Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 18.pdf/182

 EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT fied are not fundamental, but relate to procedure merely, yet, if the court may at its dis cretion determine which of these amendments are not fundamental, it must be on some distinction not found in the written instru ment, and we have heard the first suggestion that there is an unwritten constitution regu lating exercise of power by Congress. "All will concede that even though the general constitutional guaranties for the pro tection of life, liberty, and property found in the Federal Constitution are not applicable in terms, many of them are applicable in principle to the federal government in legislating for the subjects of the United States wherever they may be, and whatever may be their condition. "But the constitutional restrictions thus resting on the exercise of federal power with reference to the territories will be the restric tions of an unwritten, not those of a written, constitution, and if we are not mistaken as to the foundation on which rests the power of the courts to declare acts of coordinate branches of the government to be invalid because in violation of constitutional restrictions, it will necessarily follow that the limitations of this unwritten constitution cannot be enforced by judicial action, but must depend for their enforcement upon the same influences which have enforced the rules of the unwritten con stitution of Great Britain. It will not be safe nor expedient to recognize the power of a court to determine what acts of the executive or legislative department are in contravention of these unwritten and necessarily somewhat indefinite restrictions." CONSTITUTIONAL LAW /see History Juris prudence).

CONTRACTS. " Acceptance of an offer by Post," by Priya Nath Sen, Calcutta Law Jour nal (V. iii, p. in). CONTRACTS. " Are a Knowledge of an Offer and Intent to Accept Essential to the Recovery of a Reward Offered? " by Hugh Evander Willis, Central Law Journal (V. Ixii, P- 105). CONTRACTS. " Modus et Conventio Vincunt Legem," by Charles Morse, Canada Law Journal (V. xlii, p. 49). CORPORATIONS (Exclusion from a State). In February Michigan Law Review (V. iv, p. 257) John G. Park writes of " The Evasion

of State Laws by Mail Order Insurance Com panies." In this he calls attention to the recent extension of the modern commercial phenomena of mail order business to insurance. Companies excluded from doing business in states resort to the mails for every conceivable purpose and avoid the expense of commissioned solicitors. Many of these schemes are fraudu lent. "A correction of these evils was sought in the last Congress in the offering of a measure to withhold the use of the mails from insurance companies not authorized to transact business at their respective home offices. But it is obvious that this remedy is inadequate. It merely provides for the supervision by the officers of one state of all companies domiciled therein, and transacting business by mail. It makes no provision against unfair compe tition; it provides no protection to non-resident policy holders; it makes no requirement of obedience to the statutes of the policy holders' states; it permits a continued defiance of the laws of those states. "The proposed legislation should go further; it should prohibit the sending by mail of an insurance policy into any state where the insurer has not complied with all the statutory regulations. Such an enactment would inflict no hardship; it would protect policy holders in the respective states; it would avoid unfair competition, and would prevent the mail being an instrument of fraud and a means of breaking the law. "A remedy lies also with the courts under the firmly established doctrines of general law. A company collecting premiums on out-stand ing policies in Tennessee was held to be doing business in that state, although it had assumed to withdraw therefrom, and had refused to write new policies. By issuing a policy on property located in Wisconsin, another com pany was held to be transacting business in that state. The solicitation of applications and the collection of advance fees in Missouri was held a doing of business in that state. "It would, therefore, seem that companies adopting the scheme under consideration are doing business wherever they solicit insurance, collect premiums, or adjust losses. "No proposition is better established than that the legislature of any state may prescribe