offspring legitimate. The subject of slave marriages is discussed at length in a very carefully considered article appearing in the November number of the Virginia Law Journal, the decision in Colston v. Quander furnishing the nucleus around which the authorities are gathered. In Jones v. Jones, 36 Md. 447, it was decided that the children of a slave who intermarried with a free colored woman were legitimate, and could inherit from their paternal uncle. In Hampton v. State, 45 Ala. 82, it was held that a slave woman who, during the existence of slavery, married a slave man according to the ceremonies in use among slaves, and who, after the abolition of slavery, continued to live with him as his wife, was his lawful wife, and was incompetent as a witness against him upon a trial for murder. See further upon the question, State v. Adams, 65 N. C. 537; State v. Taylor, Phillips, 508; Sikes v. Swanson, 44 Ala. 633; Timmins v. Lacy, 30 Tex. 115; Pierre v. Fontenette, 25 La. Ann. 617; Howard v. Howard, & Jones' Law, 235; Johnson v. Johnson, 30 Mo. 72; State v. Tachanatah, 64 N. C. 614; Beamish v. Beamish, 9 H. & C. 274; Girod v. Lewis, 6 Martin, 559; State v. Harris, 63 N. C. 1; Estill v. Rogers, 1 Bush, 62; Hall v. United States, 2 Otto, 27. The legislature of Illinois, at its last session, for the purpose of suppressing the tramps, passed a stringent vagrant law. The statute requires a justice of the peace or police magistrate, before whom complaint is made for vagrancy, to proceed within thirty-six hours and try the accused, and, if the justice finds him guilty, he is authorized to sentence him to six months' imprisonment in jail or at hard labor upon the public streets. The justice is required to make a full record of the various facts in the case, and the mittimus is required to state the same and "the finding of the court and the sentence." In the case of People v. Brown, decided by the Criminal Court of Cook county on the 6th inst., the act is held to be unconstitutional. The court say that the statute being in derogation of the common law must be strictly construed, and all its requirements strictly observed (Bullock v. Gamble, 45 Ill. 21; 1 Kent's Com. [Comst. Ed.] 598, note a); that, so construed, it deprives the accused of a jury trial, and is, therefore, in violation of a provision of the constitution of the State, providing that no person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense punishable with imprisonment except on indictment and a trial by jury, and also of a provision declaring that the right of trial by jury, as heretofore enjoyed, shall remain inviolate. At the time of the adoption of the constitution vagrancy was defined, and was required to be established by the verdict of a jury. The decision appears to be upheld by the current of authority. In this State, where the right of trial by jury extends "to all cases in which it has been heretofore used," it has been held that these words are generic, and cover statutory additions made since the adoption of the constitution to the classes of cases in which jury trial was in use at the time of such adoption. Fire Dept. of N. Y. v. Harrison, 2 Hilt. 455; Wynehammer v. People, 13 N. Y. 426. See, also, People v. Turner, 55 Ill. 280; 8 Am. Rep. 615; Duffy v. People, 6 Hill, 75; St. Paul & | Sioux City R. R. Co. v. Gardner, 18 Am. Rep. 334; Phelps v. Racey, 19 id. 140; Copp v. Henneker, 20 id. 194. In the case of Portland v. Bangor, 65 Me. 120; 20 Am. Rep. 681, it was held that a State statute authorizing two overseers of the poor in any town, by writing, under their hand, to commit paupers and vagrants to the work-house, was in violation of the 14th Amendment of the Federal constitution. See, also, Prescott v. State, 19 Ohio St. 184; 2 Am. Rep. 388. In the case of Matter of Ward, 2 Redf. 251, the question was, whether a deposit by a husband in a savings bank of moneys in the name of himself "or" wife, he keeping possession of the bank-book and controlling the deposit as his own, was sufficient to constitute a gift to the wife of the moneys on deposit, so as to give the wife title thereto after the decease of the husband. The surrogate of New York, who decided the case, said that there was not such a parting with the possession or title to the money deposited as to divest the husband of all right to such money which is absolutely essential to a gift inter vivos. The surrogate cites, in support of his decision, Irish v. Nutting, 47 Barb. 370. In that case the intestate gave several notes of a third party to his wife, saying, "I give you these notes, and if I never return they are yours." This was held not to be a valid gift inter vivos, for the reason that it was coupled with a condition upon the happening of which the owner was to again receive possession. See, also, Bedell v. Carl, 33 N. Y. 581; Shuttleworth v. Winter, 55 id. 624. See, however, Sanford v. Sanford, 45 id. 723, where it is held that if one loaning money takes a promissory note therefor, payable to the order of himself and wife, this imports a gift to the wife in case she survives him, and delivery of the note to her by the husband is not necessary to perfect the gift. See, as supporting the view taken in the principal case, Smith v. Dorsey, 38 Ind. 451; 10 Am. Rep. 118, where an enlisted man, just starting for the army, said to defendant, to whom he had loaned a gun, "if I never return you may keep that gun as a present from me." He never returned, but died in the service, and it was held that there was no gift, either inter viros or causa mortis. See further upon the subject of gifts, Grymes v. Hone, 49 N. Y. 17; 10 Am. Rep. 313; Case v. Dennison, 9 R. I. 88; 11 Am. Rep. 222. Tillinghast v. Wheaton, 8 R. I. 536; 5 Am. Rep. 621; Gray v. Barton, 13 id. 181; Minor v. Rogers, 16 id. 69; Ellis v. Secor, 18 id. 178, and note, p. 184, where the leading authorities are collated. This, man.'" Mr. Pierce aptly says: "Little thought the great orator that he was greeting one who was to succeed him in the Senate, with a longer term, and as time may show, a more enduring fame than his own." Of English legal celebrities Sumner's reminiscences are more copious. The great figure of Brougham is the most exactly depicted. With him Sumner seems to have been on extremely intimate terms, his guest and familiar companion, walking arm-in-arm with Sumner gives us a microscopic and amusing pic-him in Paris. Of this great man Sumner gives us ture of Kent, in 1834. At this time the Chancellor lived in a "splendid house" two or three miles from the heart of the city of New York, where a year or two before had been a pasture. The Chancellor's domestic habits, his cordiality, frankness, and simplicity, his bad grammar in conversation, his talkativeness, his passion for general reading, especially for novels, his remarkable collection of pamphlets, his love of natural scenery, his preference of the common law to the civil on the subject of husband and wife, his violent hatred of General Jackson, all these traits are remarked. The writer says: "He opens himself like a child. though, I attributed to a harmless vanity. He undoubtedly knows that he is a lion, and therefore offers himself readily for exhibition. Indeed, he seemed to be unfolding his character and studies, etc., to me, as if purposely to let me know the whole bent and scope of his mind. I thought more than once that he was sitting for his picture, "-an operation, however, to which the Chancellor seems to have been rather averse, for "he said he would rather sit to be scraped by a barber ten times than to have his portrait taken." When Sumner handed him a letter from Greenleaf, the Chancellor, after reading it, said: "That Mr. Greenleaf is a civil sort of a man; he was a great loss to the profession at Portland; makes a fine professor, I have no doubt." When Sumner sailed for Europe the kind Chancellor sent him books to read on the voyage. At Saratoga Sumner met "two well-known jurists, Chancellor Walworth and Judge Cowen," neither of whom interested him. He says: 66 They are both mere bookmen. Judge Oakley, of New York, whom I met, is abler than both." Rather ex cathedra for a boy of twenty-six! "Johnson, the reporter, is one of the most agreeable and gentlemanly men I ever met;" "gentlemanly, accomplished, and talented, truly a delightful character." Of Choate he writes: "He is the leader of our bar, with an overwhelming superfluity of business, with a strong taste for books and learned men, with great amiableness of character, and untiring industry." In 1831 Sumner received a prize from the "Boston Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge," of which Daniel Webster was president, for the best essay, by a minor, on Commerce. He tells us, "I had to step out and receive some compliments from the 'godlike a juster idea than Wellington, who said of him, "Damned queer fellow-half mad." There was no love lost between Brougham and Wellington, for the former said of the Duke, "Westminster Abbey is yawning for him." Sumner's first sight of Brougham was in a French court, - "the gentleman was tall and rather loosely put together, not unlike, in this particular, Henry Clay. I looked at him for one moment, and at once knew him to be Lord Brougham, who is now in Paris, from the resemblance to the caricatures, though all these are immensely exaggerated." Of his capacity for labor, Dr. Lushington told Sumner that when Chancellor, Brougham nearly killed himself and all his bar. At the first interviewing between Sumner and | Brougham, the latter invited Sumner to visit him at Brougham Hall. "He flattered me, by saying that he knew me by reputation (the lord knows how); and as I was leaving, he took me by the arm, and conducted me to the door, repeating his invitation again, saying, 'come down, and we will be quiet, and talk over the subject of codification.'” "I am at a loss to account for my reception from Brougham; for he is a person almost inaccessible at present, who sees very little society, but occupies himself with affairs and with composition." Sir David Brewster told Sumner that "he received several letters from Lord Brougham, written in court, when Chancellor, on light, one of them fourteen pages long." Probably he thought that occupation more apparently respectful to the counsel than going to sleep. Meeting Brougham at dinner, he says: "My wonder at Brougham rises anew. Tonight he has displayed the knowledge of the artist and the gastronomer. He criticised the ornaments of the drawing-room like a connoisseur, and discussed subtle points of cookery with the same earnestness with which he emancipated the West India slaves and abolished rotten boroughs. Calling for a second plate of soup, he said 'there was a thought too much of the flavor of wine'; but that it was very good. He told how he secured good steaks, by personally going into the kitchen and watching over his cook, to see that he did not spoil them by pepper and horse-radish—the last being enough to make a man go mad." Brougham and Courtenay alternately quoted to Sumner several Greek epigrams written by the lawyers Williams and Alderson. Brougham told Sumner that his own Greek epigram on Chantrey's woodcocks was the worst of all. (Chantrey, the sculptor, on a visit at Holkham Hall, had killed two woodcock at one shot, an exploit which he celebrated in a marble tablet which he presented to his host, who invited all the classical world to write Greek epigrams on the occasion.) Sumner adds: "Lord Brougham is not agreeable at dinner. He is, however, more interesting than any person I have met. He has not the airy graces and flow of Jeffrey, the piercing humor of Sidney Smith, the dramatic power of Theodore Hook, or the correct tone of Charles Austin; but he has a power, a fulness of information, and physical spirits, which make him more commanding than all! His great character and his predominating voice, with his high social and intellectual qualities, conspire to give him such an influence as to destroy the equilibrium, so to speak, of the table. He is often an usurper, and we are all resolved into listeners instead of partakers in the conversational banquet; and I think all are ill at ease." He "abused Miss Martineau most heartily," and said she was "a great ass" on questions of policy and government. He recommended Sumner to write a book to avenge his country of Basil Hall. He was horribly profane. He told Sumner that O'Connell was "a damned thief." When Sumner took leave of him, he exclaimed, "Oh, God! must you go?" The late Duke of Gloucester, he said, was "a damned bore and fool." On one occasion Sumner found him in his study with a printer's devil on one side and his private secretary on the other, and "mirabile dictu! he did not use an oath." Sumner adds: "Truly, his Lordship is a most wonderful man; and I am disposed to think the most eloquent one in English history." Rogers told Sumner that Sir Robert Peel told him he never knew what eloquence was until he heard Brougham's speech on the abolition of slavery in the West Indies. "Do not listen to the articles and the reports that Lord B. is no speaker," says Sumner, "he is most eloquent, and his voice, as I heard it in the Lords, six months ago, still rings in my ear." Sumner's account of his visit at Brougham Hall is very entertaining. At dinner, among other guests, was an old clergyman, who brought as a present to the host a bottle of rum fifty years old. Lord Brougham took very little wine "less than I have seen any gentleman take at the head of his table in England but he did not scruple to swear like a trooper. "I do not remember to have met a person who swore half so much," says Sumner. "His manner was rapid, hurried, and his voice very loud. He seemed uneasy and restless." "He passed from topic to topic, expressing himself always with force, correctness and facility unrivaled; but, I must say, with a manner not only far from refined but even vulgar. He had no gentleness or suavity, neither did he show any of the delicate attentions of the host." He had nothing to say about "codification," spite of his previous intimation. "He professed an interest in America, but did not seem to care to speak about it." He contemplated visiting us, however. He had "understood that Webster is a clever man." He expressed the strongest regard for Story, but was ignorant of several of his works. He was all devotion to his aged mother, a very superior woman, who presided at his table, and Sumner bears testimony to his tenderness to his invalid daughter. Elsewhere Sumner writes: "The style of intercourse between Lyndhurst and Brougham, these two ex-Chancellors, was delightful. It was entirely familiar, 'Copley, a glass of wine with you.' He always called him 'Copley.' And pointing out an exquisite gold cup in the centre of the table, he said, 'Copley, see what you would have had if you had supported the Reform Bill.' It was a cup given to Lord Brougham by a penny subscription of the people of England." Sumner thus describes Brougham in a debate in the Lords: "In the evening's debate Brougham was wonderful. Lord Holland had placed me on the steps of the throne, so that I saw and heard with every advantage. Brougham spoke for an hour and a half or two hours. His topics were various, his spirits high, his mastery of every note in the wide music of the human voice complete, and his command of words the greatest I have ever known. Add then, the brimful house interrupting him with vociferous adding his cheer. You will read his speech, but the applause, and old Wellington nodding his head and report is utterly inadequate. I have heard many say that they thought it the best speech in point of eloquence and effect that they ever heard. The thunders he hurled at O'Connell seemed blasting, and the Tory benches, which were crowded to excess, almost rent the walls with their cheers. followed the funeral oration on Lord Norbury, and Then He changed his hand and checked his pride; his voice fell from its high invective to a funeral note, and we almost saw the lengthened train that followed the murdered nobleman to the tomb, passing through the House." The next morning Sumner was in Brougham's study, and "Brougham told me that I should have heard a good debate if Lansdowne had not spoken so damned stupidly '; for, if he had said any thing worth replying to, Copely would have spoken." Then they fell on the subject of Greek epigrams, and Brougham repeated to Sumner, Williams' lines on the Apollo, and took up his pen and wrote them down for Sumner in Greek, "as fast as I write English." This autograph is among those bequeathed by Sumner to the library of Harvard University. "I wish I could believe in Brougham," adds Sumner; "all who best know him distrust his word. (That was probably because he had changed his politics.) Sumner's account of Brougham on the bench is extremely interesting: "I have heard Lord Brougham despatch several cases in the Privy Council; and one or two were matters with which I was entirely familiar. I think I understand the secret of his power and weakness as a judge; and nothing that I have seen or heard tends to alter the opinion I had formed. As a judge, he is electric in the rapidity of his movements; he looks into the very middle of the case when counsel are just commencing, and at once says: There is such a difficulty [mentioning it] to which you must address yourself, and if you can't get over that I am against you.' In this way he saves time and gratifies his impatient spirit; but he offends counsel. Here is the secret. I have heard no other judge (except old Allan Park) interrupt counsel in the least. In the meantime, Brougham is restless at table, writes letters; and, as Baron Parke assured me (Parke sits in the Privy Council), wrote his great article in the Edinburgh Review for April last at the table of the Privy Council. I once saw the usher bring to him a parcel of letters, probably from the mail, I should think there must have been twenty-five, and he opened and read them, and strewed the floor about him with envelopes; and still the argument went on. And very soon Brougham pronounced the judgment in rapid, energetic, and perspicuous language,-better than I have heard from any other judge on the bench. I have already quoted the opinion of Denman. Barristers with whom I have spoken have not conceded to him the position accorded by the Lord Chief Justice, but still have placed him high. Mylne, the reporter, an able fellow, says that he is infinitely superior to Lyndhurst, and also to Lord Eldon in his latter days." Sumner thus sums up on Brougham: not speak so much for truth's sake, as to promote his own fame and power, or perhaps to gratify a personal pique. Certainly, in the society in which I have moved I have heard but one opinion expressed with regard to the dishonesty and malevolence which have characterized his late conduct; and his spite toward Lord Durham is represented as diabolical. In illustration of this, I have heard anecdotes which I have neither time nor space to relate. One of these is striking. Last winter it was supposed for a while that an invention had been found out which would supersede the use of coal, upon which Lord Durham's immense income depends. Brougham is said to have gone about, telling of it, and rubbing his hands, saying: Old Durham is a beggar! Old Durham is a beggar!' Perhaps all these idiosyncrasies may be better understood and more charitably viewed, when it is known, as it is not generally in England, that Brougham's father died insane, and that he has a sister who is so still. I am disposed to believe that there is in him a nervousness and an immense activity which is near akin to insanity, and which at present jangles the otherwise even measures of his character." This judgment shows the native intolerance of the writer of twenty-seven years. Perhaps in his later years, when himself the object of social ostracism for his opinions' sake, and of intense political hatred, which cost him his health and finally his life, Sumner may have felt more charitably toward Brougham, and possibly would have modified his harsh judgment. His citation of the story about Lord Durham exposes the utter lack of the sense of the humorous, with which he was always charged. The idea of Lord Durham's being in danger of beggary is one that any person, not blinded by hatred of Brougham or very obtuse, would have recognized as an extravagant jest. As to the theory of Brougham's insanity, did it occur to Sumner that possibly his lordship might have been a victim to horse-radish in his steaks, for fear of which he watched his cook, and which he said was enough to make a man go mad? Sumner should have remembered Dryden's couplet: "Great wits are sure to madness near allied, "The result of my intercourse with him thus far is that I like the man less, though I admire his powers as ever before. I could not fail to perceive, in the rapidity of his thought, the readiness of his language, and the variety of his topics, no slight confirmation of the received opinion with regard to his versatility and universal attainments. The gentleman, who is now staying here, assured me that he had often received long letters from his lordship, written, currente calamo, in correct Latin; and a friend told me that he once stood behind him, when a barrister on the Northern Circuit, and saw him scrawl a Greek ode on his desk in court. You may say credat Judæus. I have been told that the sketches of character, which form such a remarkable ornament of the new publications of his speeches, (do He himself became almost a monomaniac on the read these,) were written in his carriage while post-subject of peace and slavery, and may, finally, have ing to the south of France; and I happen to know from another source that he was paying his postil-appreciated the intensity of Brougham's convictions ions double, and I doubt not swearing at the same time, to make them go faster! I am almost sorry that I have seen Lord B., for I can no longer paint him to my mind's eye as the pure and enlightened orator of christianity, civilization, and humanity. I see him now, as before, with powers such as belong to angels: why could I not have found him with an angel's purity, gentleness and simplicity? I must always admire his productions as models of art; but I fear that I shall distrust his sincerity and the purity of his motives. I think that he is about throwing himself again among the people, and accepting their leadership. Two letters that I have received from Lord B. have been signed 'H. Brougham,' and I have heard of his signing so frequently. He spoke to me in the most disparaging terms of the aristocracy; but I shall be afraid that he will and hatreds. Mr. Pierce, in a note to the passage above quoted, refers the reader for "the unlovely side of Lord Brougham's character," to Macaulay's Life by Trevelyan. Macaulay was pestered by the idea that Brougham was jealous of him. This at a time when he himself, says Brougham, was the most popular subject in England. It looks to us, from Macaulay's own account, as if the jealousy was on the other side. But the men evidently did not like each other, and we should hesitate to accept either's opinion of the other. A perusal of their biographies, however, will hardly show that Macaulay's character was more "lovely" than Brougham's. Sumner writes: "Lord Brougham has given me his full-bottom Lord-Chancellor's wig, in which he made his great speech on the Reform Bill. Such a wig costs twelve guineas; and then, the associations of it. In America it will be like Rabelais' gown." Sumner gave it to the Harvard Law School, where we hope it is still sacredly preserved. It is doubtful whether it could ever have covered a skull more full of genius and humanity than that of its donor, or could have found a more worthy successor than the recipient. WISE WORDS FROM AN OLD BOOK. To the Editor of the Albany Law Journal: The republication of the whole of this excellent essay would occupy too large a space in your Journal, and I therefore send you only a few extracts from it, copied, word for word, exactly as spelled, punctuated and italicised, and with the numerous capital letters as in the original. In some of these strictures of the century next succeeding that in which Coke so shamefully abused Raleigh, are found the severest condemnation of such unprofessional conduct. H. C. V. S. "OF LAW." * * * * "It is the bridle of the Humane Beast, whereby he is held from starting and from stumbling in the way. It is the Hedge on either side the Road, which hinders from breaking into other men's propriety. A man has as good live in Egypt among all the ten Plagues, as in the world among the wicked without Law to defend him. 'Tis every man's Civil Armour, that guards him from the gripes of Rapine. And indeed, 'tis for this chiefly, that Laws are of use among men: For the wise and good do not need them as a guide but as a shield; They can live civily and orderly, though there were no Law in the world. And though wise and good men invented Laws; yet they were fools and wicked that put them upon the study. * "In the beginnings of thriving States, when they are more Industrious and innocent, they have then the fewest Laws. Rome itself had at first but 12 Tables. But after, how infinitely did their number of Laws increase? Old States like old Bodies will be sure to contract diseases. Aud where the Law-makers are many, the Laws will never be few. That Nation is in best estate, that hath the fewest Laws, and those good. Variety does but multiply snares. If every Bush be limed, there is no Bird can escape with all his feathers free. And many times when the Law did not intend it, men are made guilty by the pleaders Oratory; either to express his eloquence, to advance his practice, or out of maistery to carry his Cause: like a garment pounc'd with dust, the business is so smear'd and tangled that without a Galilæus his glass, you can never come to disern the spots of this changeable moon. Sometime to gratifie a powerful party, Justice is made blind through Corruption, as well as out of impartiality. That indeed, by reason of the non-integrity of men, To go to Law, is for two to contrive the kindling of a fire to their own cost, to warm others, and sindge themselves to Cynders. Because they cannot agree to what is Truth and Equity, they will both agree to plume themselves, that others may be stuck with their Feathers. "The Apostle throws the band of Simple among them that would by striving this way consume both their Peace, their Treasure and their time, as if it were of the Fool to expose a Game to the packing and the shuffling of others, when we might soberly cut and deal the cards ourselves. Is there none wise enough to compound Businesses without calling in the Crafty and the Cunning? Or is there none so wise as to moderate a little, that he may save a great deal more? "Laws is like a Building, we cast up the charge in gross and undervalue it: but being in, we are train'd along through several Items, till we can neither bear the account, nor give off, though we have a mind to 't. The troubles, the attendance, the hazard, the cheques, the vexatious delays, the surreptitious advantages against us, the defeats of hope, the falseness of pretending friends, the interest of parties, the negligence of Agents, and the designs of Ruine upon us, do put us upon a Combat against all that can plague poor man; or else we must lie down, be trodden on, be kickt and dye. And is it not much better to part with a little at first, and lose a lock of hair, or a superfluous nail; than to be leakt out till the Cistern be quite dry, or like flesh upon a spit have all our fat drop't from us, by being turn'd with before a consuming fire? Doubtless, the advice of our Saviour was not only Religious but Political and Prudential too; If any man sue thee at Law, and will take away thy Coat, let him have thy Cloak also. A small loss is rather to be chosen, than by Contention greater inconvenience. "If men could cooley have dispatch, and Business be rightly judg'd; no doubt in things of weight, the Decision would be profitable- And this does sometimes happen. For questionless, there are of this profession that are the light and wonder of the age. They have knowledge and integrity; and being vers'd in Books and Men, in the Noble arts of Justice, and of Prudence, they are fitter for judgment and the Regiment of the World, than any men else that live-And their Honesty truly weigh'd is the gallantest engine that they can use and thrive withal. A faithful advocate can never sit without Clients. Nor do I believe, That man could lose by 't in the close, that would not undertake a cause he knew not honest. A Gold smith may gain an Estate as well as he that trades in every coorse metal. An Advocate is a limb of friendship; and further than the Altar, he is not bound to go. And 'tis observed, of as famous a Lawyer as I think was then in the World, the Roman Cicero; that he was slain by one he had defended when accus'd for the murther of his Father. Certainly he that defends an injury, is next to him that commits it. And this is recorded, not only as an example of ingratitude, but as a punishment, for patronising an ill cause. In all pleadings, Foul language, Mallice, Impertinence and Recriminations, are ever to be avoided. The cause, more than the man, is to be convinc'd. Overpowering Oratory is not ever to be practis'd; Torrents of Words do often bear down even Trophies of Truth, which does so fret and anger the party over-born that the |