Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 19.pdf/579

 544

THE GREEN BAG

"On this foundation Chief Justice Marshall built his temple of implied powers in McCullough v. Maryland, and paved the way for modern forces to tread with confidence and strength. "If the Supreme Court is hampered in the execution of its powers, Congress is able to supply the omission, regulate the procedure of the Court, and prescribe the mode of carrying into effect its judgments and decrees, and the execution of its writs and mandates." CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Fourteenth Amendment). " Demands of Labor and the Fourteenth Amendment," by Roger F. Sturgis, American Law Review (V. xli, p. 481). A discussion of the cases involving the con stitutionality of laws regulating the hours of labor, regulating and restricting payments and enforcing certain definite scales of wages. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Fourteenth Amendment). " The Growing Importance of the Fourteenth Amendment," by Hannis Taylor, American Law Review (V. xli, p. 550). Address before the Bar Associations of Tennessee and Arkansas at Memphis, June 6, 1907. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. "The Treaty Making Power, by Shackelford Miller, American Law Review (V. xli, p. 527). A discussion suggested by the San Francisco school incident, concluding that the Federal government cannot take away from the States the control of local schools, a limitation of the treaty-making power of which all nations must take notice. CORPORATIONS (Status Abroad). E. Hil ton Young concludes in the July Law Quar terly Review (V. xxiii, p. 290) his article on "The Status of Foreign Corporations and the Legislature," noticed at length in this department in the June number. Having described the restrictive theory of dealing with foreign juridical persons in his first paper he takes up the liberal system, the foundation of which is the assimilation of juridical to natural persons. This is the modern system, he says, and gaining ground all the time. A review of the English law, which has made no express reference to either theory and comments on proposed legisla tion requiring foreign companies to file copies of certain documents, lists of officers and annual returns, conclude the article.

CORPORATIONS. "The Influence of Railroad Decisions in Corporate law," by Richard Selden Harvey, July American Lawyer (V. xv, p. 315). Mr. Harvey asserts that it is, " hardly too much to say that the influence of decisions in railroad matters, in delimiting the powers of directors and officers of corporations and in regulating the internal management of corporate affairs, has been, and bids fair to remain, the dominant factor," and that "if all decisions concerning cor porations were destroyed, excepting only railroad cases, sufficient material would re main to reconstruct the framework of corpora tion law as it exists to-day, and to revive the study of that substantive department of law." In support of these statements a long list of railroad cases, deciding many problems of corporation law, is given. CRIMINAL LAW. "The London Police Court Today and Tomorrow," by " T. H.," Law Times (V. cxxiii, p. 325). CRIMINAL LAW. " Capital Punishment," by Franklin E. Parker, Westwood, Mass., 1907. CRIMINAL LAW. "Fraudulent Solici tors," by John Indermaur, Law Students' Journal (V. xxix, p. 183). CRIMINAL LAW (Insanity and Expert Tes timony). The American Lawyer for July (V. xv, p. 309) has a symposium on " The Defence of Insanity in Criminal Cases and Medical Expert Testimony," suggested by the Thaw trial. The divisions are: " A Judi cial View," by Henderson M. Somerville; "An Expert's View," by Allan McLane Hamilton; "A Defence of the Present Sys tem," by James W. Osborne; " A Condemna tion of the Present System," by John F. Mclntyre; " Practical Steps Toward Reform," by Clark Bell. Messrs. Somerville, Hamilton and Mclntyre concur in desiring an indepen dent State expert or board to pass on the mental condition of the accussed. Mr. Osborne, opposes, saying: "We have too many officials already, too much restriction in the matter of discussion in the courts. Authoritative commissions are dangerous, in that they still further limit the freedom that is needed in such matters. It is the very clash of expert opinion in a trial that helps a jury — just as the clash of archi tects helps the prospective house builder in settling on the plans for his future home.