TRESPASSES DECISION'S. 115 



that such fire will be communicated to the property of others and 

 destroy it." 



In an action by the United States against a railroad company to 

 recover for loss of timber alleged to have been burned through defend- 

 ant's negligence in permitting inflammable material to accumulate on 

 its right of way, in which fire was started from an engine and spread 

 into the timber on a forest reservation, a letter written by a forest 

 inspector to the secretary of defendant some time before the fire, 

 inclosing a report from a ranger as to the dangerous condition of the 

 right of way, and asking that it be remedied, was not inadmissible as 

 a self-serving declaration, but was properly admitted to show actual 

 notice to defendant of the condition referred to therein, the fact being 

 otherwise proved. (United States v. Corvallis & E. R. Co., 191 Fed., 

 310.) 



On an issue as to the condition of a locomotive alleged to have 

 caused a fire on defendant's right of way because of its defective con- 

 dition, which permitted the escape of fire and sparks, the admission 

 in evidence of the testimony of the fireman of defendant's machine 

 shop as to the condition of the engine, both before the fire and after 

 its return from the trip on which the fire occurred, the purpose being 

 to show its condition before and at the time of the fire, was not preju- 

 dicial error. (Id.) 



(Liability of railroads for injuries by fire as affected by manage- 

 ment of locomotives, see note to Woodward v. Chicago, M. & St. P. 

 Ry. Co., 75 C. C. A., 598.) 



Injunction will lie to prevent the accumulation of inflammable 

 material upon a railroad right of way within the National Forests 

 when such accumulation is shown to be dangerous to the forests. 

 (1 Sol. Op., 300, 526.) 



There is no authority in the department to make settlement with 

 the Great Northern Eailway Co. of a fire trespass, by which the com- 

 pany shall pay at once for all timber destroyed or damaged, with an 

 agreement that any money received from the sale of damaged timber 

 to a third party, less costs of the sale, shall be paid over to the com- 

 pany. (1 Sol. Op., 496.) 



It is not the duty of forest officers directly to prosecute in a State 

 court a person accused of violating a State statute by setting out a 

 fire which spread to National Forest lands. In such case they would 

 perform their full duty by calling the attention of the proper State 

 officers to the alleged criminal offense, suggesting action and offering 

 to aid in all proper ways. (2 Sol. Op., 693.) 



The acquittal of a fire trespasser in a State court is no bar to his 

 prosecution in a United States court for a violation of the Federal 

 laws arising out of the same acts. (Solicitor to his assistant at Den- 

 ver, Sept. 10, 1912.) 



The Government is entitled to recover for damage to reproduction 

 (United States v. Corvallis & Eastern R. R. Co., 191 Fed., 310; 

 United States v. N. P. R. R. Co., Dec. 2, 1911, in United States Dis- 

 trict Court, Western District of Washington, and case of United 

 States v. C. O. Bailey, receiver for Mo. Pac. Ry. Co. and Title Guar- 

 antee Surety Co., in United States District Court for South Dakota, 

 Sept. 7, 1910) , the verdicts in which cases include such damage. (See 

 also United States v. C, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 207 Fed., 164.) 



