There are some sixty cases in the volume, and as the United States Reports do not come within the purview of our Digest of State Reports, we notice here some of the more important cases.

The first case in the volume, Carter v. Townsend, — holds that a lien for supplies, furnished in Virginia to a vessel owned in Maine, is not lost by taking a bill of an exchange drawn on one of the owners, notwithstanding that by the law of Maine the taking of a bill of exchange is presumptive extinguishment of a debt.

The only question which seems to have occupied the attention of the learned judge in the case was the effect of the bill of exchange. It seems to have been assumed, that, had the bill not been given, there could be no doubt as to the attaching of the lien, though there appears to have been no evidence that the supplies could not be procured except on the credit of the vessel. Undoubtedly at the time the decision was rendered, the profession generally did not suppose that such evidence was necessary to support a lien for supplies. But whether since the decision of Pratt v. Reed, 19 How. 359, the learned judge would now feel himself at liberty to decide the case as he did in 1858, may perhaps be doubted. In the similar case of The Sarah Starr, 1 Sprague, 458, which was a suit by a material-man, Judge Sprague decided against the lien, feeling compelled thereto by Pratt v. Reed; but he refused to condemn the plaintiff in costs, substantially on the ground that the decision of the Supreme Court had been a judicial reversal of the law, as previously understood, and that the plaintiff was justified in supposing, when he commenced his suit, that he had a righteous claim.

In two other cases, — Palmer v. Elliot, p. 63, and Baker v. Draper, p. 420, —it is held, that the presumption of payment, which the law of Maine and Massachusetts attach to the giving of negotiable paper for a pre-existing debt, was rebutted by the circumstances of the cases.

In the case of United States v. Williams, p. 5, the court decided that Circuit Courts have power to grant new trials after conviction in cases of felony. There is no doubt that such is the general if not universal practice in this country; but it is worthy of note, that the case of Reg. v. Scaife, 2 Den. C. C. 281; s. c. 17 Q. B. 238, which is relied on to show that new trials are granted in like cases in England, has been recently disapproved by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the case of Reg. v. Bertrand, Law Rep. 1 P. C. 520. Two of the judges, Sir John T. Coleridge and Sir William Erle, who decided the case of Reg. v. Scaife, sat as members of the Privy Council at the hearing of Reg. v. Bertrand, and concurred in the result, Sir John T. Coleridge delivering the opinion. It must therefore be taken as the law of England to-day, that a new trial cannot be granted after a conviction of felony.

In United States v. Holmes, p. 98, the nature of the insanity which will exempt from criminal liability is laid down in terms employed in many of the adjudged cases, but which will hardly satisfy the doctors.

In Trott v. City Ins. Co., p. 439, it is held, that a by-law which provided that any difference which might arise in relation to any loss sustained or alleged to be sustained by a party insured should be determined by referees; and that in case any suit should be commenced without an offer of reference, the claim of the party so commencing the suit should be released and discharged, was void

as ousting the courts of their jurisdiction. See the recent cases on this subject collected in an article on "Arbitration Clauses," 3 Am. Law Rev. 249; also Rowe v. Williams, 97 Mass. 163.

Carpenter v. The Schooner Emma Johnson, p. 633, decides that the admiralty has jurisdiction over a contract of affreightment between two ports in the same State when a part of the navigation of the vessel is on the high seas, and out of the jurisdiction of the State. It has since been held, in the Massachusetts district, by Judge Lowell, that admiralty has jurisdiction of a libel for wages against a vessel plying on navigable waters, though those waters are entirely within one State. See The Sarah Jane, 2 Am. Law Rep. 455.

At the end of the volume are the proceedings in the Circuit Court on the death of the Hon. Rufus Choate.

The reporter's work is well done; but the head-notes are often too vague, presenting rather some undoubtedly sound but yet obvious principle than the precise point which came up for adjudication. We congratulate Mr. Justice Clifford on having overcome that singular dislike to the definite article which disfigures his opinions in the volumes of Mr. Wallace.

Michigan Reports. Reports of Cases heard and decided in the Supreme Court of Michigan from April 28, 1868, to January 11, 1869. WILLIAM JENNISON, Reporter. Volume IV., being Volume XVII. of the Series. Detroit: Wm. A. Throop & Co. 1869.

WE have spoken of the excellence of the Michigan Reports in former numbers of this review. It will do no harm, however, to repeat that this court sets an example of judicial gravity and decorum which one could wish were more widely followed. The volume before us does not happen to be a particularly interesting one; but, as it arrived too late for the digest of this number, the most important cases are inserted here.

In Perrott v. Shearer, p. 48, it was held that a wrongful taker of goods is liable for their whole value, if destroyed in his possession, although the owner had insured them, and has been paid in full. The case of Hart v. Western R.R. Co., 13 Met. 99, which does not seem to have been cited, would perhaps have aided the discussion.

By a contract for the carriage of live stock, the owner took the risk of damage "in loading, unloading, conveyance, and otherwise, whether arising from

negligence. . . or otherwise." The bottom of the car dropped out. Held, that, if the car was unfit, the carrier was liable. - Hawkins v. Great Western R.R.

Co.,
p. 57.

A specific tax on express companies on the gross receipts of their current business within the State, was held constitutional. CAMPBELL, J., dissenting. — Walcott v. The People, 17 Mich. 68.

We have noticed Hobart v. Detroit before (ante, p. 170). The city of Detroit had power by its charter to pave its streets, but all contracts were to be made with the lowest bidder. It contracted for the Nicholson pavement, the only bidder being the patentee, who had a monopoly. Held, that the contract was legal. CAMPBELL, J., dissenting, p. 246.

In Hogsett v. Ellis, p. 351, it was held, that, after the determination of a

tenancy at will by notice to quit, assumpsit for use and occupation lies against the tenant if he holds over. Were the question a new one, there might perhaps be a doubt whether any distinction could be properly taken between the position of a tenant at will, after the expiration of the time required to be allowed by a notice to quit, and that of a tenant for years after expiration of his term. We suppose it is settled, however, that the tenant at will holding over after notice becomes a trespasser, and it would appear from such cases as Ibbs v. Richardson, 9 Ad. & El. 849, that the landlord may waive the tort and sue on an implied

contract.

We may further mention Detroit & Milwaukee R.R. Co. v. Van Steinburg, p. 99, as containing a discussion as to when negligence is a question of law and when of fact.

Probably the case of the most local interest is The People v. The Auditor General, p. 161, arising out of an act of the legislature providing for the appointment of a Professor of Homœopathy in Michigan University, with which one is led to suppose the learned regents of that institution did not fancy compliance beyond the letter of the law.

For other cases, see 3 Am. Law Rev., pp. 381, 581.

The custom of citing cases by the volume and page of the reports only, and not by name, in this series, is to be regretted.

North Carolina Reports. Cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of North Carolina. June Term, 1868, and January Term, 1869. By S. F. PHILLIPS, Reporter. Vol. LXIII., No. 1. Raleigh: Nichols & Gorman.

1869.

WE have here, we suppose, half of the next forthcoming volume of North Carolina Reports. The practice of indicating the volumes of reports by the name of the State instead of the name of the reporter, which is coming into general use throughout the Union, is hereafter to be adopted in North Carolina. As we include only entire volumes in the State Digest, we notice here some of the more valuable cases.

In an action on the case for refusing to deliver $360 gold coin deposited with the defendant, the measure of damage is the value of the gold in currency. — Gibson v. Groner, p. 10. See Gibson v. Smith, p. 103.

On a trial for murder, the fact of killing with a deadly weapon being admitted or proved, the burden of showing that the killing was not murder, but manslaughter or justifiable homicide, is on the prisoner. State v. Willis, p. 26.

The act making negroes incompetent witnesses is void, as repugnant to the State Constitution.. State v. Underwood, p. 98.

The North Carolina Stay Law is unconstitutional, as impairing the obligation of contracts. — Jacobs v. Smallwood, p. 112.

An ordinance repealing a previously enacted Statute of Amnesty is void, as an ex post facto law. State v. Keith, p. 140.

A testator made a will in 1855 by which he gave to W. T. Redmond "the sum of $2,000 to be put at interest for the purpose of giving him a classical education. It is my desire that said $2,000 shall be thus expended, and that he shall take

his course at the University of North Carolina. The testator died in 1867; Redmond, who was then a married man of twenty-four, claimed the $2,000; the executor answered that Redmond was past the age at which the legacy could be applied as intended, and that besides, Redmond, whilst a boy, had refused to be educated, and had run away from a school to which the testator had sent him; but the court held Redmond entitled to the legacy. - Redmond v. Burroughs, p. 242. A lieutenant, and a private soldier, who by command of their captain took two horses from a citizen of North Carolina on May 17, 1865, were guilty of trespass. Wilson v. Franklin, p. 259.

A guardian is not liable for having received Confederate money, in 1862, from a debtor of his ward, who tendered it on his [the debtor's] being about to leave the State. State v. Mebane, p. 315. See also Shipp v. Hettrick, p. 329, and Capehart v. Etheridge, p. 353.

The addition of the words "in specie " after a promise to pay a certain number of "dollars," is a material alteration. — Darwin v. Rippey, p. 318. So decided on the authority of Bronson v. Rodes, 3 Am. Law Rev. 565.

The opinions of the court are generally brief and pithy.

Fifth Annual Report of the Board of State Charities of Massachusetts, to which are added the Reports of the Secretary and the General Agent of the Board. Boston: Wright & Potter. 1869.

THIS report has its usual valuable collection of statistical tables, and the Board take a justifiable pride in recounting what has been accomplished in improving the prisons and charitable institutions of the State during the past five years. They own that much remains to be done; for instance, "In one of the State establishments sixty-eight boys are packed to sleep, two by two, and sometimes four by four, heads and feet in square bunks, and in an apartment containing less than three hundred cubic feet of air for each sleeper."

At page 361, there is a table giving the annual costs of the State Prisons in twenty-nine of the States, exhibiting an unaccountable difference. In but very few of the States do the earnings exceed the expenses. It certainly seems strange that while in Massachusetts the State Prison earns $26,000 more than it costs, the State Prisons in New York cost $584,000 more than they earn.

The assumption in the report of knowledge of what is and what is not the design of God and nature, and the general use of a more rhetorical style, are novelties, and not in our judgment improvements.

The Law Magazine and Law Review; or, Quarterly Journal of Jurisprudence. For May, 1869. London: Butterworths.

THIS number begins with an article on the Law Digest Commission. Then follows a sketch of Lord Wensleydale; though one of the greatest lawyers of modern times, Baron Parke's life was so successful, and withal so uneventful, that those who have attempted his biography have found it rather up-hill work. Aside from his decisions in the Reports, the only thing for which he is likely to be remembered, is the unsuccessful attempt to give him a peerage for life. The very attempt was a straw which showed how the current was going, and public

events now make it seem probable that the next attempt to create a life-peerage will not be unsuccessful.

The first volume of Mr. Finlason's edition of Reeves's History of the English Law is noticed with praise. When this history is completed, we hope to give it a notice somewhat commensurate with its merits.

Article Fourth gives a picture of an "Old Circuit Leader," one John Jones, of Ystrad, in Wales, whose career serves to point the usual moral of the evanescence of a lawyer's fame.

Next is an article on the salaries of Irish law officers, which is followed by an Essay on the Real Estates Intestacy Bill, brought into Parliament by Mr. Locke King. This is a bill providing that real estate shall pass on the death of the owner intestate to his next of kin in like manner as his personal estate. The writer of the article, who is in favor of the principle of the bill, quotes approvingly from Austin: "This needless distinction between real and personal property, which is one of the largest that the law of England contains, is one prolific source of the unrivalled intricacy of the system, and of its matchless confusion and obscurity." The Essay is very interesting, and well written.

The Seventh Article, entitled "Suggestions on an Improved System of Police for the Metropolis," may be commended to those who are now busying themselves in matters concerning the police of our large cities.

Then follow two articles, one on the "Election Inquiries," and a second on "Coroner's Election Law."

The head of "Indexing and Digesting" drew our attention as being of those who have to labor much at such work, but we were disappointed; it is merely a review of a Scotch and an Irish Digest.

66

A review of Lord Campbell's Lives of Lord Lyndhurst and Lord Brougham comes next. Certainly no man's violent dealing" ever "came down upon his own pate," as Lord Campbell's has done. His vilification of Lords Lyndhurst and Brougham has been received with a howl of contempt, and has, temporarily at any rate, ruined the character of his victims. The unanimity of condemnation is surprising. Judas and Nero have found their advocates, and we wonder that no one has arisen to defend Lord Campbell. This Review gives an amusing account of How Lord Brougham called Lord St. Leonards a bug; " a word, by the way, much more offensive in British than in American parlance. An article on the Site of the New Law Courts, and a brief notice on the First Report of the Judicature Commission, finish the articles in this number. There are also notices of several new books.

66

The Western Jurist. For April, 1869.

THIS number contains an article on the fundamental notions involved in the idea of a written constitution, and the usual collection of cases.

The American Law Register. For March, April, and May, 1869.

THE March number has a leading article on the disbarring of Mr. Bradley by the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, and the matter is again recurred to in the number for May. This latter number also contains an article on the Judicial System of Scotland, while in the April number, Judge Redfield furnishes an Essay on "Legal Tender Notes before the Supreme Court."