Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 05.pdf/420

 Bag. PUBLISHED MONTHLY, AT $4.00 PER ANNUM.

SINGLE NUMBERS, 50 CENTS.

Communications in regard to the contents of the Magazine should be addressed to the Editor. HORACE W. FULLER, 15½ 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, facttiit, anecdotes, etc.

THE GREEN BAG. 'THE following comments on the derivation of •^ the words " grass widow " will be read with interest:—

CAMDEJÍ, N. ]., June zS, 1893. Editor of the " Green Bag ' : Mr. Browne, in a recent issue of the •• Green Hag," has some remarks on the derivation of the phrase "grass-widow." I have not read the articles on that subject in the " Nation." and do not know the con clusion, if any. reached in that paper; but it strikes me that the phrase is used in precisely the same sense that we use the phrases " man of straw," '•straw bond, and straw bail." the "straw'1 having been changed to "grass," perhaps on the principle that, as we say in Jersey, "all fhsh is grass." At any rate, the German has it " strohwitte," and the French " veuve-de-paille," both meaning "strawwidow." The fact that so many languages use an equivalent expression seems to put the "gracewirlow " derivation out of the question. The Cen tury Dictionary says it is certainly wrong, as not applicable to non-English forms Yours truly, G. A. VROOM.

COMMUNICATIONS from our " Disgusted Layman" .ire always welcome; and though he is an inveter ate " kicker," there is much wisdom in his words. ., PA., June 12, 1893. Editor of the " Green Bag " : Your " Disgusted Layman " is now both dis gusted and pleased at the law : he is disgusted at a lot of idolaters rearing around about a recent decision of our Supreme Court that the first deed or mortgage recorded takes precedence, no matter which was dated first. As a layman understands it, a purchaser could have kept his deed or mortgage secret for six months, and thus cut out an honest subsequent pur chaser who could have no way of knowing whether a previous deed or mortgage was in existence except

by asking every man. woman, or child in the civilized world, and it does n't imke a particle of difference which Rustyfustyian laid this down as the law, the layman knows it is rot. The records are for the pur pose of informing anybody whether a title is clear of incumbrance : if they don't, what in the name of sense is the good of them? Now the idolatrous lawyer raises a great stir because this decision "unsettles the law," which sounds very pretty; but if "the law" is nonsense, why not unsettle it?

Whether your " Disgusted Layman " has the facts exactly right as to what the decision was. he does n't know; but he has got the substance of it. and is pretty sure that that bogie " The Common Law, Sir!" is at the bottom of the bobbery the lawyers are kicking up. Now, as to being pleased. As he understands the matter, our Supreme Court has sustained the opinion of a trial judge, that if a man wants to go to another's house, he is lawfully on the other's premises if he goes to the front door only; that when he knocks or rings, and fails to get a reply, it is his business to go out the way he came in; that if he goes poking around back doors, etc., etc., he is a trespasser. If the dog bites him at the front door, the owner of the dog is liable, if he knew or had reason to know that the dog was vicious : but if the dog bites the trespasser while poking around back doors, the owner is not liable. Now, a doggy layman like "yours truly" is much pleased to find that the law agrees with the good, sensible watchdog; and when it is in such company as that, the law must be right, beyond ques tion. Any thoroughly wise watchdog will permit a stranger to go to the front door without molestation, but is very suspicious if the visitor sneaks around back ways; and it is refreshing to note that the law is as wise as the dog. I must confess that the dog has a dissenting opinion on a point that I think he is in error as to, — he objects to the visitor leaving the grounds if none of the family are present; but great minds do not always think alike in all details. Your Disgusted Layman.

A KENTUCKY correspondent sends us the fol lowing : — Editor of the " Green Bag" : DEAR SIR, — About 1870 Judge Jas. O'Hara was Circuit Court Judge of the Twelfth Judicial District