What is bigamy? Answer (which is given ver batim et literatim) : " A pretend marag by man or women to one of the opposite sect having at the time a living companion."
NOTES.
The Bar has been curious to know why, among the symbolical figures that adorn the cen tral hall of the new Court House in Boston, "Equity" is thrust into a corner, from which but half of her person emerges, while " Guilt," " In nocence," " Fortitude," and other emblematic ladies and gentlemen stand boldly out in full relief. We believe that there is no doubt that the learned and artistic commissioners who spon sored these typical figures intended a subtle allu sion to the limited jurisdiction in equity to which the Massachusetts Court has always restricted itself, and has been coy about extending, while "Guilt " and (?) " Innocence " are to be found in full development in all the courts. This con ception is indeed worthy of the poetic nature of its authors. The transcript of a case taken on change of venue from one Indiana squire's court to another bore the following certification : — "Comes now the parties, both the plaintiff and the defendant, being represented by eminent council, namely, Ryner & McGuire for plaintiff, and Jack son & Dickson for defendant; whereupon, Jackson making a motion for a change of venue, which matter was duly supported by $1.50 in silver money, the motion was immediately granted without agree ment of council, in the name of our most merciful Lord, this 26th day of October, 1893."
It being admitted that sound is all one is able to hear; qucere, is not a judge who has heard an argument estopped from deciding that it is not sound? At the last session of the Connecticut legisla ture a law was passed forbidding the killing of deer in the state for a period of ten years, under a penalty of 11oo fine. Since then two deer have been seen at large, doubtless truants from enclosures. In this connection it may be of some
485
interest to give a copy of a law passed by the old Colonial Court of Assistants, at a session held at Hartford in May, 1677, and which also furnishes precedent to the statute which for bids the transportation of game beyond the borders of the state. The old law, which may be found in the colonial records, is as follows : — "Whereas, It is fownd to be prejudiciall to the pub : weale to transport out of this colony the skinns of bucks and dows, which are so serwiceable and vseful for cloathing, it is now ordered by this court that after the publication hereof, whosoever shall ship on board any vessel greater or lesser for trans portation, or otherwise shall transport any such skinns out of this colony, he shall forfeit the skinns so shipped, or the full value of them; the one-halfe to the complayner, and the other halfe to the county treasury; except they be shipped to be transported to another place in this county, and in such case be fore they ship them they shall give sufficient bond to the full value of the skinns so shipped that they will deliver them to such place in the colony as they pre tend to and will not transport them hence." — Forest and Stream.
A test case of a kind to gladden the hearts of th« lawyers has been brought before the French law courts by the members of a Freemason's lodge, who deposited, on the 3d of June last, a funeral crown on the statue of Joan of Arc in Rue de Rivoli, Paris. The crown was taken away by a young man named Cochin, who is being prosecuted for willful damage to a public monument. M. Cochin has secured the ser vices of Maitre Eugene Godefroy of the Paris Bar, who seems to be a remarkable adept at cas uistry. According to M. Godefroy, a crown placed on a monument ceases to be the property of the person placing it there, since it has been voluntarily given up without what is called a commerce consideration received. Neither is it the property of the city, or of the state, since the legal formalities required in the case of a deed of gift to a public body have not been complied with. It is no wonder that the judge whose fate it is to solve this knotty point has taken time to consider his decision. M. Cochin's act was prompted apparently by a desire to avenge the destruction of a similar crown placed on the same monument by the society styled the Royal ist Youth of France. — London Daily News.
