illegal act of a third party intervenes to cause the loss. Since Mr. Jefferson's letter of June 5th, 1793, to the French Minister, the United States Government has recognised the law of Nations as an "integral part" of the laws of the land; and the German .Government itself had never before the sinking of the Lusitania discarded, and has since that event expressly recognised, the principle that lives of non-combatants cannot lawfully or rightfully be put in jeopardy by the capture or destruction of an unresisting merchantman, and the obligation to take sufficient precaution to ascertain whether a suspected merchantman is in fact of belligerent nationality, or is in fact carrying contraband of war under a neutral flag. Therefore Judge Mayer concludes:

"The fault must be laid upon those who are responsible for the sinking of the vessel, in the legal as well as moral sense. It is, therefore, not the Cunard Line, petitioner, which must be held liable for the loss of life and property. The cause of the sinking of the Lusitania was the illegal act of the Imperial German Government, acting, through its instrument, the submarine commander, and violating a cherished and humane rule observed until this war, by even the bitterest antagonists."

In Mr. Frederic Harrison's most interesting Autobiographic Memoirs (Macmillan & Co., 1911), we have come across the true history of one of the most famous of legal epigrams, the proposed epitaph on Lord Westbury. Lord Westbury, Lord Chancellor (18611865), carried through measures to establish the Divorce Court, to amend the Law of Bankruptcy, to reform the Law of Landed Estates, and in the Privy Council he acquitted the Essayists who were charged with denying eternal punishment. A letter from Mr. Harrison to a friend, under date February 25th, 1864, runs thus:

'The epitaph on the Chancellor in the newspapers amuses me, because for once I can trace a rumour home. It goes about in all shapes and under all names,-Palmerston, Lowe, Dickens, etc.,

etc. It was, in fact, said to me at luncheon by a friend (E. H. P.). We were talking about the judgment, and shooting off jests, and in its final form it was written down thus:

Beneath this Marble,

in the calm assurance and serene composure
which distinguished him in life,

lies

The Rt. Honble. Richard, Baron Westbury,
L. High Chancellor of England,
who gave gentlemen in difficulties
facilities for relieving themselves of
their wives and their estates,

and enabled them to treat with indifference
The Court of Bankruptcy and the Day of Judgment.
He closed a long and successful life

by dismissing Hell with costs,
and he thus

deprived the religious world of its last hope of
Eternal Damnation.

ARTICLES AWAITING PUBLICATION.

Legislative Chaos in Canada, by A. E.. Popple, Ed

monton, Alberta.

De

Legal Fictions: The Fool's Paradise; Law's lays; The Appeal to Cæsar, by M. L. Hayward, Hart

land, New Brunswick.

Mens Rea, by Silas Alward, K.C., St. John, New

Brunswick.

Foreclosure of Registered Land under Land Titles Acts: A Comparative Study, by James Edward Hog Lincoln's Inn, London.

Practice and Procedure, by E. C. Mayers, Van cou

ver, B.C.

Sir, The Courts are now closed for the Long Vacation. During the past Sittings the work has been kept well up-to-date, despite the calls that have been made upon the judges for other work of national importance.

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has delivered its report on the special reference which was made to it by Order-in-Council asking it to consider the claims to the unalienated lands in Southern Rhodesia. The Board find in favour of the Crown on the question of ownership, but report that the Chartered Company as long as it continues to administer Southern Rhodesia under the Crown, shall be entitled to dispose of unalienated land and to apply the proceeds to the reimbursement of the expenses of administration in current and past years. The Board also report that if the Crown should, under the terms of the charter, put an end to the Company's capacity to administer Southern Rhodesia, the Company must have the right to look to the Crown to secure to it the due reimbursement of any outstanding balance of the aggregate advances made by it for necessary and proper expenditure upon the public administration of Southern Rhodesia.

A Bill extending the life of the present Parliament until January 30th, 1919, has received the Royal assent. This is the fifth measure for this purpose which has been passed by the present Parliament. It is remarkable that a Parliament which has extended its statutory existence no fewer than five times is the

same Parliament which in 1911 reduced by statute the term of seven years previously fixed by statute for the life of Parliament.

The British Nationality and Status of Aliens Bill has passed the House of Commons, after considerable discussion, and is now awaiting consideration in the House of Lords. The main object of the measure is, as I mentioned in an earlier letter, to extend the power of revoking certificates of naturalization. Under the Act of 1914 this can be done by the Home Secretary in cases where the certificate has been obtained by false representation or fraud. This provision is reproduced in the new Bill, and is extended to cases of concealment of material circumstances. By the new Bill amended in the House of Commons a certificate of naturalization may also be revoked where the holder of the certificate (a) has shown himself by act or speech to be disaffected or disloyal to his Majesty; (b) has unlawfully traded or communicated with the enemy, or has been engaged in or unlawfully associated with any business carried on in such manner as to assist the enemy; (c) has within 5 years of the of the certificate been sentenced to imprisonment for not less than 12 months or to penal servitude; (d) not of good character at the date of the grant; (e)

as

grant

was has

for

Isince that date been for not less than 7 years ordinarily resident out of British dominions, except British business or official purposes; or (f) remains a subject of a State at war with his Majesty, which does not regard the naturalization within the British Em pire as extinguishing his original national status. Before revoking a certificate of naturalization for any one of these causes the Home Secretary must not only be satisfied that a particular case falls within one these categories, but he must also be satisfied that 'continuance of the certificate is not conducive to

of

the

the

public good.' Instead of making the order at once the Home Secretary may refer the case for enquiry, and in case of alleged false representation, etc., or in cases

(a), (b), (d), or (f), the holder of the certificate will have a right to an enquiry.

The Imperial War Conference has concluded its sittings after having discussed several subjects of farreaching importance. A resolution was passed agreeing that an Advisory and Executive Committee, to be known as the "Military Demobilization Committee of the British Empire," should be set up forthwith. This Committee, which will consist of representatives of the military authorities, Dominions and Colonies, and representatives of the War Office, India Office, and Ministry of Shipping of the United Kingdom, will consider all military questions of demobilization affecting the various Governments concerned. A resolution was also passed stating that in the opinion of the majority of the members, legislation should be passed throughout the Empire restricting for a period after the war, so far as the circumstances in each country render possible, the naturalization of citizens of the present enemy countries, and also the acquisition by them of any form of political rights or land or mining privileges. The representatives of Canada abstained from voting on this resolution, and the South African representative recorded dissent.

Reciprocity treatment between India and the Dominions was discussed. This followed on a resolution passed by the Conference last year accepting the principle of reciprocity, and a further resolution was passed that effect should now be given to last year's resolution.

The Conference also discussed the constitution of an Imperial Court of Appeal, and a resolution was passed stating that the Conference was of opinion: (1) That the question of replacing the present dual system of appeal by the constitution of one Imperial Court of Appeal demands the prompt consideration of His Majesty's Government; (2) That the Lord Chancellor should be invited to prepare and circulate to