Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 25.pdf/199

 184

The Green Bag

the anti-trust law, and a lay tribunal to determine whether complaints should be certified to the courts for hearing, he said : —. With respect to the real element which affects the public, namely the question of extortionate prices, I would apply, if we are going to abandon the principle of laissez faire, and attempt to solve this most difficult problem by legislation, to the corporation the principle contained in what we know as Munn v. State of Illinois. In that case it is held that whenever a corporation is of such a character as to be a semi-public agency, as a public utility corporation, an elec tric light company, a railway, an elevator company, or a ferry, then to prevent extortion the state had the right by maximum charges to stop the quasi-governmental body from making more than a reasonable return upon its actual investment of capital. Therefore I would have this governmental tribunal, upon complaint of a given number of consumers, make an investigation, and if it found that the party charged did by reason of its magnitude of capital as compared with the capital of com petitors or by its relative percentage in the trade or by any other circumstance, have as a fact such a control of sources of supply, or for any reason such a monopolistic control over the industry, then I would treat it as I would treat a railroad, an electric light company, or any other public utility as charged with a public use; I would find out what was its actual investment and by a maximum price give it a fair return on its investment and no more. But if it were not a monopolistic combination, then I would leave, with respect to the price of the product, free play to economic forces. (P. 302.) PINGREY'S LAW OF SURETYSHIP AND GUARANTY A Treatise on the Law of Suretyship and Guar anty. By Darius H. Pingrey. 2d ed. by Howard C. Joyce. Mathew Bender & Co., Albany. Pp. 140 + xvi. ($6.) IN THE twelve years that have passed since the first edition of this book the law of suretyship and guaranty has been constantly growing. While the fundamental principles re main unchanged, their application to novel situations and unforeseen cir cumstances furnish an opportunity for

the law to develop with modern busi ness conditions. The growth of surety companies in America has been very rapid, and has presented to our court new and interesting problems. Today we have some of our courts who hold that contracts of surety companies are contracts of indemnity and are to be construed as contracts of insurance. Other courts go so far as to decide that surety company obligations stand on a different footing from ordinary surety obligations and are to be treated as un coupled with any condition except those specified in the letter of the contract itself. This advanced view and the view that makes no distinction in law on account of the character of the surety are still debatable in most of our courts. This volume presents the subject intelligently, together with many others which arise in the course of every active lawyer's practice, and are live issues in our courts. Today the performance of building contracts is so generally guaranteed by a surety that during recent years our books are full of cases dealing with the various phases of the questions that have arisen in such contracts. To anyone familiar with the conflict of authority on the various close ques tions that have bothered the profes sion on this branch of law, a clear and succinct exposition of conflicting deci sions with a plain statement of the weight of authority is a welcome aid when your practice presents such prob lems. The book does not waste time on any extended discussion of theory. Its aim is practical. It is a ready working tool for the busy lawyer who must put his hand on actual decisions; clear, con cise, and at the same time comprehen sive, it presents the law pointedly and intelligently.