« PreviousContinue »
given, but Forms Nos. 14 and 26 do not confer a joint authority. — In re Phelps, Caldwell & Co., 1 B. R. 139.
“ Only the bankrupt or a creditor can appear by attorney. — In re Michael W. Fredenburg, 1 B. R. 34.
“ The register cannot inquire into the authority given to an attorney. – In re William D. Hill, 6 Int. Rev. Rec. 51; s.c. B. C. R. 18."
The sources from which cases have been taken appear to be The American Law Register; The American Law Review; The Weekly Bankrupt Register; The Gazette and Bankrupt Court Reporter; and The Internal Revenue Rec
Appended are the orders, rules, and forms, as indicated in the titlepage.
Such a book is much needed, and if the execution of the work is as good as the plan, which we have no reason to doubt, but which can only be told by use, the profession will have reason to be grateful to Mr. Bump.
The Civil Service. Report of Mr. Jenckes, of Rhode Island, from the Joint
Select Committee on Retrenchment, made to the House of Representatives of the United States, May 14, 1868. Together with the Testimony before the Committee on the Measures proposed by them, and the Speeches of Mr. Jenckes, Jan. 29, 1867, and May 14, 1868. Washington: Printed at the Congressional Printing Office. 1868.
The civil service of the United States, the great body of subordinate functionaries to which is intrusted the practical working of our executive departments, our custom houses, and the whole internal machinery of our National Government, has long been in a state which has excited the sneers, the reprobation, the amazement of all foreign nations. Hundreds of thousands are annually paid, and millions of money are intrusted to a set of men whose appointments are merely a matter of Government patronage, constituting the spoils of office of which we have heard so much. There is no system of examination, whether competitive or otherwise, into their fitness, no organized methods of promotion, whereby age and experience shall have their proper recompense in increased authority and compensation, and no security that a faithful and valuable servant of the public shall be retained in its employ. In fact, this last sentence might seem ironical, when it is notorious what Mr. Jenckes's report brings out in fiery characters, that for thirty-five years' official existence has been absolutely dependent on what is called good service to the party. But we do not believe it is generally known, how entirely and completely Andrew Jackson is responsible for this departure from the principles of all his predecessors; even Jefferson, who, though he made many more removals than either Washington or Adams, made a solemn and frequent assertion that they were all for cause, and none for partisan merits or demerits. The system under which we now groan was wholly the invention of General Jackson; and, in testimony of this, the Committee preface their Appendix of evidence with a most pregnant extract from Parton's “Life,"— one avowedly written in praise of the “Hero of New Orleans."
Now, to remedy these evils, the Committee proposed successively two bills, one in the last Congress, and one in this. The latter, which was crowded out by the useless legislation or non-legislation of last summer, will come up at
of action would have been barred by an act of limitation of this State, if such suit had been brought therein," is unconstitutional. This case is perfectly consistent with the previous cases. In those, it was decided that a State might impose a Statute of Limitations on all suits in its own courts; in this, that it cannot insist on having its Statute of Limitations regarded by the courts of other States. Here Mr. Brightly's love of brevity has led him into a palpable mistake.
We make these remarks in no spirit of fault finding. Mr. Brightly's reputation is strong enough to bear criticism.
One word more: we do not suppose that Mr. Brightly has been able, in so large a book, to avoid all errors of the press; but we have referred to its pages from the table of cases, and from the reports, backwards and forwards, for some hours, and we have not detected a single misprint, or one wrong citation.
A Digest of the Reports of the United States Courts, and of the Acts of Congress,
from the Organization of the Government to July, 1868. Comprising the Reports of the United States Supreme Court, those of the Circuit and District Courts, and of the various Territorial and Local Courts established by the United States; together with the leading provisions of the Statutes at Large, and important Auxiliary Information upon the National Jurisprudence. Vol. III. In which titles of importance or special character have been edited or revised by Hon. David McDONALD, Hon. N. K. HALL, HENRY DUTTON, LL.D., GEORGE GIFFORD, Esq. The whole compiled by BENJAMIN VAUGHAN ABBOTT and Austin ABBOTT. New York: Diossy & Company. 1868.
This third volume of Abbott's United States Digest has come to our hands too late for us to make that thorough examination of it which we could wish, and to compare it carefully with Mr. Brightly's similar work. We have spoken of the two former volumes (1 Am. Law Rev. 732, and 2 Am. Law Rev. 534); one more will apparently complete the work.
Mr. Brightly's Digest has the advantage of being comprised in one volume, and of being the work of one mind; the Digest of the Messrs. Abbott, on the other hand, states the cases with more fulness. We should be inclined to recommend the former to those who have the reports themselves at hand, the latter to those who have not. The typographical devices by which Messrs. Abbott's Digest is distinguished are very ugly, but very convenient. The plan, too, of noting the date at which, and the circuit in which, a case was decided, thus : 3rd Circ. (Pa.) 1821, Griffith v. Bradshaw, 4 Wash. C. Ct., 171, is good, and the brief statements of the Acts of Congress, though hardly amounting to “ leading provisions of the statutes," have a greater value than we at first gave them credit for; so, too, the plan of giving the chief authorities relied upon by the courts in giving their decisions. In short, this work is as full and complete as it could be made, and yet retain its character as a digest. Digest of Fire Insurance Decisions in the Courts of Great Britain and North
America. By H. A. LITTLETON and J. S. BLATCHLEY. Second Edition. Revised and Enlarged. By STEPHEN G. CLARKE, Counsellor at Law. New York: Baker, Voorhis, & Company. 1868.
In the preface to the first edition of this work, which was published in 1862, the authors say they have attempted to include "all the decisions on the subject