of the latter's infancy, but to be merely a rescission of the With this case is a note collating the authorities

contract.

as to insurance on the life of a minor.

The loss to be made good under a policy of fire insurance is held, in Pennsylvania Co. v. Philadelphia Contributionship (Pa.), 57 L. R. A. 510, not to be limited to the cost of replacing the structure described in the survey, if, when the fire -occurs, the statutes require, as a condition of rebuilding, more substantial and expensive structural work.

A policy insuring a railway company against loss from liability to persons who should accidentally “sustain personal injuries" on its road under circumstances which impose upon the insured a common law or statutory liability for the injuries is held, in Worcester and S. Street R. Co. v. Travellers' Ins. Co. (Mass.), 57 L. R. A. 629, not to cover cases of instantaneous death without conscious suffering through injuries for which insured is responsible, where the statutes give a new right of action to the personal representative in case of death, and not a right of action to deceased, which survives.

An agreement by an applicant for life insurance, that the medical examiner appointed and paid by the insurer shall be the agent of the applicant in recording the medical examination, is held, in Sternaman v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (N. Y.), 57 L. R. A. 318, to be prohibited by public policy.

An insurance company is held, in Taylor v. Anchor Mut. F. Ins. Co. (Iowa), 57 L. R. A. 328, not to be able to defeat liability on its policy because of misrepresentations in the application as to the title to the property or the incumbrances thereon, if they were correctly stated to the agent and he failed to make out the application in accordance with the information given.

Master and Servant.-The negligent act of a foreman with general control and authority to employ and discharge. workmen, in ordering a subworkman upon an elevator, and himself operating the elevator with negligence, to the workman's injury, is held, in Swift & Co. v. Bleise (Neb.), 57 L. R. A. 147, not to be the act of a fellow-servant, but of a vice-principal.

injury received by a young man seventeen years old while helping brakesmen, at their request, to load a piano, is held, in Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Finnell (Ky.), 57 L. R. A. 266, to be within the rule which exempts the master from liability to one who is injured while helping his servants, at their request, by reason of their negligence.

Negligence. A presumption of negligence on the part of an electric company is held, in Boyd v. Portland General Electric Co. (Or.), 57 L. R. A. 619, to arise when injury results to a traveller in a public street from one of its live wires, which has broken and is hanging so near the ground as to be within reach therefrom.

Proof that an electric-light wire controlled by a private corporation, and normally suspended upon poles along a public street, was trailing broken on the sidewalk, is held, in Newark Electric Light and Power Co. v. Ruddy (N. J. Err. & App.), 57 L. R. A. 624, to afford a presumption of negligence, in a suit against such corporation by a person injured through electric shock by coming in contact with such wire.

From the fact that a quiet, gentle horse was left standing untied in the public street, free from the presence of anything which might frighten or disturb him, it appearing that the driver had been accustomed to use the horse in that way for many years without an accident, it is held, in Belles v. Kellner (N. J. Err. & App.), 57 L. R. A. 627, that no inference can arise that the act was negligent.

Nuisance. The maintenance of a tower by a landowner on his land in such a way that ice formed on it, from freezing rain or spray from a cataract, falls on to adjoining property so as to injure it and endanger human life, is held, in Davis v. Niagara Falls Tower Co. (N. Y.), 57 L. R. A. 545, to be properly enjoined.

Will.-Revocation of a will is held, in Cutler v. Cutler (N. C.), 57 L. R. A. 209, to be effected by adopting its mutilation as such.

VOL. XXIII. C.L.T.

3

BOOK REVIEWS.

MacMurchy and Denison's Canadian Railway Cases.—A selection of cases affecting railways recently decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, the Supreme and the Exchequer Courts of Canada, and the Courts of the Provinces of Canada, with notes and comments, by Angus MacMurchy and Shirley Denison, of Osgoode Hall, Toronto, Barristers-at-law. Volume 1: Toronto: The Canada Law Book Co.: 1902.

This work will be found of great practical value to the active practitioner in the Courts throughout Canada.

It covers substantially the heads under which on circuit most railway cases range themselves.

The most fruitful source of litigation, and the one in which solicitors are oftenest consulted, so far as railways are concerned, is:

Injuries at railway crossings. Upon examination of the cases collected upon this subject, one is struck with the completeness with which the compilers have covered the ground. No counsel could usefully add anything to the collection made, either upon the various ways in which the plaintiff can frame his case to cover neglect of the company, or upon the manner in which he can utilize such alleged neglect as a shield for his own admitted neglect to use his senses of sight and hearing. The inclusion of the Quebec authority, Girouard v. Canadian Pacific R. W. Co., at p. 343, is, perhaps, a mistake, as it gives an entirely erroneous view of railway law, which had crept into Quebec jurisprudence, and which the decision of Roy v. Canadian Pacific R. W. Co., by the Privy Council, reported at p. 196, has corrected. However, the case shews an ingenious endeavour to throw the whole question of what is or is not the duty of the railway company into the hands of the jury and leave the company to the " vicarious sympathy of the twelve." Whatever the rules which bind the company are, they should be settled by statute or rules framed under ss. 214-222 of the Railway Act, and no rule which might be so passed by Parliament or the Governor-in-Council could be so oppressive as the uncertainty of what might or might not

be considered proper by twelve jurors utterly ignorant of the considerations involved in the question of what is proper railway practice.

The next most canvassed liability in railway practice is, perhaps, that towards the employees, and here again the text contains practically every case required for actual practice. No doubt the authors will in future supplement the present work, and in doing so will add certain decisions on the construction of the Railway Act itself, under the general heading of "Working of the Railway."

The cases on the subject of the liability of railway companies as carriers, regulated as it is by s. 246, are (with the exception of Macdonald v. Grand Trunk R. W. Co., 31 O. R. 663, which seems to have been overlooked) all embraced. These are particularly valuable for the general practitioner, who is most apt to be led utterly astray by reading either English or American text books, unless he bears well in mind the distinctions between the cases under the English Railway and Canal Traffic Act, the American so-called "Public Policy" type of decision, and the decisions under our own Act. This little collection of cases under our own Act will keep the practitioner on safer ground in this country than any other work we have seen.

On the subject of rights of passengers the text is well thought out, but we should like to have seen one or two leading cases on the rights involved in taking "Pullman " passage, which is now often a very practical subject of advice, and one on which much confusing law exists.

The farmer's rights in respect of cattle and horses injured. by reason of defective fences and cattle-guards can be advised on in any respect by any person who will read the cases collected, and as this class of case is most often up in the Division Courts, where hitherto the variety of view reported as being entertained, has been most diverse, let us hope the decisions in future will, with this collection, be more consistent in different parts of the Province.

The other heads dealt with are farm crossings, jurisdiction of railway committee, fire claims, nuisances, compensation for property taken, bridges, etc., from which no case of practical value to the thorough understanding of the subject.

treated, so far as our Railway Act is concerned, has been omitted.

The book is recommended to any member of the profession who is called upon to advise on or conduct a case against a railway company in Canada, as giving him substantially all the leading cases which are of practical value upon the subjects treated.

WALLACE NESBITT.

The Impeccancy of the King.-A Study of Sovereignty, by Charles Morse, D.C.L.

This brilliant essay, a part of which was printed in the October number of the Canadian Law Times last year, has been published in pamphlet form as part of Transactions No. 3 of the Ottawa Literary and Scientific Society.

The Madras Legal Companion.-Edited by P. Vencata Rau. Vizagapatam, India: May, 1902.

The third number of an enterprising monthly legal journal, full of strange law.

The Natal Law Quarterly.-Edited by Wm. T. Lee. Durban: June, 1902.

An excellent legal periodical.

American Law Review.-Edited by Seymour D. Thompson, St. Louis, and Leonard A. Jones, Boston. St. Louis, Mo. Review Publishing Co.: November-December, 1902.

This number contains, among other interesting articles, a capital paper by Judge McClain, of the Supreme Court of Iowa, on "The Evolution of the Judicial Opinion."

Harvard Law Review.-Cambridge: The University Press: December, 1902.

"A Statement of the Trust Problem," by Robert L. Raymond, is the title of the leading article in this number.

The Legal Diary for 1902. Toronto: The Carswell Co., Limited.

A very useful book, containing much information, and large blank spaces for daily memoranda, monthly accounts, etc.