The Venezuelan Question. — This question, which not only threatens in a measure to raise war between two great nations, but to divide each into two inharmonious sections, is more of a political than of a legal nature, and although the Easy Chair does not deem itself foreclosed from discussing ques tions that are not legal, yet it bears in mind that it is an Easy Chair, and it does not propose to rock on any one's toes. At the same time it would not have it understood that it is insensible to the pride of country and the calls of patriotism. It believes in the Monroe Doctrine, and so do all other Americans, although they may differ as to its construction and application. One remark on this ticklish topic the Easy Chair will risk, in the belief that no true patriot will dissent : unnecessary war between England and America would be monstrous and wicked, by which ever side provoked, and the side which should refuse peaceable arbitration of any dispute would justly be held accountable in the judgment of the world and of history' for all the consequent hatred, disaster, and check of prosperity, which a hundred years would not cure. There is a view of this burning question, however, which is entirely harmless and by no means irritating, and that is the geographical view of it. This is brought to our attention by a discus sion of it by a very eminent judge and historical scholar, who at the same time is one of the most dis tinguished of American geographers — Chief-Justice Daly of New York, whose venerable years, well known moderation, and exceptional acquirement in many branches of scholarship, as well as his indis putable patriotism, entitle his opinions to grave con sideration by all Americans, and will not fail to be of weight in other countries. This gentleman has re cently treated the question from a geographer's stand point in the New York Herald, and his views are now simplified and issued in the form of a pamphlet. The conclusions to which Judge Daly comes as a geographer, after a careful examination, are : that the territory claimed by Venezuela was regarded by all cartographers and geographers as belonging to the Dutch for more than half a century before it was ceded by them to the English; that the Schomburgk line, drawn by a surveyor in the employment of Great Britain, has no indisputable sanction; that it would be difficult, if not impossible, for the Commission ap pointed by the President " to report upon the true divisional line "; that it is possible for arbitrators to say what would be a fair boundary; that "if there was ever a case that should be settled by arbitration, it is this." Whether our country should make war upon Great Britain, in case there should appear to be anything to arbitrate, and of her refusal, he de clares must be left to " the sober second thought" of both countries, calling attention to the language of the resolution adopted by the House of Representa tives, when the United States were invited by Co lombia and Mexico to send delegates to a Congress of Republics, to be held at Panama, for the purpose of making the Monroe Doctrine more effectual, which invitation was declined, upon the ground that "The people of the United States should be left free to act in any crisis in such a manner as their feelings of friendship toward these Republics, and as their own honor and policy may at the time dictate."
NOTES OF CASES. Lost Property — A novel case of lost property is Keron v. Cashman, N. J. Court of Chancery, which is reported in a recent number of the •' New Jersey Law Journal." "One of a party of five boys found and picked up an old stocking in which something was tied up. He threw it away again and one of the others picked it up and began beating the others with it. It was passed from one to an other, and finally, while the second boy was beating another with it, it broke open and was found to contain money. None of the boys had attempted to examine it or had suspected that it contained anything valuable. The father of one of the boys tocfk charge of the money and tried to discover the former owner. Afterwards one of the boys claimed the money and the others a division of it. On a bill of interpleader, it was hM that the money was not found in a legal sense until the stocking had come into the common possession of all the boys as a plaything, and that it belonged to all of them and must be divided equally between them. Some intention or state of mind with ref erence to lost property is an essential element to constitute a legal finder, and in this case it is the money and not the stocking to which this state of mind must relate." The stocking contained $775 in bills. The vice chancellor observed : — "As a plaything, the stocking with its contents was in the common possession of all the boys, and inasmuch as the discovery of the money resulted from the use of the stocking as a plaything and in the course of the play, the money must be considered as being found by all of them in common. Had the stocking been like a pocket-book, an article generally used for containing money, or had the evidence established that Crawford, the boy who first picked up the stocking, retained it or tried to retain it, for the purpose of examining its contents, or that it had been snatched from him by Cashman, another boy, for the pur pose of opening or appropriating the contents himself, and preventing Crawford's examining, I think the original pos session or retention of the stocking by Crawford, its origi nal finder, for such purpose of examination, might, perhaps, be considered as the legal 'finding' of the money inclosed with other articles in the stocking. But inasmuch as none of the boys treated the stocking when it was found as any thing but a plaything or abandoned article, I am of the opinion that the money within the stocking must 1« treated as lost property, which was not found, in a legal
