LAW OF CONTRACTS. BY THEOPHILUS PARSONS, LL. D., DAME FROFEOR OF LAW IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY, AND AUTHOR OF TREATIEZ\ Om ™ OF MERGANTILE LAW, OM NOTES AND BILLS, AxD ‘LAWS OF BUSINESS FOR BUSINESS MEH. VOLUME L vivtH EDITION BOSTON: — LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY, 1866.WILLIAM H. PRESCOTT, ESQ., THE HISTORIAN OF SPAIN, MEXICO, AND PERU. 1 went, perhaps, find some excuse for dedicating this work to you, in the natural desire of connecting my own labors with those which have won for you and for our country so much renown. And even more in the friendship, which began so long ago we cannot remember its beginning; and in the long years, that through childhood, youth, and manhood, have brought us upon the confines of age, if not beyond them, has never for a moment been broken. But neither of these is my principal motive. That, I must confess to be, a strong and irrepressible desire to speak of your father; to express, however imperfectly, my gratitude to him; and to execute, even in this slight degree, the purpose I have long had, of putting on record my testimony to the excellence of one who stood for many years at the head of his profession, who was my master during my apprenticeship to the law, and ever after my revered instructor and invaluable friend. Tt was in 1815 that I entered his office as a student. I had been accustomed all my life to see him often, and hear him often spoken of, for our families were intimate, and he was among my father’s most valued friends; and I had always beard him mentioned with a kind and degree of respect that (ityiv DEDICATION. seemed to be paid to him alone. I knew that he had held the highest place in his profession for some years; but the regard and reverence generally accorded to him were more than any mere professional success could win.’ When I entered his office, he had already given up a large part of his business. He did not go often into court; but I heard him in some important cases, and was a constant observer of the relations between him and his numerous clients, And it was not long before I learned the grounds of his high social and professional position. In the first place, let me speak of his judgment and sagacity. I cannot conceive of any person possessing, in greater per- fection, that admirable thing we call gvod sense. I doubt whether, in his long and active life, he ever made any one mis- take of importance, Whoever employed him in any business, soon saw that the wisest thing that could be done in his case,- and at every step of it, was always the very thing that was done. Hence a confidence without limit was reposed in his opinion ; and his advice was accepted and followed by all who received it, as if it made further inquiry or consideration wholly unnecessary. The next quality I would mention, was a kindred and vonnected one; I mean his perfect truthfulness. It seemed as if he could not deceive; and if he had the faculty originally he must have lost it by som user. It made no difference on which side of a question the party propounding it to him stood; for his answer was to the question, and not to the man. ‘Whether he dealt with a client, an adverse party, a witness, the jury, or the court, he dealt with them all honestly. He had, what I am sorry to call the rare quality, of loving truth so well, that his view of it was not to be distorted or obstructed. either by any interest or any feeling of his own or of thoseDEDIOATION. v whom he represented, or by any disturbing influences of cir- cumstances or position. Ispeak last of his learning, although this was perhaps more frequently remarked upon than his moral qualities, however deeply they were felt. He had passed many years in laborious and well-directed study; for he was led to this, both by his sense of duty to his clients, and by his sagacity, which told him that here he must find the means of sound judgment and use- falness and success ; and also by the love of his profession and of the law as a science. For many years after he had with- drawn from the profession, both as advocate and chamber- counsel, he still continued his legal studies; and often when I have called upon him and stated some difficult question which had occurred in my practice, he would— not for a fee— but in his kindness to me, and his love of the law, enter upon the investigation with the zeal of earlier days, and give me the whole benefit of his vast knowledge and his unerring sagacity. To these qualities I must add that of universal kindness and unfailing courtesy. And certainly I have given good reasons why he held so long the headship of a profession in which it is not easy to climb to the high places, and very difficult to hold them ; and also, why, outside of his profession and by society at large, he was venerated during his long life as few men among us have ever been. Let me add, that while he mani- fested, wherever in the conduct of his affairs it was needed, the firmness and fearlessness that he inherited from a father who stood like a tower of strength in command of the American forces at Bunker Hill, he was ‘ever, and remarkably, unassum- ing, retiring, and modest. It is difficult to believe that he could not measure his own success, or that he did not know his high position ; but no one ever heard a word ora tone from him which indicated such knowledge.vi DEDICATION. He was not eloquent, and never, to my knowledge, attempted to be; and yet he was a most successful advocate. It was his purpose and endeavor to do for every client, and in every case, all that could be done by learning, sense, industry, and honesty; this he knew he could do, and did. And more than this he had no desire to do. Such was Writ1aM Prescorr. When he died in 1844, at the age of 82, I had known him intimately for twenty-nine years, and had known of him many more. And I never yet heard a word spoken, and I never heard ofa word spoken, to his disparagement or dispraise, during his long life or since its close, by any person whomsoever; not even have I heard the “but” or “if” with which many indulge themselves in qualify- ing and clouding the commendation they cannot but render. He has left behind him no brilliant speeches to be remembered and quoted; no books in which the fruits of his learning and wisdom were gathered and preserved; and they who knew him are passing away, and already his reputation is becoming tra- ditional, And very gled shall I be, if, by this slight memorial, I may, for a single moment, arrest the waves of time, in their advancing flow over the sands in which are written his name, and the names of many others of our best and greatest. THEOPHILUS PARSONS Camnriper, October, 1858.PREFACE TO THE FIFTH EDITION. Wuen preparing for this edition, I stated to my pub- lishers that a large addition might be necessary, founded upon recent English and American reports, that the book might present accurately the law as it stands at this time. They suggested to me, that it would be better to make a third volume, the two volumes hay- ing already become, by gradual increase, in successive editions, quite as large as could be conveniently used. T have followed this suggestion, not merely because it permitted me to make the additions and illustrations from recent cases more full than I could otherwise have done; but mainly, because it gave me the oppor tanity of enlarging the scope of the work, and. em- bracing all the objects I had originally intended to include. I have now added new chapters, upon Con- tracts of Shipping, Marine Insurance, Fire Insurance and Life Insurance, Liens, and the Stamp Acta I have inserted new sections, upon Sales to Arrive, upon Bought and Sold Notes, and upon Trust Mortgages; and have greatly enlarged some other sections. The book now covers, I believe, all contracts now in com- (vii)viii PREFACE TO THE FIFTH EDITION. mon use, and the principal remedies for a breach of them. The exceeding kindness of the profession towards this book, from its first publication, makes it my duty to use my utmost efforts to render it, so far as I can, worthy of their reception. And I hope that, by pur- suing, in the preparation of the new matter, my orig- inal plan of putting in the text all the principles and rules of law, and in the notes authority for and illus tration of all that I say in the text, it may be found useful to the student, and may enable either him or the practitioner to make a thorough investigation of any especial question. I have hitherto paged the successive editions with reference to the paging of the first, by means of stars and letters. But the additions have already been so large as to make this paging very cumbersome; and as the new matter is not in a volume by itself, but is inserted among the original matter in the places which the arrangement of topics required; and the original order is itself somewhat changed; I am compelled to " page this edition anew, and to make a similar change in the references by which the notes are connected with the text. : I am unwilling to close this preface without again acknowledging, sincerely and gratefully, that reception by the profession which has exhausted in twelve years four large editions. THEOPHILUS PARSONS. Camprivar, 1864.PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. In preparing this fourth edition I have earnestly en- deavored to make my work more worthy of the singular favor which has already exhausted three large editions. The third edition contained two new chapters, The fourth has two more chapters, and many new sections, and new paragraphs in almost every chapter; and more than two thousand new cases are cited. I have profited by the friendly criticisms of the press—and have met with none which were not friendly —and by whatever advice or suggestion could help:me. The indexes of both volumes have been enlarged, and put together as one index at the close of the second volume, in the belief that this would facilitate the use of the book. For a similar reason, the cases cited in either or both volumes have been arranged in one list and prefixed to the first volume. The whole work has been, in fact, rewritten; no pains have been spared to insure a full and accurate presentment of the law as it is at this (iyx PREFACE 10 THE FOURTH EDITION. moment, in all things which relate to the foundation, the construction, or the execution of contracta, of every kind. I offer it to the profession as, substantially, a new work; with the most sincere acknowledgment of the extreme kindness with which the former editions have been received. TP. Cameron, May, 1960.PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION Tus title of the thirtieth chapter of the Second Book of Blackstone’s Commentaries is, “ Of title by gift, grant, and contract ;” and in no other chapter does he treat of the law of contracts under that name. Since the publi- cation of that work, many treatises on this subject have been published in England and in this country ; some of them are large volumes, and the latest are the largest. But I have thought that a work of still wider extent, — that is, embracing some topics not usually presented in these treatises, and exhibiting the principles of law upon many subjects more fully,— would be useful to the stu- dent and the practitioner. There is, perhaps, no definite standard by which we may determine what, and how much, a work on this branch of the law should contain. The law of contracts may be said to include, directly or indirectly, almost all the law administered in our courts. But the line must be drawn somewhere; and I hope it will be found that I have not wandered too far from the proper limits of my subject, in my desire to present it fully, and to give to all its principles the light they reflect upon each other (xi)xii PREFAOK TO THE FIRST EDITION. This work is larger than any of its predecessors; but, for finding room in the text for all I wished to say in it, I have relied mainly on a peculiarity in its plan, — that is, on the rigorous exclusion from the text of all cases. I have endeavored to state in the text the principles and rules of the law, as accurately, as compactly, and as logically as I could; and in the notes, and there only, I have given my authorities. Such was my rule; and the exceptions to it are few; and my reason for it, in addition to the saving of space, was this: If the text of any book is composed, in any considerable degree, of selected cases, whoever uses the book (whether in learn- ing or in practising the law), will naturally suppose that these cases contain the prevailing, if not the whole, au- thority on that topic, for they are selected and pre- sented for that very purpose; but, if he relies upon them, he may be afterwards surprised by the exhibition of other cases, equally authoritative, but leading to opposite conclusions. These also may have been re- ferred to by name in the notes, and even the word “contra” affixed to them, but perhaps they are not within the reader's reach, or he has not time to ex- amine them; and, at all events, nothing which is said of them in a foot-note, would place them on an equality with their favored opponents. Undoubtedly, a text-writer upon any branch of the law has strong inducements to make up his book by quotation from authorities Not merely because it fills a page and disposes of a topic with little labor, but because, on all obscure and con- troverted questions, it is easy, by ample quotation, toPREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xiii seem to state the law, and yet avoid both the toil of investigation, and the responsibility of the decision. I have endeavored to state in the text what I think to be the law ; and in the notes I have endeavored to enable the reader to judge for himself whether I am right. Cases which are only direct authorities for the statements in the text are generally referred to only by name and place. If they illustrate these statements, still more if they modify them, or contradict them, they are given by quo- tation, or abstract, at greater or less length, as their’ respective importance seemed to demand. Indeed, I have wished to enable the reader to investigate a question as he would do it in a complete library, so far as a single work of moderate size could accomplish this. The Re- ports are now so numerous that few persons endeavor to possess them all; and it was thought that this circum- stance would give additional value and utility to a full exhibition of authorities. At this School, we have, I be- lieve, a more complete collection than exists elsewhere of law-books in the English language ; for in England, they have not, as far as I know, full collections of American law, and nowhere else in this country is it attempted, as T suppose, to make the series, both of English and Ameri- can text-books and reports, absolutely perfect; this we aim at, and, with few exceptions, accomplish. And only where I could use such a library should I have endeav- ored to give all the parts of so wide a subject as the law of Contracts this fulness of annotation. Nor would it have been possible for me to have per- formed alone all the labor necessary for this purpose;siv PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. end in the preparation of these notes I have been very greatly indebted to Mr. E. H. Bennett, one of the able editors of the very valuable reprint of English Law and Equity Reports, to Mr. A. W. Machen, formérly, and to Mr.C. C. Langdell, now, Librarian of our Law School, and to Mr. EL. Pierce and other gentlemen connected with it as students. Few things are more vexatious than to search for an authority referred to as pertinent to a ques tion under investigation, and either fail of finding it, or " discover that it is wholly irrelevant. I believe I may say, that all that labor and care could do to prevent this has been done. More than six thousand cases are referred to in this volume ; but from the beginning to the end of the book no case is cited because cited elsewhere, none merely on the authority of an index or digest, or of a marginal or head note, none without actual investigation of the case in its whole extent, and none without a subsequent and independent verification of the citation. But no care nor labor can wholly avoid mistakes; and as the plan of this work is somewhat novel, and it embraces a great variety of topics, and presents questions which it is not only difficult, but at present impossible, to settle on authority, I dare only to hope that the errors of the work will not be found so numerous or so grave as to impair materially its utility. And if other editions are called for, great care will be taken to profit by all the defects discovered, and all the emendations suggested.PREFACE ‘0 THES SECOND EDITION OF THE SECOND VOLUMH OF THE LAW OF OONTRAOTS. Taree are sundry additions to this volume, two of which are of sufficient magnitude to be noticed par ticularly. One of these is a chapter on the Law of Bankruptcy and Insolvency. The other is a chapter on Remedy in Equity, or Specific Performance. In originally preparing this work, the subject of Insol- vency was frequently suggested. In the first volume, under the head of Parties, some consideration is given to insolvents and bankrupts; and in other places, in both volumes, other references to them occur. But the law on this subject was not presented with any fulness, in part from the fact that this had not been done in any pre- ceding work on the Law of Contracts; but much more from believing that the statutes of insolvency in the several States, upon which the law of insolvency in this country must depend, were so diverse, that no general statement of this law could be made which would be of any general utility. But a further examination has con- vinced me that it is not altogether so. The diversities (=)xvi PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION between our statutes are much more in form than in substance. On many points, and those the most’ material, they do, for the most part, harmonize. And in deciding the questions which arise under these statutes, all the courts make much use of the long series of adjudications which in England, and in this country also, although here during a shorter period and in a less number, have settled the principles applicable to a great variety of questions which belong, and always must belong, to every rational law of bankruptcy. In the chapter on this subject which I have added to this edition, I have endeavored to exhibit and to illustrate all these princi- ples, without pausing much upon the particular details which fall within exact statutory provisions, and may be regarded rather as local than general law. In regard to the other chapter, that on Remedy in Equity, or Specific Performance, I had much more diffi- culty. It is an altogether new thing to include a topic of this kind among those which belong to the common- law jurisdiction. And there are other modes and means of equity relief, which might seem to be almost as well entitled to a place in a work on the Law of Contracts as this. But I was led to the conclusion that such a chapter was needed, and almost as much needed as a chapter on Damages (which is practically the only remedy for breach of contract at common law), by considerations which cover almost the whole ground of the relation of Equity to Law in this country. It is very difficult for a lawyer trained by the study ofOF THE SECOND VOLUME. xvii the books, and accustomed to the processes and practice now in use, to avoid the conclusion, or at least the ha- bitual opinion, that equity jurisprudence and law juris- prudence are divided by an actual difference, and by an hiatus which cannot be filled. But an examination of the history of this difference on the one hand, and of its actual condition on the other, will show us that it is wholly artificial, and, if we may ever use the word, acci- dental. We derive our system of law from England, including therein all our arrangements of courts and all their jurisprudence. Practically, this is an excellent system, working out as good results, probably, as were ever reached in any country in the world. But the question still exists, whether the present system has not faults which may be corrected, and wants which may be supplied ; in other words, whether, good as it certainly is, it may not be made better. In England there are four quite distinct and almost independent jurisdictions. Equity, Law, Admiralty, and the Consistory Courts which are governed substantially by the canon law. As we have not and never could have had Ecclesiastical courts ‘in this country, the business transacted in these courts in England is here divided among other courts, That part which relates to the probate of wills and settlement of estates is given to special Courts of Probate, with appeal either to the Su- preme Court of Equity or to that of Law; and so much as relates to marriage and divorce has passed over to the courts of equity or law. Bunt the other three remain VOL. L Bxviii PREFACE T0 THE SECOND EDITIVN distinct in this country for many purposes, although less so than in England. There, as is well known, the system of Admiralty was curtailed and oppressed until more than half of its proper efficiency and utility was lost. Here the difficult question arose some years since, whether Admiralty should be held to mean in America what it meant.in England when most useful, and still means out of England, or only what it meant there after other courts had succeeded in sup- pressing the larger half of it. Fortunately, the wise efforts of a few strong men decided this question aright, although against violent and stubborn opposition. And we have now an Admiralty which has vindicated its own claims to respect and support most successfully. The Supreme Equity Court of England stands there almost entirely separated from, and, under some aspects, antagonistic to the courts of law. In a few of our States, equally distinct courts were established, and in some of them these courts remain to this day, on almost the same footing as in England. In other States, the legislatures have intrusted to the highest common-law courts what- ever equity process could, in their judgment, be safely and usefully exercised by any courts. In many of our States these powers are much circum- scribed, and have been given slowly and reluctantly. It was supposed that Equity differed from Law in being arbitrary, and deciding questions, not literally by “the length of the Chancellor’s foot,” as has been said, but by the view which he might take, on the whole, of theOF THE SECOND VOLUME. xi merits of each case. And when legislators were told that equity is not more arbitrary than law, and is admin- istered according to certain definite and established rules, which it applies with the same caution and accuracy with which common-law courts apply their rules, then legislators do not comprehend why these rules should be called equitable in distinction from legal. And the truth is, there is no reason whatever for it, If justice can be done in any case according to law, law should do it. If it cannot be done without violation of law, it should not be done. It is quite unreasonable to maintain in this country, and in this age, a system which had no other origin than the necessity that arose from the jealousies of independent courts centuries ago, in another land and under a different policy. Common law, long since, adopted the principal rules of equity in rela tion to mortgages and to bonds. Partially it has adopted them as to assignments of choses in action, contribution and a variety of other topics. And there is no reason whatever why it may not adopt and exercise fully and frankly, all the principles and all the powers of equity. The law merchant has been so adopted, and the law of negotiable paper is almost as much opposed to the prin- ciples of common law, as equity law generally. The absence of a jury in equity proceedings causes much of the jealousy and fear with which they have been and still are regarded. This it would be easy to remedy. The same objection was felt against the en- largement of the Admiralty jurisdiction. And in thex PREFACE T0 THE AECOND EDITION United States Statute of 1845 (drafted by Judge Story), for extending the Admiralty jurisdiction to the great lakes and the navigable waters connecting the same, a provision was introduced, that any question of fact should be determined by a jury whenever either party wished it. This Statute has been declared, to some extent, unnecessary, by the Supreme Court of the United States, on the ground that the Admiralty jurisdic. tion, ex vi termini, extended in this country over all our navigable waters, whether fresh or salt. But the clause respecting a jury remains in force. The great change we suggest cannot be made by courts alone. They must have statute authority for it. But, with the clause above intimated for a jury, we know not why every court of common law may not be permit- ted to possess, without mischief or inconvenience, all the powers possessed now by Courts of Equity, and have and use all their useful machinery and all their processes. We mean, however, to include only those powers and principles which belong properly to Courts of Equity. So far as these courts are arbitrary, or neglect or violate the rules which rightfully apply to the cases which come before them, they justify the unwillingness of many per- sons, in and out of the profession, to confer or to enlarge equity powers. And in the exposition we offer of one of the most important branches of equity jurisprudence, we are compelled to refer to instances, in which the cases exhibit a fluctuation and uncertainty incompatible with any just idea of Jaw of any kind. There are, indeed,OF THE SECOND VOLUME. m mstances which can hardly fail to suggest to the reader, that courts of equity must have sometimes forgotten their own maxim, that equity should follow law; and have supposed that it was their function, not to com- plete the law and do what it intended but failed to accomplish, but the very thing it forbade. This ig one of the mischiefs which spring from that very distinction, or rather division between law and equity, which it tends to perpetuate. The true remedy, we think, is to follow out the present tendency to a complete union of law and equity. In the great State of New York, this experiment is tried on a larger scale, and with more completeness than elsewhere. And while all acknowledge great benefits resulting from it, we have never heard that experience has developed any objec- tion, or ill result, sufficient to prevent the hope that this new system will be—always with due precaution and sufficient delay—and all necessary improvement — carried out fully there, and universally adopted else. where.CONTENTS. PART I. ‘THE LAW OF CONTRACTS CONSIDERED IN REFERENCE TO THE OBLIGATIONS ASSUMED BY THE PARTIES. PRELIMINARY CHAPTER. SECTION L rua Of the extent and scope of the law of contracta . . see 8 SECTION IL Defimition of contracts. 2 2 6 ee ee eee ee eee 6 SECTION OL Classification of contacts. 2 6 ee ee OT BOOK I. OF PARTIES TO A CONTRACT. CHAPTER I. CLASSIFICATION OF PARTIES. 9xxiv CONTENTS. CHAPTER Il. OF JOINT PARTIES. SECTION L Whether parties are joint or several... 6 6 ee es SECTION IL. Of some incidents of joiner... 1) 6 ee eee SECTION OL Of contribution... . oe CHAPTER IIt. AGENTS. SECTION L Of agency in general. . . . 1 ee eee we ee SECTION IL In what manner authority may be given toan agent ... . « SECTION DL Subsequent confirmation. . 6. 2 ss + + eee eee SECTION Iv. Rigatrebyanegemt 00 : SECTION V. Duration and extent of authority. ..... «. . SECTION VL The right of action under a contract. . 2 2 2 2 6 oe SECTION VIL Lisbility of an agent. © 6. ee ee eee ee ee SECTION VOL Revocation of authority. . 6.6 1 ee ee eee SECTION IX. How the principal is affected by the misconduct of his agent. . . ll 21 81 89 47 - oT 62 18CONTENTS. xxv SECTION X. Of notice toan agent. ©. 6 6 2 ew ee we eee 74 SECTION XI. SECTION XIL Of an action against an agent to determine the rights of a principal. 79 _ SECTION XL The rights and obligations of principal and agent as to each other . 80 CHAPTER IV. FACTORS AND BROKERS, SECTION L i Who is a factor and whoa broker . . . . Ries ea 4 98 SECTION IL Of factors under a commission. . . . » «© ee ee ew ee OD SECTION OL Of the duties and the rights of factors and brokers. . . - . 98 CHAPTER V. SERVANTS. 101- CHAPTER VI. ATTORNEYS. no CHAPTER VII. ‘TRUSTEES. SECTION L Origin of trusts. © 6 6 6 ee we eee ee ew ee 1Dxxvi CONTENTS. SECTION IL Classification of trusta 6 ee ww ew ww ww 1 SECTION OL Private trustees 6 0 wee ee et ee ee we ww oe IM SECTION Iv. Public trustees. 6 6 1 6 ewe et ee ee ew wo 1D CHAPTER VIII. EXEOUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS. 137 CHAPTER Ix. GUARDIANS. : SECTION L Of the kinds of guardians . . 2. 1 1 se se eo 188 SECTION IL OF the duty and power of a guardian... 1... «184 CHAPTER xX. CORPORATIONS. 188 CHAPTER XL JOINT STOCK COMPANIES. dt CHAPTER XIl. PARTNERSHIPS. . SECTION L What constitutes a partnership . 2...) + ee ee MAT SECTION IL Of the real estate of a parmership . . 6 6 2 2s 2 eo 6 148CONTENTS. SECTION OL Of the good-will . 2... 1 6 ee ee SECTION Iv. Of the deloctus personarum. 6. 1 6 os SECTION V. How « partnership inay be formed pce SECTION VI. OF the right of action between partners . . SECTION VIL Of the sharing of lowes. 2 2 1 1 ee SECTION VIL OF secret and dormant partners... . « SECTION Ix. Of retiring partners . 6 1 1 1 ee . SECTION X. Of nominal partners. 2... 3. SECTION XL ‘When a joint liability is incurred. . . . « SECTION XIL Of the authority of each parmer. . . . . SECTION XUL Power of amajority. .... 1 7 SECTION XIV. Of dissolntion . . 1 2 1. e SECTION XV. Of the rights of creditors in respect to partnership finds . SECTION XVL Limited partnerships... - 168 +171 172 14 - 193 - 194 2214xxviii CONTENTS. CHAPTER XIII. NEW PARTIES BY NOVATION. 217 CHAPTER XIV. NEW PARTIES BY ASSIGNMENT. SECTION L Of assignment of choses in action. 2 1. 1 1 ss 228 SECTION IL Of the manner of assignment... 1 1 ee 1 ee ee 288 SECTION OL Of the equitable defences . 2. 6 2 ee ee ee ee 289 SECTION Iv. Covenants annexed toland. . . 1. 6 ee ee ee ee. B81 CHAPTER XV. GrFTs. SECTION IL. Of gifts intervives 2 2. 1 we oe ee SECTION IL Of gifts causa mortis. © 6 6 ee ee ee ee ee + «286 CHAPTER XVI. INDORSEMENT. SECTION L Of negotiable bille'and notes... 1 ee a SECTION I. | Of the essentials of negotiable bills and notes. . . . . . . . 245CONTENTS. SECTION I. SECTION IV. Of indorsement after maturity. 6 6. ee ee ee SECTION V. Of noteson demand... ee ee ee ee : SECTION VI. Of the transfer of bills and notes... . se. 1 ee SECTION, VIL Ot presentment for acceptance 2. 6. ee ee SECTION VIII. Of presentment for payment : . +... 2 ee . SECTION IX. Of whom, and when, and where, the demand should be made SECTION X. . Of notice of non-payment... - ee ee we ee SECTION XI. SECTION XIL Of damages for non-payment of bills . . 2... 4 SECTION XIL Bibciideg: SECTION XIV. Of property passing with possession. 2... 1 we CHAPTER XVII. INFANTS. SECTION I. Incapacity of infants to contract . 2. | + 289xxx OONTENTS. SECTION IL Of the obligations of parents in respect to infant children. . . . 298 SECTION DL Voidable contracts for necessaries. . . - » » 2 2 + s+ . B12 SECTION IV. Of the torts of an infant. . . 2. . - oe oe 816 SECTION V. Of the effect of an infant’s avoidance of his contract . . . . . 821 SECTION VL Of ratification © 6 6 ee ee we ee ew ww ww 6 BB SECTION VIL. ‘Who may take advantage of an infant’s liability. . . ~ . 829 SECTION VOL Of the marriage settlements of an infant... 1... es 381 SECTION XX. Tnfant’s Uability with repeat to xed property anquird by hin on- tract. 2 6 ee ee ee oo ee 5 882 SECTION X Of illegitimate children. . . . . soe ew wee 6 886 CHAPTER XVIII. OF THE CONTRACTS OF MARRIED WOMEN. SECTION L Of the general effect of marriage. . 2... ee +. 889° SECTION IL. Of the contracts of a married woman made before marriage. . . 841 SECTION UL. Of the contracts of @ married woman made during the marriage . 845 SECTION Iv. Of the disability of a wife to act as a single woman. . . « « 865CONTENTS. xxi SECTION V. Of the separate estate of a married woman. . . . - . ~ » 868 CHAPTER XIx. BANKRUPTS AND INSOLVENTS.* 381 CHAPTER XxX. PERSONS OF INSUFFICIENT MIND TO CONTRACT. SECTION L Hon compotes mentis « . 6 se se ee ee ew ww 888 SECTION IL Spendthrifts. 6. ee ee ee ee ee we 5 888 SECTION IL Beamen . . - 2 2 eo ee eee ee . 889 SECTION Iv. Persons under duress. 2 6 2 6 ee se ee we ww 5 899 CHAPTER XXI. ALIENS. 6 6 + ee oe +. 896 CHAPTER XXII. SLAVES. SECTION L Nature of the relation of master and slave. . . . . + + + 899 SECTION OL ‘The capacity of slaves to contract © 2. 1 1 1 1 we 2 406 SECTION Iv. ‘Tiability of the master for the slave. . . 2 1 2 ee es 5 408xxxii CONTENTS. SECTION V. Of contracts between a slave and one not his master . . . . . 410 SECTION VI. Ofgiswanevo: 6 0 Sa = SECTION VIL SECTION VIL Of the marriage of slaves . aa SECTION IX. Emancipation © 60 ee ee ee ee AS SECTION X. Of slaves for a limited time, or statuliberi. . . . oe AID ee ee we eo Ald CHAPTER XXIII. OF OUTLAWS, PERSONS ATTAINTED, AND PERSONS EXCOMMU- NICATED. 423 BOOK II. CONSIDERATION AND ASSENT. CHAPTER I. CONSIDERATION. SECTION L ‘Tho necessity of a consideration... 2... 1. es. 48? SECTION IL SECTION DLOONTENTS. xxxiii SECTION Iv. Prevention of litigation. © 6. 1 ee eee + 488 SECTION V. Forbearance. 6 6 ee ee ee . - . 440 SECTION VL : Asmgnment of debt... 2 1. 1 ee ee ~ M5 SECTION VIL Work and service. Beebo oo se oe + 445 SECTION VOL | Trust and confidence. . . - - se eee « 447 SECTION Ix. A promise for a promise. a. + M8 : SECTION X. Subscription and contribution». se eee ee es 452 SECTION XI. Of consideration void in part . . . . 2 see + 455 SECTION XIL legality of consideration . 2 1 1 ee eee +. 456 SECTION .X0L Impossible consideration. . . . . . + + i. » . 459 SECTION XIV. Failure of consideration. 2 2 2. 1 se ee + + 462 , _ SECTION Xv. Rights of a stranger to the consideration . . . « +. 466 SECTION XVL The time of the consideration . . . . . «so + » 468 CHAPTER II. ASSENT OF PARTIES. SECTION L What the assent must be . epee « . 45 VOL. L axxxiv CONTENTS. SECTION IL Contracts on time. . . . . fee ese eee ee BOOK III. THE SUBJECT-MATTER OF CONTRACTS. CHAPTER I. PRELIMINARY REMARKS. CHAPTER II. PUROHASE AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY, CHAPTER Ill. HIRING OF REAL PROPERTY. SECTION L Of thelease. © 1 6 6 ee ee ee ee ew SECTION IL Of the general liabilities of the lessor... 1 6 6s SECTION OL Of the general liability and obligation of the tenant . . SECTION Iv. i Of surrender of leases by operation of law . «+ + SECTION V. Of away-going crops.» 2 1. eee teen SECTION VIL OF fixtures... 1. soe Ses se SECTION VI. Of notice to quit . . . coe ce ce 489 492 ~ 499 + 500 + 502 . 509 . 510 - 611 . 512 - 516CONTENTS. SECTION IX. Of remedy for non-payment of rent. . . . - CHAPTER IV. SALE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY. SECTION L Essentials of a sale . see eee SECTION IL Absolute sale of chattels. . . . . Ooo 0 4 SECTION IL Price, and agreement of parties . . 2 1. ee SECTION Iv. The effect ofasale . . sew ew ewe SECTION V. Of possession and delivery... 2. o SECTION VL Conditinalsales . 2 2. ee ee ee . SECTION VIL Bought and sold notes... 1. 1 ee ee SECTION VOL Ofsalestoarrive. © 2 6 1 we ee ee’ SECTION Ix. Mortgages of chattels. 2. ee ee CHAPTER V. WARRANTY. CHAPTER VI. } STOPPAGE IN TRANSITU. . 517 - 519 - 521 ~ 524 L585 « 529 « 587 - OAL « 552 . 569 578xxxvi OONTENTS. SECTION L ‘What the right of stoppage is, and who hasit. . . . . . . . 595 SECTION IL ‘When and how the right may be exercised . . . 2's « « » 60]INDEX TO CASES CITED. ‘Adair v. Winchester ‘Adam, ex v. Robinson 4219 v. Rockingham Ins. Co. il. 855, 452 v. Saundars fi, 416 ii, 728 1, 498 5 ii. 359 i 434 i. 123 . 103 ii, 117 Hi, 141, 213, 216 i, 535 La a 317xxxvi Adams v. Williams . 533 v. Woods 339 v. Woonsocket Co. 528, Express Co. v. Egbert iii. 193 Adamson v. Jarvis i. 37, 81 ; 785; iii. 192 ‘Aday v, Echols 403 ‘Adderley v. Dixon iii, 868, 878 ‘Addington ». Allen 778 Addis v. Knight 515 ‘Addison v. Gandassoqui 1, 95 v. Gray ii, 690, 698 . Kentucky Ins. Co. Adelle v. Beaure ‘Adkins o. Baker v. Watson Aalard v. Booth i, 463 ‘Adm’rs of Donnington v. Adm’rs of Mitchell i373 Admiral, The i. 314 ‘A.D. Patchin, The i391 ‘Adventure, The §, 398 ‘Zina Ins. Co. v. Tyler ii. 441, 450, 458, 461; fil. 278 Afialo v. Fourdrinier 507 ‘African Steamship Co. v. Swanzy ii. $34 v. Biden 410 ». Macklow fi. 708; ii, 877 Agawam Bank v. Strever ii 23 ‘Agnew v. Bank of Gettysburg 282 v. Ins. Co. fi. 447 v. McElroy 4i, 730, 733 v, Platt iii. 440, 442, Hy Agricola, The 4, 1055 ‘Agricaltaral Bank v. Bissell ». Comm, Bank ee ‘ilar v. ii. 357, 359 ‘Ae. Parmele ‘Ab Thaie v. Quan Wan ‘Aid, The ‘Aiken v. Barkley v. Benton v. Sanford Ainslie v. Boynton i, 291, 280; v. Go v. Medlycott Ainsworth v, Partllo ‘Akerman v. Humphery i. 607 ; iii. 487, 488 Akharst v. Jackson fii, 473, 479 Albany Exchange Bank v, Johnson ‘Albatross, The v. Wayne ‘Albert v. Winn ‘Albertson v. Halloway Albin v. Presby fi, 154, 155 Albro v. Aganém Canal i. ‘Alchorne v. Gomme Alcock v. Delay . ‘Alcott v. Avery ‘Alden v, Bi ». Cla v. Pearson Alder o. Keighley fii, 5; 419 INDEX TO CASES CITED. Alder v. Saville ‘Alderson v. Pope Aldis ». Chi ‘Aldrich ». Alexandria Canal Co. 0. Swann ii. 689 ‘Alger v. Scoville v. Thacker Alids, The ‘Aline, The Alivon v. Furaival Alkinson v. Horridge * Allaire v. Hartshorne ». Whitney ‘Works v. Guion Allan ». Gripper “Allegre . Allein v. SI ‘Alllen, Zn a v, Aldrich v. Alllen % Gente Valley Co. r= © Guambers . Charlestown Ins. Co. 433, 437 . Commercial Ins. Co. ‘Maryland Tns. Oo. i. 363, 461, 536, 708 i, 695, 699 i, 167, 171, 187 i. 608 i. 352 ii, 649, 650, 652 i, 328 120 348 242 i 597 ii, 464 4. 562, 564 i. ai, as 22,95 751 473 i, 592 259 219 iii. 198 i, 603 , 408, 4. 213, 214INDEX TO CASES CITED. ii, 759, 764, 765 i, 207 ii. 115,117 ii, 680 iu ii, 839 i 104, 108 ii. 756 i, 593, iii. 209 it, 534 270 i. 309 i. 581 vo. Kit ». Mackay v. McKean v. Merchants Bank ii, 104, 543, ®. Merchants Bank of N.Y. i. 64 v. Mille ii. 99 v. Minor i, 295, 313 v. Mutual Ins. Co. il. 494, 426, 429, 439 ». Pink 1. 590 v. Polerecaky i . Sewell ii, 169, 181, 182 . Bite Adm'r i, 270, 972 Allin v. Shadburne Allison v. Haydon ‘Allmand v. Russell ‘Allnats ». Ashenden Alloway v. Braine ‘Allwood ». Haseldon ‘Alsager, ex parte oS. Katherine's Dock Company ii, 293, 517 Commercial Ins. Co. i 368, 369 Price Alston v. Balle ». Herring ii, 296 v. Mechanics Ins. Co. ii. 403, 430, State Bank ili, 76 case ii. 558, 559 xxxix Althorfe v. Wolfe i. 108 Alvanley ». Kinnaird mu 414, 415 ‘Alves v, Hodgson i, 570; ili. 300 Alvord v. Smith i. 154 Ambler v, Bradley i. 161 ‘Amer v. Longstreth iii, 172, 174 ‘American Bank v. Doolittle i186 v. Jenness i261 American Ins. Co, v. Bryan i. 878 v. Center ii 389 v. Francia ii, 885 v. Griswold ii 868, 371, 872, 416 . Hutton 366 v. Robertshaw, ii. 478 v, Oakley 139 v, Ogden i, 277, 386, 409, 410 Amery v. Ames v. Chew v. Dy v. Gilman v. Millward Amis v. The Louisa 359 500 262 470 695 263 Amberst Academy v. Cowls i. 454 Amethyst, The ii, 315 “Ammiable Nancy i. 86 ; ili, 164, 183 ‘Amicable Society v. Bolland’ ii, 475, 482 ‘Amidown v. Osgood i170 v. Woodman i, 283 Amica v. Stevens ii. 160, 161 Amor o. Fearon ii. 35, 36 i, 582, 538 ‘Ancrum v. Slone ‘Ancher v. Bank of England ‘Andendried v. Botteley 1965 ih 5 ii, 628 i, 533 ii, 26 i, 14, 17, 28, 81 i. 479 i. 540 i 20ax Anderson v. Scott ii. 41 v. Thornton ii, 360, 401, 402, 405 v. Tompkins 4. 178, 179, v. Tarnpike Co. v. Van v. Wallace v. Wheeler Andree v. Fletcher ‘Andrew v. Allon v. Bougl Andrewes v. Cars ‘Andrews v. Belfield v. Bond ii. 259, 519 sex Insurance Com- pany ii, 874, 375, 420 ». Estes 1. 55 v. Franklin i, 249 v. Herriot _ii, 589, 607, 609 v. His Creditors i v, Planters Bank v. Pond ii, 570, 583, 584; i 110, 136. v. Wheaton 465 , Andras v. Foster 47 ‘Angel v. McLellan 311 ‘Angerstein ». Bell ii. 367 — Be i. 505 w i, 360 ® Teunton Peper Manafac- toring Co. iii, 196 vw Redford" ii. 696, 697 ‘Annandale c, Harris . $87, 436 Ann C. Pratt, The ‘Ann D. Richardson, The ‘Annen v. Woodman Anonymous i. 11, 58, 126, 224, 232; ii, 208, 340, 586, 632, 681, 703; ili. $3, 100, 109, 115, 126, 128, 182, 157, 272, 457, 461, 470, 485, 495. 414 iii, 491 Ansell, ex . Robson Anstey v, Marden ‘Anstruther v. Adair ‘Antarctic, The ‘Antonio v. Clissey ‘Antram o. Chace. ‘Antrobus v. Smith Appleby v. Dodd Applegate v. Jacoby ‘Appleton v. Binks v. Chase v. Donaldson v. Fullerton INDEX TO CASES CITED. Apollon, The ‘Aquila, The ‘Araminta, The ‘Arangaren », Scholfield ‘Aranzamendi v. La. Ins. Co, ‘Archard v. Hornor ‘Archer v. Buynes ». Dunn . English v. Hac ». Marsh v. Putaam v. Williams Archibald v. Mere. Ins. Co. ». Thomas Arden v. Pullen v. Tucker ». Watkins Arding v. Lomax. ‘Arey v. Stephenson ‘Argall v. Bryant v ee bell it, i ‘216 Argenbright v. 368, 891, 396 ele oe Worthinglon to a7 ‘Armadillo, he 283 ‘Armet v. inness 4l4 Armfield». Tato 397 411 ‘544 738 " 7 Armitage v. Insole i. 532 Armitt v, Breame i. 665, 699 Armroyd v. Union Insurance Company fi, 293 Arms. Ashle i355 ‘Armstrong v. Baldock i. 580 Burrows ii, 556 . Christian 288 v. Hi 168, v. Lewis i, 156 v. McDonald i, 810 v. Percy iii, 165, 212, 214 v. Robinson i192 o. Toler, i 100,486, i. 759 v. Wheeler Amold v. Arnold ® Brown {, 179, 184, 1095 ii. 818 v. Downi : Helentake & Lyman faynard &. Mayor of Poole fi, 6805 i v. Richmond Iron Works v. Wainwright Arnot v. Biscoe Amott v. Hughes v. Redfern Amsby v. Woodward ‘Arrott ©. BrownINDEX TU VASES CITED. v. White iii, 917, 218 Asheroft v. Morrin ili 14 Ashford v. Hand fii, 188 ‘Ashhorst », Montour Iron Co. iii. 421 ‘Asbley v. Ashley v. Harrison v. Pratt Ashlin v. White Ashmole v. Ws t Aspdin v. Austin ‘Aspinall v. Wake Associated Firemens Ins Co. ». Assum Astin v. Parkin Astley v. Reynolds 1.2965 6415 lil 273 v, Weldon iii. 160, 161 Aston v. >. Heavan ii. 219 Astor v. Miller . Price v. Union Insurance Com- pany i. 408, 596 Atchingon v. Baker ii, 64, 66 ‘Atchison v. Geo ii. 756 ‘Athelstan v. Moon ii. 691 Atherton ». Brown ii, 397 ii. 40 i. 529, 609 Adkins v, Xseylson ‘Fire and Marine Ins. Co. i, 664, 665 v. Carwood i. 847, 348 v. Hill i197 xi iii. 162. Atkyns v. Kinnier i 305 earce Atlantic Ins. Co. v. Conard 284 v. Storrow ii. 378 ». Wright ii, 462 Atlas, The ii. 280, 282 ‘Atlee’y, Backhouse i, 894, 439; ‘Attenboro v. McKenzie ‘Attenborough, in re ‘Attila, The Att'y-Gen. v, Alford v. Ansted i, 250 iii, 395 fi, 281 i. ae ‘72 1. 500 ii, 349 fi. 500, 563 iit, 324 i142 12, 801, 996 Atwater ». Townsend il. 590; ». Woodbridge Atwell v. Mayhew ‘Atwood v. Cobb v. Emery v. Gillett v. Partridge v. Vincont v. Whittlesey Atwood, ef ‘ork i. 589; ii. 535, 661 ®: Mannings i 42, 61 v. Small i. 73, 782 v. Taylor ii, 686; i. 104 .— 361 Attwool v. Attwool i, 740 Aubert v Maze ii, 698, 701, Aubin v. Bradley i, 538 Ault v. Goodric iii, 89 ‘Auriol v. Mills iii, 491, 492 ». Thomas iii, 134 Aurora Borealis The, v. Dobbie ii. 972 ‘Austen v, Wilward Austill v. CrawfordINDEX TO CASES OITED. ili. 448 | Bacon v. Brown 4,580; aoe i, 135 v. Chariton . Sawyer iil 83 vv. Cranson a v. The M., 8., & L. Railway v. Dubarry ii. 692 Co. i, 297, 245, 248, 248 v. Dyer , 278 v. Wilson i, 287, 367; iii. 173 v. Simy ii, 296 Anstralian Royal Mail Steam Nav. e.Souley. 63 Co. v, Marzetti 1. 189 | Bacot v. Parnell 129 Auworth v. Johnion £503 | Badeock, ex 463, Averline ae i us Baddeley ay De 5, 70 ‘Averill v. 484 leley v. Vigurs ‘659 v. Trish ii, 120 Badges Inre 703 v. Loucks LU 448 ‘v. Ocean Ins. Co. 392 Avery v. Baum i, 797 vv. Phinney i. 818, 320 v. Bowden ii, 305 v. Titcomt iii, 189 v. Cheslyn i 512 | Badlam v. Tucker i. 120, 275 wv. Fitch ii, 189 Beate v. Samuel 285 v. Lauve i 147 465 v. Scott 737 Aveson v. Kinnaird Awde v, Dixon Ayer v. Bartlett v. Chase Ayers v. Hewitt ii. 709 v. Jefferson v. Stewart i, 283 ; ii. 649, 664, 666 | Bag! Bese ii. 466 | Bagley v. Peddio 4. 249, 251 v. Smith i, 587 | Baikie v. Chandless ‘Ajlete v. Ashton », Bennett Ayliffe , Archdale oak Aymar v, Ashtor ynemataeiten ynsworth, ex parte Aion e: Bolt Taylor B Baileyville v. Lowell Babb v, Clemson i. 529 | Baillio v. Kell Baboock ». Beman i. 258 | Baily ». Curlin 2. Hawkins fh 6ai| ». Merrell v. Herbert ii 1609 | Bainbridge o, Firmston . Montgomery Ins. Co. ii. . Neilson 444, 446 Pinhora v. Stone i. 185 v. Wade ». Thompson fi, 756 2, Wileox °. Weston fii 439 | Baines v. Holland . Wilson i451 2. Jevons Bach », Owen 4. 882, 538 , Woodfall Bochelder v. Fiske i, 81, 32 | Baird o. Folliver Bachelour v. Gage iii '492 |" v, Mathews Bacharst v. Clinckard Backhouse v. Mohan v, Sneed i, 207 |Bakeman v. Pooler iii, 889, 409, 415 | Baker, ex parte if. 160 ms janey . Boston v. Brown v. Cartwright i. 590; ii. 973 iti, 158, 160, 162 i 195, ile ii, 25, 26 v. The Mayor of New York Ly 839 ii. 472 ii. 7; HHL 15, 16 iii 151 390 iii, 44 i476 iii, 158INDEX TO CASES CITED. v. Stackpoole ii @. Wheaton i, 489, 440, 443, 443, 453, v. White it 73 v. Wimy i, 213 v. We fi, 134 Baker’s Appeal 4,204 Balch o. Sruth i. 297 ex parte W726 Balcom v. Richards ii. 85 Baldey v. Parker i. 495, 531; iii, 41 Baldney v. Ritchie i, 975 Raldwin v. Bank of La. 4. 288; ii. 104 Bank of Nowbary oN. Y. Ins. Co. for Dif. of Usefal ii. 98, 103 ‘ii, 869, 410, 411 i. 110 i. 756 4.475 fi, 622, 645 haga Merchants Ins. Co. ii, 126, 147 1. 68 4. 150, 200 iii, 401 Si, 479, 484 Baltimore, The ii 318 Balt. Citizens Bank v. Howell 1238 Baltimore & Susquehannah R. R. Co. v. Nesbit iil, 552 Bamford v. Burrell iif. 511 ». Harris iL 741 © Iles ii, 16 xiii Bamford v. Shuttleworth Bamgardener v. The Circuit Court wa eH Bampton v, Paulin Banbury, ex purte Banchor v. Cilley £133, Bancroft v, Dumas i459 Hall i275 eae Case ay i 676 v. Cartwright i. 500 Banglay, ez parte iii, 508 Bangor ». Goding ii, 207 v. Warren ‘Hi, 624 Bank v. Treat 12 Bangs v. Mosher Hi, 95, 28 v. Strong Bank o, C 1. McChord v. Myers i 285 vv, Spicer ii, 624 of Augusta v. Earle fi. 568 ‘Australasia or Bank of Ans- tralia 487 Cape Fear v. Seawell i. 283 Catskill v. Messenger i. 28 Chenango v. Osgood 198 1.168 Chillicothe r. Sotge fii, 399 Columbia v, Fitzhagh ii, 538 v. Laurence a81 »v, Patterson's Ad- ministrator i. 110, 1895 Commerce v. Union Bank i. 264 England, ex parte iii, B17 G jopolis v. Trimble ii, 592 Ireland v. Beresford i Lansingburg v. Louisiana v. Tournill Motropolis ». Gutuchlick i 62 v, N. BE. Bank iL 104 ; ili. 264 Middlebury v. Rut. & W. BR. ino Mobile v. King i 62 Monroo v. Sng iG. 191 Montgomery v. Walker i. 267 Nort Amevica » M’Call ii, 612 v. Wheeler ii. 607 ‘Orleans v. Smith i. 106 Pittsburg v. Neal . 68 Rochester. Jones 1.9 i 258 Bt Albaise. F&M. ‘Bank i. 264 v, Scott 130 South Carolina v. Myers i. 979 The State v. Bank of Ca Fear 4,978; iii. 589 ‘Tennessee v. Johnson 256 inney i. 188 v, Cameal i966 L139xliv INDEX TO CASES CITED. Bank of United States v. Davis i. 75, a Baring v. Christie v. Clark Banton v. ‘Hoomes Baptist Church. Brooklyn Fire Tos. ‘ii, 350 m sting ii. 361 ii. 599 . Consins v. Kennedy 2. cat tam v. Barden #. Ke Bardwell v. Lydall ering v. Pony ». Tay Barefoot, The Worlich Barfoot v. Froswell Bamnesley 2, Powell Barger v. Collins Barnet °. Gilson Bargttv, Orient Ins. Co. v. Smith v. Kuykendall Barnett, ez parte Barksdale . Bro € i 523 | Barley v. Walford . Hovey 4.41, 10| Bariow v. Bishop 738INDEX TO CASES CITED. 4, 869, 878 i. 37 4, 587; ii. 776, 780 0, i. 85) Hi, 875, 408, 413 ii, 646 i. 531 fi. 649, 666 fi, 785, 736, 745 1 884; iii 417 i. 279 fi. 615, 640 if, 305 ii, 87, 97 . 7 Bartram v. Caddy 308 om wm in 609 Bi 5, OE ii. 462 Bane Ban iii, 231 Bashford o, Shaw ii, 29 Bashore v. Whistler i574 Baskerville v. Brown i 743 Baskin v. Seechrist i, 607 Bason v. Hr iii. 28 iii. 90 4, 964 ili. 62 i. 591 ii. 650 fi, 740 605 Bath, ex Bathe v. Taylor iii, 306 Batson v. Donovan ii. 203, 242, 244, 252 Battersby v. Gale i. 259 Battin w ili, 220 Bana» Secod i, 219xlvi Battle v. Rochester City Bank Batty v. v. MeCundio Banchor v. Cilley Bandier, ex Bandy e. Union Ins. Co. Bangher v. Nel Bevington © Clarks wvington v, Baxendale v. Eastern C. Ry. Co, v. Waxter v. Baxter v. Bradbary v. Connoll Earlof Leland Lit Baylies v. Fettyplace ii, 805, 675 Bayliffe v. Butterworth 1. 58, 81; fi. 539 Baylis v. Attorney-General ‘ii. 550, 563 v. Dinely 4. 295, 318, 326 v. Usher ii, 201 Baylor v. Smithers Bayly v. Garford v. Grant v. Schofield Baynes v. Baynham ebay Hospital Baynon v. Batley Bay State, The Bazin v. Richardson v. Native, The INDEX TO CASES CITED. Beach v. Olmstead o. Ran v. State Boachey v. Brown Beal v. Alexander v. Nason v. Wy Beale v. SE88Se8 Beaty ». Knoviler iii 654 Beaston v. Farmers Bank of Dela- Beaufort v. Noold 44a ‘Beaumont, e= parte ith 471 os 550, 564 v it 618 v. Meredith i. 203 v. Reeve Lass Beavan v. Delahay i 510 Beaver o, Lewis £196 Beaver Co. v. Armstrong L391 Beck o. Evans i941, 4INDEX TO CASES CITED. Bell v. Bell xvii 4.513 fi, 361, 365, 403, 555 4. 253, 261 v, Broen ii 4, 502, 583 Beck & Jackson, In re v. Chaplain 20 Beckett v. Taylor v. Crawford . 66 Beckford v. Wade 1 v. Cunningham =i. 49, 8 192 Beckham v. Drake i. 8, 64, 55, 63; iil. _v. Francis 145 162,498} —_v. Gipps ii. 696 v. Munson 34) v. Hagerstown Bank — i, 281, 282 Beckman v. Shouse —_—ii. 125, 168, 287,|_v. Horton 742 v, Kellar 13 Beckwith v. Benner v. Leggett 523 v. Brown v, Locke i, 154 1, Cheever v. Marine Ins. Co. ii, 365 Bedam v. Clerkson v. Martin ii 18 Boddingfold o. Aa v. Morrison iii, 66, 68, 71, 81, 84 fs Ex'r v. Wadsworth v. Moss i, 596, 597, 601, 607 Badeto. Powell v. Newman 213 Bedell v. Janney v. Palmer Bedell’s Caso Phyon Quin a ot 407, fi, 28, 29 : Seth ii Beeching v. Westbrook Becker v. Becker Beed v. Blandford Boe - ee & Behenectad; man v. yenectady R. R. Co. Beekman v. Wilson i Beeler v. Youn 1. 295, 296, 313 Beeman », Bu i sat Beer v. Beer i, 22 Beers v. Crowell fii, BL v. Haughton fii, 436, 443 v. Housatonic RR, Co. if. 172 2 i, 216 v. Robinson 4, 488 Beeston v. Collyer 32 Beete r. Bidgood 110 Begbic v. Levi Hi, 758, 765 v. Forbes ii, 493. Behaly v. Hatch fi, 643 Bebren v. Bremer . 697 iii, 499 4. 585, 586 fii. 479 iii. 483, 515 ~ 504 ill. 486 fii, 327 Hi 465, 468, 471 ili, 465, 469 ili. 378 Beldon v. ar i, 554 Belding v. Pitki ii, 748, 767 Beldon v. Campbell 1.78 Belknap v. Nevins fi. 340 v. Wendell Bell, ex parte 37 iti, 508 - 2 Rep Bellairs v. Ebsworth Bellemere v. Bank of U. 8. Bello Corrunnes Bellows & Peck, In re ». Lovell. v. Stone Bellringor v. Blagrave Blot &. Wyna Belshaw v. Belton, ex pe lodges Bolworth v. Hassell Beman v. Tugnot Bement v. Smith Bemie v. Vandever ii, 75 iii. 518 4. 814; iil, 462 S41 Bemis v. Smith Bench v. Merrick v. Sheldon Bend v. Ho} Benden v. Manning Bendernagio God 188, 189 v. Benedict ». Besbeo iii, 34 Caffeo L279 Davis £174 ». Fld i. 558. 1 fii, 387 i. 798 a Mowe es i514 v. Smith 4, 51 Benfield v. Solomons i 196 808 Benham v. Bisho v. United Ins. Co. Benjamin v. Benjamin v. Groot v. Sinclair v. Tillmaniii. 472 i, 781, 732 ili. 54 v. Lockwood i. 182 +z. P.& 0. Steamboat Co. ii. 225, 237 Bennington oy Di nnington v, Dinsmore sl i eg Beresford, ex parte Lex Bergen v. Bennett . Berastrom Berkeley ». Watling 4. 989, 607 Berkley v. Hardy Berkshire Bank v. Jones Woollen Co. v. Proctor ii 15] Bermon v. Woodbridge i, 358 Bernal v, Pym 1 | Biffin v. Yorke iii, 440, 449 i. 87, 81, 601 iii, 200 Beverley’s caso Boverley v. Beverle ye Bake Boverleys v. Holmes Bevin v. Conn. Ins. Christie BE ‘Gheanpeake Ins. Co. iays v. Chesay ins. Co. - v. Union Ins. Co. i, 429 Co. ii. 474, 478, 480 ia Biddlup v. Poole Bidwell v. Bigelow v. Baldwin = . BentonINDEX TO CASES CITED. Billings . Billings Hn ©: olla Co. Ins, Co, Billon v. Hyde Bingham v. All; . Bingham . Maxcy Sessions Binks v. Lord mera Binnington, v. Wallis . Birch, ex ase, 7 $22 v. Depeyster |. 636, 739, 740 v. Earl of Li i529 v. Sharisod i, 381 . Tebbutt if, 631 v. The Earl of Liverpool, ii. 44 ; iii. Burchett v. iii, $66, 371 Bie Adams v. Asteock v. Bird Blosse ii, 72; Boulter 4118; fi 1, 12 Brown i. 50, 33, 597 Caritas iti, 453, 455 Cromwell ii, 162 Gammon _ i. 218, 991 ; iii. 23, 69 Hompetead iii, 497 i. 354 12 Blane i, 978 Mublenbrink iti. 55 t fii, 458, 455 t i, 967 v. Ray 1 208 fi, 281 i, Lancashire, & Cheshire ‘Bailway v. Pilcher i, 834, 336 VoL. L > xlix Birket, ex parte i, 611 ‘>. Willan ii, 248 Birkley v. Presgrave i. 85; ii. 825, 528 Birks v. Trippet Birley v. Gladstone . Bisel v. Hobbs Bishop v. Bishop v. Breckels v. Chambre v. Elliott », Mont ». B v. Shepherd Williamson v, Wraith Bishop of Obester ». Joba Frecland i. 487 Bissel v. Price i, 290, 201 Binellv, Bissell i, 664 v. Briggs ii, 609, 610 v. Edwards ii. 618 v. Erwin fii, 226 », Hopkins i680, 570 v. Morgan i, 290 Bitner ». Brough 230 Biting & Waterman's Appeal Bixby v. Franklin Ins, Cori 265,27 v. Whit Bixler, Ream Bizo v. Dickason v, Fletcher Blachford v. Christian v. Peltior Black v. Baxendale », Bush v. Cord v, Marine Tas. Co. v. The Louisiana, 344 v. Smith ii, 641 v. Webb 524 Blackburn v. a78 », i. 200 v. Scholes it 614 ». Smith fi. 680 Blackburne v. Thompson ii, 960- Blackett v. Royal Exch. Assur. Co. ‘ii 861, 508, 547 v, Weir 4. 38 Blackharst v. Clinkard i. 205 ». Cockell i, 897401 io ii, 629 ili, 460 L419 Blackstock 9. N'Y. & 8, B.B. Co. ii, 185 Blackstone Bank v. Hill ii, 27, 634 Blackwell v. Justices of Lawrence Co. iii. 226 Blad v. Bamfield ii, 789 Blades v. Free i, 853, 355, 362 Blagden ex ‘ii, 483, 515 te haha i 1, 19, 14, 391 Blagge v. N.Y. In. Co. i 3001 INDEX TO CASES CITED. v. Cole ». Crowninshield ii. w 1196 ». Fer i 105, 108 v. Howe v, Midland Railway Co. i.290; v4 ‘167 i.7 i. 367 ii. 790, 791 bt Blakemore 9: #,.B. BB, Co. 108,238 Giamorganshire Can. Ne ‘il, 507 Blakeney v. Dufen i. 196 Blakes, ex fon iii. 452, 455 v. Midland R. Co. ii, 444 v. Williams i. 587; il, 454, 455, Blakesley v. Smallwood Blakey’s Appeal iii, 425, 497 Blanclard 2 Brooks i 790 v. Bucknam ii 340 v. Coolidge 4,161 ve. Dixon 4. 408 2. Biy i 189, 189, 185, 90 280 2 Hille . Lilley i v. No} o: Remell i 668, 887; 438, 499, 441, 448, 446, 455 1», Stevens i. 959 v. Stone ii, 728 v, Waite ii, 350, 888, 419, 420 v. Wood . Bland v. Collett Blandy Blane v. Proudfit Blaney v, Hendrick Blantin v. Whitaker Blanton v. Knox Blattmaker v. Sant Blasdale v. Babcock Blatchford o. Kirky Bloaden v. Han: Bleeker v. Hyde Blenkintop e. Cis Blennorhasect v. 1 Bis ee i 884; iil 34 i461 ii 798 £919, 997 il. 619, 657 ii, 724 ii. 708 Blight o. v. Bruen Bloom v. Richards @ Bloomer v. Sherman’ Blore v. Sutton Bloss v. Bloomer v. Kittridge Blot v. Boicean Blount v. Hawkins Blow o. Russell i. 70, 98, Blowers r. Sturtevant —_. 953, 954, 356 Bloxam v. Hubbard iti, 469 v. Sanders 4, 626, 534, 598 Bloxham, ex parte fii, 495, 512 Bloxsome v. Williams fi, 758, 164, 765 Black v. Gomperts ‘ii. 7 Bluett v. Osborne i. 588 Blundell v. Brettargh ii. 708 ; ii. 978, 405 v. Gladstone i, 558, 562 v. Winsor * i192 Blunt v. Bo, 1.218, 991 v. Melcher Blydenburg v. Welsh 4. 6795 i. 776, 781 ; 207 Blythe v. Bennett i », Waterworks Boalt v. Brown Boardman v. Gore v. Keeler ». Mostyn v. 2s Bobo v, Hansell Boddam v. Riley Bodenham v. Bennett o. Purehas Bodger ». Arch Bodine v. Glading Bodle v. Chenango Co. Ins. Co. Bodley v. Goodrich v. Reynolds Bodwell v. Swan Boohm v. SterlingINDEX TO CASES CITED. Bohannon o- Paco Bohtlingk Boineat v. 1 Bolan v. Wi ©. Molineux Boldero v. Enst India Compa- Baller, Tluffhagle Bolland c. Nash Bolwn v. Cokler v, Hillersden v. lao ii, Sto, Hi. 547, ‘Tho Bishop of Carlisle Sowerhy Maxwell ii, 199, 2! cider ¢. Dobson Bonaparte, Tho Bonar e. Muclonstd F. Mitchell Bonhonus, ex juerte ‘Tie Super te. Sherwood Bonner ¢. 13 ce. Welborn Bonney r, Seeley Boney 0. Ameo Boody e, MeKenny Bout c. Mi ii Borden v. Fitch il, 609 ingham Tnsuranco ‘Company fi, 455 Houston ii.5 Sumner ¢ ii, 455, Boreal v. ‘The Golden Rose 261 Boroughies’s Caso ii 515 Borraduile v. Brunton fii, 181, 1N2 Borradaile v. Hunter 436 ns v. Bevan i, 582, 585, 592 Corey. i. 370 ck v. Carruthers i. £93 Bosanquet 0. Dushwood Hii, 127, 128 Wry 4.165; ii, 631 Bosler v. Kul Boney ¢. Chesapeake Tnsaranco i, 284, 319, 322, Benson v. Bruzier Bank r. Chambertin & Worcester KR. R. Co. Water Power Co. e. Gray ii. 70 & India R, F, r. Hoit & Lowell RR. Co. &. Sale & Lowel’, B. & Me, & Lo ol E.R. R. Cox & Mats eR. R. Co, & Munine R. R. Co. lett 542 355, 411 Bart 430 & Sandwich Glass Co. 0, Bos. ton & Worcester RR. Corp. Dana v. Sparhawk Bostwick ¢. Dodge r. Leach Bottefont e Sandford Botte. MeCov Bottomley 2. Bor’ ». Brooke t Forhes Bottomly rv. Nuttall Bouchell e. Clary Boucher v. Lawson fi, 171, 334, 570, 6u8, v. Vanbaskirk Bouchaud r. Dias Bouck ¢. Wilber Boulthes 0, Sutbbe ‘Boulter v. PeplowBousrmaker, ex pare Bouton v. Am. fns.Co, i, “a 487 Boutilier v. Thick 703 Bovil v. Hammond 163 Bowcher v. Noidstrom 348 Bowdell v. Parsons i. 582; ii. 666, 667, 673 Bowden v. Moore ii, 152 ». Vanghan 403 Bowdre v. Hampton i. 81 Bowen v. Ashley fii, 299, 332 v, Burke i, 526, Bowers, ex urd v. Jewell i717, 721 bo Johnson if. 779, 780 re, pare ‘v. Howe i, 270, 278 v. Tibbets il. 46, 52 Bowie v. Napier 93, Stonestreet 403 Bowker v. Hoyt Hi. 594, 652, 658 Bowles v. Round i497 : v. Woodson iil. (352, 388 Bowling v. Harrison 4.973) 280 ‘Bowman v. Bailey i163 Hening Hilton (0 col all . Woods Bowne v. Joy Bowness, ez Bowser ©, Ble ywyer v. Bright Box of Bullion Boyce v. Anderson . Donglas v. Edwards v, Ewart INDEX TO OASES CITED. Boyd v. Anderson 4 469 v. Bopst i 878 v. Brown ‘i, 175, 183 ». Browne ii. 775, 776 v. Cleaveland 277 v. Cowan 220 v. Croydon £137 v. Dubois 375 v. The Falcon 271 v. Groves ii. 797 v. Hitchcock if 619 v. Mangles fii, 483, 514 v. Plamb i 186 ». Siffkin 1. 554, 655 v, Vanderkemp Boyéell v. Drummond 41, 185, 200 iii, 438, 440, 441 Boynton v. Clinton Ins. Co. fi. 355, Dyer _ i. 128, 123; v. Hubbard . 0. Page v. Veazio Boys v, Ancell Boyson v. Coles Bozon v. Farlow Bracket v. McNair Brackett o. Blake ». Bullard v. Evans v. Hoyt v. The Hercules v. Mountfort v. Norton Bradburne v. Botfield v. Bradburne Bradbury v. Wright Bradfield v. Tupy Bradford v. Bul . Tappan Bradburst v. Col. Ins. Co. 1.925,906 389 Bradish v. Henderson Bradlee v. Boston Glass Co. Bradley v. Bolles v. Bradley v. CaryINDEX TO OASES CITED. 237 579 382 365 v ». Toder i. v. Wash. A. & G. Steam Packet Co. ii, 549 v. Waterhouse fi, 242 v. White i. 161 Bradlio v. Maryland Ins. Co. ii. 886, 394 fi. 690 Bradsey v. Clyston ‘Bradshaw v. Bennett v. Heath Bradstreet v. Baldwin v. Clark v. Heron v. Neptune Ins. Co. i. 278, 588 v. Supervisors of Oneida Bett». Coon, v. Tow Brady v. Giles v. Haines ». Little Miami R. R. Co. v. Mayor Bragdon FA pleton Ins. Co, jon v. Appleton Ins. Co. Bragg o. Anderson anty v. Cole v. Fessenden v. New England Ins. Co, Brainard v. Buck Braithwaite v. Coleman v. Scofield . Skinner i127 Bramah v. Roberts 4. 145, 257 Bramhall v. Beckett i, 259 Branch v. Burnley ii, 614 Ewington ii. 52 i i. 382 £243 Brandao v. Barnett Brandling v. Barrington Brandon v. Brandon v. Cushing v. Hibbert v. Habbard v. Nesbitt v. Newis v. Old v. Pate v. Planters Bank v. Robinson Brandram v. Wharton Brandt o. Bowlby i. 290; Branston, The Brashear v. Weat Brashier v. Grate 1. 3341 Brason v. Dean Brass v. Maitland Brather v. McEvoy Nelson v Keocuall v. Mayne ®. Wheeler Braynard v. Marshall i. 587 ; iii Braythwayth v. Hitchcock Brazier v. Bryant Brazill v. Isham Broaley v. Andrew Breary 8 ». Kemp Breatved o, Hamers Loan & ‘Trus 554 . Ormsby i. 295, 329 Breckinridge v. Shrieve i. 181 Brecknock Co. v. Pritchard i, 504 ; fi. 186, : 67a Bredin v. Dubs Bree ». Sayler Breed v. Eaton v. Hillhonse v. Hurd v. Judd v. The Venus ii, 2 Brehm v. Great Western Ry. Co. Breinig v. Meitzler Bremner v. Williams Brenchley, ex pate reneman, ex parte Brennan v. Currint Brenner v. Herr Brent v. Cook v, Green Brenton v. Davis Brereton v. Hull Brett o, Brett v. Cumberland Brettel v. Williams Bretton v. Prat Breverton’s Caso Brewer v. B. & W. R. B. Co. e Dew v. Dyer ». Hardy v. Linngeus v, Palmer v. Balisbury v. Sparrow Brewerton v. Harris Brewster v, Bakerliv Brewster v. Kitchin v. McCall’s Devisees v, Silence v. Wakefield Breyfogle v. Beckley Brice o- Stokes Bricheno v, Thor Brichta v. N. Y. Lafayette Ins. Com- pany Brickhouse v. Hunter idge v. Hubbard i. 458; fi. 997, 674 v. The Grand Junetion R. cn ii, 233 Bridge v. Wain iii, 182, 212 Bridger v. Rico ‘Bridges Havkesworh Bridgem: Bridgeport Bank v. Dyer fi, 888, 544, 545 Bridgewater Academy v. Gilbert i. Brien v. Williamson Brigg v. Washbarno ‘Briggs e. A Light Boat v. Earl of Oxford v. Strange v. Vanderbilt Brigham v. Henderson v. Peters Bright ». Boyd », Carpenter v. Comper ». McKnight v. Paige v. Rowland v. Sneff Brigstocke v. Smith Brind v. Dale Bringloo v. Morrice ii, 195, 187, 176 ii, 109 Brinker v. Brinker iii, $88, 406 Brinley v. Mann i140 ” National Ins. Co. . Spriny v. Whiting Brisban v. Boyd Brisbane v. Sto Bristow v, Eastman v. Whitmore Bristowe v. Fairclough v. Needham British Empire, The i Linen Go. v, Drummond i, 588, ‘590 Brittan v, Barnaby i, 293 INDEX TO CASES CITED. Britten v. Britton v, Brix v. Braham Brizsee v. Mayhoo i381 fii, 172, 201, 203, 204 v. Thomas Broadwater v, Blot Broadwell e. Getman Brock v. ‘Thompyon Brockbank v. Anderton Brockelbank ». Brockway o. Burnap », Clark, Broddie r. Johnson Brodie v. Howard, v. St. Paul Brooder Trow, The Broennenburgh v. Haycock Brogilen r. Walker Bromage v. Lloyd v. Proxser Bromley v. Helland v. Jefferies Bronson v, Wiman Brook v. Brook v. Rounthwaito v. Smith Brooke ». Bridges v, Enderby v. Evans v. Gally v. Hewett i Ts. St. Tas, Co, 7 169 iii, 116, 117, iii, 66 ii, 268, 275 esses . Washington Brooker v. Scott Brookes, ex parte Brooklyn Bank v- De Granw Brooks v. Ball v. Hubbard Marba Mitchel . Mintura v. Moody », Oriental Ins. Co. v. Powers v. Stewart Stuart Wheelock, White Bronson v. Cahill v, Gleason v. Kinzio v. Newberry v. Stround’ ». Winan Broom v. Batchelor v. Broom v. RobinsonINDEX TO CASES CITED. Ww Broome, ex paris 1. 208 | Brown v. Howard Broomley v, Goodere iti, 511 v. Hummell, Brothers v. Brothers wit 2. Hina sce, The rough v. 364 lence, ». Whitmore fi, 361, 536 Jeaseel Broaghton v. Broughton 4. 86 Johnson v. Conway: i, 502 v. Kewley Brousseau v. The Hudson i 296 v. Kimball fii, 421, 426 ii, 21 i, 524 4, 569 i, 647 iii, 71 e Brown 935, 937, 344, 869; fi, 695, v. Buffalo & 8. LAB.R. Co. fi. 230 vB 4. 475, 508, 505 v. Curtiss 4, 248; 4.254, 255, 257 iii, 469, 483 i, 905 i 141 inger 1. 507; il, 689, 645 o Bee Edes Fagington o Elkingwoa v. Furguson v. Galloway v. Gammon Gorland Gibbins Gilman Gilmore ». Girard #. Hankerson v. Harrison v. Hartford Ins. Co. v v. Heathcote Co, ii, 253 iii, 66 i. 587 ison 4, 288, 294, 287 ii, 220 i297 i. 28 v. Maxwell i. $16; ii. 43, 230, 231 v. McCune 4.317; ti, 799 McCormack ~ ii, 791 McGran i, 70, 94, 99 v. Mott 4, 957 5 iil, 495 i. 135 ii. 638 , 376 i. 108 - 493 fi, 948, 413 4, 854, 356 ii, 352 ii, 463 4, 295, 305 ii 454 ii. 622 i, 690, 700 i. Union Ins. Co. United States Vawser i, 379, 399 ‘1, 398mM Browne v. Leo 4. 32, 38 v. Meverell 691 v. Robinson 43 v. Stackpole iii, 554 Brownell v. Flagler ii, 280, 231 : ®. Hawkins i. 108, vd 281 rowning v. Andrews 270 v. Beeston, v. Hart = Magill & esse v. Wright Broxham v. Wagstaffo ii. 34, 41, 508 ‘Bruce v. Bruce i. 262; ii. 571, 579, 686 ». Hunter o Lyte, » v. Pearson. v. Pettengill v. Schayl v. Wait Bruce's Adm’rs v. Smith Bruen v. Marquand Brumby v. Smith Brammel v. Stockton Brandige v. Poor Brandred v. Muzzy Brandrett, ex parte Brandridge v, Whitecomb Brush v. Keolor v. Scribner Bratt v. Picard Bratton v. Burton Bryan v. Bradley v. Horseman v. Jackson v. Lewis v. Robert v. Weatherhead ‘Bryant, ex, iii, 516 on Christo fil, 524 . Commonwealth Ins. Co. ii. 298, 884, 545. 122 242 ii 55 1.444, 453 iii, 292) 231 i see i, 530 v. Ocean Ins. Co. 403 » Boughieepsi Ins. Co, i. 434 v. Proctor 681 v, Young iii, 449 Bryce v. Brooks 4.98 Bryden v. Taylor i. 286 i. 176 ill, 468 4, 235 sili, 368, 418 i, 149, 152 Bryer v. Weston Brymer v. Atking Bryson v. Browning Whitehead fi. 7 INDEX TO OASES CITED. Buchanan 9. Cu v. Marshall ®. Ocean Ins. Co. v. Racker Buck v. Albee &: Ghetapeako Tas. Co, v. Chesay ins. v. Fisher Backbeo v. U. S. Ins. Co. Backer v. Klerk Buckingham v. Burgess aim. Mebean ». Smith Buckland v. Buverfeld v. Com Hal v Buckle v. Mitchell Buckley, ex or Barber Buckley Cater Furniss Guildbaok Bucklin v. Thompson v. Ward Buckman ». Levi Buckmaster v. Hi 4 Sag Buckmyr v. Darnel Buckuam o, Baraum Goddard Buckner v. Finle v. Bm Budd v. Busti o, Fairmaner Buel v. Gordon Bufe v. Turner ii. 435, 436, 177 Baffalo Steam Engine Works v. 4, 182, 201 i. 149, 181 i, 208 4, 601, 605, 609 ssssss Sun Ins. Co. ii, 855, 452 Baffam v. Bullington v. Cartis 4, 290; v. Quantin Batfum v. Fayette Ins. Co. Green °. Hh 428, 436 Bafford v. Caldwell i 775, 786 v. McNeely 197 Bulger v. Roche ii, 591 Bulkley v. Barber ii, 266 v. Dayton ioe v. Derby Fishing Co.INDEX TO CASES CITED. Bullard v. Young ii. 198 Balen v. Denning 4, 172, 508 Baller v. Harrison 1.79 Bullet v. Bank of Penn. i. 292 Ballitt v, ii, 708 "Babee v. Winthrop i. 987; iii. Bunney v. Paynts i. 498, 601 ; ii. 247, 257 Burbank v. Beach s v. Rockingham Ins. Co. B v. Manners Bareh v. Breckinridge Barchard v. Tapscott Barchell v. Marsh Barehfield v. Moore Barckle v. Eckart Burd v. Smith Burden v. Ferrers v. M’Elhenny Burdett v, Willett Withers Burdick v. Green Post Burgan v. Lyell Bargess, ez thins i. 207 Clements fi, 147, 148, 149 Gray i. 106 Gun ii, 287 v. Tucker fi, 737 v, Vreeland i, 280 v, Wheate iii, 278, 357, 358 Barghart v. Angerstein 1. 296, 297, 314 °. Garner i 113, 115, ». Hall 96 Bi . Showler ii, 723 Barham v. Webster i, 255 Burk v. Baxter i513 v. McClain iii, 455, 481 Burke v. Crager fi, 26 v. Halo; iii, 11, 13 v. McKay 86 v. Negro Joe v. Winkle Barks v. Shain Barleigh v. Stott Burley v. Russell ‘317 ‘Burlingamo v. Burlingame i. $10; iii, 281 Wii Barlinghame e. Robbins iii, 277 Barmester v. Barrow i, 978, 281 Barham v. Gentry it, 109 Burn v. Boulton iii, 76 v. Miller . 524 v. Morris 4, 52 Burnaby’s Case ii. 735 Burnby v. Bollett i588 Burnell v. Minot 1.35 Burness v. Pennell. 4.48, 145, 171 Burnet v. Bisco i439 Burnett v. Scribner iL 798 Burnham ». Allen ti 493 v. Tucker 1, 255, 256 v. Wood i955 Burns v. Fletcher i. 588 ‘Thornburgh ii. 735 Burnside o. Merrick 1. 151, 152; fii. 469, 473 Baron v. Denman £58, 514 Burr v. Foster i. 403 v. Sim 485 Barritt v. Saratoga Co. Ins. Co. ii. 402, 422, 430 Burridge e. Fortescue 157 v. Row 482 Burrall v. Acker i. 208 v. Taco i v. Rico Burrell», Jones v. North Burrongh v. Moss Burroughes v. Clarke Burroughs v. Bart v. Sternbargh Burton, ex ‘v. Blin ». Chinn v. Great Northern Ry. Co. o. Grifiths v. Hughes > it v. Lockhert iii, 475, 496 v. Philadelphia, &¢, Railroad i138 v. Schermerhorn i465, ». Stewart ii. 780 >, Wilkinson i 142 Burton’s Case iii, 108, 116, 140 Burwell v. Mandeville’s Exit 1. 198, 201 Bury v. Philpot i, 837 Busard v. Levering 4. 976, 280, 283 Bresby o. Chonanls i ana sh, ex 270 Barnard 388 v. Canfield . 206 Davies i. 96Iii Bush o. Lathrop 297, 229 Livingston iii, 116, 118 Marshall ii. 791 Miller ii, 126 Pettibone i. 384 Shipman fii, 529 ». Steinman i, 108 v. Stevens 28 Bushee 0. Allen a1 ‘Bushell v. Beavan 22 v. Wheeler Busk v. Davis Buskirk oe u800 v. Bass v. Gilbert Bussfield v. Bussfiold Bastard’s Case Butcher v. Dresser v. Easto . Forman v, London and Southwestern Ry. Co. fi, 175, 190 v. Stewart ii, 568 ; ili. 23 Batcher’s Bank v. Brown Butler, ex parte v. Arrow, The v. Basi Breck v. Buckingham Carver Chariton County Court Craig i. v. Heane e. Hicks v, Palmer v. Penneylvania v. Powis >. Broa e. Stockit . a > o. Wildman ». Winters Butman v. Monmouth Ins. Co. Butnam ev. Abbot Butt v. Great Western R. R. Co. Butterficld v. Forrester v. Hartshorn fil, 855, 395 ii. 523 4185 i 575 457 . McKinley Button v. Downham Buttrick v. Holden Butts v. Cuthbertson v. Dean INDEX TO CASES CITED. » Lister _ iil. 366, 365 Bazzell v. Laconia Man. Co. Byme v. Dough Bynom ». Bostick Byram v. Hunter Byrd v. Boyd v. Fox v. Odem Byme v. Crowninshield v. Fitshagh Byres o National Ins Go ». National Ins. Co. Byrom v. Thompson ‘Bywater v. Richardson c Cabarga v. Cabell v. vaplan Cabellaro v. SI Cable v. ate * 2 Cabot 9. Haskins v. Winsor ‘Cadman v. Horner v. Lubbock Cadmus, The ». Matthews Cadogan v. Kennett Cadwallader v. Howell Cady v. Shepherd Cage v. Acton cable eco ‘Bigelow Cailiff o. Danvers Cain v. Spann Caine v. Horsefall Caines v. Smith Cairnes v. Bleeker Calbreath v. Gracy Caleraft v. Harborough Culdecott v. Smith Calder v. Bull , Rutherford Caldwell v. Bartlett . Cassidy v. Carrington’s Heirs ®. Dawson Drake