Page:Black's Law Dictionary (Second Edition).djvu/27

Rh this term refers to the fund which the company has in excess of its capital and liabilities. Trenton Iron Co. v. Yard, 42 N. J. Law, 357; People's F. ins. Co. v. Parker, 35 N. J. Law, 575; Mutual Ben. L. Ins. Co. v. Utter, 34 N. J. Law, 4239; Mills v. Britton, 64 Conn. 4. 29 Ati. 231, 24 L. R. A. 536.

When an executor or other trustee masses the rents, dividends, and other income which he receives, treats it as a capital, invests it. makes a new capital of the income derived therefrom, invests that, and so on, he is said to accumulate the fund, and the capital and accrued income thus procured constitute accumulations. Hussey v. Sargent, 116 Ky. 53, 75 S. W. 211; in re Rogers' Estate. 179 Pa. 009. 36 AH. 340: Thorn v. De Breteull, 86 App. Div. 405, S3 Y. Supp. 849.

That which accu- mulates, or is heaped up: additional. Said of several things heaped together, or of one thing added to another.

Accumulative judgment. Where a person has already been convicted and sentenced, and a second or additional judgment, is passed against him, the execution of u-hich is postponed until the completion of the fiist sentence. such second judgment is said to be accumulative.

Accumulative legacy. A second, double, or additional legacy; a legacy given in additinn to another given by the same instru- ment, or by another instrument.

Aocusiu-e nemo se debet, nisi cox-um Dec. No one is bound to accuse himself, ex- cept before God. See Hardres, 139.

A formal charge against ii person, to the effect that he is guilty of a punishable olfense, laid before a court or maglstiute having jurisdiction to inquire into the alleged crime. See Aconsn.

Accusator post rational-rile tenipus non est audienflus, nisl se Irene de omissione excusaverit. Moore. 81']. An accuser ought not to be heard after the expiration of a reasonable time, unless he can account satisfactorily for the delay.

To bring a formal charge against a person, to the eflect that he is guilty of a crime or punishable offense, before a court or magistrate having jiirisdic— lion to inquire into the alleged crime. Peo- ple v Frey, 1l2 Mich. 251. 70 N. W. 5-18; People v. Brarnan, 30 Mich. 460; Castle r. Houston, 19 Kan. 426, 27 Am. Rep. 127; Gordon v. State, 102 Ga. 673. 20 S. E. 444; Pen. Code Texas, 1895. art. 240.

In its popular sense "nccusniion" applies to all derogzitory charges or impntations, whether or not they i-einte to a punishable legal offense, and however made, whether orally, by newspaper, or othcrwise. State v. South. 5 Rich. Law (S. C.) 489; Com. v. Andrews, 132 Mass.

263; People v. ‘Bremen, 30 Mich. 460. But in legal phraseoiogy it is limited to such socusations as have taken shape in a prosecution, United States v. Patterson, 1330 U. S. 66, 14 Sup. Ct. 20, 37 L. Ed. 999.

The person against whom an accusation is made.

"Accused" is the generic name for the defendant in a criminal case, and is more appropriate than either "prisoner" or "defend- unt." 1 Car. & K. 131.

The person by whom an ac— C

cusntion is made.

The levelers in the reign of Hen. 1., who acknowledged no head or superior. Leges H. 1: Cowell. Also certain ancient heretics, who appeared about the be- ginning of the sixth century, and asserted that there was but one substance in Christ, and one nature. Vwiarton; Gibbon, Rom. Einp. ch. 47.

In Mexican law. A ditch.

channel, or canal, through which water, di-.

verted from its natural course, is conducted, for use in irrigation or other purposes.

Fr. A purchase or hergain. F

Cowell.

in old English law. A measure of corn, conjectured to have been the same with our quarter, or eight bushels. Cowell.

To own, avow, or admit; to confess; to recognize onc‘s acts, and assume the responsibility therefor.

In conveyancing. The act by winch a party who has executed an instrument of conveyance as grant- or goes before a competent officer or court, and declares or acknowledges the same as bis genuine and voluntary act and deed. The certificate of the officer on such instru- ment that it has been so acknowledged. Rogers v. Pei], 154 N. Y. 518, 49 I\'. E. Strong v. United States (D. C.) 34 Fed. 17; Burbank v. Ellis, 7 1\'eb. 156.

The term is also used of the act of a person who nvows or admits the truth of certain facts which, it established, will entail a civil liability upon him. Thus, the debtor's arlnLu1L‘lcd,(/nicnt of tile cicditor’s demand or

G

H

right of action will toil the statute of iimita- K

tions. Ft. Scott v. Hickman. 112 U. S. 150, 163, 5 Sup. Ct. 56. 28 L. Ed. 536. Adniissilm is also used in this sense. Roaues v. Archer, 4 Leigh (\'a.) 550. To denote an avowiil of criminal acts, or the concession of the truth of a criminal charge, the word "cont'ession" seems more appropriate.

Of u. child. An nvowal or admission that the child is one's own; recognition of a parental reiation, either by a written agreement

verbal declarations or statements, by the life, M