he is not entitled to notice, unless he stipulates for it." And Parke, B., says, "The general rule is, that a party is not entitled to notice unless he has stipulated for it; but there are certain cases where, from the very nature of the transaction, the law requires notice to be given, though not expressly stipulated for." The learned baron there observes that there are two classes of cases on this subject, "one where a party contracts to do something, but the act on which the rigat to demand payment is to arise is perfectly indefinite, as where a man promised to pay for certain weys of barley as much as he sold them to any other man; there the plaintiff is bound to aver notice, because the person to whom the weys are to be sold is perfectly indefinite, and altogether at the option of the plaintiff, who may sell them to whom he pleases, and, în such cases, the right of the defendant to a notice before he can be called on to pay is implied by law from the construction of the contract." And further on the learned Judge adds: "On the other hand, no notice is requisite where a specific act is to be done by a third party, or even by the obligee himself, as for example, where the defendant covenants to pay money on the marriage of the obligee with B., or perhaps on the marriage of B. alone (for there are cases to that effect), or to pay such a sum to a certain person, or at such a rate as A. shall pay to B. In these cases there is a particular individual specified, and no option is to be exercised, and the party who, without stipulating for notice, has entered into the obligation to do these acts, is bound to do them." And Rolfe, B., goes further: "I own that when the case was first opened my impression was in favor of the plaintiff, and for this reason, that when a party enters into a contract he is bound to perform it, whether reasonable or not. Where the law casts an obligation upon him, it says that it shall be reasonable; but that is not so where a party contracts to do a particular act, for there it is his own fault for entering into such a contract." I apprehend that that is the rule of law, and I think that this is not a case in which the law would imply such a condition, and import it into the covenant as has been contended for on the defendant's behalf. It seems to me idle to assume that the lessor would be unable to inform himself of the state of the repairs. In my opinion, therefore, this is a bad plea, and judgment should be for the plaintiff. Judgment for the defendant.-23 L. T. R. 592. CORRESPONDENCE. THE TIME FOR PERFORMING MARRIAGE CONTRACTS. In 3 ALBANY LAW JOURNAL, 114, a writer expresses the opinion that the case of Burtis v. Thompson, 42 N. Y. 246, "has been somewhat rudely shaken by a recent decision of the English court of exchequer, in the case of Frost v. Knight," since published in 3 ALBANY LAW JOURNAL, 133. Upon a careful review of the two cases, I am unable to discover the incongruity alluded to. The facts in the two cases are not exactly parallel. In Burtis v. Thompson, the promise was to marry the plaintiff " in the fall." But in Frost v, Knight, it was to marry her "when his father died." The supposed similarity of the two cases is chargeable to an omission to notice the contrast between the period within which the act is to be done, and the time after which it is to be done; and also the difference between an offer and a refusal to perform. The time when an act is to be done is usually indicated by naming a day, sometimes by naming a week or a month, and sometimes, as in Burtis v. Thompson, a season of the year, as "in the fall." This time when always includes a certain period of time within which the act is to be done. Thus: when the day is named, the party has the whole of the day to perform, to refuse or to neglect to perform. He may offer to perform or refuse at any time of the day, and his offer or refusal are good, and binding on both parties for certain purposes; and, when the time is longer than one day, as a month or "in the fall," the same rule is applicable. But there is a manifest difference between a neglect and a refusal to perform. No one can be defaulted for neglect to perform until the last minute of the last hour of the specified period, be it a day, month or season, while a refusal to perform at any day or hour within the period of time specified is a breach of the contract, and an action lies immediately. And this is probably what Justice Ingalls refers to in his opinion, when he says: "The season of the year had arrived when • the defendant had agreed to per form his contract," and he had absolutely refused. But the case of Frost v. Knight is different: there no period within which the act was to be performed was indicated, only the happening of an event which was the commencement of that period; that is, it was to be after the death of his father: the end of that period could have been fixed only by a demand or refusal. And the English court well held that a refusal before the commencement of that period was as nugatory as would have been an offer or demand of performance. I see, therefore, no occasion for saying that either of these decisions is wrong. On the contrary, it seems to me that they are both correctly decided, and may stand as meritorious precedents upon the facts stated. The position that no action can be commenced until the next day after the end of the period within which the act is to be done, is applicable to neglects to perform; not to refusals. A refusal within the period, be it day, month or season, puts an end to the contract, and an action may be commenced immediately. But a refusal before the commencement of the period operates nearly as a waiver of all rights on the part of the refuser, if the other party takes advantage of it and marries another person, or hires another servant, or changes his business so as not to need the services; and toward the opposite party it operates by way of notice, putting him on his guard, and authorizing him to make other arrangements to lessen the damages. And this applies to the justly repudiated case of Hochster v. De La Tour. There, the only effect of the defendant's refusal was to authorize the plaintiff to seek other employment in the mean time, charging over to the defendant whatever loss or damage he might sustain by the change; and this loss or damage could not, in the nature of things, be completed until the period for entering into the employment arrived. It does not appear what damages the plaintiff was allowed to recover in that case; and it is difficult to see what he could have shown in an action commenced immediately upon notice of the refusal, But, as was well said by Kelly, C. B., in Frost v. Knight, "the promise to do an act on the first of June is not, and cannot be, broken by any thing done or not done on the twenty-first of May." This is sound doctrine and well authenticated. So, likewise, is the substance of the decision in Burtis v. Thompson, viz.: "That the absolute refusal of the defendant (within the period within which the act was to have been done) to marry the plaintiff gave her the right to sue at once." It was just as much a breach of the contract as if, the day being named, he had given the same absolute refusal in the forenoon of that day. These two decisions are, therefore, not inconsistent with each other, but stand well together, while that of Hachster v. De La Tour is impracticable, leads to a wilderness of confusion, and should be abandoned. C. D. LAWTON. The Illinois legislative committee has reported in favor of increasing the salary of the judges of the supreme court of the state to $6,000. Some economical members suggest $5,000, but the Springfield Journal objects, saying that on this "economy" there would be saved just a three cent postage stamp each year to every ten persons in the state. SPECIAL TERMS AND CIRCUITS. 2d Monday, circuit and oyer and terminer, Schuyler, Boardman. 2d Monday, circuit and oyer and terminer, Genesee, Talcott. 2d Tuesday, circuit and oyer and terminer, Caldwell, Potter. 2d Tuesday, special term, Tioga, Parker. 3d Monday, circuit and oyer and terminer, Westchester, Gilbert. 3d Monday, circuit and oyer and terminer, Schenectady, Bockes. 3d Tuesday, special term, Jefferson, Mullin. 4th Monday, special term, White Plains, Gilbert. 4th Monday, circuit and oyer and terminer, Yates, Johnson. 4th Monday, circuit and oyer and terminer, Herkimer. 4th Monday, special term, Erie, Talcott. Last Monday, circuit and oyer and terminer, Tompkins, Murray. Last Monday, special term, Monroe, Dwight. LEGAL NEWS. The forty-first congress made an appropriation of two millions of dollars to defray the expenses of United States courts. An English court has decided that the Bible and the Union Jack may properly be included among a traveler's personal baggage, for which the railways are responsible. Judge Shepley, of the United States circuit court in Boston, has adjudged the Boston, Hartford and Erie Railroad bankrupt, on the petition of Seth Adams. Mr. John Robert Davison, Q. C., the newly appointed judge advocate-general, has been recently sworn a member of her majesty's privy council. The Philadelphia society for alleviating the miseries of public prisons is endeavoring to raise a fund of $25,000, intending to use the income thereof in assisting discharged convicts to earn their own support. A bill has been introduced into the New Dominion house of commons for the purpose of authorizing the extradition from Canada of persons charged with having committed crimes in the United States. A bill is before the legislature of this state making the Jurisdiction of the common pleas court of New York city co-extensive with that of the supreme court, and repealing the law allowing the removal of causes from that court to the supreme court. The attorney-general of Pennsylvania has given an opinion, to the effect that the legislature of that state has power to act with reference to the recent action of the coal transportation companies, and that if two or more combine to raise the tolls their officers can be indicted for conspiracy. An Erie (Penn.) citizen wishing some Brooklyn lawyer to take testimony in a certain case, and not knowing any lawyer there, sent a telegram requesting the telegraph manager to "Ask reliable young lawyer if he can take testimony March 1;" and the answer came back: "Reliable young lawyer not known here." The queen of England has directed letters patent to be passed under the great seal, granting the dignity of a knight of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland unto Charles Robert Turner, Esq., late senior master of her majesty's court of queen's bench at Westminster. The supreme court of appeals of Virginia has decided that a person incarcerated for a tax debt to the state cannot be released by any process until the debt is paid. The lower court had decided that the act for the imprisonment of debtors for revenue tax was unconstitutional. The supreme court reversed this decision, and remanded Andrew J. Bryn, who owes the state $3,000 tax debt, to prison till the money is paid. GIVING THE PRECISE WORDS. -A witness was examined before a judge, in a case, who required him to repeat the precise words spoken. The witness hesitated till he riveted the attention of the entire court upon him, then, fixing his eyes earnestly on the judge, began: "May it please your honor, you lie and steal, and get your living by stealing." The face of the judge reddened, and he immediately said: "Turn to the jury, sir." In the case of Hoskins v. Dawson, tried in the queen's bench, Lincoln's inn sued one of its members for fees due under its rules. It seemed that the defendant owed ten years' arrears, amounting to about £30. The defendant, who argued his own case, said that he had ten years ago given up all idea of practicing law, and had left England, returning only quite lately. He contended that he had ceased to be a member, and also that the rules were unreasonable. The case for the society was, that a member could not cease to be such except on a petition duly presented, and payment of all fees. The lord chief justice directed the jury that the defendant was bound by the rules of the society, and had not ceased to be a member, and that, therefore, the society was entitled to recover. Solicitors' Journal. NEW YORK STATUTES AT LARGE. AN ACT to amend the first section of the third title of the eighth chapter of the second part of Revised Statutes, in relation to the custody of minor children. PASSED February 10, 1871; three-fifths being present. The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows: SECTION 1. The first section of the third title of the eighth chapter of the second part of the revised statutes is hereby amended so as to read as follows: 1. Every father, whether of full age or a minor, of a child likely to be born, or of any living child under the age of twenty-one years, and unmarried, may, by his deed or last will duly executed, or, in case such father shall be dead, and shall not have exercised his said right of appointment, then the mother, whether of full age or a minor, of every such child, may, by her deed or last will, duly executed, dispose of the custody and tuition of such child during its minority, or for any less time, to any person or persons, in possession or remainder. 2. This act shall take effect immediately [See 2 R. S. 150; 23 B. 472; 19 W. 18; 5 J. C. R. 279; 12 How. P. R. 515.] TO SUBSCRIBERS. The volumes of the LAW JOURNAL are strongly and uniformly bound at this office for $1.50 full sheep, and $1 half sheep. The Albany Law Journal. ALBANY, MARCH 18, 1871. STUDIES IN LEGAL BIOGRAPHY-LAW AND LATIN. It is undoubtedly better that a judge should know law rather than Latin, if he cannot know both; but some judges have known both, and their law has been none the worse for their Latin. In the existing crusade against the classics, and in favor of science, it is to be feared that the former are underrated. If we need any thing more than the spectacle of one prime minister commenting on Homer, and another translating him into English verse, to convince us that a man may know Latin or Greek and yet be capable of moving creditably in the world's affairs, let us look over the biographies of the English judges, a class of men whose lives ought to make us proud of our race and of our profession. Several of the greatest of them have been distinguished by their knowledge of the classics, and one at least was ludicrous for his lack of it. It is natural that a lawyer should be a "wrangler," and so we are not surprised to learn that Littledale, Bickersteth, Alderson, Maule, Bell, Starkie, Jacob, Cowling and others were senior wranglers; but it is refreshing to know that, among others, Ellenborough was distinguished for his classical standing in college, and that Coleridge stood alone in the first class of classics-an unprecedented honor. Few lawyers, however, carry their Latin into life, and it is to a few who have cultivated the classics in their mature years that we desire to draw attention. It is seldom that the interpretation of a dead language has been the subject of judicial inquiry. One celebrated instance is recorded. Wrangham, afterward archdeacon of Chester, being a scholar of Trinity Hall, Cambridge, was candidate for a vacant fellowship, contending that he was entitled to it as the only "scholar" who was a candidate; that by the statute it was provided, upon such a vacancy, "quod in loco socii collegii subrogetur scholaris ideoneus moribus et ingenio," and that no objection could be made to his morals or his talents. His manners, however, being disliked, he was passed over, and another elected. He presented his petition to Lord Chancellor Loughborough, praying that the election should be set aside, and the question at issue was whether moribus meant morals or manners. The counsel for the petitioner insisted that whenever the word is applied by classic authors to an individual, it means morals, but when appropriated to a nation it means manners as well, and cited Terence, Quintilian, Horace, Virgil, Tacitus and Martial -a formidable array, surely. The counsel for the college contented themselves with one quotation, supplied by the fellows, which they claimed to be decisive in their favor. Ovid, in describing his two mistresses, or rather two of his mistresses, for whose morals nothing could be said, observes: "Hæc specie mellor, moribus illa, fuit." (That is the prettier, this the more polite.) His lordship, in an extempore decision, cited several instances from Horace and Cicero, showing that the term was used indifferently, in either sense, whether applied to a nation or an individual. He decided in favor of the college, on the ground that the founder could not have "meant to tie them down to the test of little more than common honesty," but "rather intended to leave the choice as ample as possible, that the fellows might be in all respects fit for each other." The feelings of the petitioner, who was excluded probably on account of his superior learning and capacity, were soothed by his lordship's intimation that he might be "fit for greater and better situations." Lord Thurlow at the age of about thirteen wrote some very clever Latin verses entitled Gallicidium, or Cock-Throwing, relative to a brutal pastime much in vogue at that day. It may be worth while to quote a translation of the latter half: "Tied by the leg a captive cock I spied, Who oft in vain to use his pinions tried; While near him stood, in nature's strength, a clown, So many clubs, or spoiled so many mains. This is very different stuff from ordinary school verses. The swearing chancellor sticks out already in them. He amused his old age by translations from the classics, and in superintending the classical education of his nephews. Lord Campbell informs us that he was also a good Grecian, and gives an admirable translation of his, of a chorus from the Hippolytus of Euripides, and says that a translation is extant in his handwriting of the whole of Homer's Batrachomyomachia, or Battle of the Frogs and Mice. The following is his translation of a portion of the speech of the king of the mice, to Bladder-Cheek, king of the frogs: "My name is Crumb-catch, and I am the son Of Nibble-Biscuit, my great hearted sire; Lick-Mill 's my mother, King Gnaw-Gammon's child, She bore me in a hole, and brought me up With figs and nuts, and every sort of food. But how make me thy friend, unlike in kind? Thy living is in waters; but my food Whatever man is used to eat. The loaf Thrice kneaded, in the neat round basket kept, Escapes me not; nor wafer flat and long, Mixed with much sesame; nor bacon slice, Nor liver, clothed in jacket of white lard; Nor cheese fresh-curdled from delicious milk; Nor the good sweatmeats which the wealthy love; Nor what else cooks prepare to feast mankind, Pressing their dishes with each kind of sauce." Lord Mansfield, the most venerated and beloved character in judicial biography, passed the last five years of his life in retirement, dying at the great age of eighty-eight. These years he enlivened by the study of Cicero, especially of his De Senectute. Perhaps the great lawyer's fondness for Latin was instilled by the first copy given him when he began to learn text hand at Perth school, Opere peracto ludemus, a maxim which he often repeated and always acted upon. When he was at Westminster school, Lady Kinnoul, observing him pen in hand and thoughtful, asked him if he was writing his theme, and what in .plain English it was. She was rather surprised by his answer, "What is that to you?" His apparent rudeness is explained by the Latin title of his theme, Quid ad te pertinet? From the conflagration which destroyed his papers in 1780, there was preserved a fragment of a Latin essay written by him at school on one of Demosthenes' masterpieces. At Oxford he gained the first prize by some indifferent Latin verses laudatory of George I, which Lord Campbell has been at the pains to translate. It is a singular circumstance that Chatham, between whom and the two succeeding Georges there was such enmity, on this occasion tried to gain the prize by extolling the king, and is supposed, by reason of his defeat by Murray, to have contracted a lasting dislike for his successful competitor. One of Mansfield's favorite amusements was to quiz Sergeant Hill, a famous black-letter lawyer generally known as Sergeant Labyrinth. On one occasion, in a trial of ejectment, a deed being offered in evidence which purported to be an “indenture," Hill objected to its reception on the ground that its edge was cut straight instead of zig-zag, and talked about the derivation of the word from instar dentium. Mansfield took the deed and "sighted" its edge, and thus pronounced judgment: "I am of opinion that this is not a straight mathematical line; therefore it is instar dentium, and comes within your own definition of an indenture. Let it be read in evidence." On another occasion Hill was arguing the point, whether there was sufficient evidence to support an action of trespass for breaking a hole through a wall separating the houses of the parties, and Mansfield suggested that, although the hole was proved to be there, and the defendant had used it, possibly it might long have been there. The sergeant impertinently demanding if there was any authority in the books for such a presumption, his lordship quoted to him the case of Pyramus and Thisbe, and the following: "Fissus erat tenui rima, quam duxerat olim, No wonder that the sergeant scribbled contemptuous observations about his lordship in his law books, which may yet be seen in Lincoln's Inn library. A false quantity grated on Lord Mansfield's nerves. Crosby, a Scotch advocate, said at the bar of the house of lords: "I have the honor to appear before your lordships as counsel for the curators." Mansfield groaned, and softening his reproof by an allusion to his own nationality, observed: "Curators, Mr. Crosby, curators. I wish our countrymen would pay a little more attention to prosody." Whereupon Mr. Crosby quickly replied: "I can assure you that our countrymen are very proud of your lordship, as the greatest senator and orator of the present age." Mansfield often introduced classical quotations with great aptness, but seldom more strikingly than in Somersett's case, in which he pronounced those immortal words: "The air of England has long been too pure for a slave, and every man is free who breathes it. Every man who comes into England is entitled to the protection of English law, whatever oppression he may heretofore have suffered, and whatever may be the color of his skin: 'Quamvis ille niger, quamvis tu candidus esses.' (Although he 's dark, although thyself art fair.) Let the negro be discharged." It must not be supposed that Mansfield intended any pun by the word | niger, for, although the gravity of the occasion would scarcely have restrained his wit, yet, as his lordship was not an American, it may be doubted whether he was acquainted with the opprobrious epithet with which, until its subjects became voters, many Americans were wont to stigmatize them. Since that day the negro has "been discharged," and, if Lord Mansfield could have looked forward less than a hundred years, and witnessed the assiduity with which politicians court the negro for his vote, he might have added, as a warning to the white man, the poet's next line: "O formose puer, nimiun ne crede colori !" (0 beauteous youth, trust not too much to thy complexion fair.) In "Arundines Cami," an article in the London Quarterly Review, number 138, we find the following:" "We return to the judges of the land. We presume not to know whether some of these learned persons ever beguile the weariness of an interminable cause, or the dullness of some lengthy and remorseless argument, by relaxations of this kind. Certain Greek epigrams are afloat, which acknowledge one of the bench as their undoubted parent; but, to speak the truth, remembering the youthful feats of more than one of these ermined sages, the prize poems at the school and either university which have given presage of their future distinction, we are unwilling to accept these verses as fair examples of their powers, although those powers may have been blunted by disuse, by familiarity with barbarous law Latin, and the prosaic work of the courts." Then follows a very graceful Latin poem by Sergeant Lens, “Ad Amicam." The gender of the sergeant's "friend" is such as to forbid the idea that the subject of his verses may be "amicus curiæ;" but if there were any doubts on this point, Lens sheds such a clear light on the subject as to dispel it. We have attempted the following translation: Since now my tedious chains I miss, I bless your guile and artifice. Freed from old flames are heart and limb, If now the breezes waft your name, Anger no longer swells my breast; *He did not originate this doctrine, however. It was first enunciated by Chief Justice Holt. If you stare in proud amaze, Or wink or leer with am'rous gaze, But you're no more one'f the Graces, Which therefore should the more despond? The tough old sergeant's philosophy is sound and even admirable, but such sentiments would be deleterious to our profession if they should generally prevail, for they would diminish that lucrative and interesting class of lawsuits known as breach of promise" cases. The Quarterly correctly describes the verses as "youthful in style and subject." Lord Kenyon was distinguished among the English judges for his lack of classical culture. His penuriousness and his bad Latin were hit off by Ellenborough. After Kenyon's death, a hatchment was put on his house, with the motto painted by mistake, Mors janua vita. Ellenborough insisted that Kenyon so ordered it to save the extra expense of the final dipthong. In the house of lords he talked about flagrante bello for pendente bello. He was continually lugging in classical quotations without regard to their appositeness, or care or knowledge of their correctness. When he wished to express the idea stare decisis, he would say: "In advancing to the consideration of this subject, I propose stare super antiquas vias." Another favorite was melius est petere fontes quam sectari rivos. He would inform the bar that "the court will take time to consider this case 'propter difficultatem."" "Go to chancery," said he to an importunate suitor, "abi in malem rem." "Taffy," said Thurlow (he always called him Taffy), "when did you first think the court of chancery was such a 'mala res?' I remember that you made a very good thing of it." To illustrate the conclusiveness of some fact, he said: "It is as plain as the noses on your faces - 'latet anguis in herba.'" In "Westminster Hall," a miscellany of legal anecdote, he is scarcely caricatured when represented as saying to a jury: "Having thus discharged your consciences, gentlemen, you may retire to your homes in peace, with the delightful consciousness of having performed your duties well, and may lay your heads upon your pillows and say, 'aut Cæsar aut nullus." In view of the foregoing, we may well decide that "a little Latin is a dangerous thing." We have a delightful picture of Lord Tenterden beguiling the tediousness of the long vacation with botany and Latin verses on flowers and plants. At Oxford his lordship had taken prizes for Latin and for English composition. In his third year he recited, as a prize poem, "Globus Ærostaticus," the air balloon, which had just been introduced into England, and we presume his verses, as well as his subject, were inflated and gaseous. He apologizes to Sir Egerton Brydges for his flowers of nature and of rhetoric: "I have always felt that it might be said that a chief justice and a peer might employ his leisure hours better than in writing nonsense verses about flowers. *** John Williams, of the northern circuit, now the queen's solicitor-general (at present one of the puisne judges of the queen's bench), who is an admirable scholar, sent me four or five Greek epigrams of his own. I had a mind to thank each of them, and found I could do so with great ease to myself in ten hendecasyllables. This led me to compose two trifles in the same metre on two favorite flowers, and afterward some others, now I think twelve in all, in different Horatian metres, and one, an Ovidian epistle, the subject of which is the forget-me-not. One of the earliest is an ode on the conservatory in the Alcaic metre, of which the last stanza contains the true cause and excuse of the whole, and this I will now transcribe: "Sit fabulosis fas mihi cantibus (Be 't mine to lighten cares with fabled song, "You see, I am now on my hobby, and you must be patient while I take a short ride. Another of the earliest is an ode in the Sapphic metre, on the Convallaria Maialis, the lily of the valley. I am a great admirer of Linnæus, and my verses contain many allusions to his system. There are three other metres of Horace on which I should like to write something, but what or when I know not." He describes the lily of the valley as follows: "Flosculis nutans oneratis albis, Non ebur lucet Pariumve marmor Talis et pectus niveumque collum, (Heavily laden with white blossoms bending, Such is the maid of the island, who blushes The amiable, witty, and profoundly-learned Lord Stowell, brother of Lord Eldon, was a good classical scholar. In his last days, "when reason's lamp burnt dimly, and he scarcely retained a recollection of familiar objects, on some one chancing to repeat a line of Horace, he immediately took up the passage and recited thirty or forty verses with but a single pause." In his decisions he drew largely on his classical recollections. In one case, remarking how little eastern nations are assimilated to the character of the foreign elements introduced into them, he quoted: "Doris amara suam non intermisceat undam" (The bitter ocean hath not intermixed her wave); that is, "with thee," Arethusa, the nymph, who, drinking at the stream of the Alpheus, and being pursued by the river god, was changed by Diana into a fountain, and who, when Alpheus sought to mingle his waters with hers, fled under the earth and through the sea, and rose, still preserving her freshness, in the island of Ortygia. In another case, where a prize was claimed by a privateer, but it appeared that the pursuer had been chased away by other vessels, he remarks: "It is the first instance, I believe, in which |