The Editor’s Bag onward, to formulate measures abol ishing the difference between forms of action at law and in equity and to per
feet the right of appeal from decisions of highest state courts on questions of constitutionality of statutes. That the Committee on Uniform State Laws is
549
or other by being shut up in the closet, where he raised an awful row, screaming and kicking. Fi nally the row ceased, and his mentor approached the closet, to whom the youthful Baldwin replied: "I ain't good, I'm simply resting." — Waterbury American.
also a progressive body may be seen
MARRIAGES OF MINORS NOT
from the adoption by the Association of
VOIDABLE
the Uniform Family-Desertion Act and Uniform Foreign Wills Act.
T THE recent annual Conference
The work done by other organizations in the past year has been of the same temper. The Conference on Uniform State Laws has now approved the final
of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, held in Boston, there was a strik ing disagreement on the question whether a marriage should be voidable, under certain conditions, because contracted
draft of two important bills, the Uni form Child Labor and Marriage and Marriage License Acts. Progress is
by minors without the necessary con sent of parent, guardian or curator. The
being made on uncompleted drafts of the proposed Uniform Incorporation and Uniform Partnership Acts, not to speak
of the Torrens System. The American Institute of Criminal Law and Crimi nology has definitely formulated prin ciples of indeterminate sentence and parole, and is doing much to solve the problems of medical expert testimony
and the defense of insanity. Of the work of other organizations it is unnecessary to speak in this fragmentary account.
There is undoubtedly no other organ ization in the United States, apart from
these legal bodies representing the whole nation, which is doing so much to work
out the practical problems facing legislators and publicists. For that rea son, the annual conventions of the Amer
ican Bar Association and the associated societies are an annual event of pro found importance, and of an importance
section which gave rise to the contro versy was as follows: — Sec. XXVI. A marriage contracted by a person requiring the consent of a parent, guardian or curator, without such consent, shall be voidable upon the application of such person, or of the parent, guardian or curator of such person; but no such application shall be made after the party requiring consent has reached the age of legal majority and has voluntarily cohabited with the other party, nor in any event more than one year after such party has reached the age of legal ma jority. If the application is made by the parent, guardian
or
curator,
the court may
refuse to grant the same, if such refusal shall appear to be to the interest of the party who required the consent, and such party does not join in the application. Any court having jurisdiction to grant divorces shall have power to annul a marriage as provided by this section.
year, as the labors of the societies grad
This ground of annulment was favored by representatives of twelve states — Illi nois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michi gan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, North Dakota, Pennsyl
ually extend themselves over an increas ing field.
vania, Vermont and Wisconsin. It was opposed by thirteen other states, Con
which seems to increase from year to
necticut, District of Columbia, Florida, They tell a good story of Judge Baldwin, Gov ernor of Connecticut, when he was a small boy.
Kansas,
He was subjected to punishment for something
Jersey, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Ten
Maryland,
Minnesota, New
