which we received from our English forefathers has been wrought upon, split up and well-nigh metamorphosed by the statutes and judicial determinations of more than two score of independent sovereignties, so that now the law of any given State cannot be determined by reference to the law of England or of any of the sister States. It is the special credit of Mr. Dembitz that he has thoroughly collated, and, as far as possible, harmonized all the statutes and decisions of the various States and Territories of the Union. It is to be noticed that this is not a treatise on the general law of real property. "It deals only with the title, or incumbrances upon it, not with the personal obligations that may arise between owner and possessor, landlord and tenant,” etc. Hence the mode of regaining possession is not considered. Incorporeal hereditaments, are also outside the general scope, the treatise being confined to land.

Foster on the Constitution.

Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, Historical and Judicial, with Observations upon the Ordinary Provisions of State Constitutions, and a Comparison with the Constitutions of other Countries. By Roger Foster, of the New York Bar, author of A Treatise on Federal Practice, and Lecturer on Federal Jurisprudence at the Yale Law School. Volume I., 716 pp. Sheep, $5.00 net; cloth, $4.50 net. The Boston Book Company, Boston, 1895.

This is at once a complete constitutional history of the United States and a compilation of all the precedents which aid in the construction of the Federal Constitution. The author narrates the proceedings in the Federal Convention leading to the adoption of the Constitution; compares it with the provisions upon the same subject in the constitutions of the different States and foreign countries; describes the historical precedents upon its construction and collects all judicial decisions upon this point. He presents fully the result of recent researches into the sources of the constitution and the intentions of its powers; and discusses at length the theories of nullification and secession, the constitutional history of the Confederate States, the reconstructive measures, and later developments bearing upon the interpretation of the constitution, all in a spirit of judicial impartiality. The first volume terminates with the subject of impeachments, and this topic is treated in a most thorough and comprehensive

manner.

Feb. 1.

Report of Committee on Revision of Statues. Daniel L. Remsen

The Green Bag, January, 1896.

The New Supreme Court Justice, Rufus W. Peckham, A. Oakey Hall

Lottery Bonds in France and in the Principal Countries of

Dec. 6. The Action for the Malicious Prosecution of an

J. H. Beale, Jr.

Spencer Haven

William L. Murfree, Jr.

Linton D. Landrum

Is a Cause of Action for a Statutory Penalty
Assignable? .

William L. Murfree, Jr.

Services whose Performance is Excused by Sick

ness or like Disability,

Nathan Newmark
D. H. Pingrey

Eminent Domain-Rights of Tenants,
Assignment for the Benefit of Creditors as to

Property Beyond the State in which the
Assignor Resides and Makes the Assign-
ment,

The Law of the Case,

D. B. Van Syckel
R. R. Bigelow

Feb. 7. Liability of Employers for the Negligence of

Contractors,

Wm. Rogers Clay

Should one of our States, by its act or default, offend either a sister State or a foreign power, and a definite legal obligation be thereby created, a remedy is offered by the Constitution and laws of the United States, through an ordinary civil action. The offended power may sue the offending power in the Supreme Court of the United States, and justice may be enforced through the process of that tribunal, in precisely the same manner as if the defendant were a private individual.

A suit can now be brought against a State by a citizen of another State or country only by the defendant's consent, since it has, in this respect the ordinary immunity of a sovereign. Some States have enacted general laws constituting a tribunal with jurisdiction to hear and adjudicate demands against the public treasury; and in all a sufficient remedy for any wrongful act done under claim of public authority is often afforded by an action against the officer who committed it, sued as an individual trespasser, with no reference to his official character. He must then justify under some law or public mandate, and the validity of this justification it will be for the court to determine.

But if no definite legal obligation has been created by the act or default of a State, of which complaint is made, there can in no case be any judicial remedy, whether in favor of another power or of a private individual. Wrong may have been done, but the question of redress becomes merely a political one.

In the preparation of this notice free use has been made of a paper by the author-"de la responsabilité du pouvoir fédéral aux États-Unis au cas où les États particuliers s'abstiennent de réprimer les délits commis sur leur territoire"-which appeared in the Revue du Droit public et de la Science politique en France et à l'étranger, for Nov.-Dec., 1995.

If the complaint comes from another power, the injury to the offended sovereign may be of the kind just considered, that is, to him only because it is an injury to one of those whom he is bound to protect, and the individual so injured may often find an adequate. remedy by a private action against the particular officer or citizen of the offending State who did the wrongful act. Such a suit, whether by a citizen of another State or by a foreigner, may be brought in the courts of the United States, and the defendant could not justify under any authority from his own sovereign, which was in derogation of the plaintiff's rights.

But if the injury to the offended sovereign be one of a political character, or one which cannot be made good by money, or if it be one which he is unwilling to submit to judicial determination, there can be no relief except through the voluntary concession of the State, or the intervention of the United States, acting through their executive or legislative authorities.

So far as the enforcement of contracts of any sort, executory or executed, is concerned, the United States are under no other obligation than that of affording the creditor, if a sovereign power, a remedy in their courts, by an ordinary civil action; and should he recover judgment, its collection would depend on the amount of the property of the State which was subject to judicial sequestration.

Each State, being a political and corporate unit, binds itself only by its contracts. Those who choose to trust it do so upon

its own credit.

So far

But the positive, wrongful acts of a State, other than defaults of contract obligations, stand on ground wholly different. as they affect another State, or its citizens, they often call justly for redress at the hands of the general government.

If the citizen of one State is denied in another the same commercial privileges or immunities which it concedes to its own citizens, the courts of the United States stand ready to vindicate his right.

If, to take a case of a more general character, one of the States should, in the absence of due authority from the President of the United States, march a body of its armed militia into or across a neighboring State without asking and obtaining its assent, adequate redress (other than by forcible resistance) could only be obtained by appropriate legislation at the hands of Congress. The United States, by their Constitution, are to guaranty to each State a republican form of government; and a republic, which can be invaded by armed troops without its own consent,