Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 8.djvu/70

54 54 HARVARD LAW REVIEW. of the first class went too far in allowing the use of eminent domain for the creation of private trout ponds ; and in this he was alone. Dimer V. N'ye, 154 Mass. 579. He and the remaining three Justices (Allen, I^throp, Morton) went so far as to agree with the others in recognizing in the Gas and Electric Lighting Case {Opinion of the jFustices, 150 Mass. 592), the propriety of the furnishing of artificial light by the State. These four Justices, however, the majority of the court, are generally against statutes which seem to involve either more regulation of industry, or any change in the mode or extent of doing business by the State (for a con- sideration of the cases, see an article by Mr. Jabez Fox, in 5 Harvard Law Review, 30). Such a continued and outspoken difference of opinion must go far toward preventing the decisions of the court from having the authority upon the subject which they otherwise might, and toward keeping the general question of the advisability of such frequent declaring of laws unconstitutional an open one. It is also to be noted that the views of the present majority are opposed to what are currently believed to be certain tendencies of the present development of society. It will be ex- tremely interesting to see whether, when thus opposed, the tendencies will prove to be only ephemeral, or whether, the tendencies remaining, legislation of these kinds will be blocked only for a time. English and Scotch Law — Sale of Goods Act.— In 1888, Judge Chalmers drafted a codification of the Law of Sales of Personal Property, with the object of assimilating the Scotch and English law on this sub- ject. Since 1889, it has been before Parliament, and, on February 20, it received the Royal assent. It makes little change in the law in Eng- land, but very important changes in the law of Scotland, especially in regard to the passing of the property in specific goods sold but not de- livered, and also in regard to the law of warranty ( actio quanti mifioris). It is interesting to American lawyers — who see a similar process going on in Louisiana — to observe the progress the English law has been making in Scotland since the Union, and especially during the last fifty years. The passage of this Act is only one of many indications to this effect. One might cite numerous other statutes in this connection. The Mercantile Law Amendment Act of 1856, for instance, extended to Scotland several important features of the English law of sales. It changed much of the Scotch law respecting warranties as to quantity and quality, and introduced many of the practical- effects of the rule, although not the rule itself, that the title to specific goods sold passes by force of the contract alone. Nor has this process of assimilation been effected entirely by statutes. Judicial legislation has accomplished much. The House of Lords, as Supreme Court of Appeals from Scotland, has exer- cised no influence in this direction. Through this channel, for in- stance, the right of stoppage in transitu appears to have made its way north. As the old intimacy of Scotland with France and the Continent pro- foundly affected her law, public and private, so now her close association with England seems to be leading to similar results. Naturally, this other branches of the law have been influenced more or less. One need only cite the introduction of trial by jury, even in civil cases, and as a
 * ' reception " has been confined chiefly to commercial law. But many