REVIEWS. 165 ories are neatly ticketed. M. Valery inclines strongly to the rule pre- vailing in England and the United States, — the theory of " declaration," as opposed to the theory of " information " (i. e., as opposed to the doc- trine of M'Culloch V. Eagle I?is. Co., i Pick. 277). He would be willing to carry this in some respects much farther than it has been carried here, and would, for instance, hold that the entry by a merchant (in the books which he is required by French law to keep) of an acceptance should bind the other party. One, however, who was not bound to keep books should not, he says, be able to bind the offerer until he mails his answer. The hardship of this doctrine upon an offerer who does not hear of his accep- tance is to be completely obviated by an obligation imposed upon the acceptor ex bojio et cequo., corresponding to our condition or contract im- plied by law, to see that the offerer is duly informed of the acceptance, — a suggestion worth consideration here. Those idealists who feel that the foreign commercial law has none of the faults of our own will be disappointed to find that the doctrine which makes acceptances binding for the benefit of those who take on the faith of them. though they be not on the bill, is at least not unknown abroad. M. Valery states as law that they are binding, and backs it up by citing decisions (p. 223). He seems, it may be added, to be well wonted to the use of decisions as authority, and to place much reliance on them. In many other respects (for instance, the scope of tacit contracts), the book will prove interesting to any reader. R. w. H. The Law of Judicial Writs and Process. By W. A. Alderson, of the New York Bar. New York: Baker, Voorhis, & Co. 1895. 8vo. pp. lix, 667. In a great system of law, it is useless to try to memorize much, when one has but to peep into a few good books to find what is needed ; but there are some rules that every lawyer must in practice have at his finger- tips, and the law of judicial writs and process includes an unusually large number of such points. As this most important branch has never, hitherto, been at all fully or adequately treated, the profession will wel- come in Mr. Alderson's book a work conscientious in its thoroughness, and sincere in its attempt to discuss aggressively and carefully each and every doctrine of that law. Far more authorities on this subject are gathered here than can, probably, be found anywhere else ; and although this collection is hardly exhaustive (important authorities treating of this topic in I Ames and Smith on Torts are not, for example, referred to), yet it shows throughout a vast amount of diligence and labor. The student might, however, complain with some justice of certain features of the work. It is, perhaps to some extent, presented in an un- necessarily expanded and undigested form ; and the sense of proportion, and true test of really fundamental sifting and classification, is not always properly maintained. Although in these respects, perhaps not thoroughly satisfactory to the student, the book will, undoubtedly, prove valuable to every practi^ tioner wherever located, and can hardly fail to assume a well-merited and respectable position in the ranks of recent legal publications. D. A. E.
