Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 17.pdf/331

 312

THE GREEN BAG

CURRENT LEGAL ARTICLES This department represents a selection of the most important leading articles in all the English and American legal periodicals of the preceding month. The space devoted to a summary does not always represent the relative importance of the article, for essays of the most permanent value are usually so condensed in style that further abbre viation is impracticable.

AGENCY (Estoppel) BIOGBAPHY (Brougham) THADDEUS D. KENNESON in the April Co Ax able critique of Lord Brougham by J. A. lumbia Law Review (V. v, p. 261) contends Lovat-Fraser appears in the Juridical Re that the New York doctrine of the liability view for March (V. xvii, p. 17). of a principal for the issue of fraudulent re ceipts by his agent is "A Misapplication of BIOGRAPHY (Kinross) the Doctrine of Estoppel." "The doctrine of these cases may be stated Two brief estimates of Lord Kinross, late thus: Where the right of an agent to exercise Lord Justice General of Scotland, by Rt. Hon. his authority depends upon the existence of Lord Davey and Thomas Shaw are published extrinsic facts, and the exercise of the author in the March Juridical Review (V. xvii, p. i). ity is itself an express or implied representa tion by the agent that such extrinsic facts exist, and the agent exercises his authority CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Insular Tariffs) where such extrinsic facts do not exist, the "The Final Phase of the Insular Tariff Con principal is estopped to deny the truth of the troversy," as presented in a recent case before the Supreme Court is discussed by Solicitoragent's representation that such facts do ex General Henry M. Hoyt in the April Yale ist, and is, therefore, bound by such repre sentation, to any person who has parted with Law Journal (V. xiv, p. 333). As might be expected he upholds the broad imperialistic value in reliance upon the agent's representa tion and has acted in good faith. Where, view which he calls the "public side" of the however, it appears that the agent has acted argument. In the cases in question the valid for his principal in a transaction with himself ity of the military tariff of the Philippines is individually, good faith, according to the involved and sustained by the author under Court of Appeals of New York, calls for no the war power on the ground of paramount inquiry to ascertain whether the agent has in war necessities. fact been impelled by his individual interests to abuse the authority conferred upon him by CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Interstate Commerce) his principal. "... "The Concurrent Power of the States to "Surely if the plaintiff can deny the truth Regulate Inter-State and Foreign Commerce" of the agent's representation and make its is discussed by David Walter Brown in the very want of truth the basis of recovery, the April Columbia Law Review (V. v, p. 298). He principal cannot be refused the right to assert submits as the test for determining when the its falsity. The principal in such a case is power is exclusive and when it admits of bound, if at all, not because of the assumed state regulation the following: truth of the representation, but just because "Congress has exclusive power to directly it is false, and the plaintiff has, assuming it to regulate inter-state and foreign commerce, but be true, acted on such assumption to his detri the several states have power concurrently ment. The action is one of deceit, and the with Congress to indirectly affect that com falsity of the agent's representation is an es merce by regulation of its incidents. This sential element in such an action." power of the state is, however, subject to the The author commends the distinction limitation that the law of the state must not drawn in other states which imposes a duty conflict with a law of Congress on the same of inquiry on those dealing with an agent who subject, must not impose a tax upon an in issues such receipts to himself. cident of commerce in its capacity as such nor