Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 22.pdf/389

 The Editor's Bag EDITIONS OF MAGNA CARTA N inquiry with regard to moderate priced editions and facsimiles of Magna Carta, recently addressed to the librarian of one of the leading college

law libraries in the country, brought the following reply :— I cannot tell you of any publication con taining a translation of the Magna Carta and a facsimile reproduction of it, issued at a moderate price. There are plenty of trans lations and some facsimile copies. There is a facsimile by A. P. Harrison,

published in London, 1859; this is a single sheet folio. There is also a facsimile of Magna Carta, lithographed by J. Nether clift, London, 1822; this is a single sheet folio. There is another by Prichard Harri son, London, 1830, single sheet, folio. There is a book entitled "History and Defense of Magna Carta," which contains a copy of the original charter at large, with the English translation, published in London in 1769.

There are so many editions of translations of the Magna Carta that I cannot attempt to give them. Perhaps as useful an edition as any is Thompson, Richard, “Historical Essay on the Magna Carta, to which is added the Great Charter," etc., published in 1829. This is a beautiful edition and can be bought for about $5.00.

367

characterizes the Anglo-maniac, whose valet is now always a valett, pronounce the word just as it is written. “Whether the rules of modern French grammar are applicable to the Norman bar barism cestui que trust is not very material, for it is perfectly certain that, as a term of law, it has been Anglicized by long if not immemorial usage, and the plural, according to the authority of the sages of the law, is made simply by the addition of the letter s, either to the ﬁrst or the last syllable. Lord Redesdale, Mr. Hill, Mr. Jeremy and Mr. Gresley write the plural cestm' que trusts; Mr. Lewin, Mr. Perry, Mr. Smith, Mr. Adams, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Daniel, Mr. Vesey, Mr.

Cruise and Judge Story, cestm' que trust."

SPEEDY PROCEDURE FOR POOR LITI GANTS IN PANAMA READER in Panama has been kind enough to send us the record of a curi ous case which attracted considerable atten tion from the lawyers of that republic re cently. This case is remarkable for the fact that the judge himself drew the necessary papers for an indigent plaintiﬁ whose cause his court did not have jurisdiction to try. Four Washerwomen in the Canal Zone hung out their washing to dry, whereupon a. horse appeared and damaged the clothes, for which injury this action was brought. Under the laws of the Canal Zone, the District Judge,

THE PLURAL OF CESTUI Q UE TR UST CORRESPONDENTof the Solicitor's journal and Weekly Reporter recently reminded the readers of that paper that the plural cestm's que trustent is quite wrong, as the last word is a noun rather than a verb, the term being equivalent to cestm's qui ont le trust. The Legal Intelligencer of Philadelphia con siders it useless to try to apply the rules of modern French grammar to a. Norman bar barism, and quotes the sensible view expressed by Judge Penrose in an article published in that journal seventeen years ago: “It has become a fashion within a com paratively recent period to use the term cestm's que trustent as the plural of cestm' que trust and some of the younger lawyers, either ignorant of the fact that the syllable ‘cut’ at the end of the third person plural of a French verb is silent, or because of the profound contempt of foreign rules which

whose functions are like those of a Justice of the Peace, has no jurisdiction to try a case where the amount involved is unla'qur'dated. For reasons which we are at a loss to under stand, the District Judge in this instance him self wrote up the pleadings, in which damages in the sum of $4, United States currency, were asked for. He also drew up an assignment of the whole claims of three of the parties to the plaintiff, and prepared an afﬁdavit for the plaintiﬁ that she was a poor person, so that she could sue without payment of costs. When the case came to trial, he found for the plaintiff, awarding her $4 damages and $2.55 costs. The defendant, the owner of the horse,

appealed. When the case reached the circuit court, the plaintiﬁ moved to dismiss, and the litigation stopped. The judge in this important case came from a place spelled by the judge in the original papers as “Missouro." Our corre—