as it does one of the largest and most highly gifted Bars in the world, was in an exceptional position. The comments of the daily and periodical press at the time of that article, and since, were entirely favourable to the suggestion that poor and undefended prisoners should be and ought to be defended The discussion of the subject culminated in an Act of Parliament known as the Defence of (Poor) Prisoners, 1903.

"Probation Laws.-The State of Massachusetts, which was almost the only State where a system for the defence of prisoners did not prevail, has during the last year recognised the importance of some intermediary between the prosecution and the defendant, by passing a law giving power to the judges of both superior and inferior Courts to appoint probation officers, male or female (the latter to investigate the cases of all women charged with crime). These officers are not to be members of the police force, but are to enquire into the nature of every criminal case brought before the Courts under the appointment of which the probation officer acts, and may recommend to the Court that any person convicted there may be placed upon probation. These officers are to keep full records of all cases investigated by them, of all cases placed in their care by the Court, and of any other duties performed by them. The Court may place upon probation under any of its probation officers any person charged before it with crime. Each person re leased upon probation shall be furnished by the probation officer with a written statement of the terms and condition of his release. Powers are given to the justices to confer with the prison commissioners for securing any improvement in the probation service. Probation officers, police officers, and prison commissioners are to assist each other and to confer together from time to time to better promote the interests of their work. A prison commissioner is to preside over any such conference, and the prison commissioner shall annually report to the Governor of the State upon the operation of the probation system and its results, and recommend improvements for the service.

"The object of this new law, which is said to be working satisfactorily, is no doubt to bring before the Court all the surrounding circumstances of the former life, physical health, family history, mental capacity, and all that can be said in favour of a person charged-all those very facts which are daily and hourly sought for by many of our English judges and magistrates, and which are often only obtainable from those whose duty and office it is to bring to conviction the person charged.

"Evidence of the Accused.-There seems to be no State in the United States where persons accused do not give evidence, and no comment is made if they do not.

"Sentences on Conviction.-Sentences are never if possible given upon the same day as the verdict of the jury is given. A special day in the week is almost always fixed for sentence to be given."

Comité de Législation Etrangère. We have received by the kindness.

of this Society two large volumes, each of great interest. One is a treatise by M. Gourd on the Constitution of the United States, a notice of which by Mr. Bryce will be found on pp. 488-90; the other is a catalogue of the library of the Society-a library which our English Society may well envy. Not the least remarkable feature of this library is its rapid growth. In 1879 it contained 1,600 works of 5,000 volumes; today it has 8,116 works in 40,000 volumes. The mere arrangement is an education in jurisprudence, historical and analytic. Meanwhile, thanks to the generosity of the Colonies, the United States, and foreign countries, our Society's library progresses steadily if slowly. From St. Lucia we have received the Laws of St. Lucia, 1889, the Civil Code of St. Lucia, 1879, and the Code of Civil Procedure of St. Lucia, 1881; from the Bahamas, the Consolidated Laws of the Bahamas; law reports from Quebec and Canada (Exchequer Reports), from New South Wales, Natal, British Guiana, Colombo, and the Straits Settlements; also The Bombay Reporter and The Punjab Law Reporter; from the Secretary of State of the State of New York, the Laws of New York in two large volumes; from the State Library, Albany, the Annual Bulletin of Legislation, with comparative summary and index; from the Legislation Department of India, the Punjab and North-West Code, the Digest of Indian Law Cases; from Rome, the Bollettino di Legislazione Comparato, and many others, for all which the editors take this opportunity of expressing their cordial thanks to the senders.

Smoking by Juveniles.-In view of possible legislation on this subject by the Imperial Parliament, it may be useful to call attention to what has already been done in some of our Colonies and in the United States. In 1900 Tasmania passed an Act visiting with penalties any person under thirteen who smokes tobacco in any form in a public place, and any tobacconist who supplies such person with tobacco. An Act of Prince Edward Island (1901) forbids the sale of tobacco in any form to a minor under sixteen years of age, and any minor under that age who has in his possession or smokes tobacco is liable to a fine of five dollars or seven days' imprisonment. An Act of Bermuda of the same year imposes a penalty on persons selling tobacco, cigars, or cigarettes to children under sixteen years of age. Shopkeepers are made liable for permitting breaches of the Act by their employees; but it is a sufficient defence to a charge under the Act for the defendant to prove that he had reasonable cause to believe that the person to whom the goods were sold was sixteen years of age. An Act of British Columbia, 1902, prohibits tobacco being sold to youths under sixteen, and the use of it in the streets by youths of that age. Newfoundland also, by an Act of the same year, prohibits the sale of tobacco to juveniles apparently under fifteen years of age. It also provides for the punishment of persons acting as agents to procure tobacco for juveniles, and for the punishment of juveniles refusing to account for tobacco found in their possession. In the United States the effort to discourage cigarette smoking by the young has

found expression in laws in a number of States. In Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia the selling or giving of cigarettes or cigarette papers to a minor is made a misdemeanour. In Pennsylvania the offence extends to tobacco in any form, in Tennessee to bringing cigarettes into the State, and in Washington it is unlawful for a minor to smoke. Here, then, are ample precedents for legislative action. One need not subscribe to the extravagances of King James's "Counterblast against Tobacco" to recognise that juvenile smoking is a growing evil for which some check must be found.

Notes of Some Recent Decisions of the Supreme Court of Mauritius.— We have received from Wood-Renton J., chairman of the local branch of the Society in Mauritius, the following notes as to the recent decisions of the Supreme Court :

Merchant Shipping Act, 1894.-Emigrant ship; coasting trade (ProcureurGeneral v. Rault. Judgment, February 2nd, 1903).

Held that

(i) It is sufficient to make a vessel an "emigrant ship," within the meaning of s. 289 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, if she is, in fact, carrying" more than the prescribed number of steerage passengers at any time, upon "any voyage" to which the section applies.

66

(ii) The term "coasting trade" in the Customs Ordinance, 1892 (No. 28 of 1892), Arts. 87-94, includes "the carriage of all sorts of goods carried coast-wise"; and if goods are so carried, it makes no difference in the result, although both they and the vessel carrying them belong to one and the same person.

(iii) An outward and homeward voyage under the above-mentioned articles must be regarded as a visit.

Authorities considered: The Winestead, [1895] P. 170; SS. "Carisbrick" Company v. London and Provincial Marine and General Insurance Co., [1902] 2 K.B. 681.

Chose Jugée.-Tacit renunciation of prescriptive right (Samouilhan v. Flanagan. Judgment, March 9th, 1902).

(i) The authority of chose jugée, under the Code Civil, attaches to judgments of attribution (cf. Mariette v. Adeline, Dalloz, 1847, i. 45; Vaguet v. Lambert et Quesne, Dalloz, 1849, i. 131; Boissière v. PelletierMary, Dalloz, 1851, i. 293; Jacquements, Consorts de L, Sirey, 1902, i. 353).

(ii) The acts from which a tacit renunciation of a prescriptive right may be inferred must, as in the case of a tacit renunciation of a succession, be acts pointing necessarily and inevitably to the conclusion which the Court is asked to draw. Tacit renunciation is never presumed, and its existence cannot be affirmed on a mere balance of probabilities (cf. Laurent, Principes, vol. 32, pp. 197-9).

Servitude. Modification of right of passage; whether account may be

taken of general interests of agriculture (D'Argent Des Vaux & Co. v. La Compagnie Sucrière de Valetta. Judgment, March 31st, 1902).

A servient owner is prohibited from doing any act that tends to diminish or to render less commodious the right which the dominant owner enjoys. A servient owner who applies to the Court for relief (vide Art. 701 of the Civil Code) from a right of passage which is alleged to have become unduly burdensome, cannot pray in aid of his claim the general interests of agriculture if, in consequence of the proposed modification of the servitude, there will be such an interference with the position of the dominant owner as to diminish sensibly the enjoyment of his right.

Authorities considered: Laurent, Principes, vol. 8, pars. 267, 268, 275; Demolombe, Servitudes, vol. 2, p. 455; Petit v. Faure, Dalloz, 1874, i. 14; Goyet v. Société Diederichs, Dalloz, 1898, ii. 413.

Municipal Corporation.-Disqualification of councillor by interest in contract with corporation; Art. 19 of Municipality Ordinance (No. 21 of 1851); Mandataire-Adjudicataire; Code Civil, Art. 1596 (D'Espaignet v. Mayor and Municipality of Port Louis. Judgment, April 7th, 1903). Motion for injunction to restrain defendants from acting on a resolution by the municipal council of Port Louis to purchase an immovable property which belonged to the wife of B., a municipal councillor, but which under the marriage contract of the parties was subject to the law of community, and in which B. was therefore directly interested. The resolution in question was carried by the vote of B. Under his marriage contract, B. had his wife's authority to sell the property.

Held by the majority of the Court (Sir Victor Delafaye C.J. and Didier St. Amand J.; Wood Renton J. dissenting) that under Art. 19 of the Municipality Ordinance, 1851 (No. 21 of 1851), which prohibits a municipal councillor from acting as such "during the subsistence" of any "contract" with the corporation in which he is "directly interested," a municipal councillor is disqualified for taking part in the formation of any such contract, and that, consequently, although the contract was not completed at the time of B.'s vote, the statutory disqualification attached, his vote was invalid, and a writ of injunction must issue.

Held unanimously that, although B. might be regarded, in virtue of the authority to sell, in his marriage contract, as his wife's mandataire, the case did not come within Art. 1596 of the Code Civil : "Ne peuvent se rendre adjudicataires, sous peine de nullité . . les mandataires des biens qu'ils sont chargés de vendre."

Marine Insurance.-Constructive total loss; valued policy; clause fixing repair value for ascertainment of constructive total loss; "cost of repair"; deductions; time policy; plea of negligence on part of insurer; notice of abandonment (Nairac v. Maritime Insurance Company. Judgment, May 5th, 1902).

(1) There is a constructive total loss of a ship when, in consequence

of a peril insured against, she has been so damaged that a prudent owner, if uninsured, in view of the expenditure-estimated as at the date of the notice of abandonment-which the process would involve, would not repair her (Young v. Turing, 1841, 58 R.R. 484; Irving v. Manning, 1847, 14 L.C. 287; Rankin v. Potter, L.R. 6 Eng. and Ir. 83; SS. "Blairmore " v. Macredie, [1898] A.C. 593; Martin v. Sidney Lloyd's Underwriting Association, 71 L.J. Q.B. 718; Beaver Line, Limited, v. London & Provincial, etc., Company, Shipping Gazette, December 22nd, 1889, 71 L.J. Q.B. 718, 720; Moss v. Smith, 19 L.J. C.P. 225, distinguished; it was in emphasising the importance of the former element that the language was used which seemed to run counter to the "prudent uninsured owner" test).

(2) If the policy fixes the repair value of the ship, that value is binding on both insurer and insured, whatever the actual value may be (Irving v. Manning, ubi sup.; and Cp. SS. "Balmoral" Company, Limited, v. Marten, [1901] 2 K.B. 896; [1902] A.C. 511.

(3) If in addition to this the policy contains a special stipulation that the repair value so fixed is to be taken also as the measure of value for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not there has been a constructive total loss, this valuation clause is equally conclusive; and it is not competent for either party to impeach it by proving the existence of extrinsic circumstances, such as the nature of the particular trade in which the vessel was engaged, and alleging that these gave her a value different from that prescribed by the policy (Arnould, 7th ed.). It is the presence of this special valuation clause that excludes here the application of such cases as Grainger v. Martin, 1861, 31 L.J. Q.B. 186, where the peculiar character of the ship was taken account of.

(4) The term "cost of repair means the cost of putting the vessel in as good and navigable a condition, due regard being had to the retention of classification (Martin v. Sidney Lloyd's Martin & Underwriting Association, 71 L.J. Q.B. 718, 720; and cf. " Wild Rose" v. Jupe & Sons, 1903).

In particular, the following elements may be considered: All preliminary expenses necessary for the ascertainment of the cost of repair (cf. Mount v. Harrison, 1827, 4 Bing. 388; Doyle v. Dallas, 1831, 1 Moo. & R. 48; Gardner v. Salvador, ib., 116; and see Arnould, 7th ed.). Probable unseen damages (Martin v. Sidney Lloyd's Underwriting Association, Lowndes, 159). The value of the vessel as a wreck, on the balance of existing authority 1 (Young v. Turing, ubi sup. ; Irving v. Manning, ubi sup.; Rankin v. Potter, L.R. 6 Eng. and Ir. 83; SS. "Blairmore" v. Macredie, [1898] A.C. 593); and no deduction is to be made in respect of old or decayed materials, provided that, but for the peril of the sea, insured against, and the consequent casualty, the state of such materials would not have been brought

This decision was given prior to that of the Court of Appeal (Vaughan Williams L.J., dubitante) in Angel v. Merchants' Marine Insurance Company, [1903] 1 K.B. 811, in which Young v. Turing was disapproved of.