Georgetown Law Journal
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Vol. XVIII, No. 4 May, 1930 GEORGETOWN LAW JOURNAL Georgetown University, School of Law Washington, D. C., U. S. A. CONTEMPT OF COURT O. H-BRINKMAN THE ORIGIN OF EQUITY (Continuation) CHARLES A. KEIGWIN COMMENTS ON RESTATEMENT OF AGENCY; Part III BASIL H. POLL1TT and NOTES RECENT DECISIONS BOOK REVIEWS Complete Table of Contents of This Issue on Page i Published Quarterly During Academic Year By The Georgetown Law Journal Association Annual Subscription $2.50 Single Copy 75c Entered as Second-Class Matter January 24, 1922, at the Post Office at Washington, D. C., Under the Act of March 3, 1879 Copyright, 1930, by the Georgetown Law Journal Association U. S. COM PACT CODE A Handy Desk Book o f r / the United States Laws WflVy Pamphlet Service for 1929 in~ eluded without extra charge Text of The text of the laws is set forth just as they are found in the the Laws United States Code Annotated, which conforms exactly with the “ Code o f the Laws of the United States” adopted by Congress. Later Laws A ll Acts of Congress passed subsequent to the “ Code of the Added Laws” have been inserted in their proper place under the authorized classification. In the “ Compact Code” there is but one place to look for all laws down to the convening of Congress on December 3, 1928. Historical Valuable Historical and Explanatory Notes have been pro- and Other vided. These throw additional light on the text and in Notes many instances are essential to its complete understanding. Tables Reference tables are supplied which enable the user to find in the “ Compact Code” laws cited from the old Revised Statutes, the Statutes at Large, the U. S. Compiled Statutes Annotated and Federal Statutes Annotated. There is also contained a Table of Acts Re- pealed, as well as parallel tables from the Judicial Code, the Criminal Code and the Bankruptcy A ct of 1898. Index A complete subject-matter index is also provided, under one alphabet, referring to the laws as contained in the Code, as well as all supplementary legislation of a general nature to December 3, 1928. All the general laws of the U. S. down to date for $12.00 MAIL THIS ORDER TO W EST PUBLISHING COMPANY, St. Paul, Minn. On acceptance of this order send “ U. S. Code, Compact Edition,” one volume, bound in maroon Dupont Fabrikoid including 1929 Pamphlet Service at $12.00 de livered. [ ] Cash herewith [ } Charge to my account C19707 Please mention the JOURNAL when dealing with onr advertisers. Table of Contents ARTICLES CONTEMPT OF COURT O. H. Brinkman 287 THE ORIGIN OF EQUITY (Continuation, Part IV) Charles A. Keigwin 299 COMMENTS ON THE RESTATEMENT OF THE LAW OF AGENCY (Continuation, Part III) Basil H. Pollitt 327 EDITORIAL 355 NOTES CONSTITUTIONAL LAW—Jurisdiction to Tax J. B. 364 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW—Trial by Jury in Criminal Cases L. F. D. 374 LIBEL AND SLANDER— Liability for statements not ex facie libelous and published in good faith J. D. O’R., Jr. 382 RECENT DECISIONS CONSTITUTIONAL LAW—Jurisdiction to Tax J. B. 389 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW— Trial by Jury in Criminal Cases L. F. D. 390 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW—Waiver of Jury Trial in Crim inal Cases L. F. D. 390 INCOME TAXES— Community Property C. L. DeO. 392 JURIES— WOMEN— Eligibility to Jury Service following Enfranchisement J. D. O’R., Jr. 393 LIBEL AND SLANDER— Liability for Statements not ex facie Libelous and Published in good faith 395 MASTER AND SERVANT—Assumption of Risk in Protection of Employer’s Property P. C. A. 396 PATENTS— Dismissal of Bill at Hearing of Motion for Preliminary Injunction R. A. O’L. 398 PATENTS— Rights of Federal Employees as Inventors C. F. D. 399 WILLS— Construction of the word “ Money” . G. G. M. 402 BOOK REVIEWS W. Jefferson Davis: Radio Law John W. Guider 405 W. Jefferson Davis: Aeronautical Law Allen J. Krouse 406 A. Pearce Higgins: Studies in International Law and Rela tions Magnum Weeks 410 S. P. Ladas: International Protection of Industrial Property Karl Fenning 416 B. L. Klooster: Patent Accounting Karl Fenning 419 William Harmon Black: How to Conduct a Criminal Case Allen J. Krouse 421 Saul Gordon: Gordon’s Annotated Real Estate Forms Joseph D. Sullivan 422 BOOKS RECEIVED 424 Copyright, 1930, by Georgetown Law Journal Association Contributors T o This Issue ARTICLES O. H. BRINKMAN, LL. B., member of the bars of the District of Columbia and of Missouri. Formerly Legislative Assistant to United States Senate, and now Legislative Assistant to the Committee on the District of Columbia of the U. S. Senate. Author of numerous articles on legal, political and economic subjects for various period icals. CHARLES A. KEIGWIN, A. M., LL.B., Professor of Law at George town University Law School; author of Cases in Common Law Plead ing, Cases in Equity Pleading, Cases on Code Pleading, and other volumes and articles in legal publications. POLLITT, BASIL H., A.B., LL.B., Professor of Law, New Jersey Law School; member of New York and New Jersey Bars; director New Jersey Bar quizz course; author of Cases on Agency, Cases on Real Property. BOOK REVIEWS JOHN W. GUIDER, LL. B.; graduate of U. S. Naval Academy; member of the Bar of the District of Columbia. KROUSE, ALLEN J., LL.B., Georgetown; member of the District of Columbia bar; Assistant District Attorney for the District of Columbia; Book Review Editor of this Journal, 1927-1928. WEEKS, MAGNUM, LL. M.; member of the bar of the District of Columbia; assistant Professor of law at National University Law School; formerly Assistant Solicitor of U. S. Department of State; now Attorney, U. S. Board of Tax Appeals. FENNING, KARL, M.A., LL.B., Professor of Law, Georgetown University School of Law; formerly Assistant United States Com missioner of Patents; Special Assistant to the Attorney General. SULLIVAN, JOSEPH D., A.B., LL.M., Professor of Law at George town University Law School; author of Sullivan’s Cases on Real Property. ti Georgetown Law Journal ▼•lame XVIII MAY, 1930 Number 4 CONTEMPT OF COURT By 0. H. BRINKMAN he deepest, all-sustaining foundation of a democratic Tform of government—of civilization as we know it—is faith in and respect for the processes of justice as embod ied in the courts, by the people generally. The contempt of court most dangerous, then, from the standpoint of preservation of the Republic, is not that man ifested by open resistance to or disobedience of judicial de crees by individuals. It is, rather, an often inarticulate but none the less widespread and deeply imbedded opinion that the courts are not courts of justice but courts of law; that judges are prejudiced and partial; that poor and rich do not stand on an equality before the judicial bench. It is the extent of these beliefs that largely determines the length of life of a government. It is faith that individ ual rights will be protected by the courts that induces men to forego the use of personal force to protect what they conceive to be their rights of property and person. When the mass of people of any nation become saturated with the belief that they are the victims of oppression and in justice— that government, including the courts, exists for the benefit of a comparatively small ruling class rather than for the governed— courts and kings and parliaments and legislatures all are destroyed. The effort, then, of the courts, no less than of the legis lative bodies, should be to preserve public respect for the system and processes of justice, rather than mere respect for the individual who occupies the judicial bench or the legislator’s chair. 287 28 8 GEORGETOWN LAW JOURNAL It is not contempt of a court or contempt of a judge, but contempt of the courts generally, that is to be feared by all who desire the nation to live on through the ages. These are truisms with which few will disagree. Yet even a superficial examination of the decisions of the courts will reveal the fact that judges in attempting to uphold the “ dignity” of the bench have instead in some instances done vastly more to bring the courts into public contempt. Not the majority of judges, of course; but a surprisingly large number of judges. Any system of law or justice, no matter how elemental or primitive the society in which it exists, embodies the fundamental idea of an impartial, disinterested tribunal to hear the accuser and accused, and to render judgment. Yet our courts constantly, continually, almost customarily, ig nore and flaunt that elemental principle of justice in trying contempt cases. The courts themselves show the greatest contempt for the ordinary processes of law and justice— when they are themselves the accuser, the prosecutor, the judge and the jury in cases involving nothing more than a disrespect for their mandates or dignity, but a jail sentence for the accused. The law condemns to the gallows or to the penitentiary the man who having suffered a wrong by another man kills the wrong-doer or burns his house, in an attempt to find a “ short-cut” to justice. But the law reports are full of cases of judges who have adopted a “ short cut” to justice by summarily sentencing to jail in contempt of court pro ceedings an editor or litigant who has made libelous state ments about the judge. Does the judge, in such cases show any respect for the processes of law, which provide for grand jury indictment, prosecution by the State’s Attor ney, trial by a jury and an impartial court? Does the spec tacle of a judge disregarding the elemental principles of justice in order to obtain quick redress of his own wrongs bring public respect or does it bring public contempt for the courts? CONTEMPT OF COURT 289 If the integrity of our courts is menaced by partisan, political attacks, it is because those who make the attacks know that they can rely upon the support and approval of a large number of the people who believe the courts are not functioning in the public interest, but for private, spe cial, selfish interests.