the court, and may at any time be removed by the court and another appointed. One purpose in requiring a next friend for an infant is that there may be some one responsible for the costs of the suit. The next friend is liable for costs while the infant is not. It is usually provided that there need be no next friend, where an infant is a joint plaintiff with adults.

§ 582. Rights of guardian and ward in each other. -A guardian has no right to the services of a ward, and unless the relation of master and servant exists, can not recover for his own benefit any damages on account of injuries to the ward.

A ward has no interest in the guardian's services that will sustain an action by the ward against one who injures the guardian.

§ 583. Wrongs between guardian and ward.—As between each other, guardian and ward are answerable for injuries done, to the same extent as if the relation did not exist. Except, however, that where the guardian has custody of the ward's person, he stands in loco parentis and has a larger right to restrain and correct the ward. And also, where the influence of the guardian is misused, the relation enters as a factor into the duty owing and the wrong done. This is shown in the chapter on frauds.

§ 584. Guardian of the insane.-Analogous to the guardianship of infants is the guardianship of the insane.

It is generally provided by statute that upon a judicial determination of the insanity of a person, the court may appoint a guardian to take charge of the person and property of the insane. The duties of such guardians are the same in general as those of guardians of infants,

and they are held to like accountability. It is their duty to appear for and defend suits against their insane wards.

The guardianship may be terminated upon the restoration to sanity of the ward, which fact must be judicially determined in the same way that insanity was determined.

§ 585. Public law in general.-In a previous chapter public law was said to be composed of those rules dealing with the "structure, powers, rights and activities of the state" while private law includes "all the residue of legal principles." Holland makes the distinction rest upon the question of whether the law regulates rights between subject and subject or between state and subject, it being private law in the first case and public law in the second. He then divides public law into constitutional law, administrative law and criminal law. To these three divisions may be added international law, which is that body of rules in accordance with which the rights between state and state are regulated. For pedagogical reasons criminal law was treated in an earlier part of the volume, and the remaining divisions will be treated in the order named.

§ 586. Constitutional law in general.—A constitu

tion may be defined as a body of precepts, "written or unwritten, designed to control governmental action until modified in some authorized manner." Constitutional law is the body of rules and principles which the courts adopt in the application and construction of these precepts. One of the chief differences between an unwritten and a written constitution is the difference in the method of amendment or alteration. For instance, in England where the constitution is unwritten, it is changed in the same manner that an ordinary statute is passed, by an act of Parliament. In the United States, however, the method of amending the constitution is much more formal and requires a far more elaborate process than the enactment of a statute, the theory being that only those things are put in the written constitution which are so fundamental as to require their being placed beyond the reach of hasty or ill-considered action.

Two very important results have followed from this difference, and they are that in America the legislatures, are much less free than in England, and the judiciary is made the guardian of the constitution. Since our legislatures can not change the constitution their acts are subject to its limitations. Since it is the function of the judiciary to interpret and apply the law, the courts have reserved the right to decide when legislation is in conIflict with the fundamental law of the constitution and declare it void.

In America, where all our constitutions are written,. a constitution may be defined as a written instrument, setting forth the fundamental law adopted by the state as the basis of its government, and alterable only by special process. Constitutional law, then, in the sense in which we will use it, is the body of rules and principles followed by the courts in the construction and application of this instrument.

§ 585. Public law in general.—In a previous chapter public law was said to be composed of those rules dealing with the "structure, powers, rights and activities of the state" while private law includes "all the residue of legal principles." Holland makes the distinction rest upon the question of whether the law regulates rights between subject and subject or between state and subject, it being private law in the first case and public law in the second. He then divides public law into constitutional law, administrative law and criminal law. To these three divisions may be added international law, which is that body of rules in accordance with which the rights between state and state are regulated. For pedagogical reasons criminal law was treated in an earlier part of the volume, and the remaining divisions will be treated in the order named.

§ 586. Constitutional law in general.-A constitu