Gambar halaman

statute provides for constructive service of process by

NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION. publication, as a substitute for personal service, it must be strictly followed in order to bring the party ORDER OF BUSINESS OF THE FOURTH ANNUAL MEETserved within the jurisdiction of the court. Where

ING OF THE N. Y, STATE BAR ASSOCIATION, TO BE a statute required that a defendant served by publication should be given three months in which to appear


NEW CAPITOL IN THE CITY OF ALBANY, and plead, and an order made and published in a case

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1880. gave defendant only two months, held, that a judg. ment entered therein was a nullity. Gray v. Larrimore, 2 Abb. C. C. 542; Settlemeir v. Sullivan, 97 U. S.

Morning Session. 444; Brownfield v. Dyer, 7 Bush (Ky.!, 505. Morey v. The meeting, which will be held in the Senate ChamMorey. Opinion by Cornell, J.

ber in the New Capitol, will be called to order by the

Hon. Samuel Hand, President, at 10 o'clock in the MUNICIPAL CORPORATION - CANNOT BE GUILTY OF

forenoon. The morning session will be devoted to CONTEMPT. – A municipal corporation cannot be guilty

the transaction of business in the following order: of a contempt in disobeying an injunction; such contempt, if any, in disobeying a writ directed to the city

1. Appointment of committee to nominate officers for

the ensuing year. must be the contempt of individual persons; as, for

2. Reading minutes of last meeting. instance, of officers of the city. Davis v. Mayor, etc.,

3. Nominations for membership. of New York, 1 Duer, 481, 509-10; London v. Lynn, 1 H. Bl. 206. Bass v. Cily of Shakopee. Opinion by

4. Report of Executive Committee. Mr. Albert Ma

thews, Chairman, Berry, J.

5. Report of the Treasurer. Mr. Martin W. Cooke.

6. Report of Committee on Admissions. Mr. Peter PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT AB

S. Danforth, Chairman.

7. Report of Committee on Law Reform. Mr. MatSTRACT.

thew Hale, Chairman. MAY, 1880.

8. Report of Committee on Grievances. Mr. John F.

Seymour, Chairman.

9. Report of Committee on Legal Biography. Mr. CONSIDERATION — MORAL OBLIGATION OF MARRIED

John F. Baker, Chairman, WOMAN. — The debt of a married woman, which she is

10. Election of Members. not bound to pay, will prove a sufficient consideration

11. Election of Officers. to support an obligation under seal, by a third person,

12. Reports of Special Committees.

13. Miscellaneous Business. to pay it. It is true, as a general rule, the contract of a married woman is void, so that no action will lie | 14. Special Orders. against her for its breach. To this, however, there are

Afternoon Session. some exceptions. Although no recovery may be had against her, it by no meaus follows that the equity of

The Association will reconvene at 3 o'clock P. M., the claim may not be sufficient consideration to sup

when the following will be the order: port the express promise of a third person to pay it. Annual Address, by Hon. George W. Biddle, of It has been held to be a sufficient consideration to sup- | Philadelphia, Peun. Subject: “Retrospective Legisport the promise of the wife herself, made after her lation." coverture had ceased, and she had become sui juris.

Report of the Committee on Prizes. Mr. John I. Brown v. Bennett, 25 P. F. Smith, 420; Trout v. Mc

Gilbert, Chairman. Donald, 2 Norris, 144. The tendency of the author

Essays will be read by members of the Association, ities is to treat the disabilities of a married woman as

as follows: Hon. Matthew Hale, of Albany; Edward a personal privilege, which does not extend to any person who unites with her in a contract. Thus, if she

E. Sprague, of Flushing; James D. Teller, of Auburn;

Joshua Gaskill, of Lockport, and others, upon subexecute a note jointly with her husband she may not be bound, yet he shall be bound for the whole. Unangst jects to be announced. v. Fitler, 3 Norris, 135. Leonard v. Duffin. Opinion

All members of the Bar are invited to attend the by Mercur, J.

afternoon session.

At 6.30 o'clock P. M. the annual dinner will be had at HUSBAND AND WIFE — CONTRACT BY WIFE BEFORE the Kenmore Hotel. MARRIAGE. - A woman hired a dwelling-house and

Tickets may be procured at the Kenmore Hotel, and took possession, agreeing to pay a specified rent.

from the members of the Committee. Thereafter she married, continued to occupy the house,

By order of the Committee of Arrangements. her husband not living with her but visiting her frequently, and occasionally remaining with her over

TOMPKINS WESTERVELT, night. Held, that the husband was not liable for

Chairman. the rent of the house accruing after the marriage. The

WILLIAM M. IVINS, duty of a man to support and maintain his wife is well

Secretary. settled, and may be enforced by legal process in case

CLIFFORD A. HAND, of his refusal or neglect to do so. But he was a stran

PEYTON F. MILLER, ger to this contract. The lessee was in possession of

CHARLES J. BUCHANAN, the premises under a lease when he married her. The

S. W. ROSENDALE, contract and liability were hers. He no more assumed

Committee. the payment of her liability under the lease than he did of her other debts, if any existed. It is true she NEW BOOKS AND NEW EDITIONS. lived in and enjoyed the use of the house for some months after her marriage. In like manner her cloth

XX AMERICAN DECISIONS. ing purchased before was worn and used after marriage - if unpaid for, the husband could not be held HIS volume extracts cases from 2, 3 Stewart, 8 Con. responsible for it. Biery v. Ziegler. Opinion by necticut, 2 Blackford, 3, 4, 5 J. J. Marshall, 8 Mar. Paxson, J.

tin, U. S., 1, 2 Louisiana, 6, 7 Greenleaf, 2 Bland's

[ocr errors]

Chancery, 2, 3 Gill & Johnson, 9, 10 Pickering, 5 New Hampshire, 6 Halstead, 2, 3 Wendell; and important notes on nuncupative wills; whether jury bound by erroneous instructions; nature and scope of bills of review; action of land officers, when conclusive; custody of child on habeas corpus; mandatory injunction, jurisdiction to grant; insurable interest; contribution between joint principals, one being insolvent; validity of mortgage for future advances; action for possession of chattels levied on under execution.


LANDRETH ON SALE. A Brief Analysis of Sale. An Essay. By Lucius S. Lan

dreth, of the Philadelphia Bar. Philadelphia: Rees, Welsh & Co., 1880. Pp. X, 65. This monograph combats the almost universal idea that ou a contract of sale of goods, where nothing remains to be done by the vendor, as between him and the vendee, the property vests in the vendee, the Fendor retaining only a right of possession until payment. The author advocates his theory ingeniously, and fortifies it by some eminent authorities, but the contrary rule is so firmly fixed that nothing short of legislation can modify it. And for ourselves, we see "no need of a change."

[ocr errors]

he was appointed Attorney-General to the Prince of Wales, and two months afterward was appointed a Lord Justice of Appeal, and was sworn a member of the Privy Council. As he was then only thirty-nine years old, the appointment was severely criticised, but he soon justified Lord Cairns' selection. His judgments were carefully prepared and well reasoned, and his courteous manner rendered him a general favorite with the bar. The Law Times says: “A brilliant career, which those who knew the Lord Justice well anticipated would be crowned with the highest honors attainable by a lawyer, has been abruptly terminated; but not until abundant evidence has been furnished that he possessed all the qualifications of a judge. At the bar Mr. Alfred Thesiger was distinguished for his grasp of detail, his lucidity of statement and the perfect fairness with which he stated his case.

He appreciated with rapidity and accuracy points of law when they were presented to him, and without difficulty ho laid before the court the whole of his case in logical order. As Lord Justice the powers which he possessed shone conspicuously. He was peculiarly fitted for the high order of judicial work provided by a court of appeal. His judgments are models of clearness, free from verbosity - which too frequently covers confusion of ideas -- and couched in languago singularly apt and judicial. His demeanor to the bar was that of a courteous gentleman who knew that the business of a judge is to hear arguments, not to interrogate or interrupt counsel. That he felt his position - a judge of appeal when not yet forty-to be delicate and difficult, wo believe; and in the present year, when congratulating a county court judge on his appointment, he expressed a doubt whether the office of the latter was not more to be envied than that of a Lord Justice. After three years of conscientious and valuable labor ho has been cut off. The country, the law and the legal profession thereby sustain a loss which it is difficult to exaggerate. Judicial intellects are rare. Lord Justico Thesiger promised in the progress of years to develop a judicial intellect of the highest order." The Law Journal says: • He was not one of those of whom there have been many examples in English legal history -- men wbo made their way, in spite of adverse circumstances, by force of genius and perseverance alone. He was rather one who, being placed in the best situation for success, was quite equal to the situation, and succeeded. He would not have succeeded had he not possessed great industry and conscientiousness. Those who sent their briefs to Mr. Thesiger knew that the law and facts would be mastered by him. He was not a man of great quickness of parts; but he knew his defects. He acquired by labor what others had by intuition, and was able to equal and sometimes beat them in the race. He had not the faculty of picking up facts as the case proceeded, and perceiving the law as if by intuition; but by hard work he made himself practically almost as effective a forensic ally as if he had been gifted by nature with these qualities. The process he pursued was in the highest degree creditable to his powers of application and self-constraint; but it required great bodily and mental exertion. Without any wild theorizing, it may well be supposed that under this strain the machine wore out. The rest which the bench supplied — coming, although it did, much earlier than any one born under inferior auspices could have expected -- was not sufficient to restore the balance. He was not long enough on the bench to make a judgment of his judicial capacity possible. The moral qualities which had served him so well at the bar asserted themselves in the higher position. He was patient, dignified and painstaking. It fell to his lot to prepare several of the judgments of the Court of Appeal in the cases in which he took part, and they are examples of close reasoning and clear expression. He also exhibited great independence of judgment.”


Lavor of the State of New York relating to the Assessment and

Collection of Tures, including the Statutes of 1880. Con-
taining tho Laws relating to Treasurers, Supervisors,
Assessors, Collectors, and all officers under the General
Tax Laws. With Notes of Judicial Decisions and an
Appendix of Forms. By William W. Saxton. New

York: S. A. Wilder & Co., 1880. Pp. 269.
Ereise Law of the State New York, with Civil Damage

Act, and all Statutes, including 1880. With Notes of Decisions of the Courts and Forms. By William W. Saxton. Second Edition. New York: S. A. Wilder & Co., 1880. Pp. 76. These are convenient manuals, but the former will hardly supersede Mr. Thompson's Supervisor's Mannal and Assessor's, Collector's and Town Clerk's Manual. Neither of the present works professes to be in any sense a treatise, and the references to decisions are the barest. The latter manual we should judge likely to be the more useful, and quite useful, although under the civil damage act the references to decisions ought to be much more ample. Mr. Lawson's manual on this subject is a model. In one point of view, however, these manuals have a superiority — they propose to come down to the present year in statutory citations and adjudications.

[ocr errors]




THE Right Hon. Alfred Henry Thesiger, one of the

judges of the English Court of Appeal, died October 20th, suddenly and unexpectedly, at the age of forty-two. He was the third surviving son of the first Lord Chelmsford. He was educated at Eton and at Christ Church, Oxford, and was called to the bar in 1862. In 1873 he received a silk gown from Lord Selborne. At first his leading business was mainly confined to parliamentary committees and to compensation cases, but he soon acquired a leading business at Nisi Prius, and was extensively employed in the House of Lords, and he acquired a practice worth £10,000 annually. He served upon the Extradition Commission and the Fugitive Slave Law Commission. In 1877



of New York; James v. Cowing ; Sprague v. Hosmer;

The Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company LEGAL NOTICES IN SUNDAY NEWSPAPERS.

v. Hotchkiss. —Order affirmed, and judgment abso)

lute for respondents on stipulation, with costs — Brush Editor of the Albany Law Journal:

V. Burrett; Mason v. Ludington; Dean v. De Wolf; In reply to the question of “M,” of Cleveland, judgment absolute for plaintiff ou submission, with

Hewer v. Dannenhoffer.-Judgment reversed and whether a constructive service of legal process by pub

costs — Faulkner v. Hart.lication in a Sunday newspaper is good, I send the fol

Judgment of General lowing cases :

Term reve and that of Special Term affirmed, with If a publication of a notice is, by stat

costs -- Ritch v. Smith. - Order affirmed, with costsute, required to be made for any number of days less

Monroe v. The Tradesmen's Fire Insurance Company. than a week, a publication on Sunday as one of such days is invalid (Scammon v. Chicago, 46 Ill. 146; Sewall

-Appeal dismissed, with costs – Elwood v. Roof; v. St. Paul, 20 Minn. 511; see Excelsior Ins. Co. case, 16

People ex rel. Waldman v. Police Commissioners of

New York. Abb. Pr. 8; State v. Wheeler, 64 Me. 532); but if the number of days be more than a week, neither its publication on the intervening Sundays (Taylor v. Palmer,

NOTES. 31 Cal. 240; Miles v. McDermott, id. 271; Carpenter v. St. Paul, 23 Minn. 232), although Sunday may be the first day of such publication (Cleland v. Tavernier, 11

THE November number of the American Law Review id. 194), or the last (Savings Society v. Thompson, 32

contains leading articles by William A. Maury on Cal. 347), nor its omission on such intervening Sundays Validity of Statutes authorizing the accused to testify, (Kellogg v. Carrico, 47 Mo. 157) will avoid its legality;

and by Ernest Howard Crosby on Imputed Contribunor will there arise any presumption of law that such

tory Negligence of Third Persons. Mr. Crosby lays notice was published on Sunday (Jenks v. Chicago, 48

down three rules; first, contributory negligence of Ill. 296), so, a thirty days' notice of sale was held to be

third persons does not constitute a defense unless such good, although one of the three notices was posted on

negligence is to be imputed to the plaintiff; second, the inside of a post-oflice door, such office being open

the contributory negligence of a third person, who was only for two hours on Sunday (Graham v. Fitts, 53

guilty thereof as the agent of the plaintiff, must be Miss. 307; see Osgood v. Blake, 1 Fost. 550).

imputed to the plaintiff; third, a plaintiff, who derives A contract for a Sunday advertisement is void.

his cause of action from an injury done to a third perSmith v. Wilcox, 19 Barb. 581; 25 id. 341; 24 N. Y. 353;

son, is chargeable with the contributory negligence of Sheffield v. Balmer, 52 Mo. 474. Whether there can be

such person.

In the October number of the Southern a waiver of such irregularity in process — Morgan v.

Law Journal and Reporter is a leading article by Frank Johnson, 1 H. Black. 6:28; Taylor v. Phillips, 3 East,

Fuller ou Eloquence of the Bar, and a sketch, by J. 155; Vanderpoel v. Wright, 1 Cow. 209; Wright v. Jef

M. Whitehead, of Benjamin F. Porter, deceased, once frey, 5 id. 15; Gould v. Spencer, 5 Paige, 541; Pierce v.

reporter and afterward judge of the Alabama Supreme Rehfuss, 35 Mich. 53; Rheem v. Carlisle Bank, 76 Penn.

Court. Also an excellent sketch of the late Judge St. 132.

Manning. -The second volume of the Federal ReA mistake in dating process, etc., on Sunday may be porter, by the West Publishing Co. of St. Paul, conamended. Boyd v.Vanderkemp, 1 Barb. Ch. 273; York

tains causes decided from May to July, 1880, covering v. Ackerman, Penning, *900. See, also, Cotton v. Huey, 1,000 pages. It is a well-executed and very valuable 4 Ala. 56; Marshall v. Russell, 44 N. H. 509; Haines v.

publication, and little short of indispensable to erery McCormick, 5 Ark. 663.

J. H. S.

well-provided lawyer. TRENTON, N. J., Oct. 30, 1880.

Vice-Chancellor Bacon, the oldest of the English Editor of the Albany Law Journal:

judges, was raised to the Bench in 1870, and his present In Illinois, at least, a constructive service of legal

age is 82. The following are the particulars relating to process by publication in a Sunday paper is not good,

the other judges: for the same reason that actual service of a writ on the

Raised to the Present

Bench. Sabbath day would be of no effect, Scammon v. Chi

Age. cago, 40 III. 146. Your Clevelaud correspondent, “M,"

Baggallay, L. J.

1875 Bramwell, L. J..


72 may find in this authority an answer to his query in

Brett, L. J..

1868 your number of October 30, 1880.

Cockburn, L. C. J

Yours truly,
W. J. CULVER. Coleridge, L. C. J.

1873 CHICAGO, Nov. 1, 1880.

Cotton, L. J.

1877 Denman, J.

1872 Field, J...


Fry, J...

1877 Grove, J

1871 Hall, V. C..


1868 Nov. 9, 1880:


1876 Huddleston, B....

1875 Judgment affirmed with costs – Hurt v. Taylori James, L. J..

1869 Solinger v. Earle; Foose v. Whitmore; Wilson v. Law- Jessel, M. R.

1873 rence; Hooley v. Gieve; Roe v. Barker; Ormes v. Lindley, J...

1872 Dauchy; People ex rel. New York Elevated Railroad

Lopes, J.

1876 Lush, J

1865 Company v. Commissioners of Taxes of New York ;

Malins, V. C.....

1866 The Lacustrine Fertilizer Company v. The Lake Guano Manisty, J.

1876 and Shell Fertilizer Company; Hunt v. Purdy; Frieberg Phillimore, Sir R.

1867 v. Branigan, People ex rel. Westray v. The Mayor of Pollock, B.

1873 1879

51 New York, Lowenstein v. Flauraud; Pierson v. Morch; Stephen, J. Van Beil v. Prescott.

1879 Bowen, J. - Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide event- Pardee v. Treat; From this list it will be seen that there are eight Pakalinskey v. The New York Central and Hudson judges who have attained seventy years and upwards, River Railroad Company; Hatch v. The Mayor, etc., and eight whose age exceeds sixty.

THE following decisions were handed down Tuesday, Hawkins,"j

[ocr errors]

The Albany Law Journal.

[ocr errors]


Congress. He charged the jury on the question of the plaintiff's character for chastity, that the same

principles of law were to be applied to women as to ALBANY, NOVEMBER 20, 1880.

men in determining whether the exclusion was law

ful or not. That the social penalties of exclusion of CURRENT TOPICS.

unchaste women from hotels, theaters, and other

public places could not be applied to common carHOME one has kindly sent us a recent number of the riers; that they had a right to travel in the streets

Daily Memphis Avalanche. We opened the sheet and on the public highways, and other people who with some trepidation, for the reputation of the

travel must expect to meet them in such places; and newspaper in this part of our country had made us as long as their conduct was unobjectionable while apprehensive of some concealed Greek fire, dynamite, in such places, they could not be excluded. The or other explosive or inflammatory substance. To

carrier is bound to carry good, bad, and indifferent, our surprise we found the Avalanche a very calm and and has nothing to do with the morals of his pasdignified journal, uttering political sentiments which sengers, if their behavior be proper while travelling. might well have emanated from the New York Tri- Neither can the carrier use the character for chastity bune. It also brought us an item of legal news which

of his female passengers as a basis of classification, argues that at least in some parts and in some courts

so that he may put all chaste women, or women who of the South, colored folks have rights which white

have the reputation of being chaste, into one car, people respect. Jane Brown, a colored woman,

and those known or reputed to be unchaste, in anbought a ticket entitling her to a first-class passage

other car. Such a regulation would be contrary to from Corinth to Memphis, on the Memphis and public policy, and unreasonable. It would put every Charleston railroad. She took her seat in the woman purchasing a railroad ticket on trial for her ladies' car; the conductor ordered her to go forward virtue before the conductor as her judge, and in into a smoking and emigrant car; she refused to go,

case of mistake, would lead to breaches of the and thereupon she was ejected with great violence. peace. It would practically exclude all sensible and She brought suit for damages in the Federal Circuit sensitive women from travelling at all, no matter Court, and a jury of white men awarded her $3,000. how virtuous, for fear they might be put into, or The defense was first, that the plaintiff was an un

unconsciously occupy, the wrong car. So far as chaste person; second, that under the law of Ten- heard from, therefore, Jane Brown's body is marchnessee a carrier may refuse to carry any person at ing on. pleasure. It was conceded that on the occasion in

A correspondent asks us what we say as to the question her conduct wus proper, and that the rail

case of Reed v. N. Y. Cent. R. R. Co., 45 N. Y. 574, road company had no regulation making discrimi

in view of our third conclusion in regard to declaranation on account of color.

tions of injured parties, ante, 365. That conclusion was

as follows: “Complaints and statements of the injured The statute in question abrogated “the rule of party as to his present physical condition, although the common law giving a right of action to any per- | subsequently to the occurrence and indeed after suit son excluded from any hotel, or public means of is brought for the injuries, are admissible, whether transportation, or place of amusement." It also en- made to a physician or to one who is not an expert." acted that no keeper of

any hotel or public house, In the case referred to, the syllabus states that it or carrier of passengers for hire, shall be bound to was held that “the evidence of the plaintiff, in his entertain, carry, or admit, any person whom he own behalf, that at the time this labor was being pershall, for any reason whatever, choose not to enter- formed, he declared to a person casually present, tain, carry, or admit, to his house, hotel, carriage or and with whom he had no business relation, that he means of transportation, or place of amusement; felt ill, was inadmissible, either to controvert the nor shall any right exist in favor of any such person defendant's proof or to show statements of his own so refused admission; but the right of such keepers out of court consistent with his testimony.” We of hotels, carriers of passengers and keepers of say that this is not inconsistent with our conclusion: places of amusement to control the access and ad-first, because it was the plaintiff's own testimony as mission or exclusion of persons to or from their pub- to what he had said, and not the testimony of others lic houses, means of transportation and places of as to what he had said; or as Judge Allen put it, amusement, shall be as perfect and complete as that it was “the unsworn statement of the plaintiff;” of any private house, carriage, or private theater, or it was not the best evidence from his own mouth; place of amusement for his family.” Judge Ham- “the plaintiff,” said Judge Allen, “was a compemond charged the jury that this act of the Legisla- | tent witness to prove the state of his health at the ture, so far as it abrogated the common-law right of time," "and it was not necessary to resort to other action for wrongful exclusion from railroad cars on and inferior evidence; and so long as his sworn roads running between two or more States, was un- statements were admissible, his unsworn declaraconstitutional, because it was a regulation of com- tions should not have been received." This certainly merce between the States, which the Legislature is as far as the decision could go, for it did not inhad no right to make, the exclusive right to make it volve the proof of the declarations by the testimony being by the Constitution of the United States in of third persons. This, we think, serves to distin.

VOL. 22.- No. 21.


guish the case. But, second, at all events the decis- Judge Davis' virtues, talents, and public services as ion was not put on this ground by a majority of the any body, but this partisan exhibition on the bench court, for only three judges concurred in this view, is not greatly to his credit. If he wants to de. namely, Allen, Grover and Rapallo, while Folger, J., nounce Mr. Hewitt's conduct, let him hire Cooper was for reversal on another ground, in which Ra- | Institute, or publish a pamphlet. This is his right, pallo, J., also concurred; Church, C. J., and Peck- and he would have plenty of sympathizing bearers ham, J., dissented, and Andrews, J., did not vote. or readers. But the present is not the way to comSo the case is not of much authority on this point. mend himself to men who love fair play and abhor Third, if Judge Allen meant to exclude proof by judicial partisanship. It is entirely outside the third persons, not expert, of the plaintiff's declara- much-abused judicial privilege of commenting on tions, his theory that there is no necessity for such the conduct and demeanor of witnesses. The imevidence because the plaintiff himself could testify propriety of this present utterance is emphasized by as to his state of health, we think, is erroneous, and the fact that the judge committed an important erherein we agree with the dissenting judges.

ror in stating the testimony upon which he arraigns

Mr. Hewitt, and is forced to descend to an explanaAs our Court of Appeals are about to take posses

tion in the newspapers. The public do not like this sion of their chamber in the new capitol, we are re

sort of conduct in a judge. The physical, moral, minded that new accommodations for our lower and political world will continue to revolve very courts are soon to be provided in the city hall, which

well without the interference of judicial busyis to take the place of the old edifice burned last

bodies. winter. We know nothing of the plans of the new building, but we hope that every thing will not be

The meeting of the New York State Bar Associasacrificed to exterior and interior display, but that

tion on Tuesday last was even more slenderly atwe shall have rooms where people can see, breathe,

tended than usual, and the exercises, on the whole, and hear. It is of slight consequence that nobody

were of less than ordinary interest. Even the supcan be heard in the assembly chamber of the new

per in the evening did not attract the usual number. capitol, but hearing is of great consequence in a

We have concluded that the lawyer is not a convencourt room. Light and ventilation too are important

tional animal. The principal matter of interest in matters. In recent architecture, while there is a

the morning session was an elaborate report by Mr. decided revival of good taste, there is a tendency to Delafield, of New York, denouncing legislative dissink the utilitarian in the esthetic, and to give us

crimination in favor of our law schools, and seeking beautiful medieval caves where we should have

to put the Harvard, Yale, and Virginia law schools

The simple rooms. Our profession demand a little con

on the same footing in our State as our own. sideration for themselves, as well as for the judges,

former branch of his suggestions was adopted, the

latter discarded. While we are by no means strenjurors, suitors, and spectators, and must have natural light enough to see to read at mid-day, air that will

uous about having law school graduates admitted not poison, and acoustic properties that will enable

on motion, believing that the courts are quite at libthe occupants of the rooms to hear and be heard erty to amuse themselves with their present farcical without painful effort. Let the money be spent on

examinations, yet if there is an advantage in a law these points, rather than on carvings, paintings, til

school education over that to be derived from mere ings, and costly måsses of materials.

reading in an office, it would seem fair to make some discrimination, in point of the term of study, in fa

vor of the law schools. We regretted to hear Mr. However men feel about Mr. Hewitt's conduct,

Delafield read the sentence in the late Chief Judge as a politician and a man of honor, in the Chinese

Church's letter, to the effect that law school manletter case, there can bardly be any difference of

agers run the schools simply to make money. That opinion among the bar as to the rebuke adminis

declaration is a great injustice to such men as Judge tered to that gentleman by Judge Davis in his re

Dwight and Judge Dillon, of Columbia, and the cent decision. It seems to us a very unnecessary late Senator Harris and Amos Dean, and Judge and undignified, not to say improper, performance.

Parker, formerly of the Albany Law School; and If Mr. Hewitt was guilty of any crime, it was Judge especially to the late Chief Judge's eminent colDavis' duty to hold him for that crime. If he had league, the late Judge Allen, who used to come down not been guilty of any crime, Judge Davis had no

from the bench to deliver lectures before the Albany duty in the premises, with respect to him. The Law School. people have not yet constituted Judge Davis their Cato, nor their model of deportment. He has as The annual address, by Mr. George W. Biddle, of little right to promulgate his opinion on such points Philadelphia, was a vigorous, exhaustive, and adfrom the bench as we have to do so in this JOURNAL. mirably expressed essay on the proper office and This is not the first time, even in this case, that he limitations of Retrospective Legislation. Mr. Biddle has thought it important to the public to “put produced an excellent impression upon our bar, by himself on the record," from the bench, on purely his learning, modesty, and amenity, and his address public or political affairs. We are glad to know was listened to with great interest and profit. To that in this instance his conduct has not cost the his remarks, at the supper, in favor of a substantial victim any thing. We have as high a respect for l life tenure for judges, we cannot give our adhesion,

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »