Consideration Implied in Negotiable Paper.

The consideration is also implied in regard to promissory notes which have been properly negotiated. [For explanations concerning promissory notes, negotiation, etc., see Chapters 11-12.] Thus if you hold A's note for $100 which he gave to B, from whom you bought it in good faith, knowing nothing of the circumstances under which B received it, you can recover the $100 from A when the note becomes due, even though he can show that he never received any consideration from B for it. Between the immediate parties to the note however, this presumption of a consideration is not conclusive; thus if B, in the case above, should keep the note himself and attempt to sue A on it, A could then show in defence that he had never received any consideration for it.

Consideration Distinctly Set Forth.

The consideration should always be stated in the contract; but if, by any accident it is omitted from a written agreement, it is possible to prove it by oral evidence. It is vitally important in every case, spoken or written, that the consideration should be distinctly named and understood by all the parties to the contract.

Consideration Valuable and Lawful.

The consideration must be one which is of some pecuniary value, or capable of being thus estimated. A promise "in consideration of love and affection," or of "duty," is not sufficient, and such a promise would not be binding. The consideration must also. be lawful-violating no law of the land, no rule of public policy or of good morals.

Various Kinds of Consideration.

Any compromise of a claim whose validity or binding force is in dispute between the parties to it, is a sufficient consideration for the promise of one party to pay the amount, or do the act, fixed upon by the compromise.

So any agreement by one who has the right to bring suit against the other on any claim, that he will forbear to exercise such right, is a sufficient consideration for a promise by the other to pay more money or to do some further act.

Even mutual promises may be sufficient considerations for each other. A very large proportion of the contracts of every-day life are based on this kind of consideration, and in many of these it might appear, on casual observation, that there was no consideration at all, for it is the promise itself, and not its fulfilment, which is the consideration. Even a minor's promise, though not enforcable at law, is a sufficient consideration for an adult's promise, which is enforcable. [See Chapter 5.]

Thus in marriage engagements, the consideration for the promise of each party, is the promise of the other, and to sustain an action for breach of promise in such a case, it is necessary to prove that a mutual agreement was entered into, either by express words or fair implication. If only one party promises marriage, the other cannot hold him to it.

Implied Consideration.

It is not absolutely necessary to the validity of a contract that the promise should be expressly given, an implied promise being often sufficient. Thus as is suggested in the case named above, if one promises

marriage in spoken or written words, and the other does not reject the promise so made, and by acts allows a reciprocal promise to be inferred on her own part, the contract is as complete and valid as though the most binding words were used on both sides.

This doctrine of implied considerations is carried so far that one who agrees to perform some gratui tous service for another, is bound to perform such service well and carefully. Thus, if you agree to carry some valuable jewelry from your friend in one city to a mutual friend in another place, and you are so careless of the property intrusted to you that you lose it, when by the exercise of a little care you need not have done so, you can be held responsible for the damage sustained, on the promise which was implied from your accepting the trust, that you would take care of the property while it was in your possession; and the consideration for your implied promise was the trust and confidence which was reposed in you. This is an exceedingly fine point in law, over which judges and lawyers have disputed for centuries, and it may not be easy to comprehend it fully, but every one can understand that he should never make thoughtless promises to perform gratuitous services, unless he is willing to take the trouble to do them well and thoroughly, lest he be held legally responsible for any carelessness in the matter.

CHAPTER IV.

THE ASSENT OF PARTIES TO A CONTRACT.

Importance of Assent-Assent Must be Mutual and Concurrent-It Must not be in Fest nor Under a Mistake of Fact-Mistake of Law no Excuse-Mistakes as to Identity and as to Quality-Leasing House Unfit for Occupancy, Furnished and Unfurnished-Contract Invalidated by Fraud-Essentials of Fraud in the Legal Sense.

It has already been said that to effect a contract, there must be a meeting of the minds. That is, the assent of both parties to the contract in all its parts, is essential.

Assent Must be Mutual and Concurrent.

The assent must be mutual, and it must be concurrent in time.

If you make a business proposition to your neighbor to-day and he does not accept it, nor act in a manner to lead you to suppose that he wishes time in which to consider it, and a month hence he comes to you,brings up the subject and says that he accepts your proposition, no contract is thereby created, and he cannot hold you to your offer, unless you have agreed to keep it open all that time. His acceptance of your offer must be given within a "reasonable time," which is usually considered to be but a few days, or perhaps

only a few hours; and even within that time, you may expressly revoke your offer if he has not already accepted it, thereby freeing yourself from liability thereon.

Assent Must Not Be in Fest.

Nor is a contract binding which is entered into in mere jest; as in the case of mock marriages, even if the knot be sportively tied by an ordained minister, or justice of the peace. There is no marriage, because such was not the real intention of the parties, however solemnly the words may have been spoken. (But it is usually advisable in such a case to secure a judicial decree annulling the marriage to avoid any possibility of future questions on the subject).

Mistake of Fact.

The assent of the parties must be given with a fair and correct understanding of the facts of the case in order to make a binding contract, and not under any mistake concerning them, for in the latter event, no assent is really given to the contract as it stands. It is often very difficult to prove that such a mistake existed however, and it is therefore vitally essential that the subject matter of any contract should be fully understood by all the parties to it, and clearly expressed in words.

Mistake of Person.

A mistake as to the person with whom the contract is made, is such a mistake of fact as will invalidate a contract. A very good case in illustration of this statement was tried in Massachusetts a few years ago, which the reporter's head-note thus sums up.

"A who had bought ice of B, ceased to take it on