€t)e
<§mn
Published Monthly, at $3.00 per annum.
Bag, Single numbers, 35 cents.
Communications in regard to the contents of the Magazine should be addressed to the Editor, Horace W. Fuller, 15^ Beacon Street, Boston, Mass. The Editor -will be glad to receive contributions of articles of moderate length upon subjects of interest to the profession; also anything in the way of legal antiquities or curiosities, facetia, anecdotes, etc. THE GREEN BAG. T N our October number we shall publish an
- ■ exceedingly interesting article on the Su
preme Court of Connecticut, written by Leonard M. Daggett, Esq., of New Haven. The illus trations will include excellent portraits of Judges Thomas S. Williams, Henry M. Waite, Thomas B. Butler, Origen S. Seymour, John D. Parks, Charles B. Andrews, Stephen M. Mitchell, Joel Hinman, Elisha Carpenter, Dwight Loomis, John Hooker, Edward W. Seymour, and David Torrance.
that is not an assault, for falsa demonstrate non noeet. Question. What duty does the owner of prem ises owe to one whom he invites to come upon the premises? Answer The duty of lateral support. — Canadian Law Times.
The following from a Harrisburg, Penn., corre spondent cannot fail to interest our readers : — Editor of the " Green Bag" : The extract from Judge Jeremiah S. Black's famous dissenting opinion from the judgment of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Hole v. Rittenhouse, 1 Casey, 491, given in Mr. Hensel's excellent sketch of the great jurist, recalls to mind an instance of judicial sparring between Judge Black and Judge Moses Hampton of the District Court of Allegheny County at Pittsburg, which occurred about the same The " Green Bag " for July states, as a fact, time, and which may be read with interest by the patrons of the " Green Bag." that the answer given by a law student to the ques The case of Wilson v Steamboat Tuscarora, I tion, " What is an accommodation note? " was, Casey, 317, in which Edwin M. Stanton was con "One which the maker does n't have to pay until cerned for the defendant in error, tried in the Dis he is ready to." Actual fact is said to be stranger trict Court at Pittsburg, before Judge Moses Hamp than fiction, and is often much more humorous ton, and decided on a reserved point, was reversed on account of its reality. While we cheerfully because the question of law was not properly agree that this answer is one of the funniest on reserved. The opinion of the Supreme Court was written by record (and submit that daily experience lends Judge Black, and his criticism of the manner of re to it the similitude of truth), we tender the fol lowing, also actual facts, for the consideration of serving questions of law prevailing at that time in the District Court was severe and rasping. Among those who read the vacation issues of this hum other things offensive to Judge Hampton, he said : ble periodical. If anything more innocently in "It is impossible for us to sustain such a proceeding genious can be produced, let it be produced. If as this. ... In a common-law action every disputed the gentlemen who originated the answers chance fact must be determined by the jury, and not by the to see them reproduced, let them not be offended, judge who presides at the trial. This is an inflexible for they have written two of the most humorous* rule of law, which we cannot change until we can overthrow the Constitution. ... It is in vain to say things of the century. that the facts in this case are not disputed. . . . Question. Explain the maxim, Falsa demon The pleadings put them in dispute. . . . Among the strate non riocet. children of Israel it was the hard causes that were Answer. If I shake my fist at a man who is brought to Moses, and not those which were plain." within my reach, that is an assault, though I do Shortly after this opinion was written the case of not touch him, because he is within reach and I The Commonwealth v. Hays, 1 Pitts. Rep. 316, an may carry out my threat and hurt him. But if action upon the bond of a public officer, was tried he is across the street, and so out of my reach, before P. J. Moses Hampton, and a question of law 54
