Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 19.pdf/661

 624

THE GREEN BAG

released by the subsequent act of the payee in making a binding agreement with the principal for an extension of time to the principal. PRACTICE. A criticism of the practice in Virginia of limiting judges in their charge to a declaration of the rules of law applying to any state of facts, which may be found on the evidence, appears in the September Virginia Law Register (V. xii, p. 337) in an address by Hon. Richard E. Byrd before the State Bar Association, entitled " The Province of the Court in Jury Trial." Apparently Virginia practice restricts the power of the court in this respect more than in most other jusisdictions. The author also advocates the power to direct a verdict at the end of the plaintiff's case. The author says, " A transition state is now in progress. The courts find them selves compelled to develop gradually the province of the court in the direction which is now prevalent in most states, and yet they are hampered by the inhospitality of the common law to the suggestions of common sense." " I consider that we have too many reversals of righteous verdicts for immaterial causes; and the greatest source of reversals is because the instruction dead line is shifting and uncertain and the refinement of criticism which seems to be a necessary incident to the system in vogue too often results in practical hardship and injustice." PRACTICE (New York). "Examination before Trial Since the Goldmarch Case," by Raymond D. Thurber, August Bench and Bar (V. x, p. 52). Citing and analyzing New York cases on the subject. PRACTICE. " Who may be an arbitrator," by Durga Charan Banerjee, Allhabad Law Journal (V. iv, p. 255). , PRACTICE. " The Law of Certiorari in the Province of Manitoba," by M. G. Macneil, Canadian Laiv Review (V. vi, p. 285). PRACTICE. " Representation of Minor in Suits," by S. Vaidyantha Iyer, Bombay Law Reporter (V. ix, p. 194). PUBLIC POLICY (Possible Trust Remedies). A discussion of the holding corporation and possible restraints on it by Edward B. Whitney appearing in the Yale Review (V. xiii, p. 3)

under the title, " Anti-Trust Remedies under the Northern Securities Decision." "It is a necessary implication of the North ern Securities case, if there ever could have been any dispute about the point, that any other State may, by appropriate legislation, keep the New Jersey corporation out of its territory. By action of the several States the holding corporation may be extinguished as rapidly as it arose. Any State may enact that no corporation can hold in the future more than a given proportion of the stock of one of its own corporations. A reasonable time must1 be given those already existing to dis pose of their stock and wind up. This is all the shrift that they can require. Whether the several States will — whether they dare — avail themselves of this power is more doubt ful. Each legislature is subject to corporate influence; and each will be threatened with an emigration of capital to the territory of a rival. For reasons such as these, there has been a demand for an amendment to the United States Constitution, giving to the nation the control of the whole subject. If the Federal Constitution is not amended, and the States do not act, there is no power to stop the further growth by this effective means of the ' industrial ' trust pure and simple; for under the present Constitution Congress has no direct power to regulate an agricultural, mining or manufacturing industry. I shall, therefore, pass to the consideration of the cor porations which Congress does have the power under the Northern Securities decision to control. "These may be divided into two classes: first, the transportation companies pure and simple, such as railroads and steamboat lines; and, second, those aggregations which com bine the work of production with that of transportation. "If the nation desires to break up these combinations ... it can provide that (after a reasonable time to unload present holdings) no company engaged in transportation shall engage in any agricultural, mining or manu facturing industry, or directly or indirectly hold any of the stock of any corporation engaged in such industry. It can exact that (after the lapse of a similar period) no corpo ration can hold directly or indirectly, more than a given proportion of the stock of any corporation engaged in interstate or foreign transportation. ' ' Without touching on the question of limit ing aggregation of capital in itself, Mr. Whitney believes that " the holding corporation" organized " for control " is contrary to the public interest. He draws a vivid picture of its evils.