« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
ceiving and causing an injury, and the person in- 3 Cai. 61, Kent, C. J., dissenting; Allard v. Smith, jured. But there might be other cases equally mer- 2 Metc. (Ky.) 297; People v. Barker, 3 Wheel. Cr. Cas. itorious with these (see English v. Beard, 51 Ind. 19; Harvey v. Rickett, 15 Johns. 88; Roberts v. Failis, 489; Bodge v. Hughes, 53 N. H. 614); and there- 1 Cowp. 338; Grinnell v. Phillips, 1 Mass. 541; Warfore after enumerating wife, child, parent, guard- ner v. Robinson, 1 Root, 194; Wilson v. Berryman, 5 ian and husband, the statute extends the right of Cal. 44. The contrary was held in Cowperthwaite v. action to other persons injured. Does it intend Jones, 2 Dall. 55. But such figuring for a verdict among the other persons who may sue, to include does not vitiate the verdict unless there was a posithe person himself whose intoxication causes or is tive agreement to abide the result. Thompson's case, the occasion or reason of the injury? Doubtless the 8 Gratt. 637; Dana v. Tucker, 4 Johns. 488. In statute might have extended its benefits to the in- Turner v. Tuolumne Water Co., 25 Cal. 397, such a toxicated person, but if such were the intent it is verdict was held not to be a chance verdict within surprising that it was not distinctly and unequivo- the statute, but was said, obiter, to be vicious, within cally expressed. It was as easy to designate the the above authorities. The verdict, however, was party himself as it was his wife, child, guardian, not set aside. Notwithstanding the agreement to etc. Moreover the man himself may generally be abide the result of such figuring, if a different versupposed to be injured in some degree by intoxica-dict is adopted, it will not be void. Thompson's tion, so that his case would furnish the most fre- case, supra; Bailey v. Beck, 21 Kans. 462. quent occasion for a suit if he should see fit to resort to legal proceedings. It would be very re
The ruling of Judge Osborn, of the New York markable that a statute in enumerating the persons Supreme Court, in the case of People v. Briggs, that who should share in its benefits should omit to name
a wife is not a competent witness against her husthe very one who would most often be entitled to
band in a criminal proceeding (ante, 361), is susits aid." But it is a sensible and well-understood tained by a recent decision of the Mississippi Surule of construction, that when after an enumera
preme Court, in Byrd v. State, 57 Miss. 243. The tion the statute employs some general.term to em
Mississippi statute is very similar to ours; its lanbrace other cases, the other cases must be under
guage is: “Husband and wife may be witnesses for stood to be cases of the same general character, sort each other in all criminal cases, but they shall not or kind with those named. Hawkins v. Great West- be required to testify against each other, as witern Ry. Co., 17 Mich. 57; McDade v. People, 29 id.
nesses for the prosecution.” In "civil cases, the 50, and cases cited. Apply this rule here, and the
statute makes them witnesses for each other. The party intoxicated is excluded. The persons enumer
court said: “The learned judge who presided in the ated are persons who stand to him in special rela
court below held that under this section the wife tions, and it is therefore to be assumed that any may be a voluntary witness for the prosecution, other person’ who may sue must also stand to him in some special relation so as to be injured by his in- against the husband's consent. We are constrained
to differ from him in the construction he has placed toxication or by the sale, etc., to him. A creditor
on this statute. The statute is in derogation of a might perhaps stand in that relation under some
very ancient and well-established rule of the comcircumstances, or a contractor, or servant, or the
mon law, based, as we have above seen, in great master of a vessel, or a traveller passing him in the part, upon grave reasons of public policy, having street, and so on. But he could not stand in any
reference to the preservation of the happiness of such relation to himself, and therefore cannot be parties joined together in the marital relation.” understood as embraced in the terms, 'wife, child, "The rule of the common law excluded them as parent, guardian, husband or other person,' injured witnesses both for and against each other, in crimiin person, property or means of support by himself,
nal as well as civil cases. “If the Legislature had or by reason of his intoxication, or by the sale, etc., of intended to make them witnesses against as well as intoxicating drinks to himself. The statute evi
for each other, it would have been an easy matter dently contemplates three parties — seller, receiver
to express that intent in unmistakable language. and injured party – in all cases. This seems a
No reason is perceived why the Legislature should novel case.
not have done so, if indeed they had that intent;
nor is it easy to give a satisfactory reason why the In Werner v. Edmiston, 24 Kans. 147, the verdict Legislature should make them witnesses against was ascertained and determined solely by adding each other in criminal cases, when it is undoubted the sums named by the respective jurors, and divid- that they are restricted in civil cases to being witing the sum total by twelve. This was not done for nesses for each other. The whole force of the implipurposes of consultation, but by distinct agreement cation, that the Legislature intended to allow one to that the result of these arithmetical processes should be a voluntary witness against the other in criminal be the amount of the verdict, and it was immediately cases, arises from the use of the words, but they at the close of the calculation so written out and shall not be required to testify against each other, returned. This was held error, sufficient to compel as witnesses for the prosecution,' following immedia new trial.
Such a verdict was also set aside as a ately after the provision allowing them to be witchance verdict, in Goodman v. Cody, 1 Wash. 329. nesses for each other, and as a part of the same The same doctrine was held in Smith v. Cheetham, sentence. We regard this as rather an over-cautious insertion, to prevent an apprehended construc
LEGAL DEFINITIONS OF COMMON WORDS. tion of the preceding words, than as engrafting a new and independent provision upon the statute,
V. which would be the case if it allowed the examination of one against the other, in case the party offered as a witness did not object. But if we are
LAW weekly journal is a newspaper. Kerr v. A
Hitt, 75 III. 51, was a case where the legality to construe this language to mean that the Legisla- of a notice under the Burnt Records Act, so called, ture thought that by the common law husband and published in the Chicago Legal News, was called in wife might be required to testify against each other question, on the ground that it was not a newspaper, when they were allowed to testify in behalf of each it being devoted principally to the law and not other; and to infer that this provision was inserted claiming to be a newspaper. The court held that to prevent the operation of such a rule without the
such a paper was a newspaper within the meaning of consent of the party offered as a witness, it does
the statute, and laid down the following definition not follow that we are to construe this provision as
of a newspaper within the statute for the publicamaking this erroneously-supposed rule of the com
tion of legal notices. A paper that, while it may mon law a part of the statutes of the State. An
be devoted principally to the dissemination of legal enactment of the Legislature based on an evident intelligence, makes reference to passing events, conmisconception of what the law is will not have the tains advertisements, brief notices of legislative effect, per se, of changing the law so as to make it bodies, personal and political items of interest to accord with the misconception.”
the general reader, as well as the legal profession,
will be within the statute in question, although its In Grangers' Ins. Co. v. Brown, 57 Miss. 308, a circulation is confined to lawyers and business men, life insurance company defended an action on a pol- as a class. The court said: “Thus it will be seen icy, on the ground that the insured had falsely war- it comes substantially at least within the definition ranted that he had never received any serious per- given by lexicographers of a 'newspaper.' It is sonal injury, whereas his skull had been fractured none the less a newspaper' because its chief object in boyhood, and had been healed by trephining. is the publication of legal news. Many newspapers To prove this, they proposed to disinter his body, published in this and other countries are devoted after the suit had been pending eighteen months, chiefly to special interests, such as religious and poon the sole testimony of his physician that the de- litical newspapers, others devoted exclusively to litceased had told him that he had been told of such erature, that contain advertisements, news items, an accident and operation. The counsel for the personal and political, brief notices of matters of plaintiff argued: “It is complained that the court special public concern, and reference to proceedings refused, on the showing made, to violate the sanc- of legislative and other public bodies. So it is tity of a private cemetery. The proposition is re- with this journal. Besides legal it contains other volting. To break the signet of the grave, and items of news, not only connected with the bench take from its resting-place the sacred property of and bar, but others of a general interest. It is that relatives to gratify the corporation's mercenary curi- class of journal that will circulate among lawyers, osity, would be worse than Shylock's demand. Is real estate and other business men, for it contains it reserved for this age and this court to decide that information in regard to sales of real estate, whether the dead may be taken from their sepulchres, in- under judicial process or under powers." spected, and presented in their awful silent help- In Kellogg v. Carrico, 47 Mo. 157, it was held that lessness to the public gaze ? A more horrible a journal devoted to the dissemination of legal iothought can scarcely be conceived." The court telligence is a newspaper, and that publication in it said: “We are not prepared to say that in a proper imparted notice of sale under a trust deed. The case the court, in the interests of justice, should court said: “The Legal Record and Advertiser was not compel the exhuming and examination of a printed in St. Louis in the form of a newspaper, dead body which is under the control of the plaint- and was issued to its subscribers daily except Suniff, if there is strong reason to believe that without days, when the publication was omitted. It was such examination a fraud is likely to be accom- devoted to the dissemination of general legal intelplished, and the defendant has exhausted every ligence, and engaged extensively in legal advertisother method known to the law of exposing it. We ing, including the publication of notices of sales are prepared to say, however, that such an order under deeds of trust, and sales on execution and all should be made only upon a strong showing to that judicial sales. It was a law and advertising joureffect. It would be a proceeding repugnant to the nal, and so, in a limited sense at least, a newspaper; best feelings of our nature, and likely to be in many for whether a newspaper or not is a question that cases so abhorrent to the sensibilities of the surviv- cannot be determined by a consideration alone of ing relatives, that they would prefer an abandon- the kind of intelligence it disseminated. It is not ment of the suit to a compliance with the order. the particular kind of intelligence published that Without undertaking to define with accuracy what constitutes one publication a newspaper rather than circumstances would justify the making of such an another. Newspapers are devoted to the disseminaorder, we think that a case calling for it was not tion of intelligence on a great variety of subjects, shown in this instance."
such as politics, commerce, temperance, religion, and
so on; and the law and legal topics and occurrences each in turn whirling a hand fastened in the center, are not excluded from the range of newspaper en- the one at whose whirl the hand registers the highterprise. A paper devoted to the gathering up and est number taking all the money, the owner of the dissemination of legal news among its readers is, or board sometimes putting up money and sometimes at least may be, a newspaper. I regard the Legal charging the winner a small sum for the use of the Record as a newspaper of that character."
board, this is not a lottery. But then, again, “a law weekly is not a newspa- In Cronin v. People, ante, 430, the New York per.” This was held in Beecher v. Stevens, 25 Minn. Court of Appeals held that under a power to “ regu146, under a statute requiring publication of sum- late” slaughter-houses, a municipal corporation may mons in a newspaper, in regard to the Northwestern prohibit them from specified areas in a city. We Reporter. The court observed: “This is a twelve- have known the word “regulate” to have been held. page weekly publication, somewhat different in size synonymous with suppress," as in the case of the and shape from an ordinary newspaper, though the famous Texan "regulators.' difference is not such as to render it improper to In Goodman v. Cody, 1 Wash. 329, a verdict of denominate it a newspaper, provided its usual con- damages was arrived at by averaging the separate tents are, in general character, like the usual con- markings of all the jurors. This was held to be tents of newspapers. It purports to be and is de- arrived at by “chance." But in Turner v. Tuovoted specially to the interests of the legal profes- lumne Water Co., 25 Cal. 397, the contrary was held, sion.' Its usual contents are the general laws of the and so Chief Justice Kent thought. See ante, 443. State, published shortly after their passage, the It seems then that a judicial decision is a matter of • decisions of the Supreme Court of this State, the "chance."
decisions of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin, In Poor v. Hudson Ins. Co., 2 Fed. Rep. 432, a and occasional decisions of other courts, a court di-policy of insurance upon a summer hotel provided rectory, cards of attorneys and counsellors-at-law, a that a family should live in it throughout the year. list of transfers of real estate in Ramsey county, ad. It was destroyed by fire, and at the time two menvertisements and notices of law books, about a page servants and employees of the insured were staying of miscellaneous advertisements, and legal anec- therein, taking their meals at an adjoining hotel, dotes. Except as above, it does not publish, nor and working around the premises. Held, that this assume to publish, what is understood by the cur- was a “family.” The court said: “The most comrent news, or news of the day. Newspapers are of prehensive definition of a 'family' is, a number of so many varieties that it would be next to impossi- persons who live in one house and under one manageble to give any brief definition which would include ment or head. There is no specific number required and describe all kinds of newspapers. We are not to constitute a family; but they must live together called upon to incur the risk of giving any such in one house and under one head. Nor is it necesdefinition at this time. It will be sufficient for all sary that they should eat in the house where they the purposes of this case to say, that in the ordinary live. There are many families, it is well known, understanding of the word, a newspaper is a publi- who live in one place and eat outside of it. Nor cation which usually contains, among other things, was it necessary that they should be employed in what is called the general news, the current news, the house or about it; nor was it material that they or the news of the day; and nothing which does were hired. The precise question is, were they livnot usually contain such news, and is intended for ing there together, under one head or management? general circulation, is a newspaper, in the ordinary This is one of fact and not of law.” “Many persense of the word. Such a newspper is a publica- sons have residences in town, and at the seaside, or tion adapted to the general reader. Now, in the at the mountains, at the same time, and may be said absence of some controlling consideration to the con- to live at both places.” So the absence of the trary, the statute is to be taken to have used the plaintiff, his wife, and his sons, was held to make word 'newspaper' in this its ordinary sense, or as Gen. no difference. Stat., ch. 4, § 1, expresses it, according to the com- In Yerkes v. Nat. Bank of Port Jervis, 69 N. Y. mon and approved usage of the language;' and 383; S. C., 25 Am. Rep. 208, it was held that a when the object of the publication of a summons is National bank, under the power to “negotiate ” eviconsidered, the reasonableness of such a construc-dences of debt, might exchange government bonds tion of the word 'newspaper' as requires the publica- for registered bonds. The court said: “To negotion to be made where it will be likely to meet the tiate means, among other things, 'to transfer, to eye of the general reader, is quite apparent. For sell, to pass, to procure by mutual intercourse and these reasons, we are of opinion that the ‘North- agreement with another, to arrange for, to settle by western Reporter,' though it may properly enough be dealing and management.' The same meaning was denominated a ‘legal newspaper,' is not a newspa- approved in the dissenting opinion of Tappan, J., per within the meaning of the statute above cited.” | in Nat. Bank of Gloversville v. Wells, 14 Hun, 51; S. The court had the Illinois and the Missouri case be- C., Browne's Nat. Bk. Cas. 333. fore it.
We find a negative definition of “town," in Chi“Lottery” was passed upon in Buckalew v. State, cago and Northwestern Ry. Co. v. Town of Oconto, 62 Ala. 334. It was there held that where money Wisconsin Supreme Court, ante, 373, where it is held is put upon a round board, having different numbers that a “town” cannot consist of two separate and around its rim, in equal amounts by several persons, detached tracts of land
A stable is a “building,” within the statute of gressive cupidity of liquor dealers into action, especiburglary. Orrell v. People, 94 Ill. 456.
ally of that class whose brains wero only equal to the A mail agent, travelling on a railway, is a “pas recognition of results. In other words, with just foresenger," although no specific fare is paid by or for sight enough to appreciate a demand another man's
money wisely invested in a bold advertising venture him. Price v. Penn. R. Co., Phila. Com. Pleas,
had created - just liberal enough to commence adverante, 391. The court remarked: “Webster defines tising after another man, by the dint of dollars, had a passenger: 'One who travels in some conveyance spread as a stage coach or steamboat.' The fact that a man From earth's remotest bound to ocean's loneliest shore,' is employed on his travels does not exclude him
enough of that genial and germinating light to warm from being a passenger in the popular acceptation into life every seed scattered upon the earth’s broad of the term, nor does it in view of the statute, else face by timid hands, and with just integrity enough not why the proviso excepting passengers ? While in only to stealthily lay their felonious fingers upon the our view of the case the deceased was carried for legitimate offspring of another man's genius and en
terprise, but even to stoop to purloin the pet appellation hire, in view of the many authorities, some of
with which, when he stood purse in hand, solitary and which will hereafter be referred to, we deem it im- | alone, sponsor for tho child's legitimacy at the baptismaterial as to wbether or not he was carried for hire mal altar, its christening was consummated. Had the or carried free, nor is it material that he was carried young stranger succumbed to any one of the mortal on the contract of another with defendant."
maladies such juvenility is heir to, no one of them
would have worn crape at tho funeral or followed after A wife is not an "other person” from her hus
that hearse. They would all havo been found ready to band, within the meaning of a statute forbidding swear that the brat was reputed to be Van Beil's malicious damage of the property of “any other foundling, about whose nativity they knew and about person.” So a husband may smash his wife's sew- whose fate they cared nothing. But since, uulike frail ing-machine with impunity. So held in State v.
flesh, it does not seem to have been born to die, but is
destined to flourish in immortal youth, it would seen. Nugent, New Jersey, ante, 410. But we believe that it has never been held that if a husband murders ready to swear to its legitimacy, and when and wher
every old superanuated tipple vender in the land i his wife he simply commits suicide. At all events it was born and christened, and who is its father al. the courts generally hang him for such suicide. See its god-father.” also, Brooks v. Cook, ante, 442.
The argument that the words in question are mer
descriptive is answered as follows: A racing-park association does not carry on
“On the trial of this case General Foster insisted t. public exhibition of feats of horsemanship,” nor
*Rye and Rock,' like 'mess beef' and 'salt pork “show." U. S. v. Buffalo Park, 16 Blatchf. 189. descriptive, and I answered him then and there th
‘On this point plaintiff's counsel feels too little conc
to tax his time with an answer. When a court cat "RYE AND ROCK."
found capable of holding that the word rock'd
mean and describe rock, but does mean and desc E have been favored with a copy of the brief of not only rock candy.' but crystallized rock candy
nothing else, and that the word 'rye' does not Prescott, lately decided in our Court of Appeals.rye,' but is bound to mean "rye whisky' and not Counsel sometimes doubt whether the judges read else, and that those two words united can und their briefs, but there can be no doubt in this case that probable or possible contingency, be made to rei the judges read every word, and ought to have laughed any thing else but crystallized rock candy dissol at every page of the fifty brilliant pages. It seems dif. whisky distilled from a cereal heretofore suppo ficult to select passages from such a production, but lexicographers to have been symbolized by those there are some things here which the profession would letters, r-y-e, then the General's theory of the not willingly let die if once they knew them. So we tude between mess beef,' salt pork' and 'R will select a few of the most striking passages. We Rock' will not sound quite so quizzical as it now premise by explaining to the unsophisticated that“Rye “But let us go at once down to the very bed and Rock means (so we are told) rock caudy dis- this assumption that our trade-mark is desc solved in rye whisky. We believe it is a medicine. What do we sell? Candy dissolved in whi The peroration is as follows:
either of those words in our trade-mark? “Plaintiff adopted ' Rye and Rock'as a trade-mark there a synonomist living able to demonstrat in December, 1877, and immediately commenced adver-through the origin, separate use or symbolism tising it for sale on a plan large and liberal enough to words a similar significance? Down to this spread its fame in ninety days as far and wide as the effort of the kind in the wide world of letters light of the press could travel. Its fame as a curative, been made. Our first word is rye. Wha and that too of a disease that had heretofore baffled It's a cereal. What are its constituent eleme medical skill, seems to have come forth, Minerva-like, analysis will show albuminoids, ash, carbo full-grown and fledged at a single bound, and in the crude fibre and fat. Now, how is whisky suddenness of its development as well as in the uni- distillation of grain in water. What is w versality of its popularity, it stands to day without a drogen and oxygen, nothing more. Then rival outside of elevated railroads. By the first of would seem there is not a single liquid el September, 1878. plaintiff had made by the dint of per. distillation does not dissolve rye, but sim sistent publications those three words 'Rye and Rock,' its essence. By what authority, then, can words of magic, and the demand for it among pulmo- tended that the name of a cereal that cont nary and malarial invalids universal. The loud, long hydrogen or oxygen describes a liquid 90 and lusty cry that went up and kept going up, not which is hydrogen and oxygen? What merely from waste places, but from populous cities – word that has been held to be descriptit not only from restaurants and sample rooms, but also What does the learned geologist tell us ro from drug stores, was bound, as a natural matter of cite, dolomite,'gypsum, anhydrite, salt, course, to attract the attention and stimulate the ag- clase, albite and the related triclinic, feld
line and certain zeolites, the micas, chlorites, talo, for in his 'Henry V,' and also `VI,' such allusions as serpentine, olivine, pyroxene, hornblende, garnet, 'galled rock,' dreadful rock' and 'fatal rock,' point epidote, staurolite, kyanite, andalusite, tourmaline, almost malignantly at poor Prescott, whose coming graphite, magnetite, hematite, corundum and pyrite. rock was then sending its shadows centuries in advance What are the constituent properties of candy? It of its own arrival. Pistol, who had lost the courage to would take four pages to give a proper definition of live without finding enough to die, asks death for a sugar alone. I'll spare you the infliction by simply farewell treat at Prescott's bar in these memorable stating tbat there is not in candy a single constituent words, 'rock me to sleep.' Poor Pistol sleeps no found in rock, nor in rock one found in candy. How, sounder now than he soon would sleep were he living tothen, can rock be judicially held to symbolize candy, day and permitted Prescott to'rock'him often. Were and the words “Rye and Rock,' while simply tied to- Burns living he'd apologize to Dr. Hornbook in an gether with a conjunctive conjunction, and owing no apostrophe to Prescott. Prescott's rock must be that allegiance to the tyranny of context, nevertheless *mortal mineral' with which Cymbeline's queen inheld to mean and describe rye whisky and rock tended to take his life. The effect of the one is precandy and nothing else? What does plaintiff sell un- cisely that of the other. But Shakespeare in looking der his trade-mark? Rye? No. Rock? No. If he into the future saw 'our rock'as plainly as he did did, no wise, learned and just court could be expected Prescott's. In 'Cymbeline' Belarius says, 'I pr’ytheo to give us a reversal. This decision amounts to the to our rock.' Then in ‘Julius Cæsar' occurs this alluconclusion that rock'don't mean or describe 'rock,' sion, ‘I will rest on this rock.' Had he said under but something more, to wit: not only candy, but a rare instead of on we would have readily understood the quality of crystallized candy; and that the word 'rye' allusion to have been intended for Prescott's rock. He does not mean or describe rye,' but something more, again alludes in 'Two Gentlemen of Verona'to'rocks to wit: 'rye whisky.' It has invaded the broad fields of pure gold,' and in his 'Comedy of Errors' to a of science, the hoary history of mythology, the bloom- "mighty rock,' and in ‘Henry VI' to how the .rocks ing gardens of horticulture, the ornithological king- cheer,' which sounds so like a prophetic puff for plaintdom, the earth's bowels, mountain tops and river beds, iff's rock, that he holds himself ready to forward a and by the dint of a single assumption driven the word case of his ‘Rye and Rock'to any lineal or collateral 'rock' from all its old haunts. There are over 250 cit- descendant of the Shakespeare family able to identify ies, towns, post-offices and railroad stations, the names himself as such. Then the Bible contains over 30 senof which are · Rock' or 'Rye,' or either commence or tences which the word 'rock' points, subject in each end with one or the other of those two words, saying instance to the laws of context, and brimful of renothing of mountains, rivers and ravines which have proaches for Prescott, as I read and interpret them, but been similarly christened. Ornithologists tell us of the I will close this phase of this rock discussion with the * rock-dove,' 'rock-pigeon,' and that enormous bird 31st verse from the 32d chapter of Deuteronomy, which the Roc,' which has lived in Arabian tradition thou. is in these words: For their rook is not our rock, even sands of years. Horticulturists speak of the 'rock- our enemies themselves being judges.' plant,' .rock-cress,' 'rock-wood,' 'rock-moss,' 'rock- “History and romance abound in incidents and rose' and 'rock-cork,' which is a variety of the asbes- events which have christened thousands of rocks and tos, the fibers of which are loosely interlaced. The made their names immortal, from the Tarpeian rock in sea swarms with 'rock-cod' and 'rock-fish.' Geolo- Rome down to the Logan rock between Penzance and gists speak of 'rock-ruby,' 'rock-crystals,' rock-salt,' Lands Eud, and the Menamber at Sithney, which * rock-shell,' 'rock-soap,' 'rock-milk,' 'rock-water,' Oliver Cromwell had destroyed because of the superstirock-butter' and 'rock-alum.' Naturalists speak of tious adoration with which the people regarded it. The the .rock-doe,' .rock-goat' and 'rock-rabbit.' Petro- Scilly Isles are full of christened rocks. Webster gives leum is described by lexicographers as .rock-oil' and over fifty compound words, one-half of each of which is rock-tar.' Then the word 'rock'is known to every rock. How can mortal wisdom undertake to say to ten-year-old country boy on the continent whose which one our rock belongs, if to either, and the truth mother does her own spinning, as the name of the dis- is it does belong to neither. Why? Because there is taff of her spiuning-wheel.
no such word in our language as rock-candy. “What 'rock' may happen to mean, depends en- “The court below did not only hold that the word tirely upon the context in which it is found.
'rock'had such a peculiar association and identification "Shakespeare employs the word 'rock'53 times, and with rock-candy, that it must be understood wherever every time it is dependent for its meaning upon the employed alone to refer to candy and nothing else, context. · Frequently he introduces it with an adjec- enough so to amount to a description of candy, so full, tive, which, when you thiuk of the havoo Prescott's so unmistakably that it could not be reasonably con*Rye and Rock' has made among his patrons, couldjectured that it could have the slightest reference to you believe Avon's immortal bard capable of meddling any single one of all the ediously numerous objects, with the business projects of men unborn, you would animals, minerals, flowers, oils, fish, birds, cities, have to accept as a prophetic warning, especially in towns, post-offices, railroad stations, mountains, and their disjecta membra, against Prescott's patronage. rivers with which it is associated, but must mean rockFor instance, in Two Gentlemen of Verona,' Julia candy only when such a word as 'rock-candy' is not speaks of a "ragged, fearful, hanging rock.' If de- known to our nomenclature. Before it gets legitifendants could not find a living witness forgiving mately into our vocabulary at all, it is judicially introenough to testify for them, what must we naturally duced to the world clothed with a mysterious power, infer from such a strange and suspicious circumstance? and pregnant of a peculiar significance, with which its Certainly if their rock was not “ragged,' that it must derivation has nothing to do. They introduce into an have made his patrons so, and if so, that it must have already densely populated world of words an utter been indeed a 'fearful' rock, and from the number of stranger, and then slashing it in twain declare half executions with which it was probably mixed up, is means legally all the whole can literally. Nor do'they well described as a 'hanging' rock. Then Bottom stop there, but go on to say that to this new comer beseems to have his eye on Prescott's property when he longs a breadth of significance never claimed for fifty alludes to a “raging rock. Saltar (in the 'Merchant of of its predecessors to which half of its title belongs. Venice') seems determined to be understood as want- That having given rock away to candy, it's now got to ing to be offensive to defendants as he bluntly blurts mean rock no more, but candy forever more. Having out the descriptive phrase 'dangerous rock.' Shakes- given this hard word a sweet throne, they intend it peare seems to have had Prescott's rock on the brain, shall enjoy a long reign in its new dominions. That