The Judicial Work of the Comptroller of the Treasury (Cornell Studies in History and Political Science, vol. III, 1911. pp. xiii, 164) is a useful study in administrative law. After tracing the history of the office of comptroller, the author discusses somewhat fully the comptroller's jurisdiction, and then treats in detail the decisions of the controller with respect to appropriation acts, public revenues, disbursements for services to the government, and interpretation of contracts. In this part of the work it would have been of value to have a fuller statement of the administrative organization of the Treasury Department, and of the respective jurisdictions of the Comptroller of the Treasury and the Court of Claims.

The author devotes three chapters to a comparison of the Comptroller's work with similar functions in France and Germany, and presents the best brief account of the control of treasury operations in these countries. Students of administrative law will welcome the chapter on "American compared with Continental Jurisdiction over claims against the State," where the author compares the administrative jurisdictions of France and Germany. This chapter, however, does not bear a close relation to the rest of the book.

American Colonial Government, 1696–1765, by Oliver Morton Dickerson (Cleveland, Arthur H. Clark, 1912. pp. 390), is a study of the British Board of Trade in its relations to the American Colonies. The chapters on "Difficulties of Colonial Administration" and "Treatment of Colonial Legislation" are of especial value to students of political science. The author presents the fullest discussion available of the royal veto of colonial legislation, and makes a real contribution to this important subject. With respect to appeals to the King in Council from the colonial courts, the treatment is not so satisfactory. Perhaps the most serious criticism of this book is that as to its citation of the manuscript records of the Privy Council. For the whole period. covered by this book the parts of these records dealing with the colonies were in print before 1912 (Acts of the Privy Council, Colonial Series, vols. 1–4, 1613–1766), yet the author gives citations only to the manuscript record. Moreover, the citations of the manuscript are only by volume and page, without the precise date, so that they give practically no aid to a person who desires to run down the author's references in the printed acts of the Privy Council.

Mr. Samuel Robertson Honey has issued a book entitled The Referendum among the English, the sub-title of which is "A Manual of 'Sub

missions to the People' in the American States." (London: Macmillan and Co. pp. xxxv, 114). The main characteristic of the book is its failure to give any adequate account of the referendum in the United States. Tables are printed of the votes upon questions submitted to the people in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Connecticut. Some votes on constitutional questions in other states are collected from Thorpe's collection of charters and constitutions. The book is of no value to students in this country and can hardly prove of much use to advocates of the referendum in England or elsewhere. An introduction by J. St. Loe Strachey adds nothing to the value of the book.

Of much greater value is The Initiative, Referendum and Recall, edited by Prof. William Bennett Munro (New York, Appleton. 1912. Pp. viii, 365. National Municipal League Series). The editor has collected a number of the most important discussions already in print and in his selection has wisely not confined himself to papers read before the National Municipal League. An introductory chapter by the editor adds to the usefulness of the volume. In a collection of this character one would not expect to find any important new contribution to the subject, but it is to be regretted that room should not have been found for some careful analysis of initiative and referendum provisions in this country. It would be well to call the attention of the reader more definitely to the fact that there are varying types of the initiative and referendum. In the bibliography it should have been worth while to mention C. O. Gardner's article on The Working of the State Wide Referendum in Illinois (published in this REVIEW, V, 394), the only careful study of the influence of ballot forms on popular voting. Frederic J. Stimson's Popular Law Making is included in the bibliography and is starred as one of the important books, apparently because of its misleading title, for the book contains only incidental reference to, and nothing of value upon, the initiative and referendum.

The agitation in France for the enactment of a "statute of functionaries" regulating the status and guaranteeing certain rights to the employes of the state has recently called out a large number of books, brochures and articles relating to the various aspects of the question. The most pretentious of these contributions is a book of more than 900 pages by Charles Georgin, entitled Le Statut des FonctionnairesL'Avancement, son organisation-ses Guaranties (Librairie Generale de

Droit et de Jurisprudence Paris, 1912). Mr. Georgin discusses at great length the present status of the functionaries in the various branches of administration, methods of appointment and promotion, their rights and duties and the desirability, not to say the imperative necessity of enacting a comprehensive law providing certain guarantees against favoritism in making appointments and promotions, and according to them the right of association. During the past five years practically every ministry has promised such a statute but as yet none has been passed. Mr. Georgin analyzes several of these projects and submits one of his own which he thinks would meet the situation. He has so thoroughly discussed every phase of the question in his voluminous treatise that apparently nothing has been left for others to say. His work is thoroughly scientific and is based on the most extensive research and intimate knowledge of the subject. In addition to abundant citations to the literature on almost every page of his work he adds a bibliography which should prove invaluable to students.

In a work entitled The Liability of Railroads to Interstate Employees (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1911. Pp. 571) the author, Mr. Philip J. Doherty, discusses in a convenient form the legislation of Congress fixing the liability of railroads for injuries suffered by their employees while engaged in interstate commerce. The various cases in which these statutes have been construed and applied are collated and intelligently discussed. The chapter entitled "When is a Railroad Engaged in Interstate Commerce" is, however, hardly adequate. Thus, to give a single example, on page 76 there is cited a list of cases with the bare assertion that they support the proposition that a shipment transported from a point in one state through a contiguous state to another point in the state of origin is intrastate in character, and another list of cases which, it is declared, negative this proposition, but without any attempt to explain this apparent conflict of authorities. In fact there is not this conflict, at least in the Supreme Court, as readily appears when one examined the cases which are cited (Hanley Kansas City Ry., 187 U. S. 617, and Cinn. Packet Co. v. Bay, 200 U. S. 179). Upon the other hand the constitutionality of the acts is discussed at an unnecessary length, a full third of the volume being devoted to this topic, and much ground covered which can hardly be said to be, or to have been seriously debatable even before the decision in Mondon v. N. Y. N. H. & H. R. R. Co. was rendered. A chapter

of thirty-three pages is devoted to a review of the Hoxie case in which the doctrines there asserted are severely but justly criticized. In an appendix the texts of the several statutes are given.

The British Imperial Conference of 1911 has given rise to several books. In The Imperial Conference: A History and a Study, (London, Longmans, 1911, 2 vols.), Richard Jebb traces the growth of the Imperial Conference from its inception in 1887, when its first meeting was brought about by accidental circumstances rather than by any conscious idea of promoting imperial federation. Originally the Conference was an informal organization, lacking any governmental significance. From this beginning the author traces the development of the Conference until it becomes a definite institution, with stated though infrequent meetings, with the English Prime minister as presiding officer, and its membership limited to those holding cabinet positions. Mr. Jebb's work is much broader in scope than a mere recital of facts connected with the conference, and is in reality a history of the movement toward British federation. The author is a profound believer in British federation, and thinks that Britain must choose between federation and disintegration. The work is permeated with the idea that the only possible basis for a permanent federation is an economic one. It is colored by the author's very evident prejudice against the Liberal party in England, but is a scholarly and valuable addition to the literature of the subject.

The Imperial Conference of 1911 from Within (London, Constable, 1912, pp. vii, 175) is by Sir John G. Findlay, a representative of New Zealand at the Conference of 1911. In this little book the author gives an entertaining account of the work of the Conference; the greater part of the book is devoted, however, to a discussion of New Zealand's proposal for the creation of a representative imperial council.

Étude sur la Responsabilité des Groupments Administratifs by L. Couzinet (Paris, Rousseau 1911, pp. 306) is the title of a doctor's thesis which deals with the responsibility of the state and its local subdivisions for injuries committed against private individuals. Monsieur Couzinet shows that during ancient and mediaeval times no such responsibility was recognized but that the doctrine of irresponsibility was nearly everywhere abandoned during the Nineteenth Century. In France, and it is mainly with French practice that his study deals, the responsibility of the state, as well as that of the departments and

communes, for damages sustained by individuals on account of the acts of the administration is now admitted, though of course there are exceptions. Thus for acts which are governmental or political in character as contra-distinguished from those which are purely administrative (actes de gestion) the responsibility of the state is not recognized and of course this is true of legislative acts and for the most part of judicial errors. The competent tribunal for determining the liability of the state and the amount of the indemnity is the Council of State, the administrative court of common law in France, except in certain cases enumerated in the laws. The whole question is studied from every point of view, the opinions of the commentators reviewed and the decisions of both Council of State and the Court Cassation, analyzed. Incidentally he discusses the subject of administrative jurisdiction, reviews the objections which have been raised against it and presents a statement of the advantages that are claimed for it. Altogether the study is thorough and carefully done.

Among the more useful of the many doctor's theses prepared for the law faculty of Paris is one entitled De la Responsabilité Civile des Fonctionnaires, by Monsieur Nesmes-Desmarets (Giard et Briere, Paris, 1910, pp. 350). Speaking of the multiplicity of functionaries in France (there are now nearly a million, or about one for every forty of the inhabitants) he remarks that the individual finds himself in relation with some agent of the state at almost every moment of his life and it is therefore highly important that he should be protected against encroachments upon his rights. Passing over the protection afforded by means of the disciplinary and penal responsibility to which functionaries are subject-neither of which is sufficient-he reviews the systems of civil responsibility which have been provided in the principal countries of Europe and America. In England the civil responsibility of the agents of the state is fully admitted and they are all liable to prosecution before the judicial tribunals for unauthorized acts against individuals even when committed in the performance of public functions. There, he says, public functionaries are not privileged persons and are liable as private citizens for injuries committed. In the United States the rule is practically the same. In Italy all functionaries except prefects, subprefects and syndics are civilly responsible to private individuals for injuries, and since 1865 no previous authorization from the administration has been required to institute a prosecution. In Belgium since 1831 the rule has been substantially the same, if not more liberal. In Switzerland the federal jurisprudence