« PreviousContinue »
Oke's Game Laws: containing the whole Law as to Wild Birds throughout the United Kingdom, systematically arranged with the Acts, Decisions, Notes, and Forms. By J. W. Willis BUND, M.A., LL.B., of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister-at-Law. Fourth Edition. London : Butterworth & Co. 1897.
It is now sixteen years since the last edition of this book was published, and one of the most important features has been the legislation for the protection of wild birds. By the Wild Birds Act, 1896 (59 and 60 Vict., c. 56), a County Council may, with the approval of the Secretary of State, prohibit the killing of, or taking, any kind of wild bird at any time. This legislation is most beneficent to the interests of our country, and contrasts very favourably with the barbarous practices of Italy, where a traveller may pass over the open country or through woods and orchards, for many miles, without hearing the chirrup of any bird. The editor has fully maintained the repute of Mr. Oke, and has brought the book down to date with the latest Acts and cases.
Encyclopædia of the Laws of England, being a new Abridgement of the most Eminent Legal Authorities. Under the general editorship of A. Wood RenTON, M.A., LL.B., of Gray's Inn, and of the Oxford Circuit, Barrister-at-Law. Vol. II. London: Sweet and Maxwell, Limited. Edinburgh: William Green and Sons. 1897.
This, the second volume of a very useful compendium, continues to maintain its own. We notice an interesting article
“ Trial at Bar" from the pen of Mr. F. H. Short, followed by a uselessly long dissertation on “ Barbed Wire" by Mr. James Weir ; an article perhaps appropriate to the name of the writer, but which might have been condensed in a few lines. Mr. Manson subscribes an article on how to " Become a Bankrupt." We should think that the answer might fitly be found in the picture “ Vice Gambling with Death.” The phraseology of the title is unfortunate, although the article itself is well compiled. Mr. Barclay has contributed an interesting article on “Blockade" and on kindred subjects, although we notice at p. 183 a misprint, which turns Halleck's International Law into Harleck. Mr. Craies again suffers under the obligation of dealing in unsavoury subjects ; while “ Candidate," “Canvassing,” and “Capital Punishment ” from the pen of Mr. G. H. B. Kenrick are particularly happy, and probably the best articles in the volumne.
An Outline of the Law of Libel. Six Lectures delivered in the Middle Temple Hall during Michaelmas Term, 1896. By W. BLAKE Odgers, of the Middle Temple, M.A., LL.D., Q.C. London: Macmillan & Co., Limited. 1897.
These Lectures, having been written and delivered verbally, would best have been buried in oblivion, and we think it unfortunate that they have been printed and published as an “ Outline of the law of libel.” They certainly are not to be relied on as containing an accurate, or anything approaching an accurate, outline of the law of libel, and they are besides, in many respects, niisleading. They are chiefly gossiping discussions, speculative and argumentative, interlarded here and there with some trumpery case, in which the lecturer himself was concerned as counsel on one side or the other; for an instance of which see pp. 102-4. At p. 23 the author states: “ It is very doubtful whether a Corporation can sue for words which merely affect its dignity or honour." This is misleading, it being entirely free from doubt that a Corporation cannot sue in such a case; it was expressly decided in the very case quoted by Mr. Odgers (that of the Mayor and Corporation of Manchester v. Williams) that there is no principle of law on which such an action could be founded.
It seems an unusual and vulgar mode of authorship of a law book, to state an imaginary case, pp. 33-4, and then to offer to argue it when it arises “ in the Court of Appeal on either side.” Again, his illustrations are as unsound as his law; at p. 85, he states another imaginary case; suppose,” he says, paper published a libel on an eminent Q.C.' (without naming him): Can all eminent Q.C. sue, or only one?” Mr. Odgers says he should advise any friend of his so libelled to be the first Q.C. to sue. We have no hesitation in saying that no eminent Q.C.” would act upon such advice. If he did, woe betide him ! In the first place his opponent would at once traverse and deny that the plaintiff was an “eminent Q.C."; an unpleasant issue would thus be raised at the very outset, which plaintiff would find no little difficulty in meeting ; and if he failed in so doing his action would fail, however gross the libel might be. Both the illustration and the advice given by Mr. Odgers are, to say the least, unfortunate.
But these are not the worst features of the book, at pp. 111-112, referring to “ Malice,” the author says that our older Judges and text-writers state the law thus : “ Malice is the gist
of the action of libel. Again, he says, “these venerable writers start by stating something which is not the fact;" and “these worthies will have it that malice is the gist of the action.” Now these are misrepresentations, as well as reflections upon some of our ablest Judges and text-writers. judgment, nor in any text-book recognised as an authority upon the law of libel, is it stated in the way Mr. Odgers puts it. Mr. Odgers refuses to recognise the authorities as to the distinction between malice-in-fact and implied malice, or malicein-law; though expressly laid down in the well-known leading case on the subject-Bromage v. Prosser, 4 B. & C. 247, and which distinction runs through the whole current of subsequent authorities. At p. 115 Mr. Odgers says he was taught "that there must be et damnum et injuria in every action of tort.” One might be curious to inquire in what school he was so taught. We ourselves know of no law text-book containing such a maxim. We are all familiar with the maxims damnum sine injuriâ, damnum absque injuriâ, and injuria sine damno, all of which are clearly and elaborately discussed and explained in most of our elementary treatises on the law of torts; but this is the first occasion on which we have ever seen those maxims perverted into the quaint proposition " et damnum et injuria.” If space and time permitted there are many other unreliable statements we might point out. Suffice it to say that in our opinion this book is not a trustworthy guide either for the student, the layman, or the lawyer.
Four Lectures on the Law of Employers' Liability at Home and Abroad. By AUGUSTINE BIRRELL, Q.C., M.P., Quain Professor of Law at University College. London: Macmillan & Co., Limited. 1897
Mr. Birrell, in the first of the four lectures comprised in the little volume before us, discusses with remarkable perspicuity and ability the doctrine of common employment as applicable to the liability of employers, shewing its origin in the Law Courts, its application, its effect and the objections to it. He then, in the next lecture, refers briefly to the liability of employers under the Common law, for negligence and breach of duty, and the circumstances which led to the passing of the “Employers' Liability Act, 1880"; the subsequent working of that Act, and its shortcomings. In the third lecture follows a learned and interesting discussion on “Foreign Law and Systems of Insurance" with reference to the Liability of Employers. And the fourth lecture is devoted to the new Bill on the subject, which is so shortly to become law. In this lecture the chief features of the new Bill, and the leading arguments, pro and con, that were used in the House of Commons are stated with a terseness that could not be excelled ; and the advantages and disadvantages of the Bill are clearly and ably explained. The little volume is one which both employers and employed may read with interest, instruction, and advantage.
Monopolies by Patents, and the Statutable Remedies available to the Public. By J. W. GORDON, of the Middle Temple, Barristerat-Law. London: Stevens & Sons, Ltd. 1897.
This work commences with a brief summary of the history of the Patent law, which may be taken to have begun in 1600; it sets out the Statute of Monopolies, and discusses it, bringing us down to 46 and 47 Vict., c. 57, the Patents Act, 1883. The work is very interesting, being not only of legal, but also of historical learning. In the Appendices we find a treatise on the "Book of Bounty," with a facsimile of "By the King, a Declaration of His Majesty's Royal Pleasure In What Sort He Thinketh Fit to Enlarge, Or Reserve Himself In Matter Of Bountie." It will amply repay attentive perusal.
The Roman Law Examination Test for Bar and University : Questions and Answers. By W. ADDINGTON Willis, LL.B., of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law. London: Butterworth & Co. 1897.
This little treatise which is intended to assist the student about to present himself for examination in Roman Law, preparatory to being called to the Bar, consists of questions, all of which have been set in examinations, and contain answers by the writer to the same. The book will prove a "golden way" to students desirous of passing the Roman bridge, even if that bridge be kept by Horatius himself.
The County Courts Act, 1888, with Notes, Cases, Points of Practice and Chapters on Receiver, Injunction and Discovery in Aid of Execution. By EDWIN SHUTTLEWORTH, Chief Clerk of the Birkenhead County Court. London: John Smith and Co. 1897.
This book consists of the above Act with notes, a list of other Acts authorizing proceedings in County Courts, a list of Court
fees, and the Acts mentioned in the title. It is likely to prove a handy book of reference for officials connected with the County Court, it being brief and well indexed.
Kime's International Law Directory, containing an adequate representation of selected legal practitioners in most of the principal towns throughout the Civilized World. By Philip GRABURN Kime, London : Bowden, Hudson, and Co. 1897.
This directory is bound to be of considerable use, both to the legal profession and to the public at large, in these days when travels are multiplied and commercial intercourse is cosmopolitan. It contains inter alia an excellent telegraphic code.
The Barrister. Toronto. January, 1897.
What strikes—and, if he sees it for the first time, amazesthe English reader in this and other Canadian professional journals is the competitive advertising of the legal profession. Both The Barrister and the Canada Law Journal positively teem with advertisements of which the following is a fair type :“P. W. C. (formerly with D. and H., Barristers, . . .), Attorney and Counsellor-at-Law, Commissioner for the Provinces. T. Building, Boston, Mass.
“ Affidavits and other evidence for use in Provincial Courts carefully prepared. Special attention given to all Collections, Commercial Litigation,
Litigation, Probate and Equity Matters. (Reference, Hon. L. D. . . .)."
May it be long before we find such things in our Law Times !
La Giustizia Penale, Rivista Critica Settimanale di Dottrina Giurisprudenza e Legislazione. Rome. January and February, 1897
The names of Beccaria and Lombroso are sufficient to prove the high place which Italian writers have taken among authorities on penal law. This periodical is a combination of reported decisions, with leading articles on the subject treated. Both will be found very interesting by an English reader, and will introduce him to views, especially on the question of evidence, very far removed from those that are in favour in English practice. For instance, the gist of one decision is as