Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 12.djvu/214

194 194 HARVARD LAW REVIEW. bodied in II. would be against good conscience, and would be a blind, hidebound application of the principle of Merryweather v. Nixan to a state of facts in which the reason for that decision has no existence. Not only are both of the propositions believed to be sustained by the decided cases, but when the subject is broadly considered and thoroughly understood, the courts, influenced alike by the authorities and by the ethical principles involved, surely must an- nounce the law as stated. Theodore W, Reath. Philadelphia, August 12, 1898.