Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 9.djvu/255

REVIEWS. 227 hitherto based, and must, it would seem, of necessity be based, on tlie common interest of civilized Powers, and particularly of the Powers of the Concert. Interventions of this order are indeed but measures of high international police " ! An equaDy obscure passage is that upon Naturalization, on page 44. It is reassuring to find that Dr. Walker does not follow Mr. T. J. Law- rence in the whimsical notion of an aristocracy of great powers in the Old World, and an international monarchy in the New. England, it appears, is not yet prepared to discard the doctrine upon which all inter- national intercourse is built, — that of the equality of independent states. One is also glad to see the free quotation of decided cases, both English ami American, in all parts of the subject. Captain Glenn's book cannot be so highly commended. After dis- claiming originality in statement of principles, he tells us that these "have been freely copied from authorities of recognized standing; " ?nd as a mere work of selection and abridgment, ch'efly from Hall's treatise, it has been pretty well done. The general arrangement of the su ject, also, is good; this is because "the analysis of this subject and selection of cases by Mr. Snow, both of which are excellent, have been freely used." Captain Glenn's Table of Contents is in fact an almost exact copy of Dr. Sn w's "Syllabus." Having taken his arrangement and statement of principles from works already published. Captain Glenn has added certain comments and explanations in his own language. These, though sometimes clear and pertinent, can never be said to rise above mediocrity. This method of book-making is now common, and in this case, being so frankly acknowledged, cannot be called dishonest ; but it is none the less an unlicensed use of the labor and the ideas of other men. It is not necessary further to comment on the matter. Captain Glenn's book is hardly calculated to supersede Hall and Snow. J. H. B. History of the Law of Real Property in New York. — An essay introductory to the study of the Revised Statutes. By Robert Ludlow Fowler. New York: Baker, Voorhis & Co. 1895. 8vo. pp. xxxvi, 229. This book will be welcomed with especial interest by New York law students, for it makes a very readable as well as instructive introduction to the study of the Revised Statutes. Mr. Fowler is not, in the main, a profound writer, but he is always clear, and, at times, entertaining. The reader follows the narrative with ease, whether the subject in hand be the points of difference between the English and the more lenient Dutch law of feudal tenure, the effect upon the feudal system of the Statute 12 Car. II., or the effect upon uses and trusts of the Revised Statutes of New York. Here and there the way is enlivened with a glimpse of political history ; but it is only a glimpse, for the author never allows him- self to be beguiled more than momentarily from the dusty road of the legal historian. There is a good deal of reronriite learning on the nature of a fee-farm in the seventeenth century, a difficult subject, which Mr. Fowler has examined at some length, and on which he dissents with becoming modesty from the decision of the Court of Appeals in Dc Lancey V. Piepgras (138 N. Y. 26). The book is, however, for the most part an historical, and not a crit-