DUTY IN ILOATINO LOOS 



An .iwiiir .il lii;;s in ll..:itinL' 1 lii'iii ilowii ii •.Irriini i- liiii.l.- Iipi 

 (laiiinKi'K ilone to ownorM of Iniul ulon); the Htroiim ri'sultin>! fruiii 

 neglifiontly fcrmittinf; n jiiin to form nml roniiiin for nii uiiroasoii- 

 nbU- loiijith of tiini', an.i thus ov.Ttlow siuli hunl. ( \Vii!iliiii>:toii 

 .Siiprfine <'oiirt. lVI.T<.in vs. Arli.n.i, III I'ii.ilir K.>|.(iit.T ra.) 

 MINNESOTA COMPENSATION LAW VALID 



On .July ;l the Miuiiosotii Siiproiiu' <'oiirt aiiiioiiiicfil n Jefisioii 

 sustainiD}; the validity of the worknioii'n I'omppnHation law which 

 wiis enacted by the lejjislntiirc of that state in 1913. The court 

 finds that the law does not violate any constitutional limitations on 

 the power of the Icfjislature to re^tulato relations existinik' between 

 iinployers ami employes, and that any sliorti 



of the 



th. 



IMPROVEMENTS WHICH ARE NOT LIENABLE 



I'orsous in possession of property under ii mere riintr.ict of jiur 

 chase have no such interest therein as will subject the property 

 to a mechanic's lien for materials furnished for the erection of an 

 improvement thereon, without the owner's consent. (Texas Court 

 of Civil Appeals, Wilkcrson & Satterfield vs. McMurry. \iu South- 

 western Reporter 275.) 



FACILITIES FOE LOADING LOGS 



A railway company cannot be required to afford facilities for 

 loading of logs between stations, but if the company negligently 

 fails to furnish such facilities at shipping points it is liable for all 

 damages resulting therefrom to a shipper. (Mississippi Valley 

 Railroad Company vs. Crawford, 6.i Southern Reporter 462.) 

 CONVEYANCES OF "MERCHANTABLE" TIMBER 



A conveyance of '• merchantable" timber st.uiding on land, with 

 permission to remove the same within a ^'iven pcrioii, includes only 

 such timber as is merchantable at the time the conveyance is made, 

 not including trees which become merchantable before the removal 

 is completed. (Alabama Supreme Court, Wright vs. Bentley Lum- 

 ber Company, 65 Southern Reporter 353.) 



CUSTOM AS ELEMENT OF CONTRACT 



In a suit to recover overpayments on lumber, quantities of which 

 had been warranted by defendant, plaintiff was entitled to show a 

 prevailing custom among lumber manufacturers relating to settle- 

 ment under such contracts, where the effect was to explain rather 

 than contradict the terms of the written contract which existed 

 between the parties. (New Haven Supreme Court, New England 

 Box Company vs. Flint, 90 Atlantic Reporter 789.) 



DAMAGES FOR BREAKING CONTRACT OF SALE 



When one who lias contracted to sell himher fails or refuses to 

 deliver the .same, the damages recoverable by the buyer is ordi- 

 narily measured by the difference between the contract price and 

 the market price at the time and place for delivery fixed by the 

 contract, and the buyer, for his own protection, has the right, 

 under such circumstances, to buy other goods of the same kind in 

 the open market and charge the difference in price to the seller's 

 account. (Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, Richardson Con- 

 struction Company vs. Whiting Lumber Company, 82 Southeastern 

 Reporter 86.) 



CONTRACTOR'S LIABILITY ON PROMISE 



A dealer who furnishes building materials to a subcontractor on 

 the strength of a promise by the principal contractor to withhold 

 enough money to pay for such materials can hold the latter liable 

 for the price of the materials on his failing to retain the funds 

 as promised. (Kentucky Court of Appeals, Fairbanks, Morse & Co. 

 vs. Tafel, 167 Southwestern Reporter 887.) 



ILLINOIS MECHANICS' LIEN LAW 



The Illinois mechanics' lien law is unconstitutional so far as it 

 gives a subcontractor or a materialman a lien for materials fur- 

 nished to a building contractor where the principal contract con- 

 tains a provision that no lien shall be filed by any contractor, 



—32— 



■■•■ M;nl r ii..il.Ti:ilriian, .lll.n..i- .^ii|.i.'ine Ciiurt, Kitten- 



lioiis,. A Knil.ree « nn.pany v.. W n,. Wri;;!.^. .Ir.. Co., 105 .North- 

 rnstiTM Keporter 7 1.'!.) 



SUFFICIENCY OF MEMORANDUM OF SALE— DAMAGES FOR 

 BREACH OF CONTRACT 

 A memorandum dated ami reading: ''SoM II H 1' — 1 cargo up to 

 3.50M— II & V option of increasing to 5(ill,\I if J. C. Turner has 

 stock — 22.no," etc., sufficiently stated the quantity of lumber to 

 be sold, within the requirement of the New York statutes that a 

 contract to sell goods at a jirice of $50 or more shall be evi<leni'i-il 

 in writing. The damages recoverable for breach of agreement 

 made in September to sell a cargo of lumber, no time for delivery 

 being fixed by the contract, are to be measured by the excess of 

 the market value of the lumber the following sjiriug, at the place 

 of ilelivery contemplated by the contract, over the contract price; 

 it appearing that the following spring would have been a reason- 

 able time for delivery. (New i'ork Supreme Court, First Appellate 

 Division; Langstroth vs. J. (.'. Turner Cypress Lumber Company, 

 148 New York Supplement 224.) 



BISK OF FALLING DERRICK NOT ASSUMED 

 An employe of a coojierage comiiany diil not assume the risk of 

 being injured through fall of a derrick, causeil by one of the guy 

 wires t)cing cut by sharp edges of a plate to which it was fastened 

 at, the top of the mast. (Arkansas Supreme Court, Burdette Cooper- 

 age ("o. vs. Bunting, 167 Southwestern Reporter, 77.) 



BUYER'S DELINQUENCY EXCUSES FURTHER DELIVERY 



In a suit to recover the price of 157,275 feet of lumber of a total 

 of 236,085 called for by a contract of sale, it was sufficient excuse 

 for plaintiff's failure to deliver the remainder of the lumber that 

 defendant had failed to pay for deliveries made, according to the 

 terms of the contract. (Texas Court of Civil Appeals, Fink vs. San 

 Augustine Grocery Co., 167 Southwestern Reporter, 35.) 

 LIABILITY OF SHIFPEB FOR DEMURRAGE CHARGES 

 If the consignee of a carload shipment refuses to receive the 

 same, and the carrying railway company notifies the shi7)pcr of that 

 fact, the latter becomes liable for demurrage, as well as freight 

 charges, and the carrier has a lien for the total amount of such 

 charges. (West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, Baltimore & 

 Ohio Railroad Co. vs. Luella Coal & Coke Co., 81 Southea-stern 

 Reporter 1044.) 



Why Complain of Threatened Lumber Famine? 



According to a little news note in one of Hearst's Chicago papers 

 of recent date, the rate of growth of mahogany is shown in Southern 

 Nigeria, where the site of a town destroyed sixty years ago has been 

 covered with a forest containing mahogany trees, some of which are 

 more than ten feet in diameter. 



Considering this statement casually, one would say that this is 

 really a remarkable accomplishment on the part of any tree. This 

 article leads one to wonder why anybody should worry as to the future 

 source of supplj- of hardwood lumber. According to this item, it will 

 merely be necessary to plant a few acres to mahogany and in the 

 course of five or ten years we will have saw-logs which will enable us 

 to use this beautiful wood for the most commonplace purposes. If 

 ten feet in diameter is accomplished in sixty years, saw-logs of medium 

 size, say three or four feet in diameter, will grow in the course of ten 

 or fifteen years. Saw-logs big enough for the manufacture of excellent 

 lumber will be formed in five or six years. If this fact is true, why 

 not cease to worry about this conservation agitation, but go right 

 ahead and saw up our present trees as fast as possible, as with this 

 phenomenal development future generations will be absolutely as- 

 sured of ample hardwood timber for all purposes. 



We are, indeed, indebted to Mr. Hearst and his journalistic ex- 

 cellence for this very valuable discovery. 



