"The First Napoleon,-' has recently given out a very admirable review of the Waterloo Campaign — de cidedly the most comprehensible, candid and readable of the multitude of works on this vexed topic. Then in England there is Mr. William O'Connor Morris, a barrister, as he discloses, who has recently written the fairest and most interesting short life of the great Napoleon, a book which is a number of the "Hero Series" of Messrs. Putnam's Sons of New York. To the lawyers who admire this greatest soldier and ad ministrator since Caesar — and they are legion — we commend these books by Mr. Ropes and Mr. Morris. It is not a little extraordinary that this most can did and unpartisan estimate of Napoleon, by Mr. Morris, should come from the pen of an Englishman. (By the way, "The Easy Chair" finds a new and excellent grievance against the English on account of their despicable treatment of their great enemy, dis closed in the diary of the officer of the "Northum berland," descriptive of Napoleon's removal to St. Helena, now published in " The Century" magazine. These thrifty shopkeepers actually picked their pris oner's pockets of 4,000 gold Napoleons, $16,000, and •• covered them into" the national treasury!) Then to come to another great soldier, portrayed by a lawyer, we have "The Trial of Sir John Falstaff," by Mr. A. M. F. Randolph, reporter of the Kansas Supreme Court. This is very ingenious and entertaining — " an admirable piece of work." One would think that the reporter had been sitting up o' nights with the redoubtable and inimitable Jack, so deep has he dived into his soul and so thoroughly comprehended his "antic disposition." In great part the book is made up out of the Shakespearian elements and language, and where it is not, the re porter has expressed himself as Jack and his comrades assuredly would have done. The vraisemblance is acute and deceptive on the whole, although we must be allowed to utter a critical protest against the mi gration of the descendants of Justice Shallow to this new world, and especially to the western part of it if Kansas is western. Here was discovered the manuscript record of this novel trial so felicitously reported by Mr. Randolph. Sir Jack was put on trial at the Boar's Head, in Eastcheap, it seems, before Justices Shallow and Silence, with Slender as amicus curia, on the charge of being a tavern haunter, vaga bond, robber, etc. Sir Hugh Evans was chaplain and clerk. Fang was sheriff. Among the witnesses Mistress Quickly was chief, but Jack " horsesheded" her after his old seductive fashion. But we must not • ' give away " the story. The little book is full of riotous fun which must make the sides of the gentle Will to shake. Occasionally there is an excellent phrase — what could be more exquisite than "that aloofness of manner which marks most judges "?
We have all seen it, especially in the newly elected. There are some well deserved jibes at Mr. Ignis Fatuus Donnelly. There is much merriment at the expense of " Christian Science " and of homoeopathy. We do not sympathize with Jack's satire on the latter, although we enjoy it, but we heartily agree that "if all the shimble-shamble stuff set down in the phar macopoeia could be thrown into the sea, 'twould be all the better for mankind, and all the worse for the fishes." The characterization of Justices Shailow and Silence is admirable. These names would fit some judges of our own day, would they not?— judges who expose their shallowness by not being able to be silent, and others who are silent because they have a suspicion that they are shallow. That is a mad bit of mirth toward the close, where the reporter charges Pistol, in his speech on going to the wars, with an interpolation concerning certain domestic precautions which the Crusaders were wont to observe, the visible symbols of which are preserved in the Cluny Museum at Paris and the ancient tower at Nuremberg — a passage which sounds more like the "Albany Law Journal" upon a certain time than like Shakespeare. We turn over Mr. Randolph's report to the legal profession in confidence that they will thank him for his wonderful discovery and report, and us for calling their attention to it. It has enabled this Chair to to take on some delightful hours of unwonted ease.
NOTES OF CASES. Hawkers and Peddlers. In Hewson v. In habitants of Township of Englewood, in the Supreme Court of New Jersey, the facts were as follows : R., a merchant dealing in groceries in the city of New York, where for years he has kept a store, with a stock of groceries, from which he supplies his customers, employed the relator to drive his wagon to his customers in Englewood, and take their orders, and afterwards deliver the goods ordered. The relator did not sell or deliver goods in any other way, and neither he nor R. had a license, as required by the ordinance. Held, That the relator was not a hawker, peddler, or itinerant vendor, within the meaning of our statute. The Court said : "The only question presented by the case is whether Hewson was a hawker, peddler or itinerant vendor of mer chandise. No discrimination can be made between the merchant whose store is in New York City and one whose business house is in Englewood Township. Under like circumstances, the same rule applies to both (Morgan v. Orange, 50 N.J. Law, 389; Sternweis v. Stilsing, 52 N.J. Law, 517). Bouvier defines a 'hawker' to be a person going from place to place with goods to sell. He is one
