Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 12.djvu/381

REVIEWS. 361 space too may forbid much consideration of such vague things as ten- dencies. Yet one cannot but wish that attention were directed to the fact that the court in choosing the wide meaning of the term " Hberty " did change its front. AUgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U. S. 578. No mention is made of the latest phase of federal control of commerce, the Anti- Trust Act of 1890. And the dicta which led to so forcible a declara- tion — still obiter, it is true — in Brant v. United States, 168 U. S. 632, that an unwarrantably broad version of the Law of Confessions is a part of the Fifth Amendment, deserve at least to be noticed. j. g. p. A Selection of Cases on the Law of Contracts. In two volumes. By William A. Keener. New York: Baker, Voorhis & Co., 1898. pp. XXV, 1830. This collection of cases is concerned with developing the fundamental principles involved in the formation, performance, and discharge of simple contracts and contracts under seal. The reputation of the editor in the field of Quasi-Contracts leads one to expect a high standard of excellence in this collection ; and, upon the whole, that anticipation hardly fails to be realized. In regard to his selection of cases, it is true, the editor found the authority well sifted by Langdell's and Williston's Cases. But he always shows sound judgment in adding the later cases. His policy of printing the cases in full throughout cannot be too much commended. Chapter I — Formation of Contract — while most successful as a whole furnishes perhaps most opportunity to differ from the editor's judgments. The cases under Section I (a) — intention to contract — and (b) — effect of mistake — are new to case books and of fundamental importance, p. i, p. 7. But under Section II — consideration — the selection is sometimes indiscriminating. Two notable exceptions to this criticism are Jameison V. Renwick, 12 Vict. L. R. 124, and Bagge v. Slade, 3 Bulstrode 162. The criticism, however, applies to (d) — performance of a contract obligation as consideration — where Chichester v. Cobb, 14 L. T. Rep. 433, which completes a most interesting trilogy of cases, with Shadwell v. Shadwell, 30 L. J. C. P. 145, and Scotson v. Pegg, 6 H. & N. 295, is not found; Day V. Gardner, 42 N. J. Eq. 199, might well replace the unintelligent case of Myrick v. Giddings, i Mack. (D. C.) 394. However, the two concluding cases of the subsection are very late and of first importance. Abbott v. Doane, 163 Mass. 433; Arrand v. Smith, 151 N. Y. 502. Again in a related section — beneficiary — the failure to include The Trustees v. Anderson, 30 N. J. Eq. 366, and Crowell v. The Hospital, 27 N. J. Eq. 650, in a connection with Gifford v. Corrigan, 117 N. Y. 257, is unfor- tunate, p. 769. The compiler's arrangement is unquestionably the strongest element in the collection. This praise applies not only to the general plan and the arrangement and subdivision of the chapters, but to the logical sequence of the cases, which defers to its proper subordination the chronological arrangement. A flaw in the work of subdivision appears in the treatment of the surrender of right as consideration ; that subsection is much over- burdened, p. 393. The annotations are infrequent, although the refer- ences which are indispensable — essential statutes, alternative reports, omitted citations, and the like — are invariably to be found. The further editorial work consists in some few excerpts from treatises and maga-