Volume 51 — Kentucky Reports

<p>Error to the Fayette Circuit.</p> <p>Sci. Fa.</p> <p>Case 1.</p>

<p>Indictment.</p> <p>Case 2.</p> <p>Error to the Lexington City Court-.</p>

<p>Commission Merchants„ Limitations. Presumptions.</p> <p>The.case stated.</p> <p>The judgment of .the Circuit Court.</p> <p>The proof in the case.</p> <p>First question presented,</p> <p>The accoünts bif commission arid forwarding merchants formoney advririb'ed & services rendered are not embráced by the 5th section oif tlie statute of liriiitation (2 Statute Law, 1134) limiting actions upon merchants’ accounts to one year.</p> <p>Second question presented.</p> <p>The consignment of goods evidenced by the directions on the pack ages to A. Y, “care of D. & Co.,” &c., the delivery of them by the 'carrier to D. & Co., and the fact that the packages were on the usual route to the residence of A. Y., creates a presumption that A. Y. was the owner, and that the consignment wa3 to D. & Co., by the consent and direction of A. Y.; and. unless rebutted, creates a liability on A. Y.to pay advances, commis’ns, &e., to the consignee, D.G.& CO.</p>

<p>Error to the Montgomery Circuit.</p> <p>Debt.</p> <p>Case 4.</p> <p>Case stalfedjj'</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 5.</p> <p>Case stated.</p> <p>Error to the Woodford Circuit.</p>

<p> By-Laws. Lexington City Court. </p> <p>judginent. of ttíé Circtiít Court.</p> <p>Errors'iów as_-srígned in the judgment Below;</p> <p>Provisions of the act of 1840, in respect to the cityof Louisville and other cities in Kentucky: (3 Stat. Law, S71.)</p> <p>The amendatory act of 1842: *3 Stat. Law, 244.)</p> <p>The act of 4843: f¿trpAm)f</p> <p>Act of 1844-5.</p> <p>Superior Courts tyill not, ex offi-pip, taire notice pf customs, laws dr proceedings of inferiorCourts of litpited jurisdiction unlesswhen revising their judgments,'when justice rpquires they shoflja notice then}.</p> <p>A power vested by the Legislature in a city cor poration to make by laws for its government, and the regulation of its own police— cannot be considered as imparting by implication ^ power to repeal the laws of the State, or supersede then) by any of its o)-4 dinances.</p> <p>The passage of an ordinance by the city of Lexington, authorizing a fine of 100 dollars for a breach, of the peace, did not repeal the common law, which authorizes afine1 at the discretion of a jiuyby the authority of the City Court.</p>

<p> Clerk's Evidence. Instructions. Fraudi </p> <p>An official copy "of a record, certified by a clerk, is competent evidence lor him in any suit to which he is a íp arty.</p> <p>A defendant in ejectment tenant in possession be ing shown (ó have been in pos session on the 2d day of the month, tjie jury may where there is ho evidence to the contrary presume ti\at his possession w.as continued'' until the 14th o.f the same month;</p> <p>It is no objection to the admissibility of Sheriffs or other deed of conveyance at this day that it is not indented. The practice of indenting for i-dentificntion is now obsolete in Kentucky.</p> <p>Facts admitted on the trial of this case, on the last trial not appearing on the former record bo fore this Court.</p> <p>Where a convey-^ anee is assailed on the ground of' fraud, the Court in its instructions to the jury shouid hypothe-cate its instructions upon all— not a part of the facts adduced to seow fraud or no fraud in the tran suction.</p> <p>When the consideration of a conveyance is fully adequate, the irandulent in tent of the giant or in malting the conveyance will not affect its validity, rmlesslhe grantee participated in that intent. •</p>

<p> Husband and Wife. Dower. Sla'ves. </p> <p>Slaves assigned to the widow for dower in the estate of the husband, vest in the distributees subject to the claim of dowel, and up on the marriage of one of the fem-aledistributees vests in her husband, and though the feme distrib-utee dies before the dowress, the husband of such distributee is entitled to the interest which vested in his wife before the death: Turner vs Davis, (1 B. Mon., 152; 4 lb. 236; 5 lb. 556; 7 lb. 535; 9 lb. 95; 10 lb. 412; 3 Litt. 263-64,) decide that if the wife die during the continuance of the particular estate in slaves, the right vests absolutely in the husband as survivor.</p>

<p> Sureties. Rent. Liens. Equity Jurisdiction. </p> <p>The act of 1828: (2 Statute Law, lddl) authorizes a surety, where the debtor is about to remove his property out of the commonwealth to attach it — not where the removal is outof Ihe county only. A surety is not a creditor whhin the meaning of the act of J 838: 3 Statute Law, 116) and theie-ioreliasno right to sue out an at-tachmenl in chancery on the ground that the debtor is about to malic a fraudulent disposition of his property. The act of 1748: (2 Statute Law, 1351) gives no remedy to the sttkety for rent, either at law or in chancery, to attach the propel ty of the tenant on the ground that the tenant is about to remove his property out of the county, though the landlord may have, sucli remedy.</p> <p>A surety who pays the debt of: his principal has; a right in equity - to be substituted! to all the securities, liens, and equities of the creditor for the debt: (1 Story’s Sanity, 478; 2 John. Chy. Rep 560; 4 lb. 123;) but this right only accrues upon the payment of the debt. Tho’ he may, when the debt becomes due, by bill in equity, compel the creditor to enforce hjs demand against the principal debtor.</p> <p>A complainant twho has no right ,io relief upon ,the facts suited iin his bill, has no right to claim .a reversal on the ground that all iihe proper par-dies are not before the Court.</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 3.</p> <p>Error to the Clark Circuit.</p>

<p>Error to the Wayne Circuit.</p> <p>Motion.</p> <p>Case 11.</p> <p>Case stated</p>

<p> Exempted Property. Execution. New Trial. </p> <p>A decision of the Court of Appeals — settling the law arising in the case, and directing a new trial, is binding upon the Circuit Court ip a subsequent trial thereof in the Circuit Court.</p> <p>The protection from execution oí cloth manufactured in a farn. ily, given by statute in Kentucky extends locarpe-tin£, though the thread may have been purchased and the weaving done by and in a different family.</p> <p>If properly, ex empt from execution be taken by an officer, the defendanlcannot use force to regain the possession, though he •may regain it peacabiy — but if the defendant does peacabiy re gain the possession, the officer cannotjustify the. use of force to retake it.</p> <p>Where the finding of the jury is in accordance with the weight of ihe evidence, and a contrary finding would have been contrary to the evidence, no reversal should lake place because the Court gave an instruction not direcllyupon the point upon which the ease should turn.</p>

<p> Contracts. Idiots and Lunatics. Fraud. </p> <p>, The judgment of -'the Circuit '’Court.</p> <p>Persbns íiióá pa-ble of acting for themselves, tho’ not idiots or lunatics may sue by next fiiend. Mitford’s Pleading, 30, and the addition of the words “by next friepd to his own naipe,” would not -ifitiate the proceeding.</p> <p>The acts and contracts of persons of weak intellect, & thereby liable to im-positiou, will be> held void by the Chancellor, if the act or contract of the party justify the con elusion that the party has been imposed upon, circumvented,of overcome by cun mn£ or undue in fluenca.</p> <p>A-. contract for the purchase of a tract of land, worth twice the contract price, made with an old ignorant man, with a purchaser of shrewdness, and having great influence with the vendor: held to be illegal and un obligatory and the conveyance s^et aside.</p>

<p> Acceptances. Orders. </p> <p>A written aocep-baek^f an order made by the terms: “i will pa?d eventually1’'’ ceptan'ce'to pay" forthwith,audan petion lies lor failing to pay.</p>

<p> Common Carriers. </p> <p>Common carriers cannot exempt themselves from liability ior gross., negligence of themselves and agents or serv’ts by writing in the bill of lading that the boat is ’ uot to be accoun ' table for breakage of the con: tents oí boxes re ceived: (Sfory orí Baleménts, 365y*</p>

<p> Estates in fee. Dower. Curtesy. </p> <p>The object of the bill.</p> <p>The provisions of the will of A. Northcntt, unde* which complainants'Claim.</p> <p>The codicil to the will.</p> <p>The decree ofthe Circuit Court.</p> <p>A widow i3 not entitled to dower in a life estate which is not de-lermined during the coverture, & of which the hus band was never seized during the coverture: (8 B. Monroe, 202.)— This principle does not however apply to a remainder inslaves thus situated, in the administrator of the tenant in remainder is entitled to the estate in slaves, & the widow to dis tribution,</p> <p>Where there be no children of the marriage the widow is entitled to half the slaves of the husband, and half the personal estate after debts paid:— (Tibbs vs Tibbs’ Executor, 7 B. Monroe, 112.)</p> <p>A devise oí slaves to one and his heirs forever,, but if he die without lawful heirs before the wife of the testator, then to the latter for life &c Held that the testator tools a defeasible lee & not a fee tail: (8. B. Monroe.)</p> <p>Where an estate in fee is made determinable upon some-particular event, and that event happen dining the coverture no right of dower or curtesy exists: (Cruise Dig.,Tit. Dower, Chap. 3, sec. 7) but whea land is given to a man or a woman & the heirs of his or her body, the surviving wife is entitled to dower, and lite husband to cur-tesy if issue has been bom alive: (8 Coke Hep., 3d.)</p> <p>In all cases where the husband is seized of such an estate in land as that the issue of the wife may inherit, if any she have, as heir to the husband, the widow is dowable out of such estate; (Littleton on Tenures, Sec. 52,) whether any issue be born to the husband or not: (2 Atkins, 46, 1740; 3 Bos. & Pul. 654, in note, 25Geo. 3d; 2 Bingham, 446, 1825; 2 Simons, 249, 1828; Bell on Property, 67 vol. Law Lib., 272; Bisset on Estates for Lile, page 81, ,et. seq. Law Lib., side page, 38, et. seq.</p>

<p>Debts. Corporations. Taxes. Interest.</p> <p>Ia Englaad a cor poratlon could uot dissolve itself but by a sur render of its fran chise to the King and its acceptance. In Kentucky it should be to the Legislature, or a repeal of the charter — argu.</p> <p>—Butin Ky. a corporation cannot, by its own act dissolve itself so as to avoid any responsibility incurred before such attempted dissolution.</p> <p>"Where a certain tax is imposed, debt will lie for its recovery: if a certain penalty be imposed by statute debt will lie for its recovery.</p> <p>The act of the ’Legislature directing the payment of $200, part of the tax ■imposed upon the Portland Dry Dock Company, to Portland, instead of Louisville, presumed to be acquiesced in by the Company from the faja» and pleadings in the case.</p> <p>A jury, is not necessary in a" suit to recover tax fixed bylaw; —Bufno interest should be computed on such debt without' the intervention of a jury.</p>

<p>Error to the Greenup Circuit.</p> <p>Covenant.</p> <p>Case 17.</p> <p>Th'e case' stated, judgment &c.</p>

<p>Error to the Bourbon Circuit.</p> <p>Assumpsit.</p> <p>Case 19.</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 20.</p> <p>Appear from the Louisvirre Chancery Court-</p> <p>The case stated. •</p>

<p> Liens. Equity Jurisdiction. </p> <p>The lien of von*' dor for purchase' money, passes to the assignee of the note given ior the consider-^ alien, and is extinguished upon? ils final payment</p> <p>Where n eon* veranee hn«s been made oí land, ex pressing on its lace to be for a couside ration “paid and secured to be paid,” the vendee cannot withheld the purchase money unpaid, and ie* quire a release or conveyance, expressing full payment, upon the mere suggestion ol the fact that the convey anee made does not show full pajmeuu</p>

<p>Brror to thjg L'dnfsvxnnh Chancery Court.</p> <p>C¡HANCERY»</p> <p>Case 22.</p>

<p> Administrators. Heirs. Covenants. </p> <p>.Plea of def’ts.</p> <p>Reply of plff & judgment ot Ihej Circuit Comt. .</p> <p>For abreach ofa covenant to convey land which occurred in the lifetime of the obligee, tjie executor op admin-istratpfmilst sue —it after the deqth p,t‘ the oh-ligee, Ihe right is in the heir to .sue.</p> <p>The verdict not so unsupported hy the testimony as to authorize the court lo grant ¿a new trial.</p> <p>Where the dec-laralion is defective, if tbeie be an issue oi fact found against the plaintiff, it does not follow that the Court should grant plaintiff u new trial.</p>

<p>Replevin.</p> <p>XJase 24.</p> <p>Appeal prom the Pendleton Circuit.</p> <p>"Case staled</p>

<p>Wills. Incapacity of testator, tyc.</p> <p>Questions for decision in this Court.</p> <p>Facts stated, from which the Court decide that the test’rs. mind was so impaired by age & infirmity that he was not capable of mailing a will,</p> <p>Fact5? and cir* cumsiances from which the Court decide that the testator, who was between 9U and 100 years of age, and feeble in body & mind, was unduly in* iluenced by his slaves to malee a will by which they were Jo b$ emancipated,</p>

<p> Attachments. Damages. </p> <p>The Court can* not assess dam* ges in suits upon articles of agreement where an inquiry into fact is necessary to asceriain the a* mount of damages.</p> <p>The finding of the jury against a plea in abatement isfinal, and in cases where an assessment of damages is proper, the same jury should assess the damages: (3 San ders' Sep., siae page, 211.</p> <p>—But if the jury fail to assess the damages, a jury to inquire of dam ages, should be called, not a ve-nire de nova.</p> <p>Where property attach’d has been replevied, art order of sale is not proper.</p> <p>The levy of an attachment on slaves ■ is not void, tho’ there may bo personal property other than slaves sufficient.</p>

<p>Error to the Louisville Chancery Court.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 27.</p> <p>Case stated, and construed.10 be</p>

<p> County Court Jurisdiction.- </p> <p>county Court in. prior to 1851.</p> <p>The canstituional provision in regard to the jurisdiction of County Courts to hp regulated' by lay?.</p> <p>And by the 2d section of the act oí 1851, the County Co u r t composed of Uje Presiding Judge, is to be held at the same times and places as the County Couits tlien were held, and exercise the .samo power and iurisdiction, &c. ’(except in laying county levy and expenditure oí county funds,) ds the County Courts had theie toiore exercised.</p> <p>The Presiding Judge of the. County Court as Judge of the County Courtha jurisdiction lo rect the administration of insolvent estates on the petition the adhninistrator,, apd to authorize,the sale-oí, land when necessary paymeniof deblfo,</p> <p>The County -Court Judge by -the act ql }851, stands in the place of the County Court c ommissioners, under the act of 1849-50, and his powers as Judge upon the subject are co-extensive with the old County Court, which Court, if the personal as-setts do not exceed $500,might order a sale of real estate. By the 16th sec. of the act of 1851, the limit of $500 is talten off, and the County Court Judge as Judge of iheCountyCourt proper, has the jurisdiction oí settling estates and selling lands rin case of deficiency of person alty to pay debts. 'He has a separate jurisdiction as a Justice of the Peace,</p>

<p>FoRC. EnT; AND DeT.</p> <p>Case 29.</p> <p>Appear from the Spencer Circuit;</p> <p>The case stated.</p>

<p>Chancerv.</p> <p>.Case 30.</p> <p>Error to the Livingston Circuit.</p> <p>The case J*lated-</p>

<p>Error to the Harrison Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 31,</p> <p>Case staled</p>

<p>Forcible DETAINEE.</p> <p>Case 32.</p> <p>Error to the Pendleton Circuit.</p> <p>The case stated, judgment &e.</p>

<p>Debt.</p> <p>Case 33.</p> <p>Error to the Monroe Circuit.</p> <p>The case stated.</p>

<p>Mandamus.</p> <p>Case 34.</p> <p>Error, the Kenton County Court.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p> Mortgages. Warranty of title to Personalty. </p> <p>A. covenant, of general warranty in tile sale of land is broken by a recovery of dower against the vendee, and the measure of recovery against the vendor is regulated by the value of the dower interest: v5 B. Monroe, 341.)</p> <p>W sold to S a sltne upon which G held a mortgage, G brought suit to foreclose, Sgave bond for the forthcoming of the property, but failed to surrender it to satisfy the decree, G brought suit upon ihe bond and recovered Ihe amount of the mortgage debt, and costs 'ol the suit in chaneeiy and at law.— Held that W in a suit by S was not liable to S for the costs of the suit at law upon the bond for failing to deliver the slave, but only for the amount of the mongage debt and suit in chancery to foie, close.</p>

<p> Trespass. Possession. Champerty. </p> <p>Character of plaintiff’s claim to the land,</p> <p>Character oí de* iendant’s claim.</p> <p>Plaintiff lo main Lain trespass qnnre chtu-sum fugU, must have the-possession at the (laic ol the trespa>s — an on try under a junior patent outside oí the interference, does not give a possession of the inter f arenen, though i l be made* Aviih the intention of ta-lcing possession of the j unior patent to the extent of its boundary. But a possession under the eider patent givers possession of all within its bounds not already possessed in the same county in which the entry i,< made; though a prior entry under a junior patent within the ]«p with intent to take possession of jt will give a possession [o the extent of the interference.</p> <p>An entry upon a possession under the elder patent, by a junior paí-tenme, Aic. with in the interference, does not divest the posses sion under the eider patent beyond I he actual en c 1 o s u re, though thejunior patentee may have been previously possessed outside of the interlerenoe claiming to the boundary of his pulen t.</p> <p>The creation of a new county & ¿¡vid »g a toad of hind in pos session does not have the effect of divpsun? a legal possession.</p> <p>A tenant placed in possession of a large tract of land, & died upon it, left a family, they were still in possession as the head of the family had been for the landlord — no act of abandonment appearing,</p> <p>A conveyance made in compliance witli a valid contract, made when there is no adverse posses-sioe is not within the champerty laws.</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 36.</p> <p>Appeal prom the Oldiiam Circuit.</p> <p>The case stated.</p>

<p> Lien. Dower. ■ </p> <p>The substance of the proof stated.</p> <p>A widow whose husband is seized during cover-ture, cannot be divested of her dower by a suit to enforce a lien for balance of purchase money unpaid, brought after the death of the husband, to which she is no party, and a sale of the property</p> <p>The decree of the Chancellor below.</p> <p>A widow who is turnedout of the possession o f property by a sale thereof, under a decree to eníoice a lien for a balance of the purchase money due thereon by the husband, in which suit she is no party: Held tobe entitled to a third of the tents from the time she is turned out of posses sion.</p> <p>How dower interest to be ascertained, &c.</p>

<p> Contracts. Considerations. Chancery. </p> <p>Courts of equity have jurisdiction to relieve against notes, not only where there is a partial, but where there is an entire failure of eon sideration : U0 B. Monroe, 40.)</p> <p>The consideration ofa contract “is the materia' cause of the con * tract, without which it will not be effectual or binding.” — “The reason which moves a contrac ting party to enter into the contract.” If it fail entirely, the Chancellor may telieve.</p> <p>The contract be» ing to deliver personal property upon a sale thereof, the consideration fails if there be no delivery.</p>

<p> Forcible Entry and Detainer. Possession. </p> <p>If one having if elder legal title enter upon land will) the in-lent to talte possession to the boundary of his deed, he is in possession to that extent: though one be in possession outside of the interference.</p> <p>An entry upon land for the purpose of cutting and removing timber, is not such a forcible entry as will authorize the proceeding by suit of forcible entry and detainer It is only a Trespass, and there is no divestiture of possession.</p> <p>It is only where an entry has the effect of divesting a previous possession, that the writ of forcible entry and de-tainer lies.</p>

<p> Practices in Chancery. Mortgages. Parties. </p> <p>In decreeing upon a mortgage, the chancellor should ascerrain the amount due to the complainant, and state it, and a decree ni si be made giving day tor payment before any decree of foreclosure and sale. It should not be left to a commissioner to ascertain the sum due.</p> <p>And where there are joint mortgagees, all are necessary parties to a suit ior foreclosure. A decree upon a mortgage should so identify the mortgage or prop erty to be sold, as to show wiiat is intended to be sold—and where there are joint mortgagees, if the fund is insufficient to pay all the mortgage debt a pro rata distribution of the fund should be decreed.</p>

<p>Trusts <§• Trustees. Interest.</p> <p>A fund was placed in the hands oí two individuals as trustees, who undertook jointly and sever ally to use the same precedent ]y and profitably, to pay the debts of the grantor and support him, and divide ihe remainder in six months after his death between his two children; Held that the trustees (who divided the fund when received, should each be charged with the amount received and with interest on the fund at rests of two years, when disbursements with, interest irom the time of payment should be credited, and a joint decree rendered against both for the entiie sum due.</p> <p>Trustees who undertake to use ■preeedently and profitably it fund put into their hands allowed as .comp ensation for trouble and responsibility, 5 per cent is reasonable.</p>

<p> Executors. County Courts. </p> <p>All persons who are capable of making wills may be executors, and some others; (W7//-hamson Ex'ors. 112,) poveity or insolvency is no objection: (Ibid, U'9.)</p> <p>An executor derives bis authority from the will, anil if he be one who is recognized by law as competent, the County Courts in Ky., have no right to refuse their qualifieation, >on account of any supposed defect of moral character^</p>

<p> Forcible entries, SfC. Possession. County Lines. </p> <p>An entry upon any part of a iract of land, with the intent to lalte possession of I he whole survey or boun-bary; gives possession to the extent of the sur veyor boundary not held adverseiy by another— but is limited to the lines of the county in whioh the entry is made.</p> <p>The ease of Hard vs Walker, (-5 Litl. 22.) cited and approved</p> <p>Sawder <$■ Myers vs McMillan's heirs, (4 Dana, 456,) oiled and approved.</p> <p>Where a tract of land lies in two .counties, there must be an enliy 1 n each to give a possession.</p> <p>An entry upon land in one court ty and the occasional use of aim ber from abe same survey, extending into another courny, will not give such a possession as will authorize the maintaining a wiit of forcible entry & detainer.</p>

<p> Forcible Entry and Detainer. Possession. </p> <p>The landlord whose tenant, is entered upon, cannot maintain the wiit of forcible entry and de-tainer. it is on ly the person who is actually possessed and entered upon, that can maintain the writ.</p> <p>: Forcible entry and detainer can not be maintained by the landlord whose tenant has been entered upon, even though the term of the tenant has expired, and he has left the prem ises before the warrant brought.</p>

<p>CíIANUER Sf.</p> <p>Case 45.</p> <p>■Cass* stated and decree % of the circuit Court. .</p> <p>Appeal from the Washington Circuit.</p>

<p> Deeds of Trust. Fraudulent Conveyances. </p> <p>A deed of trust made for the ben efit of all the creditors Of the grantor without giving preference to any ered itor or class of creditors — he 1 d not to be fraudulent.</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 47.</p> <p>Case stated.</p> <p>Error to tiie Louisville Chancery Court.</p>

<p>Motion.</p> <p>Case 48.</p> <p>Error, to the Fayette Circuit Court.</p>

<p>Error to the Marion Circuit.</p> <p>Ejectment.</p> <p>Case 49.</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 50.</p> <p>Case stated.</p> <p>Error to the Fayette Circuit Court.</p>

<p>Error to the Graves Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery,</p> <p>Case 51.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Error to the Graves County Court.</p> <p>Motion..</p> <p>Case 52.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 53.</p> <p>Case stated, and chancellor.1 h 6</p> <p>Appear from the Louisville Chancery Court.</p>

<p> Liens. Dower. Seizin. Vendor and Vendee. </p> <p>The pleadings of the parties.</p> <p>. The decree of the Circuit Court.</p> <p>The right o f a in lands or sub-lien Tnhe* vendor of (he land held bd herhua-band but when the husband ob. fains a conveyance and gives his notes t o those persons & a mortgage upon the land to secure their payment his widow i s entitled t o dower.</p> <p>The acceptance of other or additional security by a vendor of land, is a waivor of his lien- Collard vs Seam-mond. 9 B. Mon. 265.</p> <p>Where a vendor conveys and takes a mortgage of the same date as the deed o f convey anee, there is such seizin i n the husband as entitles li i s wife upon his death, to dower in the knd: (Tlvcs vs HUele, 4 Mon. 339.)</p>

<p>Error to the Mason Circuit Court.</p> <p>Assumpsit.</p> <p>Case 57.</p> <p>Csrse stated</p>

<p>Writs or error to the-Nelson Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 58.</p> <p>gtatecU The case</p>

<p> Sheriffs. County Levy. Interest. Presumption* </p> <p>A deputy sheriff who by his bond with surety to his principal, obligates himself to collect monies and pay over accoiding to law, and, who fails to do so, is liable to his principal for the debt; the principal need to wail to be sued himself before suing the deputy; but if he be sued, and subjected to damages and cost the whole may be recovered irom the deputy and his sureties, (3 B. Mon. 307.)</p> <p>A sheriff, in a proceed against him tor the de* falcation of hi* deputy in not paying over the county levy, is not liable for in« teiest accruing before the date of the judgment.</p> <p>The sheriff is Ibound to discharge all the official duties imposed by law, ias well such as the law required at the date ofhis .official bond as thoes that may be thereafter imposed by law, and a -deputy who oblígales 'himself' to his principle to per-dorm all the duties of sheriff is bonne in the same way to his ,principle.</p>

<p>Appeal from the Henderson Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.'</p> <p>Case 60.</p> <p>The case stated.</p>

<p> Consideration. Alimony. Liens. </p> <p>No action can be maintained by a female for services rendered as a concn-bine — it is against the policy of the law.</p> <p>Though a man who has recognized a v ornan as his wife might he esiuppod to deny it in a suit by her agáinst him. yet no decree for alimony can be made unless [here be allegation and proof to show a joint claim foe-alimony.</p> <p>Complainant lived with do* íendant as his wife, though not in lact so, she advanced money which the man paid for real pio periy and it was conveyed to the man* Held Unit the woman had a lien upon the property ior the sum advanced And interest.</p>

<p>Error to the Fayette Circuit Court.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 62.</p> <p>Case stated in the bill ol complainant in re-Sied lo the lost iv!II of Robeit Todd.</p>

<p> Usury. Administrations. </p> <p>■ prese* tecTfor de° cision.</p> <p>One who pay»; his debt in which, there is usury, by the notes of. others, may forthwith sue for-the usury.</p> <p>A surety on a note »n which there is usury which, is paid by his principal cannot reclaim the usury.</p> <p>One creditor may not claim, to have the exclusive benefit of a debt due the Intestate, from the fact of his bringing such a claim to the notice of the administrator in a suit for distribution under the act of 1839--he is only entitled 10 his pro rata of it.</p>

<p>Appeal from the Hickman Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 63.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Appeal from the Louisville Chancery Court,</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 64.</p> <p>The case stated and decree of ihe chafiC®llot"</p>

<p> Femes covert. Vendor and vendee. Separate property of wife. </p> <p>The position a?, sumed by defendants below.</p> <p>A ^purchaser of property by exe-cutory contract, let inlo possession is bound lo risk such inquiries as result irom- casualties unless such risk has been guarded against by express contract, and is entitled to anj; benefit which may accrue to the estate in the interim, (Sugden on vendors, 174, 2 Powell on contracts, 61, 6 vez S49.)</p> <p>Tne ge.neral doctrine is that a feme covert cannot make a valid or boundary contract—there are some exceptions.</p> <p>Since live statute of 1846, (sess. acts 1645, 6 page 41,) slaves the property of the wife are regarded as real estate, <and do not vest absolute 3y in the husband as before the siatute,) and can only be disposed of by deed in the same manner as real esiaie—unless it be by written contract executed jointly, with the husband to pay for necessaries ’ for a member of the family.</p> <p>A feme covert, Cannot make executoiy contract either for the purchase or sale of lands— nor sell her slaves except, os authorized bylaw, except in relation to her separate estate.</p> <p>The husband war a patty to a contract for land made in the joint names of himself and wife, and executed notes-in their joint names, and agreed that the-title should be made to the wife and received & writing to that! effect from the vendor — h eld-: that the husband.-, eould be compelled specifioal? ly to execute the? contract.</p> <p>The husband ¡since the act of .1846, (sess acts lip5 6’ cannot wacuvhich win bind the ^slaves cept made in conjunciion wuh pmvided'by that »ot.</p> <p>Wher the husband sells th& (the marriage Place since tllB They may be recovered back by action of detinue.</p>

<p> Trespasses, joint and several. Practice. </p> <p>The substance of the proof of plaintiff.</p> <p>Motion to instruct ms in cas© of non suit, oves rulod and except lion.</p> <p>Defendants evS* dence.</p> <p>Motion of defendant tO'jbermit the jury 'to take a bill of exceptions,.containing 'plaintiff’s ‘eVi'dence Written 'out;</p> <p>Verdict'¡5: judgment for plaintiffs.</p> <p>, Motion for 118$ trial overruled,-.</p> <p>A. process of attachment reg-ula/Jy issued by competent -authority, is a justification 'to an. officer levying the same on the property of de-fenaant, but not ofother persons.</p> <p>A plaintiff'ots-complainant, irí-an attachment?, pase is not liable jointly with the officer who goes beyond his authority, in bringing an attach-' ment, unless he-directs or sanctions the act of the officer — nor is an officer liable jointly with a plaintiff.' who improperly sues out an attachment, or directing its levy upon property a third person.</p>

<p>Chancery,</p> <p>Case 64.</p> <p>Csu stated.</p> <p>Error to the Fayette Circuit,</p>

<p>Appeal prom the Pendleton Circuit.</p> <p>Ejectment.</p> <p>Case 65.</p> <p>Case staled, & judgment of the Circuit Court.</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 66.</p> <p>Case stated and decree of the Circuit Court.</p> <p>Error to the Bourbon Circuit.</p>

<p>Where one mem ber retiies from a. ^ parlnership, with ihe eonsent of the remaining partners, leaving a sufficiency of funds io pav the debts, Ihe' law will imply a promise to save the letiring partner haimless: (Goto, on partnership, 268.)</p> <p>If one of Iwo partners sell lo s tl/jrd person, with the consent of Ihe remaining partner, and the new partner agree In save tbe out going yurt ner harmless. The new firm are bound to appropriate the assets to the payment of the debts of the old firm, and if they misaypiy Lhem, they are individually liable lo reimburse the oiu-guing partner for any payments by 1 im.</p>

<p> Towns. Tippling houses. Taverns. </p> <p>The general laws for regnlnling towns in Kentucky, gives no anlhovily to the utislees of towns, lo license the retailing of spirituous liquors.</p> <p>The I2tb section of the acts of 1849, {sess. ads 47,) has application alone to the cities and towns, which at the passage of that act, had authority to grant license to retail spirits. That act gave no new authority to trustees of towns or cities, to grant such license.</p>

<p> State boundary. New trial. Verdict. </p> <p>Patents issued by the Slate of Virginia, for land lying in the forks of Sandy river, subsequent to the first of October, 1*799, confered no title, though the entry had been made be-ioie that date.</p> <p>Where'the jury-have decided a fact in issue, de-pendiug upon the opinions of witnesses, their decision is not do be distuibed by the Court.</p> <p>A verdict in «jectment, “that ¡he defendant is guilty of the tres pass in the declaration mentioned, and that the plaintiff recover the term yet lo come in the declaration mentioned, and one cent in damages,” though informal is sufficient.</p>

<p>Error to the Lincoln Circuit.</p> <p>Indictment»</p> <p>Case 7L</p>

<p>Error to the Arlen Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 72.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Error to the Greenup Circuit.</p> <p>Ejectment.</p> <p>„ Case 73.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Appeal from the Green Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 74.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Motion.</p> <p>Case 74.</p> <p>Case stated.</p> <p>Error tó the Wooeford Circuit.</p>

<p> Administration. </p> <p>A wife by anti-TniptiuJ contract íeserved her properly real and personal, with the issues and profits to her sep hi ale ude, a.> well as the right to dispose of it by sale or will, she died without disposing of it — held ihatlhe ftusr band had the light to administration upon her estate, Williams on Executors, 244 Tollers law of Executors, 84 5 11 B. Mon. 138, (slat. law 661.)</p> <p>(*6 Munf. 133; Ward vs Thompson, 6 Gill ani Johnson, 349.)</p>

<p>Error to the Garrard Circuit.</p> <p>Debt.</p> <p>Case 76.</p> <p>Cose stated.</p>

<p> Siireties. Contribution. </p> <p>A «ntely in an injunction bond enjoining a judgment which had been replevied, has no claim upon a surety in the replevy bond, ior contiibiition after payment of the debt, when he became surety in the injunction at the instance of the principal alone, and not the surely in the reply bond.</p> <p>A surety in a replevy bond is not a co surety with a surety in an injunction bond, and is not /table to contribution to him.</p> <p>On the contrary the prior surety has a right to be substituted to the right of the creditor against the subsequent surety to the full amount which he may be compel led to pay.— Parse,:s vs Brid-dock, 2 Vernon, 603; 5 Damn,244; 2 B. Mon. 305; 12 ibid.;</p>

<p>Error to the Rockcastle Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 78.</p>

<p> Descents. Dower. Infants' real estate. </p> <p>The question fot decision, & statute on which, it depends.</p> <p>Though Iheñlh section of the act or 1796 vl. Stat. 563.) hoes not expressly declare that the persons therein named, upon the exclusion of the mother, shall in hem an infant’s real estate, vet it is necessarily implied that, (.lie brothers and sisters, and others named, shall in herit on the ex-elusion of (he mother.</p> <p>The mother is entitled to dower in the real estate of infants, descended from the father; nor is she barred by having purchased from the grandfather of the infant, upon the death of the latter, supposing him to be ihe heir at law. Neither a widow or her tenant is bound for rents for the occupancy of the mansion, and. until dower be assigned.</p>

<p> Assumpsit. Limitation. Executors and Administrators. </p> <p>A promise by one executor to pay the debt of the testator, is sufficient to do away the eftect of a bar by limitation and authorize an action against two executors or administ’Ts. Or an action against an administrator de. bonis non, in case of the death of the executor or administrator. (4 Monroe, 36; 16 Mass Re'p. 429; Angel on Lim. 278.)</p>

<p> Slaves. Case. Bailment. </p> <p>The substance-of the prooí.</p> <p>From the fact that a master occasionally permitted his slave to do jobs for his own profit, it can not be inferred that he consented that he should engage in the hazardous enter-prize of swimming a horse— and the employ, ment of a slave in such an undertaking was a wrongful act, rendering the per.-on so employing him liable for any loss which might be regarded as the natural & proximate consequence thereof.</p> <p>One who employs the slave of another in a hazaidons business, without the consent of the owner is liable for any loss that may aim, though it might be the lack of skill in the slave that produced the injury.</p> <p>'Une who employs a slave withouL the consent of the owner, is liable for the loss of the ■«lave, even wilh- • out willful misconduct or culpable negligence t2 Rictmrdsarl’s S. Carolina Reports, 455; Wright vs Bray, 2 Bay. -464)— where the slave was induced to ride a race in which he was hilled. Cases to the same purport cited, 2Richard-sn’sS. Carotina Rpps. 613; Ban-son vs Berhly, ShoharVs Law ¿ftps. S. 0. 525*</p>

<p>Error to the Washington Circuit.</p> <p>Appeaw</p> <p>Case 82f</p> <p>Case stated,-</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 83.</p> <p>Case stated.</p> <p>Error to the Washington Circuit.</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 84.</p> <p>Error TO THE NeXSON CoÚNTY CotTRT.</p>

<p>For. En.&c.</p> <p>Case 85.</p> <p>Case stated.</p> <p>Error to the Washington Circuit.</p>

<p> Curtesy. Femes covert. </p> <p>A conveyance by an In Ian L feme covert is void.</p> <p>A mother conveyed to her son a tract of land, reserving to herself “ the right to reside on the land during her life, or so long as she may think proper;” the son died, the mother still living, leaving an. infant daughter, his only child, who married, & willi her husband, she being still an infant, united in a conveyance of the land; it is re-conveyed to the husband of the daughter, who makes a mortgage of il; and again the husband and wile make a second mortgage, the latter being still an infant, the mother,who first conveyed, being still living. Suit brought to foreclose the mortgages. The infant feme covert answeis, setting lip and relying upon her infancy, and dies; her children, being infants by guardian ad litem, rely upon the same ground of defence.— Held, that Ihe life estate of the first grantor still existing, that the husband of the heir oí the first grantee, who made the mortgage, never was seized — was not tenant by the curtesy, and that there was no interest upon which the mortgage could operate, and that no title passed by deed or mortgages.</p> <p>A husband of tenant in remain, der held not to have such seizure during the pendency of the life estate as to mahe him tenant by the curtesy.</p>

<p>Error to the Garrard Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 87.</p> <p>Case stated,</p>

<p> Trespass. Tenants. Possession. </p> <p>Une may stand upon his own land and be guilty of a trespass upon the land of his neighbor, by throwing stones upon his neighbor’s ground, or with a pole or rail reaching o■ver upon anoAh•er.</p> <p>When one joins his fence to another, and it is acquiesced in for severalyears,the former will be tenant from year to year, and the latter may not, without notice to remove the fence, disunite the fences, to the injury of the crop of the former, without being guilty of a trespass.</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 89.</p> <p>Error to the Nelson Circuit.</p>

<p>Error to the Rus sere Circuit.</p> <p>Ejectment.</p> <p>Case 8S.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Error to the Spencer Circuit.</p> <p>Debt.</p> <p>Case 89.</p> <p>Case stnted ani pleadings,</p>

<p>Fokc. Det.</p> <p>Case 90.</p> <p>Cas*e stated.</p> <p>Appeal from the Jefferson Circuit.</p>

<p> Physicians. Assumpsit. Evidence. </p> <p>T. . „ , , . It 13 the duty of physicians who "enu^infeoSd r¡sehase3fe<wheu t0 ““end not so inflicted, p°r e’e^uiionary proved 10 be necessary to prevent its e ommunication ¿5539> fonpp^?p-3209’ The fact thata a was^cabed w¿° iphe'was®attemi j“|ea®yd Paliei“3 small-pox, that would bT^'is-pejlsfd wilh ?nd another employed and he failed’ wasden attending andpiomfsednot-i bm con turned to attend, anddid-commu-pox to the pa-^evUencewgo t®.the jury on a the charge for «cover üiedam-age3,</p> <p>A physician who comm unicates to his patient an infectious _ disease is responsible for damages for the suffering, loss of time and danger to which the patient may be sub jected—argu.</p> <p>The modem doctrine allows a defendant in an. action of as-sumpsit to remit or reduce a recovery on the ground of a breach of warranty or a false and fraudulent representation in the same eon-traot—argu: See Culver vs Blake (6 B. Mon. 528) as a physician called to attend a patient for fever, and comma nicating «mall-for t« hi« pa-lient may have his bill reduced, by proof showing that longer attention was necessary and the bill in consequence of the small-pox being communicated— Chitty on contracts, supra.</p>

<p>APPEAL PROM THE MeRCER CIRCUIT.</p> <p>Ejectment.</p> <p>Case 92.</p> <p>Case stated and judgment of tho Circuit Court.</p>

<p> Trustees. Trust Estates. </p> <p>A testator denied his property to be sold and proceeds divided a Aft tin part coming to his son. to ie-main in the hands of his executor to be disposed of by him as he may deem best for the son and his heirs— Held that this Jund was subject to the payment of the debts of the son by the chancellor, ft Slat. Law, 302.)</p> <p>A slave convened to one in trust the proceeds oí Ms hire to be ap plied to the maintenance of another durins his life: Held that the interest of the cestui que trust was liable to sale under execution: (3 Bibb 3 86,) See Cosby &o., vs Furgurson 6 J. J. mar. 264 where the chancellor sub-lected the properly of the trust estate: Pope’s Executors Elliot & Co., (8 B. M. 66.)</p> <p>Where-b'y a deed' oí trust or other instrument, a beneficial entered in property or a fund ís giren, or in its issues and profits, is created, in terms oj by implication, for cestui que trust, the - property or fuñá-is liable to the demands-of cred'-r itors.</p>

<p> Sheriff’s return. Trover. Evidence. </p> <p>A sheriff by levy ing an execution upon personal property, acquires such an interest as authorizes him to maintain trover for taking it out of his possession, or where he may have left it in the defendants possession, under h>s verbal promise to deliv-*i it on request.</p> <p>The return of a sheriff that he had levied an ex execution upon property made before any s”:r. brought, is ccbj. pelent evidence in an action of trover by the sheriff to recover the possession of the property levied upon.</p>

<p> Equity jurisdiction. Mortgages. Releases. Practice in Chancel y. </p> <p>The decree of the Giicnii' Court.</p> <p>One holding the legal title and being in possession may maintain a suit in chancery to quiet his possess ion under the statute of 1756: (1 Statute Law 254,1 or upon general principles ol equity.</p> <p>An exhibit set out in an amended. bill, ' and stated to be known to the defendants to be genuine, and which is not answered will be regarded, at the hearing as genuine.</p> <p>A release to mortgagor o: property -mort; gaged, from all farther Habilip or for the debts which the mort gage was intend ed to secare i: a release of thi' mortgaged prop i©rty.</p> <p>If laud be mortgaged to secure a debt, and the debt be paid, the legal title revests in the mortgagor, (t Mar. 53, 7 J. J. Mar. 257.) l)y analogy the teleased of the debt should have the same legal effect: (See Hawkins’ heirs vs. King, 2 Mar. 109.) Such will be the effect lliough there had been a decree for sale to satisfy the mortgage debt.</p> <p>A deed convoying more land by its terms than the grantor had a right to convey, might bs effectual only to convey so much as he might lawfully convey.</p>

<p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 95.</p> <p>Case stated.</p> <p>Appeal from the Knox Circuit.</p>

<p>Assumpsit.</p> <p>Case 96.</p> <p>Case stated and decree of the Circuit Court.</p> <p>Appeal prom the Farniclin Circuit.</p>

<p> Evidence. Verdict. Shop Books. </p> <p>Enfries made in shop books made by disinterested clerks, have in some cases been held to be competent evidence for the shop own ers, when lhe nature of the case is such as to render better evidence unattainable. And in some eases has been extended to entries made by a party himself, though such proof should be made with great caution, and nev er to prove the payment of any note or money due: (1 Yeates 347. 4 Muss. Hep. 231.</p> <p>An entry by a merchant marie by himself of the giving a note, and the payment thereof, after his death — held to be incompetent evidence for his partner in a suit upon the nole to show payment.</p> <p>A verdict under the code of prac tice, (sec. 371,) finding lor the debt in the petition mentioned, is sufficiently certain.</p>

<p>ClIANCERY.</p> <p>Case 98.</p> <p>Case stated.</p> <p>Error to tiie Madison County Court.</p>

<p> Devises. Wills. Remainders, vested and contingent. </p> <p>A devise to one ior life, and at the death of tenant for life, the land devised to be sold and the proceeds divided amongst the testator’s children, gives a vested in terestin the land to the children to be enjoyed in futuie: Arnold’s ex’on. vs Arnold’s adm’r., (11 B. Monroe, 89.) Williamson’s ex’ors. 767. (5 Dana, 43d.)</p>

<p>Or. Petiton</p> <p>Case 100.</p> <p>Caso sta'ed.</p> <p>Error to the Franklin Circuit.</p>

<p>Petition.</p> <p>Case 101.</p> <p>Case slated.</p> <p>Error to the Hickman Circuit.</p>

<p> Towns. Dedications to public use. Trusts. </p> <p>' Defense set up in the answer.</p> <p>A dedication of ground in the ¡Ulterior of a town 1o public use as a public square, by conveyance for such pm pose to the jnsfieesof the County Co'vt upon condition that it be used as a public square, passed no title for the benefit of the County upon the Temoval of the seat of justice, but a right vests in trust for the benefit of (be town for public pmposes: Wide-lif/e vs City of Lexington.</p> <p>James Taylot in-1795 laid off Newport, and laid off a public square in 1796, mid conveyed the squat e to the Justices of Camp bell county, tq be held and use4 as a public square for public uses and purposes so long as the seat of justice continued at that place. In 1840, the seat of justice was removed from Newport: Held that the conveyance being intrust for public purposes, and the seat of justice being removed, that a trust resulted iq favor of the town for public jmrpo-. ses.</p>

<p>Slaves. Emancipation. Habeas Corpus.</p> <p>Though a State may have a right to declare the condition of all persons within her limits, the right only exists wMlst that per'son remain there She has not tile power of giving a condition or aiatufc i which will adhere to the perspn eveiy where—butupon his returii to the place of his dom toil, he will occupy his former position if a slave, that of a slave, ii hired as such before, and if sojourn in the other State was for a temporary-purpose only: Graham vs Stra-der, (7 B Mon. 635,) Collins vs America, (9 lb. 565. And the effect of a removal into a free State of a slavp who returns with or to his owner is to be determined by the Jaw of Kentucky, not by the bonds of the State, where the slave may hay# bepn,</p> <p>The 10 section of the Statute of Pennsylvania, of 1780, is in sab. stance like the ordinance of 1787. “That there shall be no slavery or involuntary servitude within her territory,” but does not impart par. don to slaves temporarily with in their territory with their owner or their ■mailers consent.</p> <p>A statute of any non ilateholdinf Stan declaring that any «lave bro gilt into thatr. State, by his owner, though taken there for a temporary purpose only, should be instantly free, will not be enforced in Kentupky.</p> <p>A slave taken to Pennsylvania by bis owner, and t hereupon habeas corpus de‘ cline^Lto be lree witl'i liberty to go where she pleased, came back to Kentucky, with her owner. Held that the decision of the judge in Penn sylvania, was ineffectual Lo show any right to freedom in a suit lor tha purpose brought m Kentucky, by the slave especially as she did not ask the suit in Pennsylvania.</p> <p>A decision again3t the appli cant upon one suit of habeas corpus, is no bar to another suit.</p>

<p>Appeal prom the Fayette Circuit.</p> <p>Case.</p> <p>Case 104.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Error to the Madison Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 105.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Error to the Woodford Circuit.</p> <p> Case. </p> <p>Case 106,</p> <p>Cas* stated.</p>

<p> Bills of Review. Chancery. </p> <p>The rase nov i'esented forde-iision. as clahn-11 by the bill.</p> <p>The defence relied upon in the answer.</p> <p>Tliough a bill may not be called a bill of review, yet if it describe the case» folly and rely upon an important fact discovered since the decree and that there was no negligence in npt discovering it, and which fadt should produce a different decree, and it is sought to correct the former dp, cree and it h»s been so treated by the Circuit Court, it should be entertained a? a bill of review in this Qtjurt, though the is*, eori be not ax-pressly made part of it.</p> <p>Tlie established rule’in chancery proceeding, is that though the specific prayer of the bill be inappropriate, yet the Court may and will, upon, the general pray er, grant such re lief as the allegations and proof required. And if the el»> ject of the bill is to injoin a decree in whole or in part, or for repayment of money under a de-oree, it is in effect a bill in the nature of a bill of review, though it may not in terms pray for a review.</p> <p>The chancellor will# not sustain a bill of review for the discovery of a foot which mi§hl have been and should have been discovered before the decision of the case and which the point involved was decided by the Circuit Court and affirmed .by the Court of Ap. peals.</p> <p>Upon the hearing of a bill ot review it clearly-appearing that-plaintiff in tie first suit had obtained a decree for a greater sum, than he was entitled io, and the-facts showing, that the decree to that ex tent,, should not have-been rendered' rested in the knowledge of the complainant, and not of the de f e ndant’s know ledge.— Held that the Court should grant relief by injoining the ex cess perpetually"</p>

<p>Error to the Kenton Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case lOS.</p> <p>Case slated and proceedings had in the fiutsuin</p>

<p> Equity Jurisdiction. Corporations. Possessory title. </p> <p>Demurrer ot defendants to th» - bill and antvret.</p> <p>Commissions:’» *8 'ort, deore* and app»a’.</p> <p>One having title to land and being in possession, may stie any person setting up claim thereto: (Slat. Law 249.)</p> <p>Though the trustees of Frankfort have the right to keep the streets and alleys open,they have not the right under pretence of doing so, to encroach upon the property o,f the citizen.</p> <p>The trustees of Frankfort may maintain trespass for injuries done to streets & alleys: (Slot. Law, 294, §7.)</p> <p>An injunction! may properly be granted against s corporation to prevent an abuso of its authority: (2 Story's Eq., 928, and 929.)</p> <p>If a private citizen take & hr d pusses- io i of a sireet or alter in a town and old it claiming ii a3 his own for kG ycirs, the am-píete title ’* vesied in en. h oilizen, or tho e holding in d F him and if h s riaht is qnestioied may maintu n his bill to quiet his possession.</p>

<p>Appeal from tiie Logan Circuit.</p> <p>Will Case.</p> <p>Case 110.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Error to the Fayette Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery,</p> <p>Case 111.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Error to tiif. Jessamine Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 112.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Error to the Franklin Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 113.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>

<p>Error to the Bourbon Circuit.</p> <p>Chancery.</p> <p>Case 114.</p> <p>Case stated.</p>