Review of Periodicals England might ensue. An administrator, whose talent and character every one respects, might remain in a Cabinet without agreeing wit every measure advocated by the Gov ernment. There does not appear in the nature of things to be any clear reason why a Chancellor of the highest legal eminence should not remain a member of a Cabinet though he does not agree with all the litical views of his colleagues. No doubt t 's sug lglestion is foreign to the customs of the Eng sh Constitution as they now exist. It IS alien to party overnment as at this moment carried on in ngland. But it is opposed to no rule either of honesty or of common sense." Local Government. "The New American City Government.” By George Kibbe Turner. ZllcClure’s, v. 35, p. 97 (May). _A_graphic account_ of the working of com mission government in Des Moines. Marriage and Divorce. “Necessity for Prior Valid Marriage in Prosecution for Bigamy." By Melville Peck. 15 Virginia Law Register 905 (Apr.). "There seems to be no lack of authority on this question, to the effect that the first marriage charged in the indictment must not be void. Where there are only two marriages, and the first is void ab initio, the
second may be valid, and whether it is valid or not, it is not criminal by reason of the first marriage, though the first husband or wife be living at‘ the time of the second mar riage. The oregoing is offered as an answer to the question pro unded in the note to sect. 3781, Code of irginia, 1904." Medical Jurisprudence. "Tests of Insanity in the Criminal Court." By Dr. J. G. Kier nan, of Chicago. 3 Lawyer and Banker 109 (Apr.).
"Notwithstanding the opportunity afforded the legal profession to propound hypothetical questions, it would appear that the ph sician in making his examination has on y the medical points in the case to consider. That ,is to say, he has nothing whatever to do with the outside circumstances surrounding the act; he has to determine only the condition of the brain cells so that it matters not what the case may be or whether it is due to influ ences of heredity. In the case of traumatism, syphilitic or alcoholic poisons, epilepsy, dissi pation, excesses tumors, or an
other known
cause the question is: Are t e brain cells properly performing their functions? ‘An individual whose brain cells are normal is a responsible being,’ says Grasset, ‘and that consists in responding as other men do to the influence of ordinary motives of every day life which rule conduct and human action. If the brain cells are wholly diseased and abnormal the individual is irresponsible.’" "Medical Practice Laws." By Floyd M.
Crandall, M. D. 611 (Apr. 9).
Medical Record, v. 77, p.
345
Read before the Medical Society of the County of New York, Feb. 28, 1910. "Durin the time when the contest between the schoo s of medicine was at its height, the energies of the profession seem to have been com letely exhausted by the strife. Not a sing e successful effort was made for eighteen years to improve professional conditions by new enactments. . . .
"The laws of New York as they now exist are but a reflection of a tendency that has been active for fully three decades. They recognize physicians only and take no cog nizance of medical sects. . . . Few medical practitioners are now willing to lace upon themselves either legal or more. bonds to limit their practice to a single method." Monopoliol. "Present Condition and Pros pects of the Sherman Act." Editorial. 21 Bench and Bar 1 (Apr.).
“The situation presented is that of a statute first construed and used to prevent trade agreements between independent com petitors,—a
ments,
that
is,
whose
ille
alitya is familiar to all lawyers,-—but which lgias ter been extended, indefinitel, as it seems to us, in an efiort to curb sue a gre ations of capital as, in the judgment 0 the Government, are dangerous to the public. Is the statute a fit instrument for the solu tion of the great industrial problem that confronts the country,——the problem, that is, of obtaining the benefit resultin from co operation and consolidation, whie protect
ivnlg the public a inst the danger of monopoly? e think cleary not. . . . “The plain sense of the matter is, that the act (except where an actual monopoly had been created) was intended to be confined
to the condemnation of certain forms of the abolition of competition, long recognized as illegal,—a condemnation made more effective by the use of the writ of injunction, and in other wa 5. So construed, the act is not onl inte igible, but has been used to good an useful urpose. It should not, however, be straine to embrace cases such as the urchase of the property of another, or the ormation of a partnership or corporation, merely because a cessation of competition incidentally results which in the particular case is deemed to be mischievous. Once the line is overstep d nothing but confusion can result; and if t e judgment in the American Tobacco Company case is afiirmed in its entirety we look to see the act repealed, for no amendment of which we can conceive could reach the evil. The economic problem is present and vital; but to attem t to solve it y means of this statute is hope ess, result ing merely in the unsettlement both of the law and o legitimate industry." "The Future of the Telephone." By Her bert N. Casson. World‘: Work, v. 20, p. 12903 (May). “It is a fact, although now generally for otten, that the first railroads of the nited tates were run for ten years or more on an
