Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 22.pdf/136

 124

The Green Bag

“If the Sherman Anti~Trust Act were amended, so as merely to forbid contracts and combinations which are made for the purpose of stiﬁing competition, and to prevent the practices de ned in one of more of the simple phrases above quoted, it would well nigh make illegal every improper method of competition, and make lawful every healthy agency of free competition." Negligence. See Proximate Cause. Patents. See Fair Competition. Perpetuities. See Real Property. Police Power. See Conservation of Natural Resources.

Privileged Communications. "Privileged Communications." By Alfred W. Herzog, Ph. B., A.M., M.D. Eclectic Review (New York), v. 12, p. 343 (Nov. 15).

This article is copied from the Medical Brief. "The rule," says the author, "should be so modiﬁed, not only in courts but through the action of medical bodies. that a physician, instead of considering it his duty to keep the secrets of his patients under any circum stances, should rather consider it his duty

to keep them always and under all circum stances, when they concern his patient only. "He should consider it his duty to at once inform the authorities when he has acquired any information which if withheld would be likely to bring harm to the community. He should have the right, no, not have the right, but it should be his absolute duty to reveal any such information which he has acquired which might prevent crime." Procedure. “A Comparative Study of the English and the Cook County Establish ments." By Albert Martin Kales. (Read before the Law Club of Chicago, Oct. 1, 1909.) 4 Illinois Law Review 303 (Dec.). “The actual performance in a single year of the English High Court is especially worthy of notice. . . . When it is remembered that the County Courts of England have jurisdiction up to ﬁfteen hundred pounds and that the ﬁfty-six hundred cases tried were the siftin of important contested cases from a total 0 eighty thousand disposed of, and that they were the most important tried in a great nation like England, the average of one each court day by each judge is a remarkable record indeed-without doubt one that could not be equaled anywhere in this country. . . . All the civil litigation of England and Wales, including appeals, is taken care of by ﬁft -eight county judges with jurisdiction up to fteen hundred pounds, and thirty-four judges of the Supreme Court of ]udicature—ninety-two jud es in all. If we take down the English law ist for 1908 we shall ﬁnd in it the names of upward of ten thousand English barristers and between twenty-ﬁve and thirty thousand English solicitors. Thus, in England, w..- have ninety two judges to ten thousand barristers, or

ninety-two judges to from thirty-ﬁve to forty thousand lawyers in all. In Cook county we have twenty-eight Municipal Court judges; twenty-six Superior and Circuit Court judges; one Probate Court judge, and one County

Court jud e—fifty-six judges in all. The lawyers’ irectory shows upward of six thousand law ers. No one knows how many of these wou d be barristers and how many would be solicitors if there were a division. If the ratio would be as ten to thirty, two thousand would be barristers and four thou sand would be solicitors. In short. England has one jud e to every four hundred lawyers at large, an one judge to every one hundred and eight barristers. In Cook county we have one jud e to every one hundred lawyers at large, an one to every twenty-eight of estimated barristers. In a word, one judge in England keeps from three to four times as many lawyers busy as does one judge in Cook county. . . . "The power to alplpoint judges of the Chancery Division,

'ng's Bench

Division

and the Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division is exclusivel in the Lord Chancellor. The judges of the urt of Appeal, on the other hand, are selected by the Prime Minister,

althou h it is known that he consults with the Lord hanoellor as a matter of course. In neither case are these a pointments as a rule brought before the Ca inet at all. This is almost as unlike the power of appointment b

an American Executive, with the consent

of, the Senate, as it is unlike election by the ple, and yet it has some of the elements of both methods. . . . “The barrister is not employed till the case is about to be reached for trial. Then his fees begin. No client wishes that daily ‘refresher’ of a barrister by the payment of a sum reckoned in guineas to continue any longer than is absolutely necessary. He is torn between the horror of losing the suit and that of having it drag out indeﬁnitely. The barrister who cannot get through the trial of a simple case with dispatch must be looked upon very much as would be a slow and clumsy su ‘cal operator. Thus, the division of the ar in England puts into operation the two strongest possible motives on the part of the barrister and client to try cases which are reached as expeditiously as possible." "Defects in the Administration of Law." By W. W. Dixon, of the Montana bar. 2

Lawyer and Banker 191 (Dec.). “In civil cases, I would reverse the present rule, and have all tried by the court, unless

both parties desire a jury. Unanimity Should not be required, the agreement of two-thirds,

or

at

most

three-fourths,

in

number of the jury, should stand as their verdict. . ..

“One of the chief causes of uncertainty in our law is hasty, careless and inconsiderate legislation. . . . Another cause of uncertainty in the law is the large number of independent courts We have in our country. . . . The most