Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 12.djvu/595

REVIEWS. 575 The citations in the dictionary are full, comprising, of course, both English and American cases, and are brought strictly down to date. Many 1898 cases are to be found. It is gratifying to write that among the authorities cited the Harvard Law Review figures not once or twice, but frequently throughout the entire book, and not only in respect to its leading articles, but through its notes and recent cases as well. R. L. R. A Treatise on the Law of Contributory Negligence. By Charles Fisk Beach, Jr. Third edition. By John J. Crawford. New York. Baker, Voorhis, &Co. 1899. pp. cxxxiii, 702. The main value of Mr. Beach's book on Contributory Negligence has been, as was intended, as an office tool. It contented itself with showing clearly the actual state of the law on contributory negligence and the application of it in the various situations where the question has arisen. It was clear and firm in its explanations, copious in citations, character- ized by good sense, in all a most useful book. A new edition of such a work is then important, because the value of it to the practicing lawyer lies largely in the fact that it is a complete statement of the law he is working under. This new edition has attempted, apparently, to do just one thing — ^ to bring the book up to date, it is in no sense a revision. The material of the last edition remains absolutely unchanged, — not a paragraph is taken away — only the additions which have been made to the law of contributory negligence since the second edition of 1892 are fitted into place in the scheme of the book. When we consider the num- ber of decisions in the last few years which have dealt with the subject the amount added to the text seems surprisingly small — some half-dozens of paragraphs only. These added sections deal with new topics constantly before the courts, — a landowner's liability to trespassing children, the rules in regard to the use of electricity as a motor, the doctrines of im- puted negligence, etc., and in themselves are adequate, but it is absurd to say they represent the growth of the law on contributory negligence for the last six years. That portion of the work of the new addition seems half-hearted. The collection and arrangement of recent authorities in the form of foot-notes, is, to the editor's mind, of greater importance, and there the work is, apparently, well done. A handful of representative recent cases, such as O' Toole y. Pittsburgh &> L. E. R. Co., 27 Atl. Rep. 737 (Penn.), Wolfw. Lake Erie d^• W. R. R. Co., 45 N. E. Rep. 737 (Ohio), Southern Ry. Co. V. Pugh, 37 S. W. Rep. 555 (Tenn.), dXiA Jobcrt v. Troy City Ry. Co., 36 N. Y. Supp. 105, are omitted, but as a rule the work seems care- ful and complete. And this is the more notable and praiseworthy because of the difficulty of interpreting many of the cases on the subject of negli- gence, whose decisions as to the weight of evidence are constantly re- garded as laying down rules of law. ' J. p. c. Jr.