Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 2.djvu/165

Rh ——Testator conveyed real estate in trust for his son, the rents and profits to be paid into his own hands, and not into another's, whether claiming by his authority or in any other capacity. Held, that the income should be paid to the son to the exclusion of all other persons, whether claiming as alienees or as creditors. Smith v. Towers, 14 Atl. Rep. 497 (Md.).

The court, of course, relied upon Nichols v. Eaton, 91 U. S. 7259 Bank v. Adams, 133 Mass. 170, and the Penn. cases, admitting that the law was different in England and m most of the States. See Gray's Restraints on Alienation, § 258 et seq., where the author does not agree with the cases of spendthrift trusts.

———A guardian of an infant having purchased real estate chiefly with the money of his ward, he, however, contributing a portion, and having taken the title in his own name, a trust results in respect to the property in favor of the infant who may claim afterwards not merely a lien, as security for the money, but a proportionate share of the estate. Bitser v. Bodo et al., 58 N. W. Rep. 609 (Minn.).

For a discussion of the general principle see "The Right to Follow Trust Property," etc, 2 28.

——A was the grantee of certain lands by an unrecorded deed. Subsequently the grantor mortgaged the same lands to an innocent purchaser for value, and the mortgage was recorded. Held, that the right of dower of A's widow took priority over the mortgage. Sondley v. Caldwell, 6 S. E. Rep. 818 (S. C).

This case, which certainly violates the spirit of our registry system (too often disregarded by the courts), seems wrong on pnndple. A widow's right of dower is made more effective than the right on which it depends, namely, her husband's right of title.

REVIEWS.

By Nathan Newmark. San Francisco: Bancroft-Whitney Co., 1887. 12 mo. pp. xxi and 696.

The law of sales of personal property has been so well and fully discussed by Mr. Blackburn and Mr. Benjamin that a new treatise on the subject must possess extraordinary intrinsic merit to warrant its finding a foothold among text-books of standard authority. Mr. Newmark may be said to have fairly succeeded in his "attempt to make a concise, complete, and convenient presentation of the intricate and expanding law relating to sales of personal property," and, as a digest, his book may be found to be of considerable assistance to the practitioner.

It seems to us, however, that the author has placed too much reliance upon the "fulness of the index," and that the insertion of a table of cases would have enhanced in no small degree the usefulness of his work. To the lawyer who has become familiar with the leading cases there is nothing which renders the subject-matter of a book so readily accessible as a table of cases, and even the best-arranged index can scarcely be said to obviate its use.

From the many citations, such as " according to Bennett's Benjamin on Sales," "Schouler on Personal Property, § 188, whence paragraph derived," "Basis of paragraph: 1 Corbin's Benjamin on Sales, § 461," it must be inferred that the author has not made that personal origi-