Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

age they cause, and one whose fields they break into may sue for the harm they do.

If he turns his oxen or other animals loose into the public highway, and there they injure anyone in person or property, he is answerable. Nor is it any defense that he did not know that they were particularly dangerous in disposition, nor is it any defense that the animals were not so, because he ought to have kept them at home.

Whether this applies to hens the law has not said that we know of, but it has said so very decidedly as to all four-footed animals, including one of the most troublesome-dogs. As to other animals it is a general rule that the owner of an animal that is kept at home and there injures a person, is not liable unless it can be shown that he had good reason to know that his animal was mischievous and should be kept in such a way that he would be harmless. But all dogs are mischievous by their very nature and their owner is liable for any injury they do and its direct consequences. Anyone may kill any dog who runs at him in the public highway or on his own land in a threatening way, or if he is wounding or chasing cattle or sheep in his own pastures. In States requiring that dogs should be licensed, if they are not licensed they are outlawed, and may be killed anywhere by any person who is where he has a right to be.

SECTION IX.

SALE WITH WARRANTY OF ANIMALS, of SEEDS, AND OF FERTILIZERS.

In our chapter on sales, section 4, we treat of sales with warranty. We would add here some statements of the law which have an especial reference to farmers.

1. OF ANIMALS.-Farmers often buy and often sell animals, and it is important to know when the sale is with warranty and when it is not. This is sometimes a difficult question. If the word warranty is used there is no question. But this word is not essential, and if it is not used there may still be a question whether there is a warranty. There is one rule stated in our chapter on sales of frequent importance. It is that if any thing be bought for a special purpose and this purpose is made known to the seller, it is considered in law

that the thing is sold with a warranty that it is fit for that purpose. This rule has been applied to the sale of a horse without express warranty.

Mere statements or declarations in circulars or advertisements, or those made in the course of conversation, would not amount to a warranty even if the buyer relied upon them and was deceived by them. But the law seeks to check the fraud which is often perpetrated in this way by the rule that, if the representations were made in the negotiation for the sale and formed a part of it, if they were intended to cause the sale and did help to cause it, then these representations would be a warranty in law with all the effects of a warranty, even if the seller made them honestly.

The warranty may be limited either as to its application or As to time. For example, a horse may be sold with warranty gainst lameness or against glanders, and then there would be no warranty against anything else. Or he may be sold with warranty to last only twenty-four hours, as is frequently said at sales of horses by auction. Then the horse must be returned for unsoundness or any other defect, or a claim be made for a breach of warranty within twenty-four hours after the sale.

cause.

2. OF SEEDS.-Not only farmers but everyone who has a lot of ground no bigger than a table-cloth, or even a dozen flower pots in which he tries to grow flowers or fruit, knows what an annoyance it is to find the seeds he bought and sowed different from what they were bought for, or lifeless or worthless, and that season's cultivation lost. Only a farmer knows the extent of the loss which he may suffer from this And here the law comes to his aid, and if farmers generally knew the remedy in their power and applied it generally, it might be hoped that this fraud might be lessened or punished. The rule that anything sold for a special purpose is sold with a warranty that it is fit for that purpose applies here. And it has been decided in some of our States, and we think would now be in all of them, that if a buyer asks a seller for seed of a particular sort or variety and he sells him seed as good seed of that particular sort or variety, and it turns out to be not of that sort or variety but of some other, or dead and worthless, the seller

is liable to the buyer not merely to the extent of the price paid for the seed, but for all the direct damage which he may have suffered therefrom, as the cost of preparing the field for the seed or the difference in value between the crop which he raised and the crop which would, with reasonable probability, have been raised upon the field if the seed sown had been what it was sold for. And the seller will be thus liable without any express warranty, even if he had been honest and had bought the seed as that which he sold it for, and believed it to be that, and the fraud or mistake was not his own but the man's from whom he bought it.

We have no doubt this rule would be applied in the same way where one who bought young grafted fruit-trees as of a particular variety, and they were sold expressly as such, was deceived and injured in a similar way.

It

3. Of FertilizERS.—A great deal of fraud has been practiced in the sale of fertilizers. This is now much diminished by the better knowledge of the subject possessed by farmers and gardeners, and also by the laws of some of the States. would always be safer for the buyer to insist on a warranty. But this should not be a warranty of the general quality and character of the article, for such a warranty would be of little practical use except in extreme cases. The warranty should be as to the ingredients of which the article consists, and as to the percentage quantity of these. If it be a chemical fertilizer this is easily ascertained by a chemist. The most essential of these ingredients are phosphorus, nitrogen, and potash. These elements exist in artificial fertilizers under different forms. When the amount of each of them in a hundred weight of the article is known to the buyer, it is easy for him to acquire the knowledge necessary to judge of the efficacy and value of the fertilizer.

SECTION X.

HIRING OF HELP.

1. RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF HELP.-In England the law of mas. ter and servant some generations ago was strict, nor has it lost all this character yet. Our fathers brought over to this country much of this law, but it has entirely lost all its force in all our

States. Now the relation of the hirer and the hired is purely one of contract. The hired man agrees to sell so much of his time, labor, or skill to the hirer, and the hirer agrees to pay so much money for what he buys. It is a contract of help and of payment for help, and both parties are held to their contract, and neither beyond it.

In the first place, both parties may make just such a bargain as they like. They may make a complete bargain concerning all items, or a partial one, or none at all.

In the next place, if a man works for a farmer with a partial bargain, or no bargain at all, but at the farmer's request or with his knowledge and acceptance, the law comes in and completes the bargain, or makes one for the parties. It does this on the principle that the working-man undertakes to do his work reasonably well, or according to any prevailing and acknowl edged custom as to time and manner. And then that the farmer is bound to pay him a fair and reasonable price, measured by the custom of the time and place, if there is one applicable to the case, and by the judgment of the jury before whom the case

comes.

A much more difficult question arises when a man who is hired to work on certain terms, for a certain time, works a part of the time as he ought to and then leaves his work and his employer. Can he recover from his employer payment for the work that he has done? There is some conflict in the law about this-that is, in the decisions of the courts on this question—and therefore some uncertainty as to the law. This difficulty springs from a rule of law relating to what is called "Entirety of Contract," which rule is, that if a party to a contract in which he engages to do one whole thing does only a part of it, he cannot claim payment for that part. In most cases this is perfectly reasonable. If a man agrees to sell a farm of a hundred acres for the price of $10,000, he cannot say, I have concluded to sell only half my farm, and you must give me for that $5,000. But where the whole thing consists of divisible parts, and to each part a proportionate part of the money can be applied, the rule is of course modified. Thus if A agrees to sell to B, and B to buy of A, one thousand bushels of

potatoes of a certain quality at one dollar a bushel, f A deliv. ers to B five hundred bushels and refuses to deliver the rest, B can say, I want my thousand bushels or none, and may then return to A the five hundred bushels received, and A has no claim on him. But he may choose to keep the potatoes received, and then he must pay for them the price agreed upon, and so he must if he has sold the five hundred bushels and cannot deliver them. But, on the other hand, he has a valid claim against A for anything he may lose by A's failure to deliver him that other five hundred. If, for instance, potatoes have risen in value to one dollar and fifty cents a bushel, B has lost by not receiving that five hundred bushels two hundred and fifty dollars, and may deduct this from what he has to pay. If the same rule were applied to the case of a man who at the beginning of the year engaged to work for all that year at fifteen dollars a month, and who worked for five months and then left at the be ginning of the hay-making season, and then wages were at thirty dollars a month, the hirer would pay him fifteen dollars a month for the time he worked, deducting therefrom whatever he lost by the necessity of paying higher wages, and whatever he lost otherwise by the hired man's failure to perform his contract. Such is the view taken of the question by some eminent judges. But the greater part of our courts apply the rule strictly. They hold that if a hired man engaged for a year, leaves without suffi. cient cause at the end of the eleventh month, he forfeits ali his wages and has no claim against the hirer for any part of them. All courts agree that if the hired man leaves because of insuffi cient food, ill-treatment by the hirer, disabling sickness, or other sufficient cause, the hirer is bound to pay him for the time he worked.

It may be added that it is important for the farmer to know and regard the rules pointed out in our chapter XII on the stat ute of frauds, especially in section III.

[ocr errors]

2. LIABILITY OF THE FARMer for the Wrong-doing oF HIS HELP. This liability rests upon an ancient rule of law, "What a man does by another he does by himself." Thus if a farmer ordered his hired man to steal his neighbor's sheep or wood, the hired man would be held as a thief, and the hirer would be

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »