in creating, habits of locomotion and social intercourse-in furnishing the supply almost contemporaneously with the demand-in accommodating the town by benefiting the country; or, if we take it that every one either travels, or sends, or receives goods by rail, in any view it is hardly possible to mention a branch of law possessing more varied points of attraction. There is interest in watching how the Legislature deals with these immensely powerful associations, whose influence is so wide that, as was stated a few months back in the House of Lords, scarcely one of its members could be said to be personally unconcerned in their shares. There is interest in remarking the aspect which the courts assume towards them-the modus interpretandi adopted in regard to the provisions which the legislature and the law lay down for the purpose of controlling those as well as other great corporate bodies: the ability with which old rules of the common law are made applicable to the questions, so often quite new, that arise in course of the fresh combinations and unprecedented circumstances produced by a mode of transit and carriage so foreign from the ideas of those who founded and those who built up the varied structure of English jurisprudence. With such a keen demand, then, as one would infer from the above considerations, that there must exist for a good practical Guide-book on railway law, why is it so difficult in this country to point out the treatise that is calculated to satisfy the need? Why is it that no work has assumed the position with regard to this subject that has been taken and maintained in regard to their respective subjects, by such works as Sugden on Powers, Abbott on Shipping, Chitty on Pleading, and others? The answer is this: Railway law is as yet unfinished, and, so to speak, is in the state of the new creation "pawing to set free its hinder parts ;" consequently the good and sufficient book of to-day becomes in two or three years -such is the high-pressure speed of the decisions, aided ofttimes by legislative innovations-an imperfect and unsafe directory, because it of necessity contains nothing relative to the large field of questions that has been opened, and the fresh ground that has been worked, since the date of its passage through In this state of the case we have great pleasure in contributing to bring under the notice of our readers, the able and comprehensive work, the result of the labours of an American Chief Justice, the title of which heads this article. It will be found, we believe, to embrace nearly all that has been decided in England with reference to matters of general concern (omitting, of course, some few, and but few, which depend on legislation peculiar to England), adding also a large body of American decisions, and embodying much of the reasoning on which they proceed. It is a work, which there would be nothing surprising to us in finding, for some time to come, in much request among English lawyers, both because it contains what appears to us to be a valuable digest of the English cases, and because the added American cases not 1 See the late case of M'Manus v. the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Company, 5 Jurist, N.S., 651, in the Exchequer Chamber. unfrequently discuss, with great clearness, the vexed questions of the subject, and abound with argument and inference that may be expected to go a long way towards a solution of them, as they may come in future before our Courts. The above we state as the conclusion arrived at after a careful examination of the volume; but we are far from asking of our readers to accept the estimate on that ground, and therefore in the residue of this article we shall endeavour to substantiate what has been advanced. It may be well to preface what we are about to submit with this observation: That, owing partly to the more litigious habits of the people, partly to the passion for railway travelling and traffic which pervades North America, and partly to the fact that, in 1851, the number of miles of railway, in operation there, was nearly twice as great as in the United Kingdom in 1857; and that besides, in the former year, "nearly as much more was in progress, a large portion of which is now complete," the number and variety of reported decisions is far greater in the United States, in proportion to the population, than with us. Perhaps, also, another reason for the greater inclination which has been manifested there by the Railway Companies to defend actions, may not be unconnected with the state of things which the Chief Justice describes thus :-"In the United States a large proportion of the capital invested in railways has proved hitherto wholly unproductive, and much of it has already proved a hopeless loss, and a very small proportion of the whole can be said to be at all remunerative." Be the causes, however, what they may, the fact appears to be quite indisputable, that the American decisions on railway topics are not only more numerous than ours, but deal with a greater variety of questions, embracing all or nearly all that are familiar to our Courts, and also many that have not come before them. On the ultra vires question, there has been in America a large accumulation of decisions, and, as containing and discussing them, this book will be found well worthy of consultation by all who may hereafter 1 Redfield on Railways, p. 5. be called upon to beat over that ground. The strict rule repeatedly laid down here on this head by Lord Cottenham and Lord Langdale, appears to have been fully adopted in most of the United States. Indeed, in some respects, it seems to have been carried further than we have yet advanced; but, however this may be, it is settled in their courts to be a good defence to an action for calls, that they are wanted for objects alien from those that are within the constitution of the Company.1 The subject of bye-laws appears to be treated at once neatly, succinctly, and fully; and perhaps the more attention and care have been bestowed on it, because here the author touches on one of the sore places of the railway system of his country. Some acquaintance with the works of most of the late travellers in North America had well prepared us for the following admission. After setting out the regulations of our Board of Trade, he says:— "The code of bye-laws framed by the Board of Trade in England for the regulation of travel by railway, is certainly very judicious; and, if some similar one could be adopted and enforced here, it would accomplish very much towards security, sobriety, and comfort, in railway travelling, and tend to exempt the companies from much annoyance, and very often from loss." " In fact, among a number of points in which the comfort of travellers is less consulted in America than with us, nearly the only one in which they excel is this:-in hot weather the companies are generally in the habit, at each stopping station, of supplying abundance of iced water for the gratification of the thirsty occupant of the sweltering car. As we pass along, it may be well not to omit a specimen of the author's style, the more especially as it contains a sample of his mode of criticism on English authorities. “In Humble v. Langston, 2 Railway Ca., 533, it is decided that upon the sale and transfer of the shares, where the purchaser's name is not substituted on the register of the company for that of the seller, but the stock still standing in his name, he is thereby subjected to the payment of future calls; he cannot recover the money, of the purchaser, because there is no implied contract to that effect resulting from the transaction. This is certainly a most remarkable decision, and it is something of a task to be able to read the opinion of the court, by which this result is reached, with tolerable patience. The conclusion is certainly not fortified either by reason or analogy; and in Cheltenham and Great Western Union Railway Co. v. Daniel, 2 Railway Ca., 728, it is decided1 that the purchaser of shares may, by way of estoppel en pais, be made liable for calls before his name is actually substituted, for that of the seller, upon the register of shares. If so, both parties are liable for the calls; and the seller, while his name remains upon the register, is the mere surety of the purchaser as to future calls. And what is a more natural or necessary conclusion in the mind of any one having the common sense of justice, than to imply, that while the purchaser suffers the seller's name to remain upon the register, and liable to the payment of calls, through his neglect, he does impliedly promise to indemnify him against all loss on that account? See Burnett v. Lynch, 5 B & C., 589. But the case of Humble v. Langston is re-affirmed in the subsequent case of Sayles v. Blane, 6 Railway Ca., 79. These cases can only be accounted for upon the principle of discouraging blank unregistered transfers, which have the effect to evade the stamp duties.-Shelford 108; and Report on Railways, 1839; No. 517, p. 4. Since writing the above, the late case of Walker v. Bartlett 2 has come to hand, where a blank transfer seems to be regarded as perfectly valid, and that the transfer in this mode does impose upon the vendee the duty of paying calls upon the shares while they remain his property. We may be allowed to say, that this result of the On the ground that all the machinery that the legislature had rendered necessary to constitute a member was dispensed with by the conduct of the parties.-S. C. 22 Jur. N.S., 643, in Err. from C. B., where Crowder J. yielded a reluctant assent to Humble v. Langston. |