Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 25.pdf/97

 86

The Green Bag

Panama Canal. "The Canal Diplomacy: Justification for the British Protest." By Leopold Grahame. North American Review, v. 197, p. 31 (Jan.). "The argument that as the United States subsequently acquired ownership of the territory embracing the canal zone and built the canal at her own expense in no way weakens the case established by the facts here recited, for the simple reason that the canal could never have been constructed by the United States with the remotest degree of safety unless the ClaytonBulwer treaty had been abrogated. Had it been otherwise, there would have been no necessity for the Hay-Pauncefote treaty, which embodies the principle of the most absolute equality in every respect for all the maritime nations of the world." Patents. "The Proposed Patent Law Re vision." By Gilbert H. Montague. 26 Har vard Law Review 128 (Dec.). "The patent owner, like the owner of any other property, 'cannot be compelled to part with his own, excepting on inducements to his liking.' Victor Talking Machine Co. v. The Fair, 123 Fed. 424. . . . The patent owner's rights are neither greater nor more unusual than the familiar rights of landowners. When, therefore, the patent owner requires that his property be used only under certain specified conditions and for certain specified purposes, and with certain specified accessories, he asserts no novel property rights. Indeed, the patent owner's rights are much curtailed, as contrasted with the rights of other property owners, in that the owners of every other form of property may exeicise their rights for so long a period as they and their successors may desire, while the patent owner may exercise none of his rights beyond the dura tion of his patent, and at the expiration of the statutory period of seventeen years must relin quish to the public all of his rights." "Patents and the Sherman Act." By Edwin H. Abbot, Jr., 12 Columbia Law Review 709 (Dec.). "There remains then a debatable land in which the right of the patentee is as yet uncer tain. On the one hand he may to some extent extend his monopoly by acquiring additional patents and by reserving to himself the right to furnish supplies for use with the patented article. On the other hand, by the weight of authority, he may not stifle competition between different patents either by contract or by con centrating the patents in the hands of a holding company. Somewhere between these two points the boundary of his right appears to lie." The article was written before the decision in the Bath Tub case, which has cleared up some uncertainties. See Monopolies. Penology. See Criminology. Principal and Agent. "The Liability of a Principal for the Penal or Criminal Acts of His

Agent." By Floyd R. Mechem. 11 Michigan Law Review 93 (Dec.). "In a previous article the question of the liability of a principal or master for the wilful or malicious acts of his servant or agent, was considered. (9 Mich. L. Rev. 87, 181.) It is proposed here to consider the liability of a prin cipal or master for the penal or criminal acts of his agent or servant. This will involve two aspects: (a) The civil liability of the principal or master, and (6) His penal or criminal liability." Privacy. "The Law of Privacy." By Wilbur Larremore. 12 Columbia Law Review 693 (Dec). "The American people are indulgent even toward positive libel, therein differing widely from the English people. It is probable that no edition of a great American daily newspaper is ever issued that does not contain several pieces of suable defamation, but for only a very small proportion of them are suits brought. With regard to mere publicity the attitude is even more liberal. The average person likes to see his picture in a newspaper upon any pretext. Even if occasionally actions were commenced by persons supersensitive to publicity the ordin ary American jury would be unable to perceive any damage. It is not conceivable that litiga tions over infractions of mere privacy would grow into anything like the abuse that 'trumpery libel suits' are in England. It would be a safe guard, however, to nave a right of action for damages for invasion of privacy so established as to be available in meritorious cases, just as it is always a deterrent against excesses that actionability for defamaticn exists, although resorted to with comparative infrequency." Private Property at Sea. "On the Position of Private Property at Sea in Time of War." By Lord Avebury. Nineteenth Century, v. 72, p. 1131 (Dec.). Endorsing the American proposal of the exemp tion from capture of private property at sea, advanced by Mr. Choate at the Hague Conference of 1907. That this measure would work to the advantage of Great Britain is shown, the empire having much to gain in a merely material sense. Procedure. "Progress in Reform of Legal Procedure." By Everett P. Wheeler. 12 Colum bia Law Review 685 (Dec.) An act passed by the New York Legislature only recently is described as effecting a radical change in procedure. Mr. Wheeler points out that this amendment to section 1317 of the Code will do away with the multiplicity of new trials by directing the appellate court to render final judgment upon the rights of the parties; "in short, this act gives to the Appellate Division or Appellate term of the Supreme Court the full power of the trial term. Another great reform secured by the act is the requirement that judg ment be delivered without regard to insubstantial error, in the same way as has been required by the Code of Criminal Procedure. "Other states either by judicial action, as in Maine, Washington and New Hampshire,