apply the words of Victor Hugo in his 'Notre Dame
de Paris,' and say: 'Les modes ont fait plus de mal
que les révolutions.'
It only remains to
be said that Mrs. Nash disdained the high standard
which has been created by the best and most graci-
ous portion of English womanhood. She renounced
her duties at the call of empty pleasure. She sacri-
ficed her privileges of social service for the allure-
ments of ignominious folly.

The fact that Sir William McCardie is set down as a bachelor in "Who's Who" lends all the more piquancy to his animadversions on the last infirmity of female minds.

The case is an authority to show that where the tradesman gives credit for wearing apparel to the wife exclusively, knowing that she is a married woman, the husband is excused from liability on his wife's

contract.

At the second annual meeting of the American Branch of the International Law Association, held in New York in January last, the Honourable Mr. Justice Mignault of the Supreme Court of Canada made an address which we have been privileged to read in the printed Report of the Proceedings recently issued. The address is replete with the spirit of international brotherhood. It is infused with the belief that by the example of enduring amity between the American and Canadian peoples much will be done, the world over, to render war detestable and make smooth in the heart of humanity the path of "the progressive evolution of the thought of God," as Mazzini so finely puts it. We regret that limitations of space prevent us from reprinting the whole address. We append, however, some of its more striking passages:

"It is perfectly obvious that we have a common interest in the world problems which it is your mission, as a society of International Law, to study

especially. We are very happily situated on this Continent of North America, and we have given an example, have we not, to the world, of the proper solution of international difficulties Nature

itself, it seems to me, has closely allied our two countries, and has made of the one the helper of the other. Most of you have travelled through the Canadian Rockies. If you have, you will remember a mountain stream rising in, I think, Lake Windemere, in British Columbia, rushing down dark and rocky canyons, passing through the Arrow lakes and across the boundary into the United States where it brings richness and fertility to the States of Washington and Oregon. The Columbia River, for that is its fair name, is a contribution which Canada, through Mother Nature, had made to the prosperity of the United States.

"Let us come further east and nearer to our own homes. Here we have one of the most beautiful lakes, which bears the name of the great French discoverer, Samuel de Champlain. Lake Champlain, that is the waters of Lake Champlain, flow through the Richelieu River-another great French name-mirroring, as they pass, the church steeples of peaceful Canadian villages, and watering the great valley of the St. Lawrence. Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River are a contribution which also, through Mother Nature, the United States has made to the prosperity of Canada.

"Neither of these rivers stop at the boundary. Neither are impeded in their onward flow by custom officials, or custom houses. They would mirror the latter and drown the former. Let us retain this image, because it is an image which we may take from the world of nature to the world of man, and let us hope that always streams of friendship, goodwill and reciprocal understanding will flow from one country into the other, for good feeling, friendship, and the spirit of brotherly love are things which, thank God, are and always will be on the free list."

ADDRESS TO THE NEW YORK BAR
ASSOCIATION.

BY HONOURABLE NEWTON W. ROWELL, K.C.

Mr. President, and members of the Bar Association of the State of New York:

May my first words be of very warm appreciation for the manner in which you have received this toast, and particularly for the manner in which your Chairman has proposed it. The language in which he has spoken of Canada and of the part we took in the war will be deeply appreciated by every Canadian citizen.

The President asked you to drink to the toast of the King of England. That was good. He is also King of Canada. There was a time-and this is suggested by the President's remark-when the British Empire did consist of one central government with a number of dependent colonies in different parts of the world. With that flexibility and adaptability, howver, which are characteristic of the British Constitu-. tion, during the past fifty years these colonies have developed into free, self-governing states, equal in status with the mother country, and all owing willing allegiance to a common Sovereign. We hail King George as our King in the same real sense that the people of England hail him as their King.

With the progress of time, with the increase in knowledge, and with a better understanding of the principles of free, democratic government, we are now able to do what was not possible a century and a half ago when you had your little difference with the mother country; we are able to give full expression to our national aspirations and still remain within the British Empire. You decided to work out your national destiny outside the British Empire. We are now able to work out our national destiny, with all the

liberty and freedom you enjoy, within the British Empire. We are citizens of Canada. We are full citizens of Canada, but we are more than citizens of Canada, we are citizens of the British Empire, and we are at home and under our own flag when travelling over a quarter of the surface of the globe. We prize our Canadian citizenship, but we prize our British citizenship just as thoroughly as the Apostle Paul prized his Roman citizenship.

Now, the Chairman has referred to the many ties that bind our two countries together, the many ties that bind the Bar of the two countries together. Recently we have had some new ties that bind us together, in addition to the ones you are thinking of. We have always welcomed you to Canada. If my recollection serves me aright, my distinguished friend, the Hon. Mr. Taft, the present Chief Justice of your Supreme Court, was engaged on a Canadian railway valuation case in the City of Montreal when he received notice of his appointment as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. My distinguished friend, Mr. Pierce Butler, of St. Paul, was associated with me as counsel in a railway valuation case in the City of Toronto, when he received notice of his appointment as an Associate Justice. When Mr. Butler told me of his appointment, I said, "Butler, there will be no chance for the members of the Canadian Bar, in Canadian railway valuation cases, once it is established that the road to the Supreme Court of the United States for American barristers is by way of Canada! In view of what has happened we fear we shall lose our practice and American counsel will be in charge of our railway cases."

But there is one tie of which I desire to speak particularly to-night, a tie suggested in the remarks of your Chairman in his most interesting and able presidential address of yesterday. One of the most striking characteristics of both British and American political institutions is the 'rule of law,' or the supremacy

of law. By that rule of law' we mean that no man can suffer in his person or in his property, unless he violates the law, and he is adjudged to have violated it by proper legal procedure in the ordinary courts of the land, and that every citizen, be he rich or poor, be he strong or weak, must be adjudged by the same courts and by the same law. Under this 'rule of law' we have developed our ideals of personal liberty, liberty of person, liberty of the press, liberty of assembly, and liberty of speech. We all recognize— all men of the Anglo-Saxon tradition-that the 'rule of law' is the best safeguard of personal liberty and the surest guarantee for the orderly and progressive development of our civilization. Because this rule of law' is still such a characteristic and vital feature of your political institutions and ours, a special obligation rests upon men learned in the law, and who know and appreciate its value, to endeavour to see that the laws which govern us are just, that those laws are honestly and impartially administered, so that the people may have faith in the courts and in the laws of the land.

May I give you an illustration of what we mean by the 'rule of law' as opposed to the use of arbitrary power. Shortly before 1771, Minorca became a British possession, and Lieutenant-General Mostyn was made Governor. There was a troublesome fellow there by the name of Fabregas, who took part in a riot and tried to stir up a mutiny, and the doughty General deported him to Spain without a trial. He proceeded to London and sued the General in the British courts, and, 150 years ago, when a pound sterling meant a great deal, he recovered a verdict of £3,000 for wrongful imprisonment and deportation. The General appealed, and the appeal came before the King's Bench and Lord Mansfield delivered judgment as follows:

"To lay down in an English Court of Justice such a monstrous proposition as that a Governor,