HARVARD LAW REVIEW.

Published monthly, during the Academic Year, by Harvard Law Students.

PROFESSOR JOHN CHIPMAN GRAY for the first time in many years is not present at the opening of the Law School as a member of its teaching force. Professor Gray was first appointed a lecturer on December 24, 1869, before Dean Langdell came from practice to the Law School, and he was reappointed for several years more before he became Story Professor in 1875. From that time he served continuously as Story Professor and later as Royall Professor until last February, when he withdrew from active teaching and became Royall Professor emeritus. Every member of the present Faculty has thus sat under his instruction. All who have enjoyed that privilege will remember him as a teacher exempt from the defects which often accompany such qualities as his,― learning boundless in extent, yet at every point exact and serviceable; mind moving swiftly and without friction to meet the questioner's thought, yet reaching a shrewd and ripened judgment; diction of the plainest, yet singularly graceful and pungent. But they will remember him best as the friend whose love for the Law School kept him all these years at work for them, putting aside calls for distinguished service elsewhere, and who dedicated his latest volume "to his old pupils, whose affectionate regard has been to him a life-long blessing, from their grateful master."

It is cause for rejoicing that his work on a new edition of a treatise which has reflected high credit on the Law School and on American scholarship will keep him much among us, even though we lose the benefit of his class-room instruction.

THE RESIGNATION OF MR. ARNOLD AND THE APPOINTMEnt of Mr. ADAMS. The School has suffered another great loss in the resignation

of Mr. Arnold, after more than forty years' uninterrupted service. He held the office of Librarian during Mr. Ames's whole administration, and almost the whole of Mr. Langdell's, and his single-minded devotion to the interests of the School was not less than theirs. The present library is a monument to him, and its growth under his hands, from about fifteen thousand volumes when he was appointed, on August 7, 1872, to more than one hundred and fifty thousand at the date of his resignation, tells the story of his labors. The acquisition of the Dunn Library last year was a fitting termination to his life's work. At its meeting last June the Harvard Law School Association, to show the appreciation the alumni feel for the services rendered the school by Mr. Arnold, voted that his portrait be painted and presented to the Law School.

The School has been remarkably fortunate in the choice of Mr. Arnold's successor. Mr. Adams graduated from Harvard College in 1892 and from the Law School in 1897. During his course he greatly distinguished himself in scholarship, and was one of the editors of this Review. Afterward he practised in Boston, and in 1902-3 he lectured on Property in the Law School. He was chosen Librarian of the Social Law Library in 1909, and held that position till he accepted the call to succeed Mr. Arnold. He thus comes to his present work unusually equipped with legal and library experience.

THE LAW SCHOOL. A number of important changes have been made in the curriculum of the Law School and in the arrangement of courses for this year. In order to qualify for a degree the members of the Third Year Class are required to be prepared for examination in six regular courses, instead of five, as in former years. One fourth-year course may be elected as a regular by third-year men. The course in Massachusetts Practice, given two years ago, will be repeated this year, under Mr. J. G. Palfrey, A.B., LL.B., who conducted it before. A course on Jurisprudence will be given by Professor Pound. This course will combine the half-year courses on Analytical Jurisprudence formerly conducted by Professor Beale, and Professor Pound's own lectures on the Theory of Law.

Owing to the deeply regretted resignation of Professor John Chipman Gray, a new arrangement of lecturers for the second and third year courses in Property was necessary. Mr. Charles F. Dutch, who has formerly been lecturer on Admiralty, and taught Equity III for one year, will give the third-year course on Property, and the division of second-year Property relating to Conveyances inter vivos. The position of lecturer on Wills, left vacant by the resignation of Mr. Roland Gray, will be taken by Professor Joseph Warren. Quasi-Contracts will be given by Assistant Professor Scott. Mining Law will be conducted by Mr. E. G. Davis, A.B., LL.B., a member of the Boston Bar, who gave the course in 190910. Mr. Lucius Ward Bannister, A.B., LL.B., will teach Water Rights, a half-year extra course in the second term. Mr. Bannister is a member of the Denver Bar and has been lecturer on Water Rights in the Denver Law School.

It is very pleasant to be able to congratulate Professor Joseph Henry Beale, A.M., LL.B., LL.D., who succeeds Professor Gray as Royall Professor of Law; Professor Roscoe Pound, Ph.D., LL.M., who has been appointed to the Carter Professorship of General Jurisprudence left vacant by Professor Beale; Professor Edward Warren, A.M., LL.B., who will now occupy the chair of Story Professor of Law, succeeding Professor Pound; and Professor Joseph Warren, A.B., LL.B., who has been appointed Professor of Law.

THE AMES COMPETITION. Twenty-four law clubs have entered the competition this year. The rules governing the elimination tournament are substantially the same as in preceding years. Instead of money prizes, law books will hereafter be given to the successful clubs. An additional prize is offered for the best brief submitted in the competition. First and second prizes were won last year by the Beale and the Wyman Clubs respectively. It has been decided to change the rules of the competition next year, the purpose being to stimulate still more the interest in the work of the second-year clubs. The competition will extend over two years instead of being concluded in one. Each secondyear club entering will meet a certain number of other clubs, and a limited number having the best record will argue the final rounds in the third year. The rules for next year will be announced later in more detail. The Board of Student Advisers who have charge of the competition this year is composed of Harvey H. Bundy, Chairman, Albert M. Cristy, Joseph J. Daniels, C. Pascal Franchot, George K. Gardner, Herbert F. Goodrich, John S. Miller, Jr., Herman E. Riddell.

THE LORD HIGH CHANCELLOR AND THE GREAT SEAL. - In order to attend the meeting of the American Bar Association in Montreal, Lord Haldane, the Lord High Chancellor of England, had to put the Great Seal in commission. This consists in the appointment of three commissioners who are entrusted for the time being with the actual custody of the Seal and some of the important duties of the Chancellor. The placing of the Seal in commission was not a new thing. But the fact that Lord Haldane did this and at the same time retained his position as Lord High Chancellor did constitute an innovation. Never before apparently has the Clavis Regni been put in commission by a chancellor who continued in office. Lord Haldane has therefore established a precedent. Unlike his predecessors Wolsey and Brougham, his departure from tradition has been fully approved and commended by the King.

The custody of the Great Seal and of the king's conscience has seemed such an important function in England in times gone by that down to 1830 no chancellor, with the exception of Cardinal Wolsey, ever dared to leave the kingdom during his tenure of office. In fact, as Lord Haldane pointed out in his address at Montreal, Cardinal Wolsey almost lost his head for an unpermitted journey to Calais. In 1830 Lord Brougham took his place on the woolsack, and a year or two later aroused much

excitement and indignation by his unauthorized visit to Scotland, where he is said to have lost the Great Seal while playing games and antics in a Scottish country house. A lady of the party found the Seal, and made the Lord Chancellor redeem it by playing a game of blindman's-buff. While the game proceeded he was guided by music to a tea-chest where the Seal had been carefully hidden. That the keeper of the royal conscience should thus make a plaything of the Great Seal of England annoyed the King to such an extent that it is said he referred to Brougham's journey as "high treason."

Important as the functions of the Lord High Chancellor were, and in spite of the fact that he had the king's ear, he seems in the early days to have received a salary about as commensurate with the dignity of his position as the salary of many American judges to-day is with their positions. "From one of the records," says Lord Haldane, "it appears that his wages were five shillings, a simnel cake, two seasoned simnels, one sextary of clear wine, one sextary of household wine, one large wax candle, and forty small pieces of candle."

The meeting of the American Bar Association at Montreal, which was the occasion of the Lord Chancellor's visit to this country, was the first to be held outside of the United States. Its international aspect was further emphasized by the presence of the distinguished Maître L. Labori, the foremost lawyer of France. Particularly in keeping, therefore, with the spirit of the gathering was Lord Haldane's address, in which he presented an eloquent plea for a full international "sittlichkeit." Lord Haldane explained that "sittlichkeit" is the German for that "system of habitual or customary conduct, ethical rather than legal, which embraces all those obligations of the citizen which it is 'bad form' or 'not the thing' to disregard." "Sittlichkeit" thus occupies a field midway between the dictates of conscience and the commands of the law. Upon the lawyers of the three great nations represented in the assemblage to which he spoke he urged the nourishing of a "sittlichkeit" of international scope, because he said to him the conception seemed more hopeful of realization between nations bound together by a "common inheritance in traditions, in surroundings, and in ideals."

It is interesting to note that in the course of an interview published in the New York Sun for August thirtieth Lord Haldane said, "I am convinced that the Harvard Law School is a model for the world." On another occasion the newspapers quoted him as saying that he considered the school second to none. It should be gratifying, not alone to graduates and friends of the Harvard Law School, but to Americans generally, that the Lord High Chancellor of England could make these statements of an American school of law.

JURISDICTION OF EQUITY TO ENJOIN EXPULSION FROM CLUBS.— Practically every club1 has in its constitution or by-laws some provision empowering a named committee to expel a member for cause.2 Courts

1 "Club" in this article is used in the sense of an unincorporated club. The rules applying to incorporated clubs are, of course, quite different. See COOK ON CORPORATIONS, 6 ed., §§ 11 and 504.

2 See WERTHEIMER'S LAW RELATING TO CLUBS, 4 ed., p. 125.

of equity will not review the decisions of these committees except in three classes of cases: where the rules by virtue of which the expulsion is effected are "contrary to natural justice"; where the proceedings held are not in accordance with the rules; where the action of the committee is purely malicious. An unincorporated club is a voluntary association of individuals, all rights in which are derived solely from the association, not from the law. On what right of the expelled member, then, do the courts base their jurisdiction to grant him relief?

Some courts assert that their jurisdiction grows out of their power to enforce contracts specifically. The constitution and by-laws of the club, they argue, form a contract between the member and the association, into which is read a stipulation that the rules will be administered in good faith. Hence expulsion without compliance with the rules is the violation of a contract, and the damages at law being clearly inadequate there may be equitable relief. In two aspects this theory is objectionable. First, a contract does not always exist. Since the association is not a legal entity, and therefore has no capacity to enter into a binding agreement, the contract, if any, must be between the incoming and the already admitted members. Such a contract is perfectly possible, but the relationship can be merely associational, not contractual. Secondly, granting the existence of a contract, the theory disregards the fact that the contract involves so largely the discretion of the club, or its committee, that courts should hesitate to enforce it. Other courts, chiefly English, found their jurisdiction on the protection of property rights, asserting that every member has an interest in the club property, of which unfair expulsion will unjustly deprive him.10 Protection of property rights is a function of equity courts; and this theory, therefore, is sound, in so far as true property rights are involved." In proprietary

These three classes of cases in which courts will interfere were first laid down in Dawkins v. Antrobus, 17 Ch. P. 615, 630. Later cases have laid down the same rule, but no case has been found where jurisdiction has been taken for the first or third reasons. For jurisdiction based on the protection of property. Labouchere v. Earl of Wharncliffe, 13 Ch. D. 346, is an example of Q.

See White v. Brownell, 2 Daly (N. Y.) 329, 337. No one has a legal right to membership in such an association. See NIBLACK, BENEFIT SOCIETIES AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE, 2 ed., § 30.

See Krause v. Saunder, 122 N. Y. Supp. 54, 55.

• See Blisset v. Daniel, 10 Hare, 493, 522.

7 See Steele v. Gourley, 3 Ti. Rep. 119. Creditors must proceed against the club members who incurred the debts. See In re London Marine Association, L. R. 8 Eq. 176, 195.

There would seem to be no reason why this word should not be regarded as a correct legal term. The meaning which it conveys is certainly well recognized.

A good example of an association in which there are no contractual ties between the members is a college alumni association. The incoming graduate certainly has no thought of contracting with the other graduates. He simply enters the organization on the footing of an associate.

10 For a good statement of the principle, see Rigby v. Connol, 14 Ch. D. 482, 487. Injunctions against the unfair expulsion of members of a stock exchange, on which the seats are very valuable, are therefore properly granted. Hutchinson v. Lawrence, 67 How. Prac. (N. Y.) 38. Also there are real property rights in cases of beneficial insurance associations and insurance lodges. And so in disputes between churches, or between a church and one of its members, equity should take jurisdiction if real property rights are involved. Yanthis v. Kemp, 43 Ind. App. 203, 85 N. E. 976; Boyles v. Roberts, 222 Mo. 613, 121 S. W. 805.