It is not possible to give full expression, within the limited space allotted for this article to the many activities of this remarkable man; to speak of his innumerable arguments on behalf of public interest before the courts of law, Committees of Congress, State Legislative Committees, and the Interstate Commerce Commision, of his scattered writings and speeches on the problems of his time, or of his role in the Zionist movement in which he has been such a prominent figure; and above all to attempt to write a summary of his judicial opinions. I will only touch on his main interests, which I believe lead to the heart and kernel of the thinking of Justice Brandeis, to the best of his teachings and true values.

The distinction between an offer and an invitation to deal is clear and its consequences are well-known. Whilst the former bestows upon the offeree the power to accept and thus to conclude the contract, the latter is only intended to elicit an offer which the tenderer is then at liberty to accept or reject. It is, by contrast, less simple to determine when we are faced with an offer or an invitation to deal, or which of these might alone apply according to the rules of one or other legal system.

In this paper we do not intend to touch upon the questions involved in an overture to a specified individual or an announcement of a reward to the public for the performance of some act, i.e., to the person who carries out the required act (although, as happens in English law, such a case also falls under contract and is not regarded as a unilateral promise effective in itself). Instead we shall deal with overtures to the public indicating that a person has goods or services to supply, which take the form of displaying wares in a shop window or in the interior of a shop (sometimes by inviting customers to utilize self-service facilities) or of distributing catalogues, price lists, handbills, advertisements, posters and the like.

Property relations between spouses have for many years been a domain which did not receive the proper and direct attention it deserved from the hands of the legislature.

Ottoman and Mandatory Periods: Under the Ottoman regime these matters were dominated by personal or religious law, as the case happened to be, and there was no law in existence which was applicable to all the inhabitants of die territory known as Palestine, irrespective of people's religious beliefs or formal religious affiliations.

The Mandatory authorities did not wish to interfere with the existing pattern. The Palestine Orders-in-Council 1922–1947, under arts. 51–67, accorded a special status to the religious courts of the various religious communities within the judiciary of Palestine. Not all religious courts enjoyed the same extent of jurisdiction but all exercised, in matters of personal status either exclusive jurisdiction over the members of their communities or concurrent jurisdiction together with the civil courts in those cases where all the parties to the action consented to such jurisdiction. “Personal status” as defined by art. 51 covered a wide range of matters some of them concerning the person as such and others concerning proprietary rights to which a person is entitled by reason of his personal status such as alimony, maintenance, succession.

With citizenship and residence sufficient to sustain United States taxation of worldwide income, a United States citizen, resident or corporation, is liable for United States taxes on all income derived from Israeli sources. Such income, being Israeli-linked by virtue of the source rules described in the first part of this article, will normally be subject to Israeli taxation. In these circumstances the United States taxpayer would be in principle subject to both Israeli and United States taxes.

In reality, however, double taxation is the exception to the rule. The United States has adopted unilateral relief measures in the form of the exemption from its taxes of certain income derived from sources outside the United States, the deductibility of foreign taxes, and a foreign tax credit. Israel, for her part, grants numerous exemptions from Israeli taxes to receipts which would be otherwise taxable, and greatly reduces its taxes on certain income. We turn first to those measures of relief afforded by the United States Internal Revenue Code.