Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 10.djvu/267

NOTES. 241 might profit by them ; and enactments may be proposed and adopted in one EngHsh-speaking community in ignorance of the fact that similar measures have after trial been abandoned or modified in another." To prevent this by disseminating a more extended knowledge of the sub- stance and form of legislation in other jurisdictions, will be one of the main objects of the Society. It will also undertake the scientific study and comparison of the diverse systems of law, Hindu and Mohammedan, P>ench, Roman-Dutch, and Spanish, which come before the Privy Council in the exercise of its remarkable jurisdiction as Appellate Court for the Colonies. Following the example of the American Bar Association and the Institiit de Droit International, the Society has formed standmg committees, in- trusted with different departments of the work. These committees are to deal respectively with Statute law, Mercantile Law, Comparative and Historical Jurisprudence, and Procedure. The information collected by the Society is to be published in convenient form, probably to a great extent in its Journal, of which the first number is fairly indicative of the nature of the work undertaken. It contains two hundred and thirty-eight pages, and includes articles on The Legislation of the British Empire in 1895, Modes of Legislation in the British Colonies, The German Civil Code, Application of European Law to Natives of India and of Ceylon, and The State Legislation of America in 1895. A Strange Application of an Old Docfrine. — The New York Court of Appeals has recently been called upon to decide a novel ques- tion. A woman was pregnant by one A, who, on seeking for a way out of the difficulty, bethought himself that his friend B was looking about for a wife. At their next encounter A informed his friend that he knew of a virtuous young woman who might be willing to wed, and ultimately B was induced by false representations to marry the very woman *whom A had seduced. He soon learned of the fraud that had been practised upon him, and instead of repudiating the union, as he might well have done, he sought revenge upon A through the instrumentality of the courts of justice. The result was the case of Kujek v. Goldman^ the final decision of which, in the Court of Appeals, is reported in the New York Law Journal of October 21, 1896. The court admitted that the action was unprecedented, but felt satis- fied that the plaintiff, in being compelled to support a woman he would not otherwise have married, and -in being deprived of her services while she was in child-bed, had suffered legal damage for which he could re- cover in an action of deceit. And upon this peg it was deemed per- missible, owing to the nature of the case, to hang exemplary damages. Thus far the logic of the decision seems unassailable, though the par- ticular point decided is new. The nearest approach to it appears to be found in those cases where a marriage is induced by fraudulent mis- representations to one of the parties concerning the amount of prop- erty possessed by the other. This is regarded as an actionable wrong, and in certain cases courts of equity have compelled the person guilty of the fraud to make good his representations. Mofitijiori v. Montifiori^ I W. Bl. 363 ; Piper V. Hoard, 107 N. Y. 73. In the case under discussion, however, the court proceeds to assert a much more radical doctrine. It is laid down that " the action can