Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 16.pdf/260

 Notes of Recent Cases. than of jurisdiction. Wisconsin i>. Pelican Ins. Co., 127 U. S. 265, 291, 32 L. ed. 239, 243, 8 Supreme Court Reporter 1370; An drews i-1. Andrews, 188 U. S. 14, 36, 47 L. ed. 366, 371, 23 Supreme Court Reporter 237. The Constitution does not require the State of New York to give jurisdiction to its courts against its will. If the plaintiff can find a court into which it has a right to come, then the effect of its judgment is fixed by the Con stitution. But the Constitution does not re quire the State to provide such a court. The case of Christmas v. Russell, 5 Wall. 290, 18 L. ed. 245, is distinguished. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. (CARRIERS— NEG LIGENCE—PLACE OF CONTRACT— FKDEKAI. QUES TION—INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT.) UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

In Pennsylvania Railroad Co. v. Hughes, 24 Supreme Court Reporter 132, it is held that the action of the State court in applying the lex loci contractas to a controversy as to the right of a common carrier to limit its liability for negligence to an agreed valua tion, does not present a Federal question which will sustain the jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court, the rule an nounced in Hart v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 112 United States 331, 28 L. ed. 771, 5 Supreme Court Reporter 151, in which such a contract was upheld, not being one of Federal law wherein the decision of the high est Federal tribunal is of conclusive author ity. The refusal of a State court to uphold such a contract is also held not to contravene any of the provisions of the Interstate Com merce Act of Feb. 4, 1887 (24 Stat. 379, c. 104, U. S. Сотр. Stat. 1901, p. 3154), Mis souri, K. & T. R. Co. v. Haber, 169 United States 614. 42 L. ed. 878, 18 Supreme Court Reporter 488; Smith v. Alabama, 124 United States 465, 31 L. ed. 508, i Interstate Com merce Reports 804, 8 Supreme Court Re porter 564; Cleveland, C. C. & St. Louis R. Co. v. Illinois, 177 United States 514, 44 L. ed. 868, 20 Supreme Court Reporter 722 are cited on this branch of the case, and Chi cago, M. & St. R. Co. v. Solan, 169 United

2 17

States 133, 42 L. ed. 688, 18 Supreme Court Reporter 289, is said to be virtually decisive of it. MINOR CHII.I). (PERSONAL INJURIES BY PARENT —RIC.HT TO DAMAI-.ES.) TENNESSEE SUPREME COURT.

McKelvey v. McKelvey, 77 Southwestern Reporter 664, was an action by a minor child against her father and step-mother to re cover damages for cruel and inhuman treat ment, alleged to have been inflicted by the latter. The case was dismissed on demurrer, and in sustaining this ruling the court de clares that the common law right of control vested in a parent over his minor child, in volving the subordinate right of chastise ment, results in giving the child no civil remedy against the father for personal in juries inflicted. This conclusion is reached in opposition to the statement of Judge Cooley in his work on torts (page 171) that in principle there seems to be no reason why such a right of action should not be sus tained. Howlett v. George, Ex'r, 68 Miss. 703; 9 Southern Reporter 885; 13 L. R. A. 682, is said to be the only case in which the particular question has been discussed, the ruling being hostile to the maintenance of the action. The fact that the cruel treatment was inflicted by the step-mother is immate rial in view of the joint liability of the hus band for the wife's tort. Abbott v. Abbott. 67 Maine 304, 24 Am. Rep. 27, and Phillips v. Barnett, First Q. B. D. 436, relative to the right of a wife to recover for personal injuries inflicted by the husband, are cited as furnishing some analogy to the ruling made. ORDINANCK. (POLICE REGULATION — CIRCULATION OF DODGERS—VALIDITY. NEDRASKA SUPREME COURT.

In Anderson v. State, 96 Northwestern Reporter 149, the validity of the city ordin ance making it unlawful to circulate or dis tribute dodgers, handbills, etc., on the public streets, was challenged, the contention be ing that it violated Constitution Article I,