The Supreme Court of Indiana.

103 Ind. 314, involved the right to recover for damages sustained from an unforeseen cause after a right of way had been con demned and paid for. The discussion in this case is peculiarly satisfactory, and the writer does not hesitate to controvert the soundness of some recent English decisions of the Queen's Bench. Another principle enforced in this case, and in that of Sims v. The City of Frankfort, 79 Ind. 446, was that a municipality is not liable for mere error in judgment, but is responsible for negligence in devising the plan of a public improvement. The illustration used in this opinion — of the plan of covering a sewer with weeds — has been used by several courts, and at least by two writers of wide reputation. Binford v. Johnston, 82 Ind. 426, was another case of negligence of a toy-vender in selling a toypistol to a child, with which pistol a second child was accidentally shot by letting it fall when loaded upon the floor. The vendor was held liable. In Billman v. The Indianapolis, etc. Co., 76 Ind. 166, the right to recover for damages sustained by reason of negligence occasioned by an intervening agency is discussed in a very satisfactory manner; and this is followed • in the recent case of Louisville, etc. R. R. Co. v. Nitsche, 126 Ind. 229. The decisions of the court while he has been on the bench have been very numerous, and a practitioner in that State has very little need of going beyond these decisions for an authority. The Midland Ry. Co. v. Wilcox, 122 Ind. 84, and Farmers' Loan and Trust Co. v. The Canada etc. Co., 127 Ind. 250, involved difficult questions concerning the enforcement of a mechanic's lien against a railroad, questions of first impression in this State. In Carr v. Coetlosquet, 127 Ind. 204, is discussed at great length the obligation of a State, and the power to enforce it to pay its obliga tions. In The State v. The Indiana, etc. Co., 120 Ind. 575, it is decided for the first time that natural gas is an article of commerce, and that its transportation beyond the boundaries of the State cannot

271

be prohibited by statute. The case of The Rushville, etc. Co. v. The City of Rushville, 121 Ind. 206, was decided a short time after the majority in the Federal House of Repre sentatives was insisting upon the right to count as present, in order to make a quorum, those present who refused to vote and did not answer the roll call. It announced the principle contended for by the majority, and attracted wide attention at that time. The case of The State v. Haworth, 122 Ind. 462, involved the constitutionality of a law author izing the State to superintend the supply of school-books, to let out the contract of fur nishing them to private individuals, and for bidding the use of any other in the public schools of the State. It presented many dif ficult questions, but was upheld in an able opinion. Judge Elliott and his only son are the joint authors of " The Work of the Advocate," published in 1888, a practical treatise con taining suggestions for preparation and trial. They are also the joint authors of " Roads and Streets," published in 1890. Both these works have had a very wide sale. During the present year Judge Elliott and his son have published a large work on Appellate Procedure, a work of great value to the pro fession. His address, in August, 1890, before the National Bar Association, on " Local Self-Government," attracted wide attention. Walter Olds. The subject of this sketch was born in Morrow County, Ohio, Aug. 11, 1846. While attending the common-schools of his county, he enlisted in the One hundred and seventyfourth Ohio Volunteers. After his return from the army he attended college until 1867, and then studied law until 1869, when he was admitted to the bar and moved to Co lumbia City, Ind. He continued there in the practice, and in 1876 was elected State Sen ator, serving during the sessions of 1877 and 1879. In 1884 he was elected judge of the Circuit Court, overcoming a decided adverse political majority. In 1888, over two years