guardian ad litem, costs for his services are
properly taxed against plaintiff, he baving failed
to establish his cause of action.-Burkhardt v.
Burkhardt (Iowa) 1069.

§ 4. On appeal or error, and on new
trial.

Cost of an amendment to an abstract held
taxable to a successful appellee because unnec-
essary. William Deering & Co. v. Beatty
(Iowa) 325.

Under Code 1873, § 2840, it is wholly within
the discretion of the court whether to order the
costs to be paid by the party to whom a new
trial is granted.-Battin v. City of Marshalltown
(Iowa) 493.

Costs of additional abstract containing irrele-
vant matter, except as to the necessary matter,
will be taxed to appellee.-McDermott v. Abney
(Iowa) 505.

Appellee held not liable for costs of printing
additional abstract because of repetitions, the ap-
peal being dismissed.-Moller v. Gottsch (Iowa)
859.

Where judgment of reversal is entered, plain-
tiff in error can recover costs of the appellate
court; those in district court abide final deter-
mination.-National Masonic Acc. Ass'n
Burr (Neb.) 1098.

V.

Discretion vested in the supreme court to
award damages for delay will not be exercised
unless the writ of error was clearly frivolous or
taken in bad faith.-Ossowski v. Wiesner (Wis.)

184.

CO-TENANCY.

See "Tenancy in Common."

COUNTERCLAIM.

See "Set-Off and Counterclaim."

COUNTIES.

See, also, "Municipal Corporations."

§ 1. Officers.

In the absence of contract to the contrary,
first clerk of newly-organized county compiling
numerical index held entitled to compensation
from the county.-Bastedo v. Boyd County
(Neb.) 387.

§ 2. Fiscal management, public debt,
and securities.

Under Comp. Laws, § 593, enjoining the com-
missioners to superintend the county's fiscal
concerns, they may in good faith, and for val-
ue, sell to an outgoing county officer uncol-
lectible notes of the county.-Brown County v.
Jenkins (S. D.) 579.

One who bought for value and cashed ir-
regular county warrants, in good faith and with-
out notice, held not liable to repay the money
at the suit of taxpayers who were guilty of
laches.-Webster v. Douglas County (Wis.) 885.
Payees of county warrants held liable to repay
money fraudulently collected in anticipation of
an injunction. Webster v. Douglas County
(Wis.) 885.

Right to trial by jury, see "Jury," § 1.
Trial by court without jury, see "Trial," § 7.
8 1. Nature, extent, and exercise of ju-
risdiction in general.
Consent of parties cannot confer jurisdiction
of the subject-matter. - Johnson v. Bouton
(Neb.) 57.

Jurisdiction of subject-matter is power to hear
and determine the cause.-State v. Smith (Neb.)
384.

A judgment by a district court in a case
transferred from another district court by the
court on its own motion held void.-Lefferts v.
Bell (Neb.) 680.

§ 2.

Establishment, organization, and

procedure in general.

An order appointing special term for certain
matters made by a judge of the district court
more than 20 years ago, and ever since acted
upon, held valid, though there is no proof that
it was ever posted as required by statute.-
Northwestern Fuel Co. v. Kofod (Minn.) 206.

When two judges of the Fourth judicial cir-
cuit sit together, as provided by Gen. St. 1894,
$4869, the senior judge may decide the case
after his associate resigns.-Darelius v. Davis
(Minn.) 214.

Where after action was tried, and before it
was decided, the county was formed into anoth-
er judicial district, the judge trying the case
could file a decision, though he was not a
judge of the new district.-Darelius v. Davis
(Minn.) 214.

Adjournment to subsequent day in the term
does not adjourn term nor deprive judges of con-
trol.-Green v. Morse (Neb.) 925.

The court can revoke an order adjourning court
to subsequent day of term and reconvene.-
Green v. Morse (Neb.) 925.

§ 3. Courts of general original jurisdic-
tion.

District court held to have jurisdiction of ac-
tion to test right to office of street commissioner.
-State v. Alexander (Iowa) 841.

§ 4. Courts of limited or inferior juris-

diction.

Const. art. 6, § 16, does not invest county
courts with criminal jurisdiction.-In re Cheno-
weth (Neb.) 63.

A county court has no jurisdiction to try one
charged with selling intoxicating liquors.-In
re Chenoweth (Neb.) 63.

the legislature with any other criminal juris-
The county courts have not been invested by
diction than that of justices.-In re Chenoweth
(Neb.) 63.

The criminal jurisdiction of a county court is
re Chenoweth (Neb.) 63.
the same as that of a justice of the peace.-In

County court has jurisdiction of actions to
recover for breach of covenant against incum-
brances.-Hesser v. Johnson (Neb.) 406.

That land is situated in a state where cove-
nant against incumbrances runs with the land
does not affect the question of jurisdiction.-
Hesser v. Johnson (Neb.) 406.

§ 5. Courts of probate jurisdiction.

Under Code 1873, §§ 2312, 2379, 2408, et seq.,
the district court sitting in probate has juris-
diction to determine the validity of mortgages
held by a decedent against a legatee.-Prouty v.
Matheson (Iowa) 1039.

§ 6. Courts of appellate jurisdiction.
The supreme court has original jurisdiction in
mandamus.-State v. Smith (Neb.) 384.

7. United States courts.

A petition to compel an express company to
accept goods for shipment at the regular char-