Along

By the length of, as distinguished from across. 119 111. 225.

By, on, up to or over, according to the subject-matter and context Church v. Meeker, 34 Conn. 425; Walton v. B 67 Mo. 58; l B. & AdoL 448; Benton v. Horaley, 71 Ga. 619; Stevens v. k. Co., 34 N. J. L. 532, 3 Am. Rep. 269; id., 21 X. J. Eq. 259; but not necessarily touching at all points; Com. v. Franklin, 133 Mass. 569.

This term means “by,” “on,” or “over,” according to the subject-matter and the context. 34 Conn. 425; 1 Barn. & Adol. 448; 67 Mo. 58.

Over against in length; lengthwise of. Compare By, 1; Parallel. " By the length of, as distinguished from across; lengthwise of; " as, a railway along a highway.''' " - A sidewalk " along the line " of land does not import that the sidewalk must at all points touch or be parallel to such line."* " Along a line " means up to, extending to, reaching to, that line.^ In the expression " on, over, and along " an alley, is synonymous with on or over, not by the side of.^ An insurable interest on property of a railroad " p.long its route " means property in proximity to the rails upon which the engines run: which may be outside the lines of the roadway or lawfully within those lines. ^ " Along the bank " of the Chattahoochee is definite enough to exclude the idea that any part of the river or its bed was not to be witliin the State of Georgia — by the cession of her unsettled territory to the United States in 1802. The call excludes the idea that a line was to be traced at the edge of the water as tliat may beat onetime or another; — itisfor"the bank," the fast land which confines the water of the river in its channel or bed in its whole width. Wherever the bed may be it belongs to Georgia, and not to Alabama. The line Is to be determined, in each trial, by the jury. '° 1 Barney v. City of Keokuk, 94 U. S. 337 (1876), Bradley, J. See also New Orleans v. United States, 10 Pet. 717 (1836); 16 F. E. 816. = Saulet V. Shepherd, 4 Wall. 508 (1866). 3 People ex rel. Swiss Society v. Commissioners of Taxes, 36 Hun, 311 (1885): Webster. 1 Salem Capital Hour Mills Co. v. Stayton Water- Ditch* Ca,nal Co., 33 F. E. 164 (1887). ' County of Cook v. Great Western E. Co., 119 lU. 225 (1886): Webster. • Commonwealth v. Franklin, 133 Mass. 570 (1882). 'Benton v. Horsley, 71 Ga. 626 (1883;. "Heath v. Des Moines, &c. E. Co., 61 Iowa, 14- (1883). » Grand Trunk E. Co. v. Eichardson, 91 U. S. 472 AIiS. See Altos, Alios. AIjSO. In wills, most frequently points out the beginning of a new devise or bequest. Imports no more than "item," and may mean the same as " moreover," but not the same as "in like manner."! Compare Likewise. AIiTEE.2 To make a thing diflerent from what it was; as, by cutting out a brandmark.' The word implies "another." A thing which ceased to exist can in no proper sense be said to be " altered. " If altei'ed it has merely changed its form or nature, but still has an existence. Thus, in forgery making may be by an original fabrication or by merely changing a thing already made into another thing. An altered note is still a note.* To " alter judicial districts " means to change them. It is not a violation of usage to speak of the increasing or diminishing of a given number as an alteration or change in the number.' Alteration. 1. A change or substitution of one thing for another: as, the alteration of a way.6 See Addition, 1. 2. An act done upon an instrument by which its meaning or language is changed. If what is written or erased has no tendency to produce this result or to mislead it is not an "alteration." The term applies to the act of the party entitled under the instrument and imports some fraud or improper design to change its effect. The act of a stranger is a mere "spoliation" or mutilation of the instrument, and does not change its legal operation as long as the original writing remains legible, and, if it be a deed, any trace of the seal remains.' Material alteration. Such alteration as changes the language or meaning of the contract in a material particular. Immaterial alteration. Such merely verbal change as does hot vary the contract in an essential particular.8 Suspicioiis -alteration. Such change, apparent upon inspection, as would lead a man of ordinary caution to infer that the instru- > Evans v. Knorr, 4 Rawle, 68-70 (1883), cases; 22 ni. 366., = L. L. alterare; L. alter, other, another. ' Smith V. Brown, 1 Wend. 236 (1838). » Haynes v. State, 15 Ohio St. 467 (1804). 6 People V. Sassovich, 29 Cal. 4S4 (186G). » Johnson v. Wyman, 9 Gray, 189 (1837), Shaw, C. J. ^[1 Greenl. Ev. §566. ment had been illegally tampered with; or such apparent change in the language as would deter such person from accepting the instrument as reliable evidence of indebtedness or of an oblfgation. That is a "material alteration'' which causes the instrument to speak a language different in legal effect from what it originally spoke; i or which gives the instrument a different legal effect.^ A material alteration made without consent after execution avoids the instrument; but not so as to words which the law would supply. The question of materiality is for the coiu't. If attested as made before execution does not detract from credit; nor, if it is against the interest of the holder. If suspicious upon its face, the law presumes nothing, but leaves questions of time, person, and intent, to the decision of a jury. If immaterial, presumed to have been made before execution. But some authorities require explanation before any altered instrument can be admitted in evidencp.^ It will not be presumed that a party would sign a, document with material clauses interlined or in the margin. The rule is strict as to negotiables. The burden of explaining alterations in ancient writings is not imposed when they are taken from their proper repository. Formal blanks may always be filled.* The material alteration of a written contract by a party to it discharges a party who does not authorize or consent to the alteration, becaiise it destroys the identity of the contract and substitutes a different agreement. Any change which alters the contract, whether increasing or diminishing liability, is " material." ' Some authorities hold that where there are no particular circumstances of suspicion the presumption of law is that the alteration was made contemporaneously with the execution, giving as a reason that a deed cannot be altered after its execution without fraud, which is never assumed without proof; other authorities hold the presumption to be the other way, and require an explanation of the alteration before the deed can be admitted in evidence.' In the absence of proof the presumption is that a correction by erasure in a deed (a patent to land) was made before execution. This doctrine rests upon principle. " A deed cannot be altered after it is executed without fraud or wrong; and the presumption is against fraud or wrong.'' The cases are not uniform in this country, but the most stringent ones leave the question to the jury.' 1 1 Greenl. Ev. § 505; 0 Baxt. 402. 2Eckert v. Piokel, 59 Iowa, 547-48 (1882); 51 id. 675; 30 Minn. 154; 76 Va. 545, 544; 18 Ot. 01. 565, 3 1 Greenl. Ev. §§ 564-08; 01 Ala. 269; 2 Bl. Com. 303. « 1 Whart. Ev. §§ 621-33, ?32, cases. 'Mersraan v. Werges, 112 U. S. 141 (1884), cases, Gray, J.; Angle v. Northwestern Mut. Life Ins. Co., 92 id. 342(1875). A voluntary alteration of any instrument under seal, in a material part, to the prejudice of the obligor or maker, avoids it — Unless done with the assent of the parties affected. Such act differs from spoliation by a stranger, or accidental alfteration by mistake, in which case the instrument retains its effect. In respect to commercial paper the rule is more stringenjb, the la'W casting on the holder the burden of disproving any apparent material alteration on the face of the paper. The ground of the rule is public policy to insure the protection of the instrument from fraud and substitution. The purpose is to take away the motive for alteration by forfeiting the instrument on discovery of the fraud. 1 See Forge, 2; Note, 2, Raised; Katifioation. AIiTEENATIVE.2 Offering a choice between two acts, courses, or things: as, an alternative— covenant, obligation, judgment. An alternative writ commands the respondent to do a certain, thing or show cause why he should not do it: as, an altei-native TnandamiLS,^ q. v. Alternative pleadings are ill; and alternative judgments, decrees, and sentences are, as a rule, invalid. See Or, 2; Relief, 3.