meanor by the lex loci. If so punishable, French law is applied in all its phases. These provisions are the subject of the author's most poignant criticisms. For example, certain offenses are not punishable at all by the lex loci. In case of trading with the enemy, the Court of Cassation decided in the face of the express provisions of the Code that the French courts had jurisdiction. "This praetorian jurisdiction opens the door," argues the author, "to the greatest liberties." Again, it is impossible to know if the lex loci contemplates both the adjective and substantive law and if there is any jurisdiction over offenses outlawed by the statute of limitations. Foreign sentences have in France the negative authority of 'chose jugée,' that is, there may be no second conviction in France but the sentence is not capable of active enforcement there. Professor de Vabres concludes: "The speculations of Bartolus and his disciples are perhaps as strange to our legislators and judges as they were to the authors of the Code of 1808. But the necessity of an effective struggle against the dangers of international criminality has sufficed for the restoration of a doctrine which justice and reason inspired .. What the history of the doctrine means and what is commanded and justified by experience is the exclusion of certain axioms which still exist in popular opinion as the survival of a principle which general sentiment has condemned. First, the idea that the international competence of criminal jurisdictions is measured by the interest of the state Next, the idea in the field of criminal law, that the choice of jurisdictions is confused with the choice of laws .. Finally, the idea that a penal judgment in one state is without value in others " This book may meet the same criticism by Anglo-American jurists as have those of other continental writers who follow the theoretical method. However the author has in a measure forestalled this criticism by placing himself at the outset upon the ground of the positivists in stating that actually nothing more can be seen in international penal law than a chapter of criminal law. Moreover, to American publicists (and jurists, perhaps) a touch of the broader humanitarianism of the a priori method may not be amiss at this particular time. Professor de Vabres might receive a larger audience on this side of the water were there some references to English and American jurists. We find here a historical study bearing all the marks of assiduous and scientific research, containing the fullest references to classical authorities and continental writers, but as a work on international penal law which confines itself solely to the survey of its aspects in countries deriving their jurisprudence from the Roman Law, it is as remarkable as a treatment of International Law from one nationalistic point of view. Regardless of any conflict in our own law between the objective and subjective theories, the admirable exposition of the history of these two conceptions in continental jurisprudence by Professor de Vabres throws at least an instructive light upon the issues involved in the impending choice which America must make regarding her world relations. The practical idealism of the Italian doctrine reached affluence in France at about the time of the end of the Hundred Years War but was stamped out by the subsequent growth of royal power and its attendant nationalism; the vision of Grotius was forgotten amid the clamour of the nationalization of XVIIth century Holland; the humanitarianism of Leibnitz and Wolff, engendered after the Thirty Years War, was crushed by the egoistic nationalism of the XVIII century publicists. The World War resulted in the Pact of the League of Nations in which the natural law of Grotius became International Law. International Law as interpreted by a permanent Court of International Justice and enforced by penal sanctions would be no longer, in Holland's phrase, the "vanishing point of jurisprudence." The effect on future jurisprudence of the isolation preached by the nationalistic publicists of our own time and country may well be considered in the light of Professor de Vabres' history. The work of Professor de Vabres is one of remarkable erudition, of clarity of method, of great vision, and is worthy of a lasting place in the literature of the new science of the conflict of laws. Chicago. HARRY LEROY JONES. Pp. EUGENICAL STERILIZATION IN THE UNITED STATES. By Harry Hamilton Laughlin, D.Sc. Published by the Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, 1922. xxiii +494. Occasionally a real service is rendered to a nation by the production of a book which champions and carries forward a movement of vital importance to the future welfare of that nation. Such a service has been rendered in the publication of Dr. Laughlin's book. It is perhaps the first of its kind to be published in this country, and presents in a comprehensive manner the necessity for sterilization of the socially unfit, and the benefits to be derived thereby. The author is well qualified to produce such a work, being Assistant Director of the Eugenics Record Office, Carnegie Institute of Washington, Cold Springs Harbor, Long Island, New York, and Eugenics Associate of the Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago. The book is published by the Municipal Court of Chicago, the introduction to the book being written by Chief Justice Harry Olson of that court. Much credit is due Judge Olson, under whose leadership the Municipal Court of Chicago has recognized that its duty was a greater one than the mere application of rules of law to particular cases; that it was also the duty of the court to materially aid in the solution of the crime problem in large cities. That court. has for some time advocated a permanent segregation of incorrigible defectives as a means of protection to society, a protection to the individual from himself, and a restriction of propagation of the defective type. And now, in view of the discoveries of the biologists and psychopathologists which prove the potent influence of heredity in causing mental and physical defects in the human race, this same court comes forth with another contribution-publication of a book which will go far in educating the public mind to the value of eugenical sterilization. As Judge Olson points out in his introductory remarks, sterilization does not supersede the need for segregation; both are necessary, for "sterilization protects future generations, while segregation safeguards the present as well." Dr. Laughlin states that his work is intended primarily for practical use, designed to be of special value to four classes of per sons "First, to law-makers who have to decide upon matters of policy to be worked out in legislation regulating eugenical sterilization; second, to judges of the courts, upon whom, in most of the states having sterilization statutes, devolves the duty of deciding upon the constitutionality of new statutes, and of determining cacogenic individuals and of ordering their sexual sterilization; third, to administrative officers who represent the state in locating, and in eugenically analyzing persons alleged to be cagogenic, and who are responsible for carrying out the orders of the courts; and, fourth, to individual citizens who, in the exercise of their civic rights and duties, desire to take the initiative in reporting for official determination and action, specific cases of obvious family degeneracy." Dr. Laughlin first considers the various state statutes that have been enacted on this subject, these statutes being presented in full, with a comparative analysis of the subject matter as treated in the different statutes. From this analysis, it is seen that while some states pass the act purely as a eugenical measure, others pass it as a therapeutic measure, others have a punitive motive, while still others combine two or all three of the foregoing motives. It is also to be noted that the acts vary as regards the persons affected, and as to procedure to be followed in effecting sterilization. Some acts provide for an administrative board with full powers to put the law into effect; others prescribe for such a board, but with a right to appeal to a court of record; while still others provide that the law shall be enforced only through the channels of a court of record. Fifteen states have passed sterilization laws: Indiana, Washington, California, Connecticut, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Michigan, Kansas, Wisconsin, Nevada, Oregon, and South Dakota. In nine of the fifteen states, the validity of the acts has been tested. In Washington and California the statutes have been held constitutional; in Indiana, Iowa, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Michigan, and Oregon (lower court of latter state) the statutes have been held unconstitutional, various reasons being assigned by the different courts so holding: (1) cruel and unusual punishment; (2) deprivation of liberty without due process; (3) deprivation of equal protection of the law. Following this presentation of the sterilization acts that have been passed and the resulting litigation, Dr. Laughlin gives in detail case and family histories of persons who have been brought before the courts under this law. This information with the accompanying charts, shows in an impressive manner the part which heredity has played in the lives of many of the morally and physically unfit who are now a real menace to society. That portion of the book which is devoted to the "Anatomical and Surgical Aspects" and the "Physiological and Mental Effects" of sexual sterilization can be more intelligently reviewed and criticized only by one having a medical rather than a legal training. As lawyers, we are naturally interested in the legality of such a law, and Dr. Laughlin has presented much material on this point. All litigation arising under the sterilization laws is reported in detail. Likewise, legal opinions of various prominent members of the bar are given, this list including Chief Justice Harry Olson of the Municipal Court of Chicago, Louis Marshall and Charles A. Boston of the New York Bar, and the attorney generals of the states of California and Connecticut (who give their opinions of the validity of the sterilization laws of their respective states). The legal status of a sterilization law may be summarized as follows: A state may in the proper and constitutional exercise of its police power, enact sterilization laws, devoid of punitive features, provided that such laws are not so unduly discriminatory as to deprive those persons affected, of the equal protection of the law as guaranteed to them by section one of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and provided further, that such statutes provide for "due process of law" in their administration. A law which defines a natural class of undesirable parents and which provides that all the members of that class who are sexually fertile shall come within the operation of the law, would very probably not be held unconstitutional as 'class legislation' or as an unwarranted extension of the police power of the state. From the decisions in the New Jersey, New York and Michigan test cases it would seem that an act including those of a certain class (i. e., insane) who are in state institutions, but not applying to those of the same class who are not in such institutions, would be declared unconstitutional, as it does not give to those persons affected the equal protection of the law. It is also very probable that any act would be declared unconstitutional which is purely a punitive measure, for that will be considered as opposed to the spirit of our constitutional provisions against cruel and unusual punishment. Elimination of the punitive character of the act would also eliminate the objections which have been presented in some states that the act was a bill of attainder, or that it was an ex post facto law, or that it puts a person "twice in jeopardy of his life and limb." On the question of due process, it would seem that sterilization of a person will no doubt be deemed a sufficient infringement on his personal liberty as to require court procedure. Where the statute places the procedure in the hands of an administrative board, there is grave doubt of its constitutionality. Dr. Laughlin presents a "model sterilization law" which he believes would be most effective, and which would withstand all attacks against its constitutionality. In this regard, it would seem that his zeal for his subject has resulted in an extension of the operation of the act to too large a group, for in his definition of "socially inade quate classes," he has included not only the feeble-minded, insane, criminal, epileptic, inebriate, and diseased (including those infected with tuberculosis, syphilis, or leprosy), but also the blind, the deaf, the deformed (including cripples), and the dependent (including orphans, ne'er-do-wells, the homeless, tramps, and paupers). Many persons who would otherwise support such a law will part with Dr. Laughlin on its extension to the latter classes, for it seems to be an unwarranted extension of the police power of the state. However, that feature in no way detracts from the service that has been rendered in furnishing a model law from which subsequent sterilization acts may be drawn. The objective sought by the author and publishers has indeed been accomplished. Those interested in this great movement to "keep the life stream pure" will find this book to be an invaluable contribution to the cause. C. C. SPRAY. ARTICLES IN PERIODICALS AMERICAN SYSTEM OF LAW AS CONSERVATOR OF REPUBLICAN INSTITUTIONS. Shepard Barclay. Am. L. Rev. LVI 641. DECLARATORY JUDGMENTS. Thomas R. Gordon. Am. L. Rev. LVI 659. ANDREW JACKSON JUDGE. Frederick Cubberly. Am. L. Rev. LVI 686. JURISPRUDENCE AS A SOURCE OF ANGLO-AMERICAN LAW. Borris M. Komar. Am. L. Rev. LVI 702. CHILD LABOR AND THE CONSTITUTION. J. F. Lawson. Am. L. Rev. LVI 733. THE DUTY OF DISCLOSURE. Sherman L. Whipple. Am. L. Rev. LVI 801. PARTNERSHIP LIABILITY UNDER BUSINESS TRUST. Noble Brandon Judah. Am. L. Rev. LVI 826. VOLUNTARY TRIBUNALS. Percy Werner. Am. L. Rev. LVI 852. DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION UNDER JOHN MARSHALL. Albert J. Beveridge. Am. L. Rev. LVI 921. ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS IN FEDERAL COURTS. Wm. Howard Taft. Am. L. Rev. LVII 1. DELAYS IN THE COURTS. Jacob Trieber. Am. L. Rev. LVII 24. ABOLISH THE JURY. J. C. McWhorter. Am. L. Rev. LVII 42. IMPLIED CONTRACTS WITH THE UNITED STATES. O. R. McGuire. Am. L. Rev. LVII 57. LEGAL ASPECT OF THE JUVENILE COURT. Bernard Flexner and Reuben Oppenheimer. Am. L. Rev. LVII 65. AIR LAW. William R. McCracken. Am. L. Rev. LVII 97. THE FIRST COURT OF CHANCERY IN CANADA. Wm. Renwick Riddell. Bost. Univ. L. Rev. II 231. GERMAN TAXATION AFFECTING FOREIGNERS. Carl G. Grossman. Bost. Univ. L. Rev. II 244. CASES ARISING FROM BANK LIQUIDATION IN MASS. J. E. Hannigan. Bost. Univ. L. Rev. II 249. DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAW OF WATERS IN THE WEST. Lucien Shaw. Cal. L. Rev. X 443. RECOGNITION OF NEW INTERESTS IN THE LAW OF TORTS. E. F. Albertsworth. Cal. L. Rev. X 461. MISCONCEPTIONS OF INSANITY IN JURY TRIALS. Edward Huntington Williams and Ernest Bryant Hoag. Cal. L. Rev. XI 1. MUTUAL OPEN AND CURRENT BOOK ACCOUNTS STATED AND THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. Esmond Schapiro. Cal. L. Rev. XI 12. |