The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-02-27

.os tass:ss 70 = !. vss..s "a .ssAa.s sseus Ne
Of wan N Waxit " dssiosd 3 Esss Ia, ~ - 49,
s.;S I;si = Vs. ~ w.. Il. a.: ! e.
tally Ss thsA The statute required so9plses srrss
msns % ). n vrias tlas sss shouid = . "a &
ssrssms.t q wrttss omitted the eoadsaoa IL vss .
IL status. Lord Elsaborcssh ssid "As ssrcsnsss
thing TO which there must be the asseet Of two
Minds and which ought 70 b 20 certain and eom.
counsel, Canon L1sus, said shs agrssmsatLs .ths
whole agreement specifying ths coazaeng parss that
son.dsrsso. s.d ths Iscis. must y !. xass ~
Hazryatt disputed this csnnton. Ten agrssnsst Il
essential that thsrs Be- soatsst.g pafesa thing 10 b
ing nom tbs other dde there - any Difference thers
IL, perhspa less danger Of fraud or psray IN omitnG the
oSS:r .n.s q from me ssr 1r onm
supposed TO b that the PROMISE or thing to b dons
would BE- Ally stated But the 0surt saw, 1. the ease
against the intention Of tbs law; corrupt careless
witnsss might miststs what the consideration was, %
ven e What the Irsniss was Ca. Rsv.o.s N ITO 70
thoss decisions amended the angnsgs Of the former
statute and quisi sxprsssy What the former statuts
or memoraadum thereof, szprsssss the sonsdsraton,
nj Guild b in writing. they thus meant that Whoever
read thu statute should plainly psresvs that the whole OF
containing thswhss Of these ssssatia although In N
informal way, and mere note or memorandum. must
leaving ont the prios to BE- paid, thss l. also danger
in leaving ont the lot to b conveyed the name Of
the person Who u 70 purch.ss. OF the name Of him
Il NO contract, and no nots memorandum Of . con-
traet-it IL not g complete that each party may
Il. &: nS.
or memorandum Of the contract false or careless
wt1sss may By oral svidsncs, prove that some
the seller b omitted there equal risk that the same
kind Of witness may oral evidences prove thst some one
was II The .s:s who o. never ss.ssS 70 H The sv xcad
h might not have been the person who agreed to ss
and the sellers may b omitted, who never
for dsmagss for contracting TO ssu what hs aid not own
5SDl"1h: :t.ts.s provide: tsss tie nan 10. ).
shall bs brought shall bs in writing. This the
whole agreement, Of which the confederation forms An
vsntisn Of fraud and perjury that the wion
leads to the promise should be In writing the promise"
not the name Of the contrasting partly ~ equally e.
y to prevent fraud and perjury, the eoasidsrAtioai
II said that the name Of the seller was here b. NJ
Of So ne the h. y .
enough to bind him personally the buyer whom he docs
not the face Of h msmorandum Of the contract dis
another. or for the goversnent (klls ". Hunt; 20
Wend 430) He them u looked upon the seller, and
nse's :. such whether hi. principal b liable :. not
The contract not II have son to Peck, E. r. Lud.
low for Ogden, E. a. Luilow for Nurray' but It ID
signed BY Ludlow aone, without any way dselosing
who the owners were. II Mr.. Ludlow himself were the
principal In the contract It might in it, present FORM
the poorest richest in the city were the prin
cipal It might still be in this FORM No cen tan BY
reading tbs whole contract who Il the seller Could this
BE- sompsts memorandum Of contract reading whioh
one could tell who the buyer wasf That cannot b
complete agreement In writing hish leaves parol proof
materials part Of the agreement The agency Of the
austionssr to sn his nss contract made substan
TALLY In the name Of his principal net to contract made
asrssmsat complete in inssl except 10 the signatures
he 10 not the agent Of either to gn bagan not show
Parish IN Page no. and Of Anderson VI. Harold no Ohio
&c., have, It believed, been generally unesrstood TO
taia the same positions Whether they extend Tar
not these positions 10 follow from other d.
caons and the great object Of the statuts better
that statute found necessary to prevent frauds and
pe,uls. should b literally construed 10 carry ont and
extend the views Of the Lsgialaturs, than to ritter II
away piece BY piece In order to enable purchaser who
has made good bargain, but - yet paid nothing It,
md lost nothing In fast to realise the expected gain that
he would have been entitled to II the alleged contract had
bssu carried out This plaintiff has himself to blame in
part for his he paid the 10 psr cent to the
eioneer In due tme and taken the proper receipt his
courss Of action would have bssn complete Ths excuse
which he makes, Of waiver i estabhShsd only By parol
that dangerous kind Of evidence In such whioh
the statute bsing rsosivsd to establish contract