صور الصفحة
النشر الإلكتروني
[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

to loss or damage arising from a breach of the ship- not learned, but he had a way of getting at the pith of a
owner's duty to provide a ship fit for its purpose, as it thing that made his opinions valuable. His special
ouly applied to matters occurring during the voyage. virtue as an advocate was hit off by Sergeant Parry,
Steel v. State Line Steamship Co., 37 L. T. Rep. (N.S.) who said that he better than any other mau knew
333; 3 App. Cas. 12; 24 Eng. R. 37. High Ct. Just.. when to be silent.
Q. B. Div. March 11, 1884. Tattersall v. National But let us leave now the neighborhood of Westmin.
Steamship Company (Limited). Opinions by Day and ster, and imagine ourselves in the quiet and beautiful
Smith, JJ.

city of Worcester. The Worcester courts are an ex. COVENANT--RENEWAL, CONSTRUCTION.-In constru-ception to the ordinary dingy, crowded and inodorous ing a covenant in a lease for the purpose of ascertain. abode of justice, being large, lofty and well ventilated. ing whether it is a covenant for perpetual renewal or The learned gentleman in the pit arrayed in the neatnot, the same rule of construction applies as in constru- est of wigs, the most immaculate of frills, and the ing any other contract, and the rule is that the inten-glossiest of silks, who is just opening his case to the tion of the parties to the contract is to be ascertained solid, jolly-looking jurors, is Huddlestou, the leader from the language used. Where the language used is of the Circuit, and as good a man at Nisi Prius as any obscure, the presumption is against a covenant for in England. His legal knowledge is not very greatperpetual renewal; but where the language is clear not more than sufficient to serve his turn-and his opthis presumption has no application. When once one ponent, the keen, quiet-looking mau beside him, has is satisfied, according to the canons of interpretation, probably forgotten more than he ever knew; but as to the meaning of a document, which the law does Huddy" is an advocate all over, and before a jury not require to be in any special form of words, the he will play second fiddle to none. Matthews however thing is done. When once the bargain is ascertained has his revenge in banc. There Huddleston's law is there is no rule, either at law or in equity, that the listened to with polite indifference mixed with a little parties are to be punished because they have not ex- of the amusement known at the bar as baiting the badpressed themselves more fltly. The object of rules of ger, whilst Matthews receives the attention his learnconstruction is to enable the courts to uuderstand con- ing deserves. It is however strange to observe the imtracts. What was said by Sir Edward Sudgen in Sbep- mense advantage Huddleston has over all his oppopard v. Dovlan, 3 Drew. & War. 1, is borne out by the nents before a jury. Matthews is no stick; he is fluent observations of Wood, V. C., iu Hare v. Burges, 4 K. and persuasive in speech, severe in cross-examination, & J. 45. See also Ex parte Clarke, Irish R., 6 Eq. 51; and attentive to the jury. Yet somehow or other HudBrown v. Tighe, 2 ('l. & Fin, 416. Ct. of App. Jan. dleston's cases are half won before they are begun. 22, 1884. Swinburne v. Milburn. Opinious by Brett, Does “personal magnetism ” make the difference? M. R., and Bowen, L. J.

Huddleston is now on the bench, and no doubt makes

a good practical judge of the Baron Martin stamp. ODDS AND ENDS.

We need not stop to discuss any of the half-dozen

Q. C.'s who are on the Assize, and amongst the crowd
NAME now almost forgotten by the public is that

of juuiors only Jelf, the tall young man with the sinof Sir John Karslake. Yet in his day-less than gle eye-glass, and Motteram, the burly old fellow, just fifteen years ago--he was by common consent the first rising to examine the first witness, are the only ones man at the English common-law bar. The brilliant worth notice. Motteram's career has been one of misattoruey-general of a brilliant government, learned, fortune pluckily met, and now he is County Court eloquent and upright, with a physical presence that judge of Birmingham, and boasts of clearing off his well supplemented his intellectual gifts, Sir John was 23,000 cases per annum without arrears! Jelf was unthe beau ideal of a great advocate. No other man doubtedly the leading junior of the Circuit, a first-rate within my recollection had such weight with the lawyer and a clever advocate, but a year or two of this judges, and his certain destiny appeared to be either tired him out, as it does most meu, and he was glad to the chief justiceship, or if he remained in politics, the seek the comparative ease of silk. What with giving woolsack itself. But sudden blindness struck him, opinions, advising on evidence, drawing pleadings, and amidst the universal regret of his coufreres he running small cases alone, and prompting his leader in was forced to retire alike from professional and par- big ones, the leading junior's lot is indeed "all work liamentary life. He may perhaps still be seen at the and no play.” Once arrayed in silk, the drudgery of Temple church, led to his seat by affectionate hands, chamber work is past. A glance at his brief over night but the public hears him no more.

(and very often not even that), a five minutes' consulHe was succeeded by another Sir John), whose career

tation with the attorney, in which the big man listens has since been closed by death. Sir John Holker's condescendingly to the poor fellow's nervous suggesforensic art was the art that conceals itself. Out- tions, and dismisses him with a “Well, Mr. A., I dare wardly rough, heavy and listless, his list of victories say we'll pull it through, but it's a weak case," and spoke for him, and to no one would the attorneys more

then into court he goes, and very likely opens for a refreadily intrust an apparently hopeless case than to

The judge is ready enough to meet him, for this "man from the provinces," as a supercilious critic has he not a heavy list and only two days to clear it once called him. In Parliament he achieved a success

in? and before the astonished attorney can say Jack much beyond that of the average attorney-general Robinson, the case is referred to Mr. Blank, the learned The miscellaneous body that represents the British Q. C. walks off with his forty or tifty guineas, and the Commons is usually somewhat impatient and incredu- junior attends the reference. lous of lawyers. They talk too much and too readily This is bad enough, but worse often happens in Lonto suit its tastes, but Holker soon gained and kept a don, where owing to the multiplicity of courts counsel place as one of the most valuable debaters in Disraeli's is sometimes bound to be in two places at once, and not staff. He had a broad way of looking at things, and a being Sir Boyle Roche's bird, the result is that one certain easy frankness that made his suspicious hearers cause loses his assistance altogether. The fees must forget the wig and gown he had left outside. Although be paid all the same, for the theory is that these are a vehement Tory, and a vigorous denouncer of the Lib. paid for reading the brief, wbilst as if to add insult to erals and all their ways, yet he made such an impres

injury, this same briel, so dearly paid for, and with all sion on Mr. Gladstone that after the fall of the Bea

its wealth of legal disquisition and argument, in which consfield government he was offered a lord justiceship

probably the attorney bas felt a secret pride as the re

sult of much and arduous labor, comes back to his by his quondam opponent. As a lawyer, Holker was hands uuanuotated, uuread, nay, even unopened.


[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

tors a little fooling. At this season alone do we A correspondent asks us why Mr. Hun publishes
suffer our poetical editor to intrude upon these mere memoranda of decisions. Mr. Hun informs
grave and prosaic columns, although we keep him us that it is done at the express direction of the
in pay through the whole year. Last week he ten- judges. That is a complete justification for the
dered some advice to the political candidates on the reporter, but what is the use of publishing such
subject of interviewing. This week he offers a few memoranda ?
lines dedicated to those two or three judges of the
upper courts in the city of New York, who indulge

The stories that newspapers tell about lawyers in the pastime of stock-gambling He wrote and judges are sometimes very extraordinary. We these lines a good while ago, and sent a copy to

look to see Judge Drummond suing the St. Paul William Cullen Bryant, among others. Mr. Bryant

Pioneer Press for libel on account of some “ anecacknowledged the receipt very courteously, but dotes” of the judge published by that credulous mildly intimated that they had a suspicious and imaginative journal. If these " anecdotes” are resemblance to his own “Lines to

a Water

true it is no wonder that the judge resigned, and fowl.” Whereupon the writer explained to Mr.

the bar would probably be, but our readers will Bryant that the resemblance, if any, was purely ac

conclude after perusing them that some wag of a cidental — one of those remarkable coincidences | lawyer has been imposing on the reporter. But which have sometimes been noticed between men here are the "anecdotes: " "Once Matt Carpenter of genius as Charles Reade and Dean Swift, for undertook to play fast and loose in an argument example. This must have been satisfactory to Mr.

before Drummond. He was interrupted: Mr. Bryant, for the writer did not hear from him again. Carpenter, you helped to pass this law.

A man It is a great resource to be able to diversify law with should be ashamed to quibble over a law of his own poetry. Doubtless the great poets have often making.' As Carpenter went out of the court wished they could diversify poetry with law. These

room, smarting under the rebuke like a whipped verses were written at a time when a curb-stone schoolboy, he remarked to a brother lawyer: "Old broker was known as a "gutter-snipe.” The fashion

Tom Drummond is the ablest legal mind this counof Wall street may have changed the designation,

try has produced. I say it without reserve.' Once and we make the explanation for the benefit of our

Carpenter alluded to an attorney opposed to him as rural readers who do not gamble in Wall street.

that man.' The expression came out several times

before Judge Drummond's wrath waxed vocal. He LINES TO A GUTTER-SNIPE,

frothed at the mouth, and cried out: Mr. CarpenWhither midst falling due

ter, sit down. Do you desist calling any lawyer Of notes and checks at two o'clock each day,

in this court 'that man. If you ever again call a Through Wall street's seething depths dost thou pursue brother attorney in my court 'that man' you will Thy melancholy way?

cease to have the opportunity for such an insult.' Gaily the broker's eye

In a lawsuit over the Adams estate in Milwaukee Doth mark thy timid tread, to sell thee “short” one firm of lawyers put in a bill for $15,000, anAs dimly seen upon the curbstone nigh,

other lawyer a bill for $5,000, and still another a Thy figure skulks about.

bill for an equal sum. The estate amounted to but Seek'st thou the boiling hell

$32,000, and the parties in interest were orphan Of William street, or Broad street's margins wide, children. Drummond went over the charges, which Or where the crazy brokers shout and yell,

as judge he must audit. As he went from item to Tossed on the Gold Room's tide ?

item his anger increased. It is said by those who There is a power whose law

were present that no set of men ever received such Restricts thy pathway to that dirty gutter,

a Jove-like castigation. "Gentlemen,' he said, And shuts thee out of rooms where victims goaw

you consider yourselves good lawyers. How much Their lips, and curses utter.

more are your services worth to your clients than All day thy feet with pain

mine to the people? You have charged $25,000 Have trod those dusty stones, nor homeward tend,

for sixty days' service. Could you not be content Till latest price of "Erie” or “Fort Wayne" The bulletins append.

each of you to take my pro rata for the same time?

These charges are infamous. They are such as And soon thou'lt be a “goner;

men who are scoundrels and thieves at heart would Soon shalt thou find the bottom of thy pocket,

make. This charge of $15,000 is cut down to And swear among thy fellows; in some corner" Thou wilt “go up” like rocket.

$1,500, those of $5,000 each to $500. Repeat such VOL. 30 -- No. 4.

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]


a piece of rapine in this court, and I will disbar commonest form, was fully sufficient, but proof was
every one of you.” If Judge Drummond can sub- required that Mr. Benjamin was a British subject.
mit to such imputations of bad temper, false logic, This was supplied by a statement in his handwrit-
and impotent threatenings; it would astonish us in- ing in the books at Lincoln's Inn, that his father
deed, but that he should submit to the charge of and mother were British subjects of Jewish extrac-
expecting the lawyers practicing in his court to tion, and that be was a British subject in virtue of
work for as little as he got is more than ve can 4 George, II, chapter 21, by which the children of

British subjects not born on British soil obtain
British nationality by descent.

It thus appears
Lord Coleridge is not going to write a book on that Mr. Benjamin was all his life a British subject,
America, after all. He writes us: “I cannot see and after being an American senator and Confeder-
your very kind and cordial words in the Law JOUR- ate Attorney-General he became domiciled in En-
NAL, which reached me last week, without inflict- gland, and died a domiciled Frenchman.”
ing a line upon you to thank you for them. I wish
also to say that there is not, and never has been,

We have not seen the bill, but from what we hear the slightest foundation for the statement, which I have not thought it worth while publicly to contra

of it we should suppose that Judge Poland's bill, dict, that I am writing a book about America. My recently introduced in Congress, to regulate comvisit was too short, too hurried, too pleasant in all ing to negotiable instruments, would be a very im

merce among the States, and codify the law relatways, to give me any real insight into your wonderful country. There must be by-ways I never saw,

portant reform. It proposes to suspend the laws of unscrupulous people I never met; and if I were

the several States regulating commercial paper, and

to substitute for them one law of the United States foolish enough to try to generalize from such very imperfect materials, I have not the power to do so

to govern such paper throughout the country. The with effect. I cannot knock off a dissertion on a

importance of having one kind of commercial great country of infinitely complicated elements, paper, as we now have one kind of bank notes, and endless variety of social aspects, in half cannot be overrated. It would every year save a an hour. The incorrigible vanity of such a pro- greatly facilitate the operations of inter-State com

great amount of confusion and loss, and would ceeding would be laughable if it were not sometimes so very mischievous. No; I must be content

We suppose, of course, that it would rewith the very pleasant memories of my ten weeks" | quire the assent of three-fourths of the States. American vision, during all of which I never heard an unkind word, or met an unfriendly person, and

NOTES OF CASES. which will always warm my heart when I think of it, till it is chilled forever by that which cannot (N Davis v. Lenawee County Savings Bank, Supreme now be very far away. Of course, there were in

Court of Michigan, March, 1884, 18 Rep. 86, a America, as there are in all countries, things on depositor in a savings bank opened a second account which one might make unfavorable comment. But in the name of his wife, being told at the bank then I always said what I thought when I was in that he could not open two accounts in his own America, and did, now and then, presume to find

Upon his wife's death the bank refused to fault a presumption which, as the Americans be recognize his right to the deposit. Held, the fact lieved me to be a friend, they in no way resented. that an account stands in the name of another does I said in fact the little I had to say, in your coun

not affect the depositor's rights to the depositor. try, and kept back nothing to say of it after I had The court said: “In the present case the testimony left it."

does not tend to show that the bank ever contracted

with anybody but plaintiff, or received funds on The late Mr. Benjamin came near proving no ex- this account which were not his funds. The case ception to the rule that great lawyers are apt to he made out, and which the jury must have found make a mess of it in their wills. The Law Journal true, was that while deposited in his wife's name, says: “It is to be observed that Mr. Benjamin de- it was not intended to be for her benefit, or to be clared his intention of living in Paris for the rest | beyond the husband's right to withdraw. Any idea of his life, thus carefully precluding any question of a gift to her was clearly negatived. Her name as to his domicile, which might easily have arisen, was only another form for his name, and so agreed. and occasioned much litigation. The testator hav- The bank-book is no contract, and is only one of ing thus elected a French domicile at the time of the means of indicating the state of the funds, his death, the question arose whether the will, Whatever presumptions may arise from it, and which being a holograph, was duly executed ac- whatever protection may be given to acts innocently cording to French law, ought not to be proved in done on that presumption, it can not exclude ex. France. Under the act of 1861, known as Lord planatory evidence. The contract was made with Cranworth's act, the will of a British subject plaintiff, and with no one else, and the bank is wherever domiciled may be proved in England if answerable to him to fulfill that contract. There is executed according to the forms of the English | no principle of law which makes the mere placing law. The attestation clause, although not in the of money or property in another's name an irrevoc

[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

able gift to that person. But this arrangement falls public use of the plaintiff's book. But copyright is short of even this, because in law it was merely a the right, by printing or otherwise, to multiply contract between two persons that one should open copies. To multiply copies of a material portion of an account in the name of a third person, the orig- a work which is entitled to copyright is as much a inal depositor having a reserved right to draw the breach of the law, though differing in degree, as to sums credited. At common law no one could sue multiply copies of the whole work; and it has long on an express contract, except the parties to it. been settled that multiplying copies for private disUnder the equitable action for money had and re- tribution among a limited class of persons is just as ceived, a beneficiary may sometimes sue, but this illegal as if it were done for the purpose of sale. can only be where the parties have given him such | Take, for example, a valuable copyright like Lord a right as transfers the fund to his control. The Tennyson's poems. No one could print them and money belonging to one person can not cease to be distribute the copies among his friends, or among long to him until he does some act to dispose of it. the boys at a school, or any limited class of persons, The cases heretofore determined in this court are any more than he could print them for sale. Novello stronger cases than the present in favor of plaintiff's v. Sudlow, 12 C. B. 0. S. 177. Therefore I have no rights. See Burtnett v. Bank, 38 Mich. 630, and hesitation in saying that the circumstance that the Bank v. Burrows, 34 id. 153.” To the same effect, defendants do not sell their books, or that they only Brabrook v. Boston Five Cents Sav. Bk., 104 Mass. give them to their own agents, and to merchants 228; S. C., 6 Am. Rep. 222.

with whom they correspond, would not justify this

multiplication of copies. But the defendants' main In Ager v. Peninsular and Oriental Steam Naviga- iff's book, they are doing no more than the plaintiff

argument is, that in making this use of the plainttion Company, Limited, Chan. Div. June 14, 1884, 50 intended they should do, and Mr. Giffard ingenL. T. Rep. (N. S.) 477, the plaintiff published and iously compared the case to that of a copy-book copyrighted a book consisting of 100,000 words ar

with the usual slips printed at the top of each page, ranged alphabetically, selected from eight languages. These are intended to be copied, and he argued and specially compiled with a view to correct tele

that if any one bought one, he might fill up that graphic transmission. To each of the words was ascribed a different combination of five of the ordi- with facsimile copies if he could make them in hand

book, and as many blank books besides as he chose, nary numerals 0 to 9. The book could be used by writing, without infringing the owner's copyright, any one to make a code of cypher telegraphy of his because that sort of use was intended by the owner. own by attributing to any of these words, or to the

But the question is, whether the use made in this equivalent numerals, whatever meanings he might please, and communicating these significations to

case by the defendants was intended by the plaint

iff. By bringing this action he declares it was not. his correspondents. The defendants printed a book containing the bulk of the words comprised in the He has printed on the title-page of his book the

usual intimation in a work intended to have copyplaintif's book, and taken from it, but appending right, that it is entered at Stationers' Hall. Is to them numbers aud meanings of their own. They there any thing in the nature of the case which distributed these books, marked “private,” gratu- makes it necessary or proper to infer that his conitously to their own agents, and to merchants with tention is wrong? In the first place, the use the whom they corresponded by telegraph. Held, an

defendants are making of his book is not absolutely infringement of copyright. The court, Kay, J., essential even to the defendants' mode of availing said: “The defendants admit that they could not themselves of the plaintiff's research. They might sell, or even distribute gratuitously, their book to print their own code, referring to the words or any one who might wish to have it, without infring- numbers in the plaintiff's book, without reprinting ing the plaintiff's copyright. But they do not do one of such words, so that any one having a copy this

. What they do is to give — not sell — their of the plaintiff's book, and placing the debooks, and only to their own agents and merchants fendants' code beside it, might employ that code with whom they correspond by telegraph, and for with little, if any, trouble more than is involved in this purpose they have printed about 150 copies, the use of the defendants' book, while the advantand have distributed about fifty at present. I have age to the plaintiff would be, that which he must no doubt – indeed that is scarcely denied that be very blind to his own interest if he intended to enough of the plaintiff's book is copied to constitute give up, viz., that so many more copies of his book a serious invasion of his rights, unless the defend- must be bought. On the other hand, if the deants can justify the manner in which they take it. fendants be right, any one to whom they give one One justification attempted is the circumstance that of their books could from it, without betraying any they only give the books to their own agents and secret of the defendants, inform the whole world correspondents, and do not publish or use them what were the words selected by the plaintiff, and otherwise than privately, and they point to the thus render his books comparatively useless. In the word 'private 'printed conspicuously on the cover, illustration of the copy-book it is not denied that and to the fact that the object would be defeated if no one could print a copy even for private use. It their code were made public

, as sufficiently showing can only be copied in the mode and to the extent that it is out of the question that they make any intended by the owner. Copying to a certain ex

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

tent is the very object which the owner of the copy- musical entertainments, furnishing meals for its book intended, but any copying beyond that members, and keeping a small stock of liquors for extent would be illegal. The illustration is inapt, their exclusive use, affording no profit, but partly unless it be clear that such copying as the defend-paid for by their monthly dues, each member payants have made was intended by the plaintiff, and ing for what he uses as it is taken, is not subject to I have no difficulty in believing that he never in- tax as a ' retail liquor dealer' as 6 other merchants." tended any thing of the kind. Applying the usual Tennessee Club of Memphis v. Dryer, 11 Lea, 452. tests (Scott v. Stanford, 16 L. T. Rep. N. S. 51, 53; The court cited Seim v. State, 55 Md. 566; S. C., L. Rep., 3 Eq. 718, 723; Kelly v. Morris, 14 L. T. 39 Am. Rep. 419; Graff v. Evans, 8 Q. B. Div. 373. Rep. N. S. 222; L. Rep., 1 Eq. 697), it seems to me The court said: "We think it is clear from the that the plaintiff must have expended a great deal statements of the bill that the mode of salt as it of time and labor on this compilation; that what is termed, to the members at a rate fixed by the the defendants are doing is to avail themselves very governing committee of the club, is only in fact an largely and unnecessarily of the labor and research equitable mode of distributing refreshments to its of the plaintiff without adequately recompensing members, which are provided by the club for them him; that the use which the defendants make of exclusively. It cannot be controverted but that their book is calculated to interfere seriously with the the complainant would have a right to purchase sale of the plaintiff's book; that it is a multiplying and keep liquors at its club rooms for the use of its of copies of the plaintiff's book within the words of members, and to distribute them among them in the Copyright Act (5 & 6 Vict., c. 45); and that it is any method it might deem proper, and to raise therefore an invasion of the copyright of the plaint- funds for the purpose of replenishing by assessiff against which he is entitled to be protected." ments upon its members, and the mode adopted of

the form of a sale alone to its members of such a

quantity for so much money can be nothing more COMMON WORDS AND PHRASES.

than a mode adopted of assessing each member in

proportion to the amount he consumes. HOLESALE LIQUOR DEALER.- A manufac- In the case of State v. Smith, 5 Humph. 394, this

turer of liquors selling in unbroken pack- court in construing a revenue act held that to conages at his place of business is not a " wholesale

stitute a merchant in the meaning of the revenue liquor dealer,” liable to taxation as

other mer

laws, the business of buying and selling should be chants." Taylor v. Vincent, 12 Lea, 282. The the pursuit and vocation by which the party makes court said: “We hold that a dealer is correctly de- his living. In that case the preceptor and propriefined by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in the tor of an extensive female school had between case of Commonwealth v. Campbell, 9 Casey, 386, as fifty and a hundred pupils and tutoresses boarding a middleman between the manufacturer or the pro- with him and members of his family. To supply ducer and the consumer, or as was said by Judge these persons with clothes, books, etc., he kept on Black in Norris v. Commonwealth, 3 id. 495, 'a hand a supply of such articles of clothing and stadealer, in the popular conception or sense of the tionery as they might need, and furnished these arword, is not one who buys to keep or makes to ticles not with a view of profit, but to accommosell, but one who buys to sell again. He stands im- date his pupils and keep up his school. He sold mediately between the producer and the consumer, to no person not a member of his family. Held and depends for his profits not upon the labor he that he was not a merchant, or subject to be taxed bestows upon his commodities, but on the skill and as such.” foresight with which he watches the markets. In MECHANIC. — A photographer is not a other words, a manufacturer of an article from the chanic” within the statute of exemption from exeraw material, though he sells the article thus manu- cution. Story v. Walker, 11 Lea, 515. The court factured in unbroken packages to dealers, is not a said: The Legislature of this State has not treated wholesale dealer under these revenue statutes. The photographers as mechanics, but as photographic added clause and shall be taxed as other mer- artists, and subjected their vocation to a privilege chants' shows that the Legislature had in mind tax.

The words of the statutes of exempwholesale merchants men engaged in buying and tions were used, and intended to be understood in selling as an occupation, and not the original manu- their usuul and proper sense.

A mechanic engaged facturer selling as in this case.” In State v. Lau- in the pursuit of his trade is a workman employed enhaupt, 11 Lea, 13, the court said: “We take it, in shaping and uniting materials, such as wood, what is meant by retailing is selling by small quan- metal, etc., into some kind of structure, machine, tities to suit customers, articles which are bought or other object requiring the use of tools.

The in larger amounts generally. Now one who sells tools must be such as are used by the workman to in this way, or whose business is so to sell is a re

shape or change the surface of lumber or other ma tail dealer, one who sells by the nature of his busi-terial, or create an object by manual labor. Freeness in gross, and not by the small quantity or par- man on Ex., $ 226. The photographer is an artist, cel to consumers, is a wholesale dealer."

not an artisan, who takes impressions of things and Retail Liquor DEALER.– A social club, organ- persons on prepared plates or surfaces. He is no ized under statute, maintaining a library, giving more a mechanic than the painter, who by mean s

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


« السابقةمتابعة »