Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 32.djvu/224

i88 HARVARD LAW REVIEW of view of a lawyer familiar with the atmosphere of the common law, and dealing chiefly with the legal relations of the army to the outside world, is a real contribution to military-legal literature. The author, writing in the midst of the great war and in a time of crisis when the issue was stUl doubtful, naturally wishes to give the army wide scope for its activities. He strongly indorses the point of view of the minority in Ex parte MUligan, 4 Wall. 2. But his attitude is not at all one-sided, as is shown in his criticism (pp. 59, 60) of Ex parte King, 247 Fed. 868. The least satisfactory part of Professor Glenn's book is that which deals with military law in its narrow sense, i. e., the law governing the discipline of the army. He cites (pp. 24-26) early cases and statutes on the question as to the time when draftees become subject to military law, but fails to make any reference to the 2d Article of War in which Congress has definitely settled the question. He shows (pp. 38, 39) that a court-martial has criminal jurisdiction only and that neither courts-martial nor courts of inquiry have jurisdiction to entertain a civil suit and award damages, but fails to mention boards of investigation which under the 105th Article of War have jurisdiction to assess damages. He seems (p. 40) to treat the question whether a court-martial ceases to exist after it has reported to the appointing authority, as though it depends upon whether new trials may be awarded, although nothing is better settled than that a court-martial may be reconvened for revision. (See Manual for Courts Martial, par. 352 and App. 6.) In stating (p. 60) th^ the 74th Article of War gives precedence, at least in time of peace, to the civil courts in cases where the civil and the miUtary courts have concurrent jurisdiction, he ignores the important exception, contained in that article, of cases where the accused is held by the military authorities to answer, or is awaiting trial, or result of trial, or is undergoing sentence for an offense punishable under the Articles of War. In stating (pp. 30, 163) that "citizens," except spies, are not punishable under the Articles of War, he fails to mention persons relieving, corresponding with, or aiding the enemy, who by the 8ist Article are also punishable under the Articles of War. In the paragraph relating to the juris- diction of the various kinds of courts-martial, the proof-reader has made such havoc (p. 37) that one unfamiliar with the Articles of War would have some difiiculty in ascertaining the author's meaning. These defects are, however, not of the essence, and lawyers and officers will read the book with interest and profit. The book gives a very concise and, for the most part, an accurate view of the place of the army in our legal system, Austin W. Scott. Bibliography of Municipal Utility Regulation. By D. L. Stevens. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. $4.00. The Position of Foreign Corporations in American Law. By G. C. Henderson. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. $1.50. Judicial Tenure in the United States. By W. S. Carpenter. New Haven: Yale University Press. $1.25. Departmental Co-operation in State Government. By A. R. Elling- wood. New York: Macmillan. $2.50. Continental Law in the Nineteenth Century. Various. Boston: Little, Brown Company. $5.00. History of Germanic Private Law. By R. Huebner. Boston: Little, Brown Company. $4.50. Development of German Prize Law. By C. Huberich and R. King. New York: Baker^ Voorhis. [To be reviewed.]