Index to Periodicals This article was prepared during the summer of 1911 at the suggestion of some members of Congress who had become interested in the pro posed amendment of the Federal Judicial Code. A recommendation identical to that contained in this article was made to the American Bar Asso ciation during the latter part of August by its special committee to suggest remedies and form ulate proposed laws to prevent delay and unneces sary cost in litigation; and this recommendation was unanimously approved. The American Bar Association therefore now stands committed to the proposal to allow a general right of appeal on all questions of the validity of a statute under the Constitution and laws of the United States. See Judicial Recall. Constitutional Law. See Fourteenth Amendment, Judicial Recall, Workmen's Com pensation. Contracts. "Releases and Covenants Not to Sue Joint, or Joint and Several Debtors." By Prof. Samuel Williston. 25 Harvard Law Re new 203 (Jan.). "The subject of joint contracts is regarded as an elementary one in the law of contracts, yet its difficulties have received singularly little discussion either in treatises on the law of con tracts or in essays. The fullest treatment of the matter is perhaps to be found in books on the law of partnership. But it is not always easy, where a partnership is concerned, to be sure how far peculiar rules of partnership may have affected the general principles of joint contracts." Criminal Procedure. "Lynching Unneces sary: A Report of Commonwealth v. Christian." By Richard W. Hale. 45 American Law Review 875 (Nov.-Dec.). "The proverbial law's delays and lynch law both merit condemnation." As a protest against the over-emphasis placed on these two evils by publicity, the author deems it a pleasure to sub mit to -the public and the legal profession a report of this case. "A Trial for Murder in England." 45 Ameri can Law Review 801 (Nov.-Dec.). Conclusion of the Dickman case (see 23 Green Bag 644). Educational Trusts. "Educational Trusts and Recent Decisions." By J. Edward Graham, K.C. 23 Juridical Review 243 (Oct.). The effect of the transfer of educational trusts to school boards, under English law, is considered. Equity. See Admiralty. Evidence. "The Artificiality of our Law of Evidence." By Hon. Simeon E. Baldwin, LL.D. 21 Yale Law Journal 105 (Dec.). An article full of shrewd common sense which should be read by everyone interested in the progressive reform of existing procedure. "The starting point in disposing of an objection to proof of any fact should always be this: 'Unless
87
excluded by some rule or principle of law, any fact may be proved which logically tends to aid the trier in the determination of the issue. Evi dence is admitted, not because it is shown to be competent, but because it is not shown to be incompetent.' The question, also, as to its re ception is always one to be answered with a view to practical rather than theoretical consid erations. Will or will it not tend to throw light on the justice of the case on trial? This the trial judge must determine lergely as a matter of com mon sense. He must be armed with a pretty wide discretion. "The present tendency of most American courts is in this direction. . . . "Our jurors are now generally intelligent and fairly educated men. There is less and less need to guard them from hearing evidence which is objectionable because remote. They can them selves appreciate its remoteness and weigh it accordingly. "To some extent all courts have met this change of conditions." See Expert Testimony. Expert Testimony. "Proof of Handwrit ing." By Albert S. Osborn. 6 Illinois Law Re view 334 (Dec.) The author proposes that wise rules of prac tice admitting proved standards of comparison be adopted, and that the appellate courts desig nate qualified experts who may be called upon to give evidence for the state or court when there is a conflict of testimony. Federal Control. See Constitutionality of Statutes, State Control. Federal Courts. "The Neglected Depart ment." By Judge George C. Holt. North Ameri can Review, v. 195, p. 15 (Jan.). "Nearly twenty years ago a change in the federal judicial system, more important than had ever occurred before, was caused by the establishment of the Circuit Courts of Appeals. The business of the Supreme Court had been for many years badly in arrears. To relieve the congestion it was determined to create a system of intermediate courts of appeal. The obviously proper thing to have done would have been to establish new and distinct courts, made up of a proper number of judges, having no con nection with the courts subject to their appellate jurisdiction. What was actually done was to create courts of appeal to be held by the existing circuit judges, with power in them to call in any of the district judges when necessary. The num ber of the judges constituting these courts is usually three, and they habitually sit in review of each other's decisions. . . . "Under the new act, going into effect on Jan uary 1, 1912, transferring the original jurisdiction of the circuit courts to the district courts, the district judges will continue to do substan tially all of that work. In striking contrast with this spirit of parsimony in organizing these im portant appellate courts has been the action of Congress in establishing various special tribu nals."
