« PreviousContinue »
very strong. We incline to think, with M. Barth, they are unanswerable. If it be asked, as naturally it will be, what then is the paramount authority there, our author's reply will no doubt be to many highly disconcerting. For, practically, his reply is that none such exists. It would therefore have to be provided, and the modus operandi of this provision, through a mixed Commission, as suggested by Mr. Nelson, could not fail to be highly instructive. Whatever principles might be found to be held in common by all the races of Southern India would form the Fus Naturale et Gentium of the Madras Presidency. The customs observed by the numerically predominant non-Brahmanic and non-Aryan inhabitants would then, many of them for the first time, obtain Judicial recognition. Some such have already been so recognised, why not others? Doubtless these customs would, in not a few cases, be obnoxious to Western conceptions of Law and Morals; but not more so, it may well be contended, than
many customs which, on the authority of possibly isolated, often conflicting, texts of speculative writers of uncertain date and still more uncertain prevalence, are at the present day imposed upon persons who laugh at Brahmans and deride the Vedas. That the Code of Manu, so called, ever was Law proper, we have our. selves long disbelieved. That the Brahmans should have wished to make us accept it as Law, we can readily understand. We are grateful to Mr. Nelson for his able and interesting work, and wish him success in his battle for the “Scientific Study of Hindû Law,"
A Manual of Practice of the Supreme Court of Judicature in the Queen's Bench and Chancery Divisions. Second Edition. By John INDERMAUR, Solicitor. Stevens & Haynes. 1881.
The recent consolidation of the three Common Law Divisions into one
Queen's Bench Division," and the abolition of the ancient and historically interesting but practically superfluous offices of the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, and Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer, afforded an opportune occasion for the publication of a second edition of Mr. Indermaur's excellent manual of Practice. A new edition had moreover for some time been called for in consequence of the alterations rendered necessary by the various new rules, more especially those of April, 1880, and the many decisions on points
of practice which had been given during the preceding three years. The author has thoroughly and carefully revised the work adding a chapter on Arbitration and also some additional forms in the Appendix. Altogether about 60 pages have been added to the book; but without imparing the conciseness which was a commendable feature of the first issue. Both Articled Clerks and Solicitors will find the present edition a convenient authority for the purpose of ordinary practice.
The Law of Fixtures, in the principal relation of Landlord and Tenant, and in all the other or general relations. By ARCHIBALD Brown, M.A. and B.C.L., of the Middle Temple, Esq., Barristerat-Law. Fourth Edition. Stevens & Haynes. 1881.
We are glad to see that a fourth edition has been called for of Mr. Archibald Brown's able treatise on the somewhat difficult branch of law which deals with the Law of Fixtures. His statements of the law are eminently clear and concise, and the arrangement, which has been improved in the present edition, leaves little to be desired. The changes in the law, both statutory and case-made, which have occurred since the issue of the last edition, in 1875, have been carefully incorporated, and the whole of the work has been subjected to a thorough revision. An additional feature is the inclusion of the law regarding ecclesiastical fixtures or dilapidations. The numerous references to the leading American decisions render the present edition equally available for practitioners on both sides of the Atlantic.
SMALLER BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS. Mr. M. D. Chalmers, M.A., of the Inner Temple, addresses to Mr. Baron Pollock a Letter on The Cost of Litigation, with Suggestions for the Amendment of the Procedure of the Supreme Court (Stevens and Sons, 1880), in which, we observe, he takes some ideas from the Indian Code of Civil Procedure. There are, probably, not a few points upon which, making due allowance for local diversities, our law reformers might not glean useful suggestions from our Indian Codes. Mr. Chalmers's views tend in the direction of a diminution of Jury trials, which he considers an expensive “luxury" to the litigant. He also favours the One-Judge System, about the merits of which there is just now no small controversy. The value of his pamphlet is brought out in one of the articles in our February issue,
A collection of Latin Maxims literally translated (Stevens & Haynes, 1881), will be found a useful companion for the Articled Clerk in the course of his reading for examination. The author, who is apparently a Solicitor, has selected those maxims which most frequently occur in the received examination text-books, and besides translating them, has given short explanatory notes, containing reference to the leading cases involved. The student would do well to commit the whole of the 144 maxims to memory, and subsequently to study their full bearing, and more especially the many exceptions to them, in the larger work of Broom.
A Digest of the Law of Light, by Mr. E. Stanley Roscoe, Barrister-at law (Reeves and Turner, 1881), supplies a compact and scientifically arranged exposé of a branch of the law by no means free from difficulties. The statements are given in numbered paragraphs, illustrated by examples drawn from decided cases, and occasionally supplemented by concise notes. At the end is a brief Appendix of Statutes and Forms. Not only lawyers, but urban landlords, architects, and builders, will find this little work a very useful vade mecum.
In an Essay on the Law of Pleading by way of claim for Alternative Relief (Butterworth, 1881), Mr. A. Gordon Langley, of Lincoln's Inn, has published a learned and well-reasoned tractate on an important but somewhat obscure point of pleading, in which the authorities, both prior and subsequent to the Judicature Acts and Orders, are digested and classified. The practitioner will find it worthy of attentive perusal.
Mr. W. Shirley Shirley, M.A., of the North-Eastern Circuit, assisted by Mr. C. M. Atkinson, M.A., LL.M., of the same Circuit, in a Sketch of the Criminal Law (Stevens and Sons, 1880), plunges boldly into the “Mare Magnum ” of criminal law, which he maps out for the student who shall navigate in his wake in the brief space of a text of 128 pages. To arrive at his end, he is obliged to use great compression. We do not think that it is possible fairly to condense so large and difficult a subject, for instance, as the Law of Libel, into the small compass which Mr. Shirley, of necessity, allots it.
The headings of the various paragraphs, however, are well brought out by the use of bold type, so that the key-note can scarcely fail to catch the eye.
** Pressure on our space compels us to postpone several Reviews, as well as the usual Select Cases and Quarterly Notes.
Law Magazine and Review
ALL REPORTED CASES,
LAW REPORTS, LAW JOURNAL REPORTS, LAW TIMES
REPORTS, AND WEEKLY REPORTER,
COLLECTIVE TABLE OF CASES AND INDEX OF SUBJECTS.
AUGUST 1880—AUGUST 1881.
HENRY M. KE A RY,
Of Lincoln's Inn, Esq., Barrister-at-Lab.
LONDON: STEVENS AND HAYNES,
BELL YARD, TEMPLE BAR.