Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 23.pdf/587

 The Editor’s Bag onward, to formulate measures abol ishing the difference between forms of action at law and in equity and to per

feet the right of appeal from decisions of highest state courts on questions of constitutionality of statutes. That the Committee on Uniform State Laws is

549

or other by being shut up in the closet, where he raised an awful row, screaming and kicking. Fi nally the row ceased, and his mentor approached the closet, to whom the youthful Baldwin replied: "I ain't good, I'm simply resting." — Waterbury American.

also a progressive body may be seen

MARRIAGES OF MINORS NOT

from the adoption by the Association of

VOIDABLE

the Uniform Family-Desertion Act and Uniform Foreign Wills Act.

T THE recent annual Conference

The work done by other organizations in the past year has been of the same temper. The Conference on Uniform State Laws has now approved the ﬁnal

of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, held in Boston, there was a strik ing disagreement on the question whether a marriage should be voidable, under certain conditions, because contracted

draft of two important bills, the Uni form Child Labor and Marriage and Marriage License Acts. Progress is

by minors without the necessary con sent of parent, guardian or curator. The

being made on uncompleted drafts of the proposed Uniform Incorporation and Uniform Partnership Acts, not to speak

of the Torrens System. The American Institute of Criminal Law and Crimi nology has deﬁnitely formulated prin ciples of indeterminate sentence and parole, and is doing much to solve the problems of medical expert testimony

and the defense of insanity. Of the work of other organizations it is unnecessary to speak in this fragmentary account.

There is undoubtedly no other organ ization in the United States, apart from

these legal bodies representing the whole nation, which is doing so much to work

out the practical problems facing legislators and publicists. For that rea son, the annual conventions of the Amer

ican Bar Association and the associated societies are an annual event of pro found importance, and of an importance

section which gave rise to the contro versy was as follows: — Sec. XXVI. A marriage contracted by a person requiring the consent of a parent, guardian or curator, without such consent, shall be voidable upon the application of such person, or of the parent, guardian or curator of such person; but no such application shall be made after the party requiring consent has reached the age of legal majority and has voluntarily cohabited with the other party, nor in any event more than one year after such party has reached the age of legal ma jority. If the application is made by the parent, guardian

or

curator,

the court may

refuse to grant the same, if such refusal shall appear to be to the interest of the party who required the consent, and such party does not join in the application. Any court having jurisdiction to grant divorces shall have power to annul a marriage as provided by this section.

year, as the labors of the societies grad

This ground of annulment was favored by representatives of twelve states — Illi nois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michi gan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, North Dakota, Pennsyl

ually extend themselves over an increas ing ﬁeld.

vania, Vermont and Wisconsin. It was opposed by thirteen other states, Con

which seems to increase from year to

necticut, District of Columbia, Florida, They tell a good story of Judge Baldwin, Gov ernor of Connecticut, when he was a small boy.

Kansas,

He was subjected to punishment for something

Jersey, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Ten

Maryland,

Minnesota, New