Correspondence Constitution, and (2) that state deci sions based on federal constitutional grounds be reviewable by the United States Supreme Court. Such a plan is not so radical as it may appear at first sight, and under it I think we might accomplish the principal end aimed at in the recall of judges and the "recall of judicial decisions." And this end is primarily that of restraining illiberal and often irresponsible declarations by state courts that state laws are invalid as depriving of "due process of law" or "equal protection of the laws" under the state constitutions. W. F. DODD. Urbana, III. April 12, 1912. [We regret exceedingly having done Professor Dodd an injustice, by failing to set forth his proposal with greater precision. Our comment on his proposal was based on the extracts from his article in the Michigan Law Review pub lished in our February issue (24 Green Bag 89). We had in mind his suggestion that the power to rule state statutes unconstitutional, on the ground of their conflict with state constitutional pro visions of "due process of law" and "equal protection of the laws," be taken from state judges, which Professor Dodd would accomplish by striking these pro visions from the state constitutions. As Professor Dodd would allow an appeal to the United States Supreme Court from all decisions of state courts involv ing the "due process" and "equal pro tection" clauses of the federal Consti tution, the final determination of the constitutionality of statutes would rest with the federal tribunal rather than with state courts. The observation to which Professor Dodd objects was thus offered in good faith, though it should have been couched in terms more spe
273
cific than those which we thought it safe .. to employ, in sacrificing explicitness to brevity. — Ed.]
AN ODD FORM OF "COLLATERAL" To the Editor of the Green Bag: — Sir: On May 25, 1846, one Hudgins borrowed $65 of Ramspeck and gave his note therefor. In most respects it is a very usual instrument, but after stat ing terms and time of payment the note says: "for the settlement of this note promptly at maturity I hereby pledge my word as a Gentleman, and for the consideration aforesaid I hereby for myself and family expressly waive all right of homestead or exemption which by the Constitution or laws of Georgia are allowed to us or our families." Has such collateral any market value now? Can you suggest any way the sheriff could put one in possession if this mortgage had been foreclosed? I wonder if this is but an humorous effort of some ante-bellum joker or whether it was an actual trade. The note bears all the marks of being an "ancient document," and from the fact that it is not marked satisfied, I wonder if the collateral was required. Old timers tell me that in their boyhood days they saw such instruments in cir culation. DEAN E. RYMAN. Atlanta, Ga. March 21, 1912. [The conceptions of our law are highly elastic, and the judicial mind infinitely resourceful, so it may be possible for some one of our readers to cite an au thority sustaining waiver of statutory exemptions made for the benefit of survivors as a valid consideration. Such a decision would be worth including in our museum of legal oddities. —Ed.]
