Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 10.djvu/802

* INTERPELLATION. 712 Chamber to pass judgment upon the policy of the Cabinet. This form of interrogating the Ministry occupies an important place in the parliamentary procedure of France and Italy, and is" also occasionally resorted to in other t'ontinentJil countries of Europe which have a purely |)arlianientary form of govcrnnu'nt. Any member of Parliament is free to bring for- ward an interpellation without regard to the wishes of the -Ministry. The legislative lioily lixcs the day on which the -Ministry arc to be interpellaled" on a given subject. Tln> -Min- isters then prepare their answers and make ready for a defense of their policy against the e.pectcd attack. Any member may rejily to a Jlinister, and a general debate may follow, as well as motions which may result in the resigna- tion of the Ministry. In France, of about twenty -Ministries which have resigned in conse(|uenee of an adverse vote in the Chamber of Deputies, ten have done so on account of motions growing imt of interpellations. Interpellations arou.se more general interest than the debates on im- portant measures, and one of the chief sources of a Minister's strength is his skill in answering them. Ministers are not, however, obliged to answer interpellations when such an answer might prove jirejudieial to the public interest, as in the case of diplomatic negotiations. It often •happens that the .Ministry is glad to be inter- ]>ellated. as a full disclosure of the Government's policy may strengthen its position in the estima- tion of the Chambers. In Italy tlu- method of interpellation exists in substantially the same form as in France. The rules of the Imperial (Jernian Reichstag also pro- vide for interpellations; but since the ('hancellor, to whom they arc in theory addressed, has no feat in the Reichstag, and never resigns on ac- count of legislative disapproval, the interpellation is of litle significance in German parliamentary procedure. INTERPLEADER. An equitable remedy, available to a person against whom two or more persons claim the same thing, debt, or duty, and who is, without his om fault, ignorant or in doubt as to which is the rightful claimant. It was first used in England to enable a depositary or bailee of deed in escrow of whom the grantor and grantee each demanded delivery of the deeds to himself (one affirming and the other denying that the terms or conditions h.nd been complied with) when sued by either to recover j)Ossession of the deeds, to apply to the court for an order compelling the other claimant to appear and be substituted as defendant in his stead. This relief was all that could be granted by a court of law, and was originally confined to the above class of cases. The idea was taken up by the courts of equity, and wa.s extended to cover claims of every na- ture, where the demands were identical. It be- came the prnetice to permit one who was harassed by two claimants demanding the same thing, debt, or duty, to file a bill or pleading in ecpiity set- ting forth the facts and praying that the parties be compelled to interplead, that is. to contest their claims before the court between themselves, and that the court decree which of them was justly entitled to the matter in eontrovcrsv. This was permitted irrespective of whether actions had been commenced or not. In this form the remedy exists in modern practice. The pleading by INTERPRETATION. which the complainant brings the matter before the court must set forth the following facts; ( 1 ; That two or more persons make a claim against him; {2) that they claim the same thing, debt, or duty; (y) that he has no beneficial interest in the thing or obligation elainied; and (4) that he cannot determine without hazard to himseli which is the rightful claimant, lie nmsl also show by affidavit that he is not in collusion with cither parly, and nmst allege his willingness to perform his obligation to the proper party, ilu must, therefore, be entirely inilillerent as to which clainumt .succeeds; in other words, be in the position of a stakeholder. Very abstruse questions of law often arise as to whether the parties are demanding the performance of the same obligation. For example, if a landloid and a person claiming title from an entirely dilVereiit and independent siairec, both demand rent from a tenant, he cann<it lompel lliem to interplead, as he is under a duty to iiis landlord not l(] dispule his title. Ilowevr'r, if a ])erson claiming to iiave derived his title from or through the landlord by purchase or otherwise and the landlord himself both denntnd rent, the tenant has grounds for relief, as they demand the same obligation, and he diK's not thereby dispute his landlord's origi- nal title. The relief will not be granted where it appears that the applicant knows or should know which of the claims is just, liut if there is » reasonable duld be ruiming a ]>ersonal risk to decide between tlu'ni. with the means of knowl- edge at his cimimand, it is the setlli^d practice to allow the remedy. See EQflTV; Pi.lCAniNf: ; and consilt the antlioiities there cited. INTERPOLATION (Lat. interpohilio. from inicriioliin: to alter, from inlcrpotin, inlcrpolii/i, altercroxiniate the inter- nwdiate terms bv a~-uniing a simpler relation. E.g. given h.g SO = l.tlOltO. and log 00 = 1.0.542. The lo'jarithm of 85 is approximately obtained by adding to l.no:iO one lialf (if the diflerence )ie- twecn l.!»542 iind 1.00.10. although the logarithms are in aritrunetic progression only when the nini- lers arc in geometric progiession. The method of interpolation is not only of use in pure analy- sis, but it is particularly valuable in prol)lems of astronomy, and other seiences. often saving lalio- rious calculation. Thus, the i>osition of thi' moon for any hour may be d<'termined by interpolation from its computed positions for every 3. 0. or 1'2 hours, with sulTicient acruracv for practical pur- poses. Methods of interpolation for astronomical problems are found in Lagrange's memoirs of 1783. 1702. 1703. INTERPRETATION (T.at. Inlr^rprelnlio. r- planation. from itiUrprrlori. to explain, from in- frrprm. agent, interpreter), or CoNSTRrcTioN-. The process of ascertaining, subject to the rules o! law. the meaning of a speaker or a writer, or of parties to a legal instrument, as expressed in the spoken or written terms. Some authorities distinffuish construction from interpretation: using the latter term to describe the proeess of finding out the tnie sense of any form of words, and applying the former to the process of ascer-