is properly the subject of negotiation with a foreign country." It probably cannot be safely assumed that the Supreme Court has at any time in its history maintained the doctrine that Congress cannot in its treaties invade the reserved powers of the states, in an extreme form. The assumption cannot be made merely on the ground that cer "That's very indefinite," said the lawyer. "What do you mean by the best part of one winter?" "Well," said the witness, after due deliberation and reflection, "I've been up there about eleven months." HAPPENINGS IN COURT tions was being argued before one of the judges in Chicago, and one of the points raised was that the four men in control were operating the two competing concerns through one office and employing the same bookkeepers for both companies, and thus were enabled to favor, and were favoring, one corporation to the injury of the other. tain remarks scattered through dissent-motion for a receiver of two corporaing opinions, or made obiter in majority opinions in connection with a general survey of a region presenting no specific subject for elucidation, have reflected such a view. Accordingly it is doubtful whether what Willoughby calls "the obiter doctrine that the reserved rights of the states may never be infringed upon by the treaty-making power" (Willoughby on the Constitution, s. 215) was ever seriously maintained. Instead there seems to be a tendency toward clearer recognition of the principle implicitly contained in the Constitution from the first, that the reservation of certain rights to the states is qualified, but not radically affected, by a grant which the Constitution makes to Congress of a very broad but not necessarily unlimited jurisdiction over all matters properly subjects for international agreement. A PART OF THE WINTER CHICAGO mining engineer tells A of a law suit tried in that city, wherein one of the witnesses was an old prospector from a mining settlement in the Far Northwest, a settlement situated about twelve thousand feet above the sea, where the snow drifts and packs and remains the year round. "How long have you lived in Marshall?" asked the lawyer, conducting the examination of the old prospector. "The best part of one winter." "Well, what is there wrong about the two concerns sharing the expenses of the same bookkeepers?" argued the judge. "I remember that when I was in business, I didn't have enough money to hire a bookkeeper myself, and I used to share the expense with another concern." "Both competitors? In the same line of business?" asked the astute lawyer. "Competitors? I didn't have any competitor; but it was the same line of business," admitted the judge. "And may I ask what your line of business was," persisted the lawyer keenly. "It was the law business but Mr. Reporter, don't put that in the record though. The Supreme Court probably would not believe it." Once Happy Hooligan, having heard so much praise in favor of army life and having become tired of his wanderings around the land, decided to become a soldier boy of dear old Uncle Sam. The dignity of the military discipline, the illusive grades of military rank, and the clanking together of heels with prolonged salutes were difficult and arduous for Hooligan and on the third day he was brought up for trial before the Colonel on the following charge and specification: "Charge: Violation of the 62d Article of War, conduct to the prejudice of good order and military discipline. "Specification: In that he, when meeting his Captain, did waive his hand to him and did say 'Hello, there, Kiddo!"" "Is that lawyer for the woman, or against her," asked one bystander of another after they had been listening to his argument for an hour. "I don't know, I am sure," was the quick reply, "he hasn't committed himself yet." In the Criminal Court of Chicago, the other day, a young attorney that was battling for the life of his client ended his plea with the following burst of eloquence: "Gentlemen of the Jury, there is a nigger in the woodpile somewhere! I can see him floating through the air; and I know you will nip him in the bud." "Look at this document and tell the jury whether your signature appears thereon," directed the young attorney. The witness scrutinized the paper carefully and then hesitatingly said: "I don't know. I can't " "Does it or does it not appear thereon? Yes or no no explanations are necessary," interrupted the court. "I object to the question," interrupted opposing attorney; and then followed a long argument between the two attorneys and the judge, after which the court ruled: 66 MONG the most amusing incidents I've ever seen in court," says a Cleveland lawyer, "was that which occurred recently in my town. "A big chap stood at the rail completely swathed in bandages. One might say that little of his face was visible, aside from one eye that peered through an opening in the bandages. "'You are charged with disorderly conduct,' said the Court. "So I understand,' said the man at the rail, 'And I want to be held for trial.' "This was a decidedly unexpected announcement; and everyone in court was correspondingly astonished. "I should think,' said the Court, after a moment's hesitation, 'that you would plead guilty now, and pay a fine of five dollars, ending the matter.' "I thank your Honor,' said the man, 'but I want to be tried.' 'Why?' 66 "For this reason,' explained the mussed-up man. "The last thing I remember was that I was standing very peaceably on a street corner. When I came to, two doctors were busily engaged in sewing me together. I want to be tried so that I can hear the stories of the witnesses. That's about the only way I'll ever find out what came off." The Editor will be glad to receive for this department anything likely to entertain the readers of the Green Bag in the way of legal antiquities, facetiæ, and anecdotes. In view of the pressure of material supplied by the meeting of the American Bar Association it has seemed better to omit this month some of the regular departments of the GREEN BAG, which will be resumed in the next issue. |