EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT ecutive justice is to improve the output of judicial justice till the adjustment of human relations by our courts is brought into thor ough accord with the moral sense of the public at large. "Legislatures are pouring out an everincreasing volume of laws. The old judicial machinery has been found inadequate to en force them. But they touch the most vital interests of the community, and it demands enforcement. Hence the executive is turned to. Summary administrative action becomes the fashion. An elective judiciary, sensitive to the public will, blithely yields up its pre rogatives, and the return to a government of men is achieved. If we are to be spared a return to oriental justice, if we are to pre serve the common-law doctrine of the su premacy of law, the profession and the courts must take up vigorously and fearlessly the problem of to-day — how to administer the law to meet the demands of the world, that is. ' Covenants without the sword,' says Hobbes, ' avail nothing.' If the courts can not wield the sword of justice effectively, some other agency will inevitably take it up." PUBLIC POLICY. " Law and Industrial Inequality," by George W. Alger, The Brief (V. vii, p. 1). TREATIES (Japan). In the April Yale Law Journal, Edwin Maxey writes on " The Compromise in the Japanese Controversy." As in a former article Mr. Maxey, who was retained as counsel for the Japanese Govern ment, argues that our treaty with Japan gave Japanese children a right to attend our public schools, which was violated by the San Fran cisco segregation, and the Federal Government has full power to make such a treaty. He is of the opinion that the Supreme Court will ultimately have to decide this question of the extent of the treaty-making power, too vital to the conduct of our foreign relations to remain unanswered. It is therefore unfortu nate that the compromise will probably result in the present case being dropped instead of being carried to the Supreme Court for decision. . . . "In order to avoid forcing the issue, Cali fornia has agreed to admit the Japanese chil dren into the public schools on condition that
313
Japanese coolies not already here shall be excluded from this country. This satisfies the labor organizations, and it was they who were responsible for the act excluding Japanese children from the public schools. It also satis fies Japan, as the amendment to our immigra tion laws will be general in terms and hence will not wound the pride of the Japanese and will have the effect of turning the Japanese laborers toward Korea and Manchuria where their labor will contribute far more to the progress of Japan than if they emigrated to the United States. "While, therefore, the settlement reached accords very well with the economic interests of Japan and with the political exigencies of both countries, it leaves the main question raised in the controversy precisely where it found it. It leaves room for the suspicion that the school question was raised by the labor leaders in order to furnish a quid pro quo in negotiations looking to another end, viz., the reduction of competition .by Japanese laborers in the California labor market. It merely postpones the settlement of the legal question of the extent of the treaty-making power of the Federal Government — a ques tion of far more importance than the presence or absence of a few Japanese laborers in any section of our country." TREATIES. " The Japanese School Ques tion," by Victor E. Ruehl, The Brief (V. vii, P- 13)- • TRUSTS (Purchaser at Sheriff's Sale). Roland R. Foulhe in the March American Law Register (V. lv, p. 147), examines the Pennsyl vania law on " Purchaser at Sheriffs' Sale: When a Trustee." The conclusion is: — " If property in which A has an interest is about to be sold at sheriff's sale, and B by promising A before the sale to buy the property and hold for A's benefit induces A not to protect his interest, whereby B obtains the property for less than its value, B will be held to his promise, and if the subject-matter is real estate, the Statute of Frauds will not be available as a defense to B." TRUSTS. " The Loss of the FiduciaryPrinciple," by Thomas Nelson Page, Albany Law Journal (V. lxix, p. 43).
