Gambar halaman

der an agreement for sale to defendant, he to pay the sity; and when this is not known the warrant must purchase price of the same, the horses to remain the indicate on whom it is to be served in some other way, property of the owner until paid for and to be returned by a specification of his personal appearance, his occuat a specified time if pot paid for. The defendaut re- pation, his precise place of residence or of labor, his fused to return the horses and did not pay for them. recent history, or some facts which give the special Held, that he was not guilty of larceny as bailee. In designation that the Constitution requires. The concluPennsylvania it is settled that the bailee of goods who sion from all the authorities is that both at the common uses and enjoys them as if his own, cannot divest the law and in conformity with our constitutional guarantitle of the bailor, nor can the bailee's creditor seize ties, proceedings may be instituted and carried on them in execution of his debt. When delivered under against an offender whose name cannot be ascertained; a contract of bailment the owner will be entitled to but in such a case such a description of him must be them against every body. But a delivery on a condi- given as will point to his identity, while yet there is tional sale, the property to remain in the vendor until no exact form of the description required. It must the goods are paid for, with right to reclaim them, is be suggested by the particular circumstances; and of void as respects the vendee's creditors, or an innocent course it must conform also to any statutory provispurchaser from him. The delivery being on the foot ions which may exist in the individual State. Bish. of a purchase, the vendor's right, as against the Cr. Proc., $ 680. Maino Sup. Jud. Ct., Jan., 1880. vendee's creditors, is regarded as a lien for the pur- Harwood v. Siphers. Opinion by Symonds, J. chase-money. Chamberlain v. Smith, 8 Wright, 431; Haak v. Linderman, 14 P. F. S. 499. By the terms of

RECENT ENGLISH DECISIONS. the contract tho seller may retain the right of property in the goods till paid for, as against tho purchaser, and in default of payment, he may reclaim them, or use

CONTRACT — INCONSISTENT CONTRACTS - RIGHT OF civil remedies for recovery of possession, but the con

ACTION.-A lease of laud from A to B contained a tract does not make him a bailor, as respects other covenant by B not to assign or underlet without prepersons, nor the purchaser a bailee in tho sense of the

vious written license. B, without license, underlet a word as used in the statute. The statute, as shown by

part of the land to C, by an agreement which also gave Read, J., in Commonwealth v. Chatham, 14 Wright, C an option of purchasing tho wholo within fivo years. 181, is taken from tho English statute; and in that case

B subsequently surrendered his lease to A and obtained the interpretation of the words “bailee and bailment."

a new one, which contained a similar covenant against as fixed by the English decisions, was adopted, which

assigning or underletting. Chaving exercised his decisions were cited, showing that the words must be

option of purchase, but A having refused his license, interpreted according to their ordinary legal accepta

notwithstanding that he had been cognizant of the tion, that “bailment relates to something iu the hands

agreement: Held, that C was not entitled to specific of the bailee,” which is to be returned in specie, and

performance against A or B. A lessor in A's position does not apply to the case of money in the hands of a

will not be precluded from exercising his strict legal party who is not under any obligation to return it in

rights, unless he has so far acquiesced that it would precisely the identical coin which he originally re

amount to fraud for him to do so. Where a person bas ceived;" that “to bring a case within this clause, in

entered into two contracts which are inconsistent with addition to the fraudulent disposal of tho property, it

one another, the earlier will be enforced. Ch. Div., must be proved, first, that thero was such a delivery of

June 18, 1880. Willmott v. Barber. Opinion by Fry, the property as to divest the owner of the possession,

J., 43 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) 97. and vest it in tho prisoner for some time; secondly, CONTRACT - IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFORMANCE--CONthat at the expiration or determination of that time STRUCTION. By an antenuptial settlement, dated the identical same property was to be restored to the Aug. 1873, and made in the Scotch form. A bound himowner." The term “bailee" is one to be used, not in self on or beforo the 20 July, 1875, to take out and its large but its limited sense, as including simply those effect upon his life for the full term thereof, in the bailees who are authorized to keep, to transfer, or to name of the trustees therein mentioned, a policy or deliver, and who receive the goods bona fide and then policies for the total amount of 10,000. On the 1st fraudulently convert. When it does not appear that a July, 1875, A was so ill as to be unable to insure, and fiduciary duty is imposed on tho defendant to return continued in a similar state of ill-health until his death the specific goods of which the alleged bailment is in Sept. 1878. Held, that there was no implied concomposed, a bailment under the statutes is not consti- dition in the covenant that A's life should be insurable, tuted. Whart. Cr. L., $ 1055 (8th ed.). Pennsylvania

and that damages for non-performance of the covenant Sup. Ct., March 15, 1880. Krause v. Commonwealth. were payable out of his estate. In Bailey v. DeCresOpinion by Trunkey, J.

piguy, L. R., 4 Q. B. 185, it is said “where the erent is WARRANT — NOT DESCRIBING ACCUSED INVALID TO

of such a character that it canuot be supposed to have PROTECT OFFICER. A warrant, wherein the only de

been in the contemplation of the coutracting parties scription of the accused is, “a person whose name is

when the contract was made, they will not be held unkuown bnt whoso persou is well known, of Vassal

bound by general words which, though large enough to boro, in the county of Kennebec," is too defective in

include, wero not used with reference to tho possibility matter of substance to afford any protection to the

of the particular contingency which afterward hapofficer who makes an arrest upon it. Such a warrant

pens." It is put in a very similar way in Taylor F. is too defective to be aided by any waiver in pleading.

Caldwell, 8 L. T. (N. S.) 357. Ch. Div., May 8, 1880. It is not in accordance with a constitutional provision

Re Arthur's Estate. Opinion by Jessel, M. R., 43 L that "no warrant to search any place, or seize any per

T. Rep. (N, S.) 47. son or thing, shall issue without a special designation GIFT -CAUSA MORTIS- OF CHECK-OF BILLS OF of the placo to be searched, and tho person or thing to EXCHANGE.-A dying man who was possessed of s be seized," nor with the precedents of the criminal banker's deposit note for 27001., on tho back of which law. “If the name of the party to be arrested be un- was printed a check form, and which had attached to known, the warrant may be issued against him by the it a notice of withdrawal, being in the expectation of best description the nature of the case will allow." 1 death, stated his intention of giving his wife 500. oat Chit. on Crim. L. 39; Commonwealth v. Crotty, 10 of the 27001., and filled up the check form and the withAllen, 404. The omission of the name, as a means of drawal notice for 5001., and sent the document to the identification, is justified only on the ground of neces- 1 bank. The practice of the bank was to require seven

the freighters for loss of cargo by perils of the sea is, TAI

days' notice before withdrawal, but the testator died distress is allowable, inasmuch as the state of the vesonly two days after the notice was given. Held, that sel in distress may involve danger to life. On the tbere was no donatio mortis causa. Hewitt v. Kaye, other hand, deviation for the purpose of saving propL. Rep., 6 Eq. 198; Beak v. Beak, 26 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) erty is not thus privileged, but entails all the usual 281; L. Rep. 13 Eq. 489. The same donor also gave two consequences of deviation. But where the preservabills of exchange drawn by himself to his own order, tion of life can only be effected through the concurbut unindorsed, to a friend, and requested him to pro- rent saving of property, and the bona fide purpose of sent them, and give the money to the donor's wife. saving life forms part of the motive which leads to the The frieud undertook to do so and handed the bills to deviation, the privilege will not be lost, because the the wife, who retained them until after the donor's purpose of saving property may have formed a second death, at which time they were still unpresented. Held, motive for deviating." Ct. of Appeal, April 20, 1880. that the bills passed by a donatio mortis causa. Veal Scaramanga v. Stamp. Opinion by Cockburn, C. J., F. Veal, 2 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) 228; 27 Beav. 303. Ch. and Bramwell, L. J., 42 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) 840. Div., June 29, 1880. Re Mead Justin v. Mead. Opinion by Fry, J., 43 L. T. Rep. (N. S.) 117.


VOL. 4, JACOB'S FISHER'S DIGEST. owner of a ship who has contracted not to be liable to

THIS volume contains the titles Error - Illegality, nevertheless, liable to them for such loss, during a de

and columns 4651 - 6400. We can only reiterate our viation from her course for the purpose of saving a hearty commendation of the work, intrinsically so imship in distress and her cargo, if such deviation was

portant and so well executed. It will entirely supplant not (or was prolonged until it ceased to be) reasonably the foreign edition, both in point of conipleteness and necessary in order to save life. Herman v. Western of economy. The publisher is George S. Diossy, 231 Marive and Fire Ins. Co., 15 LeB. 516; Natchez lus. Broadway, New York. Wm. Gould of this city has it Co. v. Stanton, 2 Smed. & M. 349; Stewart v. Teunes- for sale. see Marine & Fire Ing. Co., 1 Humph. 242. The court remark: “It is a remarkable fact that, wbile the com

WATERMAN'S MAINE PROBATE PRACTICE. merce and the mercautile marine of Great Britain have Hand Book of Practice in the Probate Courts of the State of been for so many years the largest in the world, the Maine. Containing Notes on the Execution and Proquestion as to how far a deviation for the purpose of

bate of Wills, Duties of Executors, Administrators, saving life or property reuders the ship-owner liable to

Guardians and Trustees; also full Forms of Petitions, & goods owner, whose goods have been lost through

Orders and Decrees, with References to the Revised the deviation, has never come before the tribunals of

Statutes and Amendments thereof; and decisions of

our courts. By Enos T. Luce, late Judge of Probate this country, so as to be authoritatively determined;

of Androscoggin county Revised by John A. Waterwhile in the United States both questions have ou bev

man, formerly Judge of Probate of Cumberland county. eral occasions come before the courts, and the law may With an Appendix, containing tho Assignment and Innow be taken to be there settled by judicial deoislon, solvent Laws of Maine, arranged as amended, and all as well as by the consensus of jurists. Iu this country

the decisions of the Supreme Court hitherto rendered the question, with one exception, has only presented

in insolvent cases. Portland, Me., Dresser, McLellan & itself incidentally to that of salvage, and cannot be

Co., 1880. Pp. viil, 352. said even in that form to have been brought to the test So far as plan and expression go this is the most ex. of judicial decision. The exception in question is to cellent manual of probate practice wo have ever seen. be found in the case of Lawrence v. Sydebotbam, 6 Its accuracy in details we must take on trust. It seems, East, 54, in which the question of deviation to assist a however, to havo stood the test of eight years' experivessel in distresswas incidentally touched upou, but was ence, and doubtless will be indispensablo to the Maine not the point for decision. The case before us presents practitioner. itself, therefore, so far as our courts are concerued, as one of the first impressions in which we have to de.

BIGELOW'S HISTORY OF PROCEDURE. clare, practically I may say, to make the law. I am glad History of Procedure in England from the Norman Conquest, to think that in doing so we have the advantage of the

The Norman Period (1066--1204). By Melville Madison assistance afforded to us by the decisions of the Amer- Bigelow, Ph. D., Harvard University. Boston: Little, ioan courts, and the opinions of American jurists,

Brown & Co., 1880. One vol., pp. 400. whom accident has caused to anticipate us on this The author of this work is known to the legal proquestion. And although the decisions of the Amer- fession by his work on Estoppels, Leading Cases on ican courts are, of course not binding on us, yet the Torts, and other publications; and to scientific stusound and enlightened views of American lawyers in dents of the law by the volume entitled Placita Anglothe administration and development of the law - a Normania, in tho introduction to which this work was law, except so far as altered by statutory enactment, promised. The latter has probably drawn the attenderived from a common source with our own – entitle tion and perusal more of those who are interested in their decisions to our profound respect and confidence. the curiosities and antiquarianism of the law than of It is unnecessary to go through the American decis- tho lawyer in busy, every-day practice. The present ions in any detail. The effect of them is to be found work is likely to do tho same. It will, however, interin the well-known text writers, but is nowhere better est and instruct the philosophical student of the law, stated than in the judgment of Mr. Justice Sprague, in and well repay his careful perusal; and the leisure of the case of Crocker v. Jackson (Sprague (American) | the practicing lawyer may be spent upon it with profit. Rep. 141). The result of the American authorities By its aid, tho former may trace the growth and deimmediately bearing on the question which we have velopment of somo of the existing practical methods here to decide may be briefly stated. Deviation for of modern times; and tho latter may find interest and the purpose of saving life is protected, and involves amusement, and not seldom a fact for practical use or neither forfeiture of insurance nor liability to the suggestion. Thus, it is recent, the public excitement goods owuer in respect of loss which would otherwise at tho theft of the body of Alexander T. Stewart, and be witbin the exception of perils of the seas.' And the discussion that arose of whether there was a propas & necessary consequence of the foregoing, devia- erty in the dead human body. In this book it is tion for the purpose of communicating with a ship in stated, that in Abbot Peter v. Bishop Ramelin, in the

side of the subject of the courts and the conduct

of CHI

reign of Henry I, the plaintiff recovered the body of a

OBITUARY. deceased person carried away by force of the defendant, and Placita A .glo-Normania is cited.

EDWARD G. RYAN. The purpose of the author was to give the lawyer's

NHIEF JUSTICE EDWARD G. RYAN, of the Wiscauses during the Anglo-Norman period; to treat of it consin Supreme Court, died at his residence at 80 as to be of service to the student of general consti- Madison, Oct. 19th. He was born at Newcastle, county tutional history, and also the student of the growth of Meath, Ireland, in 1810, came to this country, and was a special system of law, by showing the technical pro- admitted to the bar in New York in 1836, and immecesses of the law at that time, and how causes were diately thereafter went West. For many years Mr. actually conducted through their different stages, and Ryan has occupied a prominent place in the affairs of to elucidate the English procedure as a great branch of the North-west. He founded the Chicago Tribune as remedial law, developed and developing. The book

a Democratic paper about thirty-eight years ago, and treats of the constitution, kind, jurisdiction and by his vigor and ability soon placed it in the lead of methods of courts which then existed; the Witenuge- Western journals. Ho soon wearied of editorial work, mot or “ Assembly of The Wise Men," with legisla. however, and went to Milwaukee, where he engaged tive and judicial functions; the Ecclesiastical Court, in the practice of the law, early taking the foremost with its jurisdiction, large at first, afterward parrowed rank at the bar of that city. He was an orator of rare and limited; the King's Court, its new processes and power, commanding in presence, forcible, logical, and, claims to large jurisdiction, and the final establish where his feelings were enlisted, terribly sindictive. ment of its supreme and almost universal authority; In 1856 he achieved a national distinction by the manthe Exchequer, how and when it originated, its first

ner in which he conducted the prosecution in the imcharacter and subsequent limit; the County Court, its peachment trial of Judge Levi Hubbell before the senancient existence and continuance through the Nor- ate of Wisconsin. When the civil war broke out, he man period; the Burghmot or Hustings Court; the issued the famous “Ryan address," a document reHundred or Wapentake Court; the Manorial Court; markable for its fierce denuuciation of the poliep of the Forest Court; of the Writ Process, and how the the administration of President Lincoln. In 1874, a writs were gradually developed in England; Distraint; vacancy having occurred on the Supreme Bench, the Summons; the Issue Term; the Trial Term; the Fi- bar of the State united in nominating him to the place, nal Judgment. There is also an appendix of Carto et and he was elected without opposition. He was rePlacita, records of litigations in Normandy from the elected for a full term two years afterward. He was a time of William the Conqueror to that of Henry II.

forcible and elegant writer, as the extracts from his Upon the several topics there is a mass of minute and address to the law class of Madison University, rewell-arranged information of highest interest.

cently published in this JOURNAL, will bear witness. We have not the space to go more into detail. The book is a systematic and philosophical essay, and will

NOTES. increase the stock of general information upon the subject of which it treats, making easily accessible AS

Swo anticipated, the Supreme Court of South what but for the loving labor of the author was hidden Carolina have sustained the claim of Gov. Simpin books and treatises at the hand of but few.

son to the office of Chief Justice, holding that the elee

tion of Chief Justice Willard to that post was not for CORRESPONDENCE.

a full term, but only to fill the vacancy which made

the election necessary. A clerical friend of ours, RESPONSIBILITY FOR COUNSEL FEES.

speaking of our article on Escape, ante, p. 164, says it

was St. Paul and not St. Peter who assured the jailer Editor of the Albany Law Journal:

we are all here," and suggests that as we are Would some of your readers be good enough to acquaint me with the practice of American lawyers in a

near Troy we would better join that lawyers' Bible case like the following: A lawyer in New York sends quoting Scripture. We notice, however, that one of

class. He also says that lawyers are famous for misto a confrère, say in Chicago, a claim for collection. Suit is entered and judgment obtained. To whom well enough informed to correct our error. Perhaps

our legal contemporaries, in copying the article, was would the Chicago attorney look for his costs; the

he had recently been attending such a class. New York lawyer or the latter's client? It is, of course, understood that there is no express agreement. In Lenoir v. Ritchie, the Supreme Court of Canada Yours truly,

M. the highest tribunal in the Dominion – decided that MONTREAL, Oct 18, 1880.

the governments of the different Provinces had not the LEGAL NOTICES IN SUNDAY NEWSPAPERS.

power to appoint Queen's counsel. The decision was

rendered in such a way as to leave the question still Editor of the Albany Law Journal :

involved in considerable doubt, and although some Is a constructive service of legal process good by leading barristers whose commissions as Queen's counpublication in a Sunday paper?

M. sel were derived from Provincial governments doffed CLEVELAND, Oct. 18, 1880.

their silk gowns and again put on the stuff, there were

many eminent lawyers who persisted in maintaining RELEASE OF DOWER.

the validity of the Provincial appointments. Matters Editor of the Albany Law Journal :

have been in this state for some time, but at last the Your correspondent “F. L. M.” may find the fol- government of the Dominion has passed an order, in lowing cases useful: Stevens v. Owen, 25 Me. 94; Wales council, nominating a number of Queen's counv. Coffin, 13 Allen, 213; Melvin v. Proprietors, 16 Pick.

sel. Most of these had already acquired the title 137 ; Greenough v. Turner, 11 Gray, 332; Burge v. from Provincial authority, but it is considered that Smith, 27 N. H. 338; Allen v. Reynolds, 4 Jones & Spen.

the effect of the order will be to settle the rexed ques298; McFarland v. Febiger, 7 Ohio, 194; Witter y. Bis- tion once for all. The Provincial governments were coe, 13 Ark. 423; Deutzel v. Waldie, 30 Cal. 149; Prather very loose in their appointments, many of which, it is V. McDowell, 8 Bush, 46, and Laughlin v. Fream, 14 w. said, were really bad — the qualifications generally Va. 322. Yours truly,

being political services rather than professional emi.

J. H. S. nence. The action of the Dominion goverument will TRENTON, N. J., Oct. 21, 1880.

thus materially enhance the value of the title.

that "

The Albany Law Journal.


may be that the Legislature, by saying that she should not be compelled to testify or give evidence

against him, intended to prevent upon a cross-examiALBANY, NOVEMBER 6, 1880.

nation an inquiry into any other matters not in

quired of upon the direct examination, and which CURRENT TOPICS.

might be very damaging to the husband, and so vice

versa. Whether this be the correct solution or not, THE Albany Oyer and Terminer, Justice Osborn is quite immaterial. It is enough that no positive presiding, have quashed the indictment of

enactment can be found making it proper to call Briggs for the murder of Woods, for the reason

husband or wife as a witness against the other. that the prisoner's wife was allowed to testify for

The following authorities (if indeed authorities are the people against her husband before the grand

necessary on this point) go to substantiate this reajury. The same testimony was permitted on the

soning: 22 Alb. L. J. 81; State v. Houston, 50 Iowa, preliminary examination before the magistrate, and

512; Dill v. State, 1 Tex. App. 278; Hubbell v. at the time we expressed our opinion that this

Grant, 39 Mich. 641; State v. Donovan, 41 Iowa, was error. See ante, 81. The court now take the

587.” The extraordinary measure of quashing an same view. The statute under which this testimony

indictment, because of incompetent testimony bewas introduced is as follows: “In all criminal trials

fore the grand jury, is resorted to, in this case, and examinations before trial a husband or wife may

because, as the court say, that testimony is clearly be examined on behalf of the other, but upon no

of the greatest substance, and it is not clear that the such trial shall a husband or wife be compelled to

bill could have been found without it. testify against the other.” The court say, by Justice Osborn: “Does this section confer the right Our revised statutes require that ballots at public claimed by the prosecution ? It seems to me clearly elections shall be “indorsed ” in a prescribed mannot. The only innovation which this section makes

The Legislature last winter also prescribed upon the common law or the statutes as they form- that they should have a certain "caption.” Deputy erly existed was to give a right to a husband or Attorney-General Ruggles has given an opinion that wife to be examined as a witness on behalf of the a ballot with the required "caption" printed on the other in a criminal trial or examination. Suppose face of it, will be “indorsed” as required by the this were all of the section, would it be contended revised statutes if it is folded so as to leave the for a moment that either could be called as against “caption ” outside, the rest of the face of the balthe other ? Of course not. Now, the other words lot being folded inward. We cannot agree with the are of a negative character. They certainly create deputy attorney-general. The indorsement and the no new right or privilege as to the husband or wife caption are distinct things, provided for by differbeing witnesses that did not exist before.” “The ent enactments, and they must both be distinctly only construction that can be given to these words and separately observed. The caption is something to warrant the position taken by the prosecution additional to the indorsement. A caption is a leadwould be, that because the Legislature said they ing; an indorsement is a backing. A heading cancould not be compelled to testify against the other, not at the same time be a backing. The ballot may the inference is they might do so, if such testimony possibly have an indorsement when folded in the was voluntarily given. But it would be most dan

manner pointed out by the deputy attorney-general, gerous to allow any such interpretation or construc-sufficient to warrant its admission to the ballot-box, tion of the section. Such an innovation upon the but how will it be when unfolded by the counters ? common law would require a positive, affirmative

That is the more important occasion, and then it provision or enactment of the Legislature. She will prove to have no indorsement. A promissory could not be called as a witness in behalf of her

note payable to the order of the maker would not husband until the Legislature so enacted. She cer- be “indorsed” by him by his turning his signature tainly cannot be called to give evidence against him over on the back of the note. These are matters of until the authority is expressly given. It may be substance, not of mere form. The deputy attorneythat the latter part of the section amounts to noth-general however admits that the ballot would not ing. Certainly no one claimed before its enactment

be hurt by printing the required indorsement on the that husband or wife by any law that ever existed outside, and this clearly being so, we cannot concould be compelled to testify against each other.ceive why any risk should be run. Wylie v. People, 53 N. Y. 225. But it may have been placed there (and I think this the more probable reason for the employment of the language) to It is to be hoped that the judges will universally prevent a husband or wife after being called as a adopt the habit of citing the State reports by the witness for the other, or on behalf of the other, as title of the report and not by the name of the rethe language is, from being compelled on cross-ex- porter. In our own State the Court of Appeals amination to testify to facts injurious to the party reports are uniformly cited as the “New York," exin whose behalf he or she was called. For instance, cept those of “Comstock” and “Selden,” which a wife might be called as a witness on behalf of seem to form an exception. Why they should be the husband to prove some one isolated fact. It excepted we do not know, unless through a senti

VOL. 22.– No. 19.


mental veneration for those particular reporters, only women who dare speak on this question.” Mr. honored judges of our State in former times. In Jamieson : “ Then in their acquaintance they must referring to the United States Supreme Court re- have been unfortunate.” Dr. Drysdale, of London, ports, confusion is made by citing them, now, for thought the existing marriage law in England, at example, as "Wallace” or Otto,”

,” and again by any rate, exceedingly unfair to women, particularly the proper title and number. The greatest confu- in the matter of the custody of children. sion arises in the case of the Pennsylvania State reports, which the Pennsylvania judges always cite by the reporter's name, and all other judges by the In the discussions upon divorce the ladies also proper title and number. In most of the States joined. Mr. J. Campbell Smith, advocate, attribtheir own reports are now usually cited, both by uted the increase in cases of divorce to the increased bench and bar, by the State name and number. facilities for obtaining divorce, and not to increased The reasons for the course preferred are obvious. immorality. His experience of the divorce courts In the first place, it is right to call a thing by its showed that for one bad wife there were three bad name, and not by the name of its maker. Second, husbands; but when a man bad a bad wife she was citing reports by the reporters' names frequently thrice as bad as the worst husband. He thought confuses the case of the same name in different there should be other grounds of divorce than adulStates. Finally, the number indicates at a glance tery or desertion. Miss Downing, of London, conwhether the case is old or recent.

sidered drunkenness a good cause for divorce; say. ing, if she had to choose, she would rather live with

an unfaithful husband than a drunken one. Mrs. At the recent Social Science Congress, in Edin- M'Laren objected to divorce altogether, and considburgh, ladies took an active part in the discussion ered a judicial separation might always meet the upon the law as affecting women's rights of prop- necessities of the case. Miss Burton thought there erty and over their children. Mrs. Elmly said, with hardly was a married couple who, at some time of regard to the suggestion that the wife's income their life, did not wish they had not been married. should be made equally liable with that of the hus- With greater facilities they would just increase diband for the household expenditure, there were

Miss Elmly differed from the other ladies points in the existing law that gave a very great ad- who had spoken, and pleaded not only for divorce vantage to the husband, and it was only just and as it existed, but for the assimilation of the laws of expedient that, before the wife was equally liable England to those of Scotland. In England a woman for the household expenditure, these points should could not obtain divorce on equal terms with her be rectified. In the first place, the wife was only a husband. Mrs. Wolstenholme Elmly considered servant who received no wages, and yet she had to that the law had placed the woman simply in the perform an immense amount of domestic labor; and, position of being the property of her husband. Mr. in the next place, the husband had the sole legal Mangus Rendall, of Leith, held that marriage should custody of the children. Miss Lydia E. Becker did not be made too popular. It was too popular alnot believe the satisfactory amendment of this law ready; and women looked too much to it for a setpossible, so long as unmarried women, who had prop- tlement in life. Miss Burton said the men had eduerty that might be affected by the marriage laws, cated the women up to let them take part in meetwere altogether deprived of any voice in the makings such as the present; and they must take the ing of the desired alterations. She believed there consequences. Certainly Miss Downing is neither were many unmarried women who hesitated to con- squeamish nor mealy-mouthed, and Miss Burton has tract matrimony through their unwillingness to come a vast amount of knowledge of the marriage state under those objectionable laws. Mr. R. Campbell, for a single woman. advocate, said the manner in which this difficult matter had been treated seemed to him to make it all the more difficult. He took exception to the The only result of the election on last Tuesday extreme and sentimental views which had been ex- which we need to chronicle is the election of Judge pressed. He submitted that the law as it stood was Folger to the office of Chief Judge of the Court of markedly in favor of women, and remarked that if Appeals of this State. The people have made an these proposed changes were adopted the question unexceptionable choice. The same would have would arise — was marriage to be a life-long con-, been true if Judge Rapallo had been elected. The tract ? Mrs. Duncan M'Laren protested against the result is probably quite indifferent to the gentlemen custody of children being regarded as a minor mat- in question, and we do not believe it will make a ter. It was a matter of life and death to women particle of difference in the administration of fina! whose children were being subjected to the cruelties, justice in this State. Chief Judge Folger will simbrutality, and abominations of husbands. Mr. An- ply continue to preside and to sit at Judge Rapallo's drew Jamieson, advocate, said the law of Scotland left instead of his right, and to receive $500 addihad on the whole worked very well. He expressed tional salary for these arduous duties; while the some curiosity as to what sort of husbands those court will continue to pursue its calm, dignified and ladies who had spoken had known. Mrs. Duncan impartial course, undisturbed and uninfluenced by M'Laren: “ Those who have good husbands are the politics and unsuspected by partisans.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »