Page images
PDF
EPUB
[graphic]

rather "in the nature of the bailment, locatio operis mercium vehendarum. The character of a chattel seems to be stamped upon a message reduced to writing," &c.

True it is that such a position is taken in one or two of the cases which attempt to decide the question of the liability of telegraph companies; but in the majority of them it is positively denied. When we consider the operations of telegraph companies, the agencies they employ, and what they in fact perform, it is submitted that the above position is not the most reasonable. How can it be considered that telegraph companies are technical common carriers or bailees of any sort? They do not obtain the use of any property nor do they bail goods as such. "The telegraph company receives a written message for transmission. It uses machinery to reproduce the words of that message at a distant point, either by direct copying of it, under some alphabetical system or by translating the message into certain symbols which, marked upon paper at a distant point, are thus translated into our ordinary language. It cannot be said to be even in the manual charge of the message so transmitted, during its transmission." Birney v. N.Y. & Wash. Printing Teleg. Co. 18 Md. 341.

Is the nature of the engagement of telegraph companies different from that of ordinary agents who are employed to perform specific services?

The chapter as to the extent of the responsibility of telegraph companies is very full and complete. The subject is first presented upon the authorities, and then the authors' views are given at length, while it is conceded by them that the weight of judicial opinion is adverse to holding telegraph companies to the liability of the common carrier, they nevertheless declare them to be so liable. Their reasons are given at length, and they are worthy of the perusal of all. The question of their liability is an open one; and whether such companies should be held to a greater responsibility than the passenger carrier, or even the ordinary bailee, is still a question of much doubt.

The authors hold persistently to the view that telegraph companies should be held liable for loss occasioned solely by their own negligence, even where the sender of the message has not chosen to pay for repetition or insurance. We think this position entirely correct, and one which will be ultimately adopted. Upon the whole, the profession, and those who are engaged in the business of telegraphy, should welcome this book upon the law of telegraphs as, perhaps, the best which can now be written, considering the newness of the subjects discussed, and the contrariety of the judicial mind with regard to the duties and responsibilities of those who engage in the transmission of messages by the electric telegraph. Let the authors be satisfied with the result of their patient, persistent, and intelligent labors upon the first treatise concerning the law of telegraphs.

A Treatise on the American Law of Real Property. By EMORY WASHBURN, LL.D., Bussey Professor of Law in Harvard University. Author of a Treatise on the American Law of Easements and Servitudes. Third Edition. 3 vols. Boston: Little, Brown, & Company. 1868.

THERE are some evils which are inevitable in this world; and we suppose that the expansion of Professor Washburn's excellent treatise on real property into three volumes is one of them. Such evils, too, it is common to remark, are

[graphic]

only blessings in disguise; and such, we believe, will turn out to be the fact in the present instance. For though it was very pleasant for us to feel, in 1864, that we had an able, accurate, and comprehensive text-book on the law of real property as it existed in this country, all in two volumes; yet it must be confessed that we congratulated ourselves a little more than the facts warranted. It is no more than the truth to say that such a treatise cannot be contained in two volumes; and when we open the present edition of Professor Washburn's work, we are surprised that we ever thought that it could. And this we say, having regard not only to the growth of the law on these various topics, since the publication of the last edition, and the increased number of important cases bearing upon these topics during the last four years; but also to the necessity, in order to make the work complete, of treating more thoroughly some matters too lightly passed over in the former editions. But especially, when we consider the importance of having these recent adjudications duly incorporated in the text, and of stating fully the points, hitherto unnoticed, perhaps, on which they turn, we are confident that the profession will welcome the three volumes of Professor Washburn's new edition as an old friend laden with another serviceable contribution.

We find the recent cases and statutes systematically, carefully, and clearly embodied in this new edition. The law is brought down to the present day, as it should be. And notwithstanding the quantity of new statute law, and of new cases thereon, requiring laborious analysis and careful compression in order to present the results without prolixity, repetition, or obscurity, we can honestly say, not only that we have found nothing to criticise, but that we have found much to admire. For it must be remembered that, to write a work of this kind, so various and comprehensive in its scope as to embrace the diverse statute laws, and the decisions thereon of thirty-six distinct States, is a very much more difficult task, in many respects, and certainly a much less inviting one, than to trace the thread of adjudications on a question of common law. For in the latter case the writer is not embarrassed by technical constructions of the statute, nor is he obliged to separate so entirely the decisions of one bench from those of another bench, because of a difference in the meaning or the words of the law which is passed upon. He can use all the cases to discover his principles; while the writer in Professor Washburn's position can enjoy this pleasure only when treating of some of the oldest and most common incidents of real property; in regard to many of the topics of his work he is forced to separate his cases from regard to the interpretation of a multitude of statutes.

It is undoubtedly from the fact that Professor Washburn is seen to have executed his difficult task as well as it could be done, that the wide-spread popularity of his work on Real Property has sprung. He has composed an admirable summary of the law of Real Estate as it exists in the United States. Such is the constant communication between the different States, that lawyers in one State are in constant need of acquainting themselves with the laws of other States; while the recent radical changes in the common law, especially as respects the rights of married women, and the right of homestead, make it absolutely necessary that a work of this kind, to be really useful, should be brought down to the present time.

There is in this edition an entirely new section on the Right of Homestead,

#, - -- - "་"

[graphic]

comprising the law on this important subject as it exists in each of the States of the Union. We observe also many new sections and chapters and copious footnotes on subjects too various to be particularly specified. We have also the pleasure of remarking on the very ample index with which the book is furnished.

A Treatise on the Companies' Act, 1862; with special reference to Winding Up, for the Purposes of Reconstruction or Amalgamation; with Forms and Precedents of Memoranda and Articles of Association. With Supplement, containing the Companies' Act, 1867, Notes, and a Digest of Additional Cases. By G. LATHAM BROWNE, of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law. London: Stevens & Haynes. 1867.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

THIS volume treats of a branch of law which is peculiar to England, and altogether created by statute. However nearly, therefore, it may meet the wants of the profession in England, and we may remark, that, notwithstanding its very recent publication, it has already acquired a decided standing in that country as a trustworthy and useful treatise, - it can hardly obtain a wide circulation in the United States. Portions of the book, however, are of general applicability; and the first part, on "The Life of a Limited Company" may be read by the American lawyer with interest and profit. Of course, to any one desirous of acquainting himself with the history, constitution, and fortunes of the multitudinous "limited companies" to which of late years so much of the business enterprise and capital of England has been devoted, this work of Mr. Latham Browne's is indispensable.

Incidentally we cannot but notice that many of the most important cases in the equity series of the Law Reports arise under the Companies' Act. Indeed, it seems as if the law of this subject were now growing into a well understood system with something of the suddenness and rapidity which has marked the development of insurance in this country during the last fifty years.

Commentaries on the Law of Partnership, as a Branch of Commercial and Maritime Jurisprudence; with occasional Illustrations from the Civil and Foreign Law. By JOSEPH STORY, LL.D. one of the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, and Dane Professsor of Law in Harvard University. Sixth Edition. By JOHN C. GRAY, Jr., of the Boston Bar. Boston: Little, Brown, & Company. 1868.

A COMMENTATOR on the law of partnership should have not only learning, patience, and experience, but he more particularly requires an ingenious mind, assisted by the power of clear statement, so that he may be able to draw fine distinctions which shall not fade into shadows; and by a subtile analysis of apparently conflicting cases harmonize them to such an extent as will enable him to lay down rules of broad application. Such qualifications Judge Story certainly had, and therefore it is not surprising to find that the reception of the first edition of this work, in 1841, was such as all his books have received, although in this case the able treatises of Watson, Gow, and Collyer, on the same subject, were already in existence.

Mr. Gray, in this edition, has cited about nine hundred new cases; probably most of these have been decided since the last edition was published, in 1859;

[graphic]

at all events, none will deny the necessity for the present edition who remember the importance of the cases relating to this subject which have been decided in this country and England during the last ten years.

It is of course impossible to speak with certainty upon such a matter; but, so far as we have noticed, all the decisions of interest upon this subject to the present time have been cited in this edition.

We can, however, speak with certainty in regard to the notes which have been added by the present editor, and which greatly increase the value of the work, and we unhesitatingly praise them for their point and brevity attained without the sacrifice of clearness and comprehensiveness.

The note to section forty-nine discusses the very important question what constitutes a partnership, and comes to the conclusion that the fact that a person has a lien on the profits, or that he is entitled to an account, though strong evidence that he is a partner, is not entirely satisfactory as an ultimate test to be applied in all cases.

We cannot do more than call attention to a note to section ninety-four, upon "Real Estate of Partnership," although it well deserves careful study. In conclusion, we heartily recommend this work to the profession.

Reports of Cases decided in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia. By PEACHY R. GRATTAN. Vol. XVII. From April 1, 1866, to July 1, 1867. Richmond: V. L. Fore, Printer. 1867.

WE are glad to observe, in this continuation of Mr. Grattan's able series of reports, that there is no evidence of falling off in the legal learning and ability which have always characterized the decisions of the highest court of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Nor has there been any lack of opportunity for the court to display its powers in the nature of the cases to be adjudicated. Unlike some of the Southern States, in which litigation has, since the war, been restricted to comparatively few and uninteresting channels, Virginia has apparently no want of important and intricate law-suits. We are sorry that we have not been able to include cases from Mr. Grattan's recent volumes in our Selected Digest of State Reports; but we will call attention to a few of those in the present volume that have seemed most to deserve study.

In The Merchants' Ins. Co. v. Edmond, Davenport, & Co., p. 138, the appellees insured their vessel, the Sally Magee, with the appellant corporation, on the twenty-fourth day of December, 1860. By the policy the company undertook to insure inter alia against "men of war," "enemies," "takings at sea," and "arrests," which terms the court in the very clear opinion of Rives, J., considered equivalent to the common term "capture." The ship was captured on the 27th of June, 1861, by the United States, and was subsequently condemned and confiscated by a prize court. The case is reported in 3 Wallace, 451, The Sally Magee. Judge Rives, in giving the judgment of the court in favor of the appellees, follows the law as laid down in that case by the Supreme Court of the United States, and also by the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, in 1863, in Dole v. N.E. Mutual Marine Ins. Co., 6 Allen, 373.

In Sawyer v. Corse, p. 230, the appellant was the contractor for carrying the mails between Alexandria and Washington, and a letter containing several hundred dollars handed to him by the appellee was lost, owing, as was alleged, to

[graphic]

the negligence of one of the carriers of the mail. The question before the court was, whether the contractor was responsible for the carelessness of a carrier. It was argued that the latter was a public officer, and that under the regulations of the Post-office Department he was not the agent of the contractor, but of the government. The court, in the able opinion of Mr. Justice Joynes, reviewed all the English and American cases on this somewhat vexed question, and held, that Sawyer, having voluntarily employed the carrier, must be considered as responsible for his negligence; and the case was accordingly remanded to the jury to try the question of fact.

In Oneale's Case, p. 582, which was on an indictment for bigamy, it was held, in opposition to the decisions in New York, Massachusetts, and Connecticut, that the confessions and acts of the prisoner were competent evidence to go to the jury in proof of marriage. Mr. Justice Rives, delivering the opinion of the court, follows, we suppose, the prevailing current of American authority. He gives a very satisfactory review of the precedents.

An important and well considered case, involving several difficult points which generally come under the head of "conflict of laws," is Fant et al. v. Miller & Mayhew, on p. 48. This was an action of debt on certain promissory notes signed in Virginia, but sent to Maryland to be filled up and made payable there. They were not stamped according to the laws of Maryland, and a suit could not have been brought upon them in that State. It was contended, on the part of the defendants, that an action on them would not lie in Virginia; but the court held, that, inasmuch as the notes were not void in Maryland for want of a stamp, but only inadmissible in evidence, the action would lie in Virginia, although the contract was a Maryland and not a Virginia contract. The elaborate opinion of Mr. Justice Joynes in this part of the case is well worth perusal. Another question was that presented by the defence of usury. The contract was usurious according to the law of Maryland; but in that State simple interest may always be recovered on a usurious contract. The defendants, however, contended that the courts of Virginia must follow the lex fori of Virginia in cases of usury, and restrict the recovery of the plaintiffs to the amount of the principal of the debt. But the court held, that there was nothing in the lex fori, the law of Virginia, to prevent the plaintiffs getting judgment for the amount of their notes, and simple interest thereon, according to the lex loci contractus. See the opinion of Rives, J., p. 63, quoting McFadin v. Burns, 5 Gray, 599.

We wish we had space to remark on other cases in this volume. There are several which contain able and full discussions of equity powers, and of the practice in courts of chancery, which we should be glad to mention, had we space to do so.

Commentaries on the Criminal Law. By JOEL PRENTISS BISHOP, author of "The First Book of the Law," and Commentaries on the Law of "Criminal Procedure," and of "Marriage and Divorce." Fourth Edition, revised and enlarged. Boston: Little, Brown, & Company. 1868.

WE cannot say that we have examined thoroughly this latest edition of Mr. Bishop's well-known work on Criminal Law, nor, indeed, that we have ever read through the original work; but we can say honestly that we have had repeated occa

« PreviousContinue »