Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 21.pdf/274

 Latest Important Cases tially that on discovery of the fire its watch man endeavored to telephone, but that through the negligence of the operator no connection was established until the fire had spread to the other buildings. The Court held that the facts on which a recovery was sought were too speculative and remote. Negotiable Instruments. Liability of Indorser on Fraudulently Raised Note. N. Y. Where a promissory note was raised by the maker from $75 to $375 without the knowl edge or consent of the indorser, and the plaintiff bank discounted the note for the defendant indorser as altered, the New York Court of Appeals held Mar. 5, in National Exchange Bank v. Lester (N. Y. L. J. Mar. 15), that the indorser is not liable to a bona fide holder for the increased amount, and that the presence of open spaces inviting forgery, and the presumption that some one will commit forgery, obligating the indorser to guard against it, is not to be recognized. Nuisances. See Billboards. Procedure. Certificate of Reasonable Doubt —Appeals— Expeditious Trials. N. Y. "The test of propriety of granting a cer tificate of reasonable doubt," said the New York Supreme Court (per Marcus, J.) in People v. Meadows (N. Y. L. J. Apr. 10), in March, "is not that the judge to whom the application is made should be satisfied that the judgment will be reversed on appeal, but that questions of law are raised sufficient for the consideration of the appellate tribunal. . . "The present law, providing for a cer tificate of reasonable doubt in a proper case, has doubtless grown to some extent from a certain manifestation of public impatience with the delays that at times mark the admin istration of criminal law. Such considera tions, however, should not control judicial action. If the present mode of procedure in criminal trials, with the appeal or appeals allowed, results in undesirable delay in the enforcement of criminal law, relief should be had by legislative action in the way either of abolishing appeals altogether, which, how ever, would be undesirable, or still further expediting their disposition toward final ad judication. As it is, appeals in criminal cases are given preference upon the calendars of all appellate courts in the state. "As illustrating the danger from allowing no appeals in criminal cases, it is sufficient to note that within the past two years a

253

Court of Appeals in criminal cases has been established in England for the first time in its judicial history, where no appeal from a judgment of conviction or acquittal of the trial court formerly lay." Procedure. Mandamus to Secure Evidence of Non- Resident Witness— New Trials. Cal. A building supplied with gas was destroyed by a sudden explosion. The owner of the house recovered damages. A new trial was asked on the ground of newly discovered evi dence, which was a statement that Harry Orchard, under sentence of death in a foreign state, would testify that he had blown up the house in an attempt to assassinate one Bradley. A new trial having been denied, an appeal from the order was pending. The Superior Court had refused to have Orchard's deposition taken, and had refused, also, application to perpetuate his testimony. In Gas & Electric Co. v. Superior Court, 99 Pac. Rep. 539, the California Supreme Court held that where a trial court improperly refuses to issue a commission to take the deposition of a non-resident witness pending an appeal for use in a new trial in the event of a re versal, mandamus will lie to compel its issu ance, an appeal from the order denying the application being an inadequate remedy. The issue is not whether the testimony of such witness will be material to the issues already tried, but whether it will be material to a new trial. Public Morals. Bible as Evidence—Liquor Trade. Conn. In the endeavor to defeat the granting of a liquor license appellant urged that the sale of intoxicating liquors was so destructive to the public health and so inherently immoral that no law upholding it was valid. He further contended that the Bible condemns the sale of intoxicating liquors as a beverage, and therefore the state cannot permit it on any terms. In Appeal of Allyn, 71 Atl. Rep. 794, the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors held that even when in the early history of the state the Bible was a rule of political government, it was never considered to con tain any absolute prohibition of such a busi ness. Public Morals. Swedenborgian Doctrines— Devise Against Public Policy. Pa. A devise for the benefit of an educational institution, to enable it to teach the doctrines