A party, contracting to deliver a quantity of any commodity (as, coal) may provide that he shall not be liable for non-delivery in the event of a strike prevent ing his obtaining the article.¹ The fidelity of the employees of a railroad company is at the risk of the company. Therefore, to a suit for non-delivery of goods within time, the carrier cannot answer that the delivery was prevented by a strike, unless, perhaps, the interference come from discharged employees.2 If a society or union bring about a strike and uphold a striker's extraordinary demand, all who participate in the action of the association are chargeable with conspiracy. "If A is possessed of a stone-pit, and B, intending to discredit it and deprive him of the profits, imposes so great threats upon his workmen, and disturbs all comers, threatening to maim, and vex them with suits, if they buy stones, so that some desist from working, others from buying, etc., A shall have an action upon the case against B, for the profit of his mine is thereby impaired." 4 Freedom is the policy of this country. But freedom does not imply a right in one person, alone or with others, directly or indirectly, to injure another in his lawful business, and to threaten him with annoyance or injury, for the sake of compelling him to buy his peace. With respect to strikes and boycotts generally, the States may be divided into (1) those in which the common law of conspiracy alone prevails, and (2) those in which the law is regulated by statute. Arkansas, California, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, and Tennessee follow, in substance, the section (Ch. VIII, § 168, sec. 6) in the New York Code which makes it a crime "to commit any act injurious to the public health, to public morals, or to trade or commerce, or for the perversion or obstruction of justice, or of the due administration of the laws." Michigan, New York, Rhode Island, Texas, and Vermont have statutes to the effect that every person, who by himself or with others shall attempt by force, threats, or intimidation to prevent any other person from pursuing any employment he may think proper, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor. In Kansas and Michigan it is a crime to combine to impede, by any act or by means of intimidation, the regular operation of any railroad company, or other incorporation, firm, or individual; or to hinder the running of any locomotive engine, freight or passenger train, except by due process of law. It is a crime in Georgia and South Carolina for any one, knowing the fact, to persuade the servant of another to leave his employment, when such servant is under an attested contract. [Delaware, &c. R. Co. v. Bowns, ante. In Alabama, Missouri, and Wisconsin an overt act is necessary to constitute a conspiracy a crime, except when a felony is the object. In Indiana it is a crime to conspire to commit & felony. In Colorado and Maine it has been made a crime to conspire to indict a person, or to do any other unlaw. ful act. In Delaware any railroad employee who, to aid, incite, or encourage a strike, shall abandon any train before it reaches its destination, or shall refuse to move the cars of another company, such company's employees then being on a strike, or if any person in aid of a strike shall molest or obstruct a railroad employee engaged in the discharge of his duty, or de stroy the track, such person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Michigan, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania allow employees to combine to leave their employment, and to use peaceable means to persuade others to leave their employers.¹ See BOYCOTTING; CARRIER; COMBINATION, 2; ОвSTRUCT, 2; RIOT; TRADES-UNIONS. See COUPON, Stamps. Stub duplicate of tax receipts, made by a county treasurer, as required by law, are evidence of the re ceipt of the tax, although they have never been re turned to the county auditor, as directed by the same law. 122 Am. Law Rev. 241-42 (April, 1888), citing stat utes, codes, cases. See also 21 id. 41-69 (1887), cases; 3 Kan. Law J. 339 (1886) - Weekly Law Bul. (1886): 10 Va Law J. 391; 17 Cent. Law J. 163-66 (1883) - Can. Law Times. As to interference with railroad property in * Blackstock v. N. Y. & Erie R. Co., 20 N. Y. 48 hands of a receiver, see Re Doolittle, 23 F. R. 544, 549 (1850); Cooley, Torts, 640. * Commonwealth v. Curren, 3 Pittsb. 143 (Pa., 1869). Bacon, Abridg. Actions on the Case, F., Bouv. ed. p. 119; Gwillim's ed. of 1797. 5 Carew v. Rutherford, 106 Mass. 15 (1870), Chapman, C. J. See also Mapstrick v. Ramge, 9 Neb. 390 (1879). (1885), cases; United States v. Kane, 6 Cr. Law Mag. 530 (1885). 2 Lee v. Barkhampted, 46 Conn. 217 (1878). • Rutherfoord v. Cincinnati, &c. R. Co., 35 Ohio St 563 (1880). State v. Ring, 29 Minn. S4 (1882). J