Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 16.pdf/329

 284

77/6' G feen Bag.

chemists, that the stain was not caused by human blood. The State's contention is dis proved and the damned spot" becomes as harmless as a splash of red paint. If it be desired to go further and corroborate the accused, blood from the rabbit treated with hog's blood is placed in a second tube con taining a portion of the salt solution. If precipitation occurs, the witness is cor roborated, and his general veracity strength ened. If not, he was lying, but the lie can have little effect upon the immediate ques tion, since the other test eliminated the stain altogether as evidence. SPEAKING of legislative measures with re spect to gambling in option" and "future" contracts in foods stuffs and agriculture produce, The Law Times says: It appears that, with the exception of Aus tria, Germany, and Norway, in no country does any special legislation exist which deals with the matter. But in those three coun tries statutes expressly prohibiting such gambling have been passed; while in the Argentine Republic, Greece, the Nether lands, and Spain there seems to be sufficient power, without further direct enactment, to frustrate transactions which constitute a gamble or depend on illegal speculative en gagements. A Bill relating to the offence has been before the Belgian Senate, and also before the Legislature of France; but, so far, nothing has been done in the matter. And in the United States of America, although various Bills have been introduced, none ap parently has as yet passed into law. Mani festly, however, it is only a question of time for all Governments to act in checking the evil, and that of the United Kingdom will not wisely be behind the others. There will

be no novelty in the proceeding. Engross ing of the market was in this country an offence by the common law; and ''forestallers" and "regrators" met with scant consid eration in the Middle Ages. Any attempt to buy up and "corner" the necessaries of life, for the purpose of selling them again at a dearer price, was repressed with a high hand in those days; and, in the interests of the public generally, none the less should it be so now. THE recent Iroquois theatre fire in Chi cago has given rise to a number of legal questions, which are discussed in several law journals. On the "Liability of Municipality for Fail ure of Its Officers to Enforce Ordinances," the Central Laic Journal (February 26) savs: Coming now to the exact question before us, t. e,. the liability of municipal corpora tions for negligence in the enforcement of municipal ordinances, we find the law to be settled, though not without some dissent, against the imposition of such liability. The reason of the rule that a municipal corpora tion cannot be held liable for the non-action of its officers in this regard is stated to rest on the principle of ultra vires—the city not being held liable where the non-action of its officers is contrary to the will of the corpora tion, as expressed in its ordinances. Case and Comment for February says : The law seems to be well settled, in most jurisdictions, at least, that the failure of a city to enforce ordinances enacted in the ex ercise of the police power will not render it liable for damages caused by their non-en forcement. The Albany Law Journal for March takes the same view.