Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 8.djvu/520

504 HARVARD LAW REVIEW. and as it did not appear that the carrier made any effort to notify the consignee it would seem that the carrier had not "done all that the law required of him to effect a deliv- ery." Hutchinson on Carriers, 2d ed., § 356. Constitutional Law — Extradition. — One who, standing in one State, shoots some one in a bordering State, does not thereby " flee from justice " within the United States Constitution, Art. 4. sec. 2, cl. 2. Siate v. Nallf 48 Cent. L. J. 148; 20 S. E. Rep. 729(N. C). See Notes. Constitutional Law — [Canada] — Federal Negative on Provincial Acts. — The Manitoba Education Act of 1890, although not unconstitutional under cl. i, § 22, of the Manitoba Act (Canadian Statutes, 1870, ch. 3 ; Winnipe^^ v. Barrett [1892], App. Cas. 445), is nevertheless subject to be negatived by the Dominion Cabinet under cl. 3 of the same section. Sevible, that whether or not the conditions justifying a negative exist is a judicial question. Brophy v. Attorney General of Manitoba, 11 The Times Law Rep. 198 (Privy Council). See Notes. Constitutional Law — Interstate Commerce — Oleomargarine. — To pre- vent deception a statute in Massachusetts forbids the manufacture or sale of oleomar- garine in color resembling butter. Held, that the statute in its application to sales of oleomargarine brought into Massachusetts from other States is not in conflict with the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce. Pluniley v. Commonwealth, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 154, Fuller, C. J., Field and Brewer, J J., dissenting. See Notes, 8 Har- vard Law Review, 353. Constitutional Law — Power of Jury in Criminal Case. — The jury in a criminal case, although they have the power, have not the right to decide upon ques- tions of law. Sparfy. United States, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 274. See Notes. Constitutional Law — Sale of Liquor to Indians. — The code of California makes it a felony to sell intoxicating liquors to any Indian, regardless of his citizenship or tribal relation, //eld, that the law was general and uniform in its operation, and not in violation of any constitutional rights and immunities to which such Indians as citizens of the United States are entitled. People v. Bray, 38 Pac. Rep. 731 (Cal.). This provision in the California code is in line with those statutes, whose constitu- tionality has been upheld, forbidding sales of liquors to minors (52 Ind. 4S6), persons already intoxicated (126 Pa. St. 602), and habitual drunkards. Such legislation is highly desirable, and a proper exercise of the police power. Black, Intox. Liq. § 42. It is well known that Indians as a class exercise very little self-restraint, and when drunk are especially dangerous to themselves and others. A court would therefore be slow to regard such a restriction as here imposed unreasonable and arbitrary. The case finds supjiort from the Montana court in Territory v. Guyoi, 9 Mont. 46, though there the In- dian was a member of a tribe and not a citizen. Such statutes as those in California and Montana do not conflict with Congressional legislation upon the same subject. Black, Intox. Liq., § 427. Constitutional Law — Taxation — Assessment. — The General Assembly of South Carolina empowered a city council to assess two thirds of the cost of paving a roadway upon the abutting land according to the frontage on said highway. This was a suit by an abutter to restrain the city council from making the assessment. //eld,X.hG act authorizing such assessment is op))osed to the " law of the land," and is in conflict with the provision in the State Constitution requiring all taxes to be uniform in respect to persons and property, /l/auldin v. City Council of Greenville, 20 S. E. Rep. 842 (Co. Car.). While denying the right to make special assessments for improvements upon a pub- lic street, the court recognized the right to tax the land abutting for the cost of improv- ments of sidewalks and sewers, as the latter power was early exercised by the colonial legislature, and thereby became the " law of the land." Such precedents would seem sufficient ground for a contrary decision in the principal case, but the court prefer to be consistent and follow State v. Charleston, 12 Rich. Law, 702 (i860), where the right to assess for similar benefits was denied. In holding the assessment void by bringing it within the constitutional provision requiring uniformity, the court are evidently aware of its unique position and perti- nently inquire, " Why may not the people of this Commonwealth adopt a domestic policy at variance with the views of others ? " There is no reason, of course, if the Legislature sees fit, and the Constitution does not prevent, but as the case is directly contrary to the almost universal doctrine among the other States, even where similar