hardly be a part of a system of procedure. 3. Sections which only remotely relate to practice. These should be eliminated, for if the Code is to include all matters relating to practice, many more sections would have to be added to its present 3,400 which have been found so cumbersome.

Some object that a revision of the Code will necessitate a change in the arrangement of the statutes. In their present disorganized state, it seems as though any change must be for the better. We recognize that lawyers are loath to part with rules of practice with which they have become familiar, but when we consider that each session of the Legislature brings amendments and enlargements which will in time render the Code almost impracticable, we are forced to acknowledge the wisdom of some system of revision and abridgment. Revision is inevitable. The sooner it comes, the better.

THE need of some national legislation on the subject of marriage and divorce receives new and striking illustration in a recent decision of the Oklahoma Supreme Court by which a number of divorces granted in that territory within the last few years are invalidated.

With its ten grounds for absolute divorce, and its further inducement of a nominal residence for the brief period of ninety days in order that the applicant for a divorce may ease his burden the more quickly, Oklahoma Territory has long been a Mecca toward which pilgrims have been wont to journey to relieve themselves of their marriage bonds.

Under the decision of the Court, those who have availed themselves of the supposed freedom granted by the Oklahoma judges to marry again are now bigamists,

and actions may be brought against them in any State where they happen to live.

There is little doubt that many divorces granted under the laws of South Dakota are no more valid than those of Oklahoma

mentioned above. Obtained, as they have been, under statutes fully as liberal to those who wish to sever the marriage tie, we can but be apprehensive of a court decision overthrowing some South Dakota divorce which will not only expose hundreds of people to the danger of prosecution for bigamy, but will also invalidate a countless number of transfers of property made by persons supposing themselves to be single who are in fact still married.

Aside from these actual and probable cases, there are numberless complications continually arising from the dissimilarity of marriage laws in the different states. Since the marriage laws of each State have no extra territorial effect, persons desirous of marrying, who are under any disqualification in their own State have but to go within the jurisdiction of a State where these impediments are not considered a bar to marriage, in order that they may lawfully marry; more than that, upon the rule of law that "a marriage valid where made is valid everywhere," they may even return to the State from which they came, and have their marriage recognized as legal. As long as such conflicts exist in the marriage laws of the different States that cousins prohibited from marrying in Massachusetts, may lawfully wed in New York; that persons divorced by a New York court and forbidden to marry again, may cross the river to New Jersey and marry there with impunity, so long will the scandals and abominations growing out of thoughtless and hasty marriages continue and that disrespect for the

marriage tie which our contradictory laws engender, increase.

A national law which would wisely regulate the question of marriage and divorce, would bring the States into uniformity, obviate the evil of evasion of the law, lessen the number of hasty marriages and causeless divorces and would be a long step toward promoting the "domestic tranquility" of the nation.

THE Supreme Court of Minnesota has lately rendered a decision which is of interest to travelers on suburban railroads. It is reported in Vol. 63, N. W. Rep., page 259.

The defendant railroad was in the habit of issuing at a reduced rate book tickets containing ten coupons. As a part of the agreement, on each coupon was printed the words:

"This coupon must be detached by the conductor only, or it will not be accepted for passage."

The plaintiff admitted that she presented one of these coupons for passage detached from the book; but averred and proved that the defendant company had waived the conditions on the coupon by continuously and as a regular custom receiving such detached coupons from her and other persons.

*

The Court says of them: "It is apparent that to accuse another of being an anarchist in the sense in which the term is generally accepted fixes upon him a stigma which would cause all honest and upright people to shun him *To charge that an individual would be thus guilty for gain would undeniably subject him to contempt and hatred, and would therefore be actionable in itself.”

Our readers may rest assured that we shall never refer to any of them as anarchists even if they blow up the building.

A DRAMATIC DENOUEMENT.*-Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr were occasionally associated in the trial of a cause. On such occasions they were almost irresistible. It is related that, on one occasion, they were retained to defend a man indicted for murder, and who was generally believed to be guilty, though the circumstances under which the crime was committed rendered it a deeply interesting case of circumstantial evidence. During the progress of the trial, as the circumstances were developed, suspicion began to attach to the principal witness against the prisoner. Burr and Hamilton brought all their skill in cross-examination to bear on the witness, in the hope of dragging out of him his dreadful secret. But with singular sagacity and coolness he eluded their efforts, though they succeeded in darkening the shadows of suspicion that fell upon him, and strengthening their convictions of their client's innocence.

Before the cross-examination of the witness was concluded, the court adjourned for tea.

"I believe our client is not guilty, and I have no doubt that Brigham, that cunning witness, is really the guilty man; but he is so shrewd, cool, and deep, that I am fearful his testimony will hang poor Blair, our client, in spite of all we can do," said Hamilton to Burr, while on their way back from the court-room to the hotel.

"I agree with you that Blair is not guilty, and that Brigham is, and I believe

From Lawyer and Client, by L. B. Proctor.

we can catch him. I have a plan that will detect him, if I am not wonderfully mistaken," said Burr. He then proceeded to explain to his associate the nature of his plan.

"You may succeed," said Hamilton, after listening to the plan. "It's worth trying at any rate, though you have a man of iron to deal with."

After tea, Burr ordered the sheriff to provide an extra number of lights for the evening session, and to arrange them so that the rays would converge against the pillar in the court-room near the place occupied by the witness.

The evening session opened, and Burr resumed the cross-examination of the witness. It was a test of the profound skill and subtlety of the lawyer, the self-possession, courage and tact of the witness, standing on the very brink of a horrid gulf, calmly and intrepidly resisting the efforts of the terrible man before him to push him over. At last, after dexterously leading the witness to an appropriate point. Burr suddenly seized a lamp in each hand, and holding them in such a manner that their light fell instantaneously upon the face of the witness, he exclaimed in a startling tone, like the voice of the avenger of blood: "Gentlemen of the jury, behold the murderer !"

With a wild convulsive start, a face of ashy pallor, eyes starting from their sockets, lips apart, his whole attitude evincing terror, the man sprang from his chair. For a moment he stood motionless, struggling to regain his self-possession. But it was only a momentary struggle; the ter

rible words of the advocate "shivered along his arteries," shaking every nerve with paralyzing fear. Conscious that the eyes of all in the court-room were fixed upon him, reading the hidden deeds of his life, he left the witness stand, and walked shrinkingly to the door of the court-room. But he was prevented by the sheriff from making his escape.

This scene, so thrilling and startling, may, perhaps, be imagined, though it can not be described. It struck the spectators with silent awe, changing the whole aspect of the trial.

NOT A DIVIDED FAMILY.-There was a certain barrister in Sydney well known by reason of his padded chest and the bluish dye on his whiskers. His services were generally called into request when there was no hope of getting a prisoner acquitted by ordinary means of defense. Holding a brief one day in such a case, he made an eloquent appeal to the jury, urging them not to blight the future of the young prisoner by committing him and sending him to jail. He proceeded to draw a harrowing picture of two grayhaired parents in England looking anxiously for the return of their prodigal son to spend the next Christmas with them, and he asked, "Had they the hearts to deprive the old couple of this happiness ?" The jury, however, being heartless men, found the prisoner guilty.

Before passing sentence the judge called for the prisoner's jail record, after exam

ining which he blandly remarked "that the prisoner had some five previous convictions against him, but he was glad to say that Mr. — 's eloquent appeal would not remain unanswered, for he would commit the prisoner to the Maitland (New South Wales) jail, where his aged parents at the present moment were serving sentences respectively, so that father, mother and son would be able to spend the ensuing Christmas season under one roof."

THE following unique advertisement is found on page 187 of Hubbell's Legal (Appendix) for 1893. For obvious reasons we omit the name: 66 Attorney,

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Twenty-five years experience. Collected thousands of dollars, and never failed to remit within forty-eight hours. Never drink or gamble. Plenty of property to pay all liabilities. Insolvencies and transfers to defraud creditors a specialty." For a comprehensive advertisement, well adapted to the "environment" we never saw its equal. The last statement is possibly a trifle ambiguous, but in the large and breezy new West "everything goes."-American Law Review.

THE following is said to be in the statutes of the State of Oregon: "All traction engines and bicycles must carry two planks, each 12 feet by 12 inches by 3 inches, upon which to cross the bridges, and must come to a stop within at least 100 feet of any horse-drawn vehicle approaching from either direction."

IN THE good old days in Washington, a lawyer who was discussing a motion before his honor, Judge Green, involving

the question whether certain alleged facts amounted to fraud, in support of his contention read copious extracts from Browne on Frauds. In doing so, he constantly called the author's name Brown-e. This grated on the learned and critical ear of Judge Greene, who at last interrupted the counsel with the question, "Why do you pronounce that name Brown-e?" "It is spelled," answered our friend with charming gravity, "B-r-o-w-n-e; if that is not Brown-e I would like to know what it does spell!" "I spell my name," says the Judge, "G-r-e-e-n-e! you would not call me Green-e, would you?" "That depends," replied our friend," on how your Honor decides this motion." The judge waived the contempt and joined in a general laugh.-Central Law Journal.

THE following is vouched for as an actual fact. A lecturer on Criminal Law at one of our law schools, in tracing the history of Criminal Law, quoted: "Whosoever sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed." Genesis ix. 6.

Not long afterwards a member of the class was hunting the library diligently for a copy of "Genesis Reports." It is unnecessary to add that he was unable to find the citation under that title.

ONE of the learned justices of the Maine Supreme Court, than whom no man better knows how to appreciate a really amusing thing, was holding court at Ellsworth, and, according to honored custom, called in a local clergyman to open the session with a supplication to heaven. This worthy gentleman came, and after a chat with the justice proceeded to address the giver of all good and perfect things thus: "Almighty God! we beseech Thee to bestow upon the presiding justice the wisdom which he so greatly needs!" The learned recipient of the blessing never heard the rest of that remarkable prayer, which, in truth, was cut short by disorder in the court, strongly resembling halfsmothered laughter from the direction of the clerk's desk. It is said that the same judge once opened court after prayer which began this way: "Oh, Lord, we pray Thee to overrule the decisions of the court to thine own honor and glory."

EDWARD EVERETT and Judge Story once met at dinner. In his post-prandial speech the judge said that "Fame rises where Everett goes," to which Mr. Everett replied: "However high my fame may rise, I am sure I will never get above one Story."-The West Virginia Bar.