OCR Text |
Show POPULAR TALKS ON LAW. Tho rule that every promise must have a consideration to support it in order to be good in law; in other words, that every contract must havo two sides; and tho further rule that tho consideration, or that which Is agreed to be given for tho promise, must not bo something which tho promisor Is already bound In law to glvo, has frequent application in cases of settlements of existing debts. A man owes mo, wo will say, $500, and tho debt Is overdue. I say to him, "Pay mo ?460 now and I will release you from tho remainder of tho debt." Ho pays mo $450, relying on my promise. prom-ise. Am I bound In law to release him from tho remainder of tho debt? No, because tho consideration for my promise to release him was his paying pay-ing mo ?450, something which ho was already bound in law to do. If, however, how-ever, ho had agreed to do something more than ho was already bound to do, as for instance, to pay ?4G0 at somo placo other than that provided in tho original contract, or to pay mo ?4C0 and do somo specified service, then that which was agreed to bo done over and above the mere payment of tho ?450 would be considered In tho law a sufficient consideration to support sup-port tho agreement to roleaso tho debtor from tho remainder of tho debt. It is held, however, that if a man owes me ?100 overdue, and I agree to accept something other than money, as, say, a horse in full payment, I cannot thereafter claim that the horso wa3 not worth $100, and that therefore there-fore the debtor still owes mo the difference dif-ference between the value of tho horso and the hundred dollars on tho ground of no consideration. If one pays something some-thing other than money, whatever Its valuo, in full satisfaction of his debt, and the creditor accepts it, tho debt Is discharged as completely as If it had been fully paid in money. Then, too, if the debt is not yet duo, the creditor's agreement to accept a. part of it at once in full dlschargo of tho whole debt is good, as in that caso tho consideration is payment before be-fore tho debt Is due, and that is a now consideration something tho debtor was not bound to do. Where tho debt is uncertain In amount, or is In dispute, It is held that a promise to give a release on tho payment pay-ment of a certain amount of money Is good, even although it may be afterwards after-wards found that tho real amount duo was more. If a creditor receives in full payment from his debtor somo obligation dub tho debtor from a third person, tho debt is discharged, even although tho transferred debt is smaller than tho ono for which It Is given In payment. If a person to whom a debt Is due agrees to accept a negotiable promissory promis-sory noto for a less amount than tho debt and gives a dlschargo, he is bound to do so, th0 theory being that tho advantage tho creditor gets from tho noto, It being negotiable, is sufficient suf-ficient consideration. It was held that a promise of extra pay to sailors In consideration of their agreeing to finish a voyage for which they had signed articles was without consideration. So was a promise to pay a witness for attendance at court more than tho fees prescribed by law. So was a promise to reward an officer for arresting a criminal whom. tho duties du-ties of his office required him to arrest. ar-rest. Tho whole question as to whether or not a promise to pay less than tho whole debt will discharge tho debt on tho payment of tho lesser amount doponds entirely upon whether or not what is agreed to bo done by tho debtor debt-or Is something which In law ho Is already al-ready bound to do. If there is anything any-thing to bo given or to bo dono by him other than ho Is bound by law already to do, there Is sufficient consideration for the promise to release, and the promisor will be bound. A promise mudo to ono In consideration consider-ation of his forbearing to suo Is mado on valid consideration. A promise mado to ono in consideration of his forbearing to collect a debt or to en-forco en-forco payment Is made on good consideration, con-sideration, providing tho forbearance bo for a deilnito or reasonable time. A forbearanco not to prosecute a demand whlcn Is found not to exist in law or In fact Is no consideration. If a creditor agrees to give up part of a debt in consideration of tho debtor's debt-or's giving him a new or additional security, his promiso will have a. good consideration and bo valid. Then, too, In order for tho consideration consider-ation to bo legal, It must not bo something some-thing in tho past. Thus, if ono does work for mo gratultiously and I afterwards after-wards voluntarily promiso to pay him for It, I am not bound in law to keep tho promise, tho consideration having been something in tho past. So If 1 havo bought a horse, and not at tho time required a warranty, and I afterwards after-wards go to the person from whom- 1 bought It and ask for a warranty, a warranty then given, unless something some-thing is paid or promised to bo paid on it, is not valid in tho law. If I promiso to repay to strangers what they must pay out In tho future In taking caro of my sick son who Is of full age, tho promiso Is supported by a valid consideration and Is legally binding. If, however, strangers take care of my sick son who is of full ago and I afterwards promise to reimburse them, my promiso Is without consideration, consid-eration, as it Is based upon past acts. I may bo morally bound to do so, but I am not legally so bound. It has been held that whore tho aci Is dono at tho request of another person under such circumstances that tho law will imply a promise to pay what tho service is worth, a subsequent promise prom-ise to pay will bo binding, tho tbeor being that tho parties have reduced to a certainty what they havo purposely left undertermlned. As an exception to tho rulo that promises cannot bo based on a consideration con-sideration that is past wo name promises prom-ises to pay debts barred by tho statute of limitations or by discharge in bankruptcy. bank-ruptcy. Courts so holding have declared de-clared that tho moral obligation in bankruptcy Is sufficient to uphold tho promise. Another rulo is that the consideration considera-tion must bo something possible. A promiso to do something that cannot in tho nature of things bo dono is not a valid consideration to support a contract. con-tract. Not only a thing wnich is physically phy-sically Impossible, but also a thing which Is legally impossible cannot bo mado a consideration. A more stockholder stock-holder In a corporation cannot exe-cuto exe-cuto a legal deed for tho corporation. A promiso by a stockholder to do so would not bo a legal consideration for a contract. Tho question arises as to whether tho fact that ono Is morally obligated to do a thing will make his promise to do It valid as a consideration for a contract. Wo havo seen that where ono Is legally bound to do a thing his promiso to do It will not make a legal consideration. Tho rulo Is that a moral mor-al obligation will not uphold a promise. prom-ise. Thero is ono othor point wo should considoro before passing from tho subject sub-ject of consideration. Somotimes a consideration is said to fail. If I promise prom-ise to pay a man a hundred dollars In consideration of his agreeing to sell mo his chestnut colt, tho consideration considera-tion supporting my promiso to pay Is his promiso to convoy tho title to the animal to me. If before he does so tho horso dies, there Is a total failure of consideration. Thero is absolute. no way possible by which ho may ful- H 1111 his agreement. Where a patent right was a consld- H oration of a contract, and It was found ' H that tho patent right was void, tho ,H consideration was said to havo failed. il Tho more fact that a patent right that H constituted tho consideration of a con- tract could not bo applied to any use- 'lH tul purposo and was of no value did j'H not constitute a failure of consldora- I lion. I A promiso to pay money for notes which aro afterwards found to bo forged Is another instanco of a prom- iso given for a consideration that has H tailed. Thero Is such a thing, too, H as a partial falluro of consideration, H in which caso tho party injured may 1 recover for so much as has failed. 1 jJ Before passing from tho question of consideration, let us emphaslzo the H fact that a court -will novcr oxamlno into tho nicro adequacy of prlco or JH consideration, that Is, it will not con- 1H sldcr whether tho price or consldora- i tion was largo or valuablo enough. H Courts do not attempt to mako con- i H tracts for people They will not an- H swer tho question as to whether ono H person received enough for what ho H gavo,. or whether ono promiso was H worth tho other. The only time when . tho question of adequacy can como up is when fraud Is charged and tho gross H Inadequacy of tho consideration Is ' H brought In as evidence of tho fraud. H Mcro inadequacy of consideration, however, is not enough to warrant a H court in setting usldo n contract. (To bo Continued.) H o |