442
THE GREEN BAG
CURRENT LEGAL ARTICLES This department represents a selection of the most important leading articles in all the English and American legal periodicals of the preceding month. The space derioted to a summary does not always represent the relative importance of the article, for essays of the most permanent value are usually so condensed in style that further abbre viation is impracticable.
ADMIRALTY (Australian Federal Jurisdiction)
THE resemblance of constitutional problems in Australia to our own appears from an article by F. L. Stow on "Maritime Law and Juris diction in Australia" in The Commonwealth Law Review, for May (V. ii, p. 157). He dis cusses the extent of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction conferred on the Federal Govern ment, and concludes that it is limited to ship ping concerned in interstate or external com merce. He advocates further extension simi lar to that of our admiralty courts. AGENCY (Estoppel. Liability of Principal)
JOHN S. EWART in an article entitled "Es toppel by Assisted Representation" again returns to the defense of the doctrine of estoppel in the June Columbia Law Review (V. v, p. 456) in a reply to the article by Thaddeus E. Kenneson in the April number of the same review, which was reviewed in our May number. The issue he states as follows — "An agent having authority from a company to issue warehouse receipts for goods received, fraudulently issues one to a confederate without having received the goods mentioned in it; the confederate passes the receipt to "a purchaser in due course; it is agreed that the purchaser is entitled to hold the company to its receipt and the question is, Upon what ground does he base his right?" With reference to Mr. Kenneson's argu ment, he suggests: "(i) that the case in hand is not one in which it can be said that 'the principal has done nothing to induce' the purchaser of the receipt to believe in the ex istence of real authority; and (2) that the case belongs to a most extensive class of cases for which I have ventured to enunciate the principle of 'estoppel by assisted misrepre sentation.'" In explanation of this he quotes from his well-known work on Estoppel as follows: "One man may be estopped by a misrepre
sentation made by another, when the former, in breach of some duty to the deceived person, has supplied the defrauder with that which was necessary to make the representation credible. If the fraud was accomplished with out assistance, there can, of course, be no estoppel (of any one but the defrauder). If, although there was assistance, yet the assist ance was an immaterial factor in the accom plishment of the fraud, there ought likewise to be no estoppel — the assistance did not furnish the occasion or the opportunity for the fraud. But if the assistnce was in some way essential to the success of the fraud — furnished the occasion of opportunity for it; made credible a representation which without it could not have been successfully made — then, if there has been a breach of some duty in rendering that assistance, estoppel will ensue." He further calls attention to his classifica tion of these cases, in both of which classes he finds that the courts hold the principal estopped. "A. If an agent acts within what appears to be his authority, the principal is bound. "B. If an agent appears to be acting within his authority, the principal bound." "There may be appearance as to the ex tent of real authority (A); and appearance as to the act being within the real authority (B) — appearance in relation to the authority (A), and appearance in relation to the act (B)." Under one head or the other he believes all the cases may be grouped. BIOGRAPHY (Thomas Jefferson)
AN interesting account of Thomas Jefferson as a lawyer by G. A. Finkelburg, suggested by the finding of Jefferson's copy of Mercer's Abridgement of the Laws of Virginia, is published in the American Law Review for May (V. xxxix, p. 321).
