NOTES OF RECENT CASES

' ' greaser, ' ' while being transported by his employer to his place of work, was injured by a derailment of the car. On the ground that he had paid his fare by a ticket given by the company and that he was going to his work it was contended that he was not a passenger. The Supreme Judicial Court of Maine held that although the ticket was given him by the company for that ride he had paid for it by his services. It was part of his wages and delivered to him as such. It could make no difference in his status as a passenger whether he paid his fare in cash or in tickets thus earned. This is a plain case. The employee is accepted as a passenger without regard to the nature of the consideration. It is not the case of an employee on duty. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. (Initiative and Referendum.) Okl. — The initiative and referen dum provisions of the Oklahoma Constitution are discussed in Ex parte Wagner, 95 Pac. Rep. 435. The relator was convicted on December 20, 1907, of violating an ordinance which was passed and officially published on December 12, but on December 18 a petition was presented to the Mayor demanding a referendum vote on the ordi nance and requesting that it be held in abeyance until the election could be held. The legislation making effective the provisions of the constitution was not adopted until April, 1908. The question to be determined was whether the initiative and referendum provisions of the constitution were self executing. The Court concludes that they were not, and until they were made effective by legislation a petition for a referendum filed with the mayor was of no effect. The writ of habeas corpus presented by relator was consequently denied. CONSTITUTIONAL

LAW.

(Police

Power.)

La. — An ordinance of New Orleans provides that all cows from which milk is sold shall be subjected to the tuberculin test by a health officer of the city and if such animals be incurable they shall be destroyed without compensation to the owner. In the case of City of New Orleans v. Charonleau. 46 So. Rep. 911, defendant refused to permit one of his cows to be subjected to the test for tubercu losis and was convicted under this ordinance. He contended that the city had no. authority to pass such an ordinance; that the destruction of infected cows would be a taking of property with out due process of law; that if the city had this power it could not be delegated to the board of health; that dairy cows afflicted with tuberculosis are not so serious a menace to the public health as to render them fit subjects for this extreme exercise of the police power; and lastly that he

635

must be afforded a judicial hearing before his property could be condemned. The Supreme Court of Louisiana discussed each of these con tentions, but upheld none of them. COURTS. (Conflicting Jurisdiction.) U. S. Dist. Court. Ala. — Two opinions by Judge Hundley in In re Steele, 156 Fed. Rep. 853, and 161 Fed. Rep. 886, discussing a disagreement with Judge Jones as to appointment of referees in bankruptcy were recently noted in these columns. In an opinion reported in 162 Fed. Rep. 694, under the title Ex parte Steele and Ex parte Birch, fudge Jones states the reasons leading to his action revoking the appointment of Steele and appointing Birch. Underlying the whole con tention is the question as to the construction to be placed on the Act of Congress approved Febru ary 25. 1907, providing for the appointment of a district judge for the Northern District of Ala bama, but failing to expressly limit to the Middle District only the jurisdiction of Judge Jones, who was commissioned as judge of both the Northern and Middle districts. Then, assuming that Judge Jones still holds office as a judge of the Northern as well as Middle district, a further question arises as to theauthority of one judge to act independently of the other in making appointments of court officers. Judge Jones stoutly maintains that he is still a judge for both districts and disavows any intention of interference with the orderly administration of justice. Portions of corre spondence between himself and Judge Hundley are published indicating an attempt to arrive at some satisfactory agreement relative to appointments. He states that he had called the attention of Judge Hundley to the fact that the terms of office of two referees of the district were about to expire and had suggested that some agreement be reached relative to their successors, when Steele was appointed without his knowledge arid with out consulting his wishes. The opinion contains a very interesting discussion as to the rights of judges where there are more than one in office in a district. CRIMINAL LAW. (Accessory to Suicide.) Tex. Cr. App. — The Penal Code of Texas provides that one causing the death of another by causing the latter with intent to murder, to take poison, shall be guilty of murder. It appeared in the case of Sanders v. State, 112 S. W. Rep. 68, that appellant had furnished carbolic acid to a girl with whom he had been intimate. Shortly thereafter her dead body was found with indica tions that she had taken the poison. Notwith standing the fact that no evidence was introduced at the trial showing conclusively that appellant had done more than furnish the drug, he was con