Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 23.pdf/464

 430

The Green Bag

churches or sects. . . . The precise constitu tional eﬂ'ect of the opinion of the ma'ority of the Supreme Court [in the case in 245 ll.] is,'then, to chan e the principleiof secularism, excluding

the Bible from the public schools, from a prin ciple of state governmental policy to a prin ciple of state governmental power, i.e., to a rule 0 fundamental organic state law, expressed by the people in the state constitution, cutting

down the scope of the power of the legislature over the subject of public education. The 0 inion makes Illinois the only state in the nion, I think. that puts a constitutional pad lock on the Bible in public schools." State Insurance. “A National Insurance Scheme in Practice." By George P. Forrester: F.C.S. Fortnightly Review, v. 89, p. 995 (June), "Britain's scheme has the advantage of being based on experience observed abroad, and on the working of an admirable system of volun tary assistance of the kind it is intended to pro vide, backed by that shrewd common sense with which we are credited. Its rece tion in the pioneer country of this class of soda legislation augurs good for its future, but the proof of the

pudding is in the eatin, and here the supreme test will be in its actua application." “A National Health-Charter." By Harold Spender. Contemporary Review, v. 99, p. 654 (June). "Above all, Germany, which, even if happily it should never prove to be our military rival,

is of necessity our chief commercial competitor, has maintained the full physical vigor of her race. That result is lar ely due to her great system of insurance. Lloyd George now proposes to lead the British nation along the same tried and beaten track. Will the nation rise to the opportunity?" “The Government Scheme of National Insur ance." By A. Carson Roberts. Nineteenth Cen tury, v. 69, p. 1141 (June). The writer is in sympathy with the general pu

se of the scheme, but oﬂers some criticisms

of etails. Taxation. “The Corporation Tax Decision." By Charles W. Pierson. 20 Yale Law Journal 636 (June). "The Supreme Court holds, and in its opinion reiterates many times, that the tax is upon the privilege of doing business in a corporate capacity.

“Right here is the crux of the matter. Cor porate capacity is not a right granted by the national Government. It is something which Con ess can neither give nor take away. In the ivision of powers which marked the creation of our dual government the power to confer cor porate capacity was reserved to the states. The

decision, therefore, comes to this: Congress can by taxation burden the exercise of a privilege which only a state can grant. And the power to tax, it must be remembered, involves the power to destroy." "The Things that are Caesar's, VI: Why Nature's Way is Best." By Albert Jay Nock. American Magazine, v. 72, p. 335 (July).

The town of Lloydminster lies half in Sa katchewan, half in Alberta. Saskatchewan taxes improvements, Alberta taxes only land values.

Lloydminster, Saskatchewan. cannot compete with Lloydminster, Alberta. Everything that can move into Alberta without sacriﬁcing more

than the difference in taxation moves across the boundary. "Alberta has got hold of the method of Alberta, natural under taxation. the land-value . . . In tax, the no province man will hold more land than he can use; and thus the simple free competition with natural oppor

tunity holds industrial conditions at a normal level." Uniformity of Laws. “Four Uniform Com. mercial Acts." By George Whitelock. 45 Am can Law Review 327 (May-June).

"The present paper does not purport to be a philosophical analysis of the new acts. l_10_l' to

trace the evolution of their various provisions Its purpose is brieﬂy to indicate certain diver gencies from the rules prevailing in Maryland and visions to show are but thatembodiments in most instances of familiar the new prin PIP‘

ciples, supplemented occasionally by reasonable rules of sound mercantile usage. United States Supreme Court. See Federal Courts and jurisdiction.

Waters. "The Law Governing Diversion 0‘ Interstate Waters."

By Carman F. Randolph

Engineering News, v. 65, p. 670 (June 1). An opinion rendered to the Merchants' AS50 ciation of New York City on the question whetliﬂ' the city can obtain an additional supply of Water from interstate rivers. _ "Were the states of the Union indepemltem

nations, each would be in a position to use the waters within its territory without regard to ceivable the effectthat in other greatstates, statesand would it isabuse not ll'iCOl?‘ the"

power to the detriment of weak neighbors. But were sumedthe that states generally independent, each woulduobserve it is to be Pfe' the principles of international law in this as in other respects. . . . _ "At present the international law of water! relates chieﬂy to navigation. but whenever the use offorwater-courses sion canals or forfor consumption, drainage, orimgation their dive!" 01‘ power causes injury in another country" ’ controversies will arise, and from these oontm versies we must look for the formulation 0i principles for their adjustment: _ "Surely the pollution of a river to the senOﬂ! detriment of a neighboring country would be a substantial grievance. Ii works in one country should impair navigation or ﬂood property In another there would be just cause for complaint. (Vattel, I., ss. 271-3.) The United States once complained of an obstruction to the ﬂow of a stream in Maine caused by acts done in Canada. (Wharton's International Law Digest,s. 20.). .

"Vhen international controversies over water supply become suﬂiciently frequent to attract the sustained attention of publicists we shall have a general declaration that a nation is not

justiﬁed in dealing with international waters in