San Luis Advocate (San Luis, Tex.), Vol. 1, No. 7, Ed. 1, Tuesday, October 13, 1840 Page: 3 of 4
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: Brazoria County Area Newspapers and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the The Dolph Briscoe Center for American History.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
s
""TaRtI
'
sS
Z1?fi&ii-tJ
MiTsvi:.--"
V
J
JSlSS
Zi-C--
-?
wM"j;wm''w jw
?
-cr
ie
.X.
x
i:
r2
eals at tiis day. They do not even perform
thMTBfipal office. They are good for noth-
tt1a'lkieoaatrj without a signature because
'P&.fcav'io distinctive character. And -yet
j .weaaaigraveirioiaDy me expounacrsoi xue
kwibat seating m a relic of ancient wisdom
when the most superjickdjawyer knows what
Btaciratone above testifies that it is nothing but
a relic of ancient .ignorance; thatmen began
o seal only because they could not wHte.
; wcjjuoic uib luituwing iro.n juugc x tan ui
Tore. ' i his venerable custom of seal-
arelic of ancient wisdom and is not with-
tVegLfceat this day. There is yet some
defirteof oIcmHt7Jl"ixnis lormoi conveyance.
.A ieal attracts attejnnon ana excites caution m
illiterate persons nd thereby operates as a se-
curity against f ratwd. If a man's freehold might
be conveyediA cre note in writing he might
be more fs&lr imPa!cd-on procuring his
signature to suchTconveyance when he really
supposed he was signing a receipt a note or a
letter.' (12 Johns. Rep. 76.) Now wc ask if
this is not a pitiful reason for the use of seals
at this day. If a man can write he can read
writing and if he can read writing he can al-
ways know what he is signing away. Besides
who is it that generally affixes the seal the
party himself) "or the scrivener who draws the
instrument 1 We all know it is the latter.
This talk about solemnity then is all nonsense.
Yet to hear the sages of the law descant upon
it one might suppose that trumpets were sound-
ed heralds sent .forth a procession made or
tne whole neignoornooa sumraonea 10 witness
the awful ceremony. But no: all this solem-
nity consists in a scrivener's wetting a wafer
placing it on the instrument and putting a bit
of paper over it; and it is the presence of "this
imposing emblem when the obliger signs his
name that attracts the attention and produces
the caution above mentioned.
Hear what Blackstonc says upon the same
subject he who afterwards confessed in the
same chapter that the reason for seals had
ceased. " A deed is a writing scaled and de-
livered by the parties. It is sometimes called
a charter carta from its materials; but most
usually when applied to the transactions of
private subjects it is called adced in latin fac-
tum by many of eminence because it is the
most solemn and authentic act that a man can
possibly perform with relation to the dis-
posal of his property; and therefore a man
shall alway be estopped by his own deed or
not be admitted to aver or prove any thing in
contradiction to vhat he lias once so solemnly
and deliberately aroircd" (2 BL Com. 295.)
A novice might infer from this pompous de-
scription that a seal must be 'some amulet of
gems annealed in upper fires.5 Plain common
sense would say that the simple fact of mak-
ing a written declaration should be the reason
if there be any reason why a man should be
estopped or precluded from averring or prov-
ing any thing to the contrary. But no : the ex-
pounders of the law declare the true reason to
be because the man has performed the august
light of sealing his declaration or of having it
sealed not with blood or before the altar but
with wax or wafer and no matter where. This
doctrine is so ineffably absurd that it requires
a good degree of apathy to discuss it coolly.
We have never doubted the propriety of re-
quiring contracts concerning real property to
be executed with more formality than those
which concern personal property. And hence
the provisions of many of the states requiring
uceas to oe aitesua by witnesses and aclcnoKl-
edged before a magistrate strike us as highly
judicious. These formalities do in truth at-
tract attention excite caution and deliberation
- undrend to guard against fraud surprise and
mistake- They arc in fact what the affixing
of a seal is only in theory.
And let it be understood that we do not op-
pose seals simply because the fcSbtett affix-
ing them yields no goodin return. ' For as we
have already said there is very little trouble
about them: not one tenth part as much as in
making an acknowledgement before a magis-
trate; and this is one reason why wc say they
evince neither caution nor deliberation and
are utterly without solemnity. But our objec-
tions go much farther. We contend that while
they produce no goad whatever they produce
much positive evil. This evil is found in the
legal consequences attached to them some of
which we shall now consider. We say some
for the grand distinction between specialities
and other writings has been the fruitful mother
of too numerous an offspring to leave it possi-
ble for us to notice them all. Years of the
most toilsome research will scarely make one
perfeCTin the petty and perplexing distinctions
vrhich iave been gathering by successive ac-
cretions since the introduction of seals over
the beautifully simple doctrines of contract
Theyan be compared to nothing more aptly
than tothe congregated absurdities of syllogis-
tic reasoning in the hands of the schoolmen.
A contract is an agreement upon sufficient
consideration to.do or not to do a particular
thing. Now who that had never studied the
law would suppose that the mere presence of
that insignficant thing called a seal could
transform this contract into a very different
matter ? Yet such is the fact It changes the
name and nature of the contract the form of
action upon the contract the character of-the
pleadings' the kind of evidence required and
thujultUMtely.lhe right or title by it created.
First as to the consideration. A-sealed con-
tract imports a consideration from the mere
presence of the seal and in case of litigation
you are precluded from investigating that es-
sential part of eVery contract Whereas a
contract in the same words without a em! hn.
ports the direct Opposite. Onn nartv mnat nirar
and prove and the other partr may disprove
. ooin these rules there are
Exceptions but these are the general principles.
IOW e Question we Jtsfc is. mxrht en Imnnrf.
-sat. a consequence to follow from so trifliafa
cansevJ3e53Tit by no mean evident that
good policy requires any instrument not nego-
tiable to import a consideration. On the icon-
trary we think it might be shows had we time
that fewdoctrincsin the law are ore suscept;
'We of -buse; for it is very nearlythesame as
ulSPensfinir pntirplir with 9 rnn.Map.ri.. : tl.l
Class "nf rnnlr.irlc ttt ... A.U :. 1
- .- wui ncu uiuam 11 uc
important to retain this doctrine in re-
: to any other than neoriaWe' instru-
it can be done without retaining seals :
nstance. by providing -that all witnessed
n0wltdged instruments shall import a
uon.
to the difference of remedy. Time
tinctfcl?' ns to P0"11"11 one ih 'en of ihe dis
c.kJ-between CcxbiatUini- Assumnsit.
rawyer''knows that they agree in scarce-
iJwhing but the fact that they are personal
-ctionsThe rules of pleading and evidence
as applied 10 me two are entirely different.
And for all this no reason whatever can be as-
signed ..except that ' so are the precedents.1
The whole is purely technical. The most
searching analysis of the subject matter would
have conducted to no such results. But all this
is too notorioas to need comment
Now let us look at some of the minorponse-
quenccs of the use of seals.
In 1815thequestion was solemnly discuss-
ed in New York where a freehold could be
conveyed without a seal there having been at
the time of'theconveyance no statutory provis
ion requiring a seal. The party wno sow :ioe
land received its full value; the language ufceli
n the instrument was ample and explicit to" con-
vey the fee; and it was signed in the presence
iof two
1 witnesses. But.alastKe talisroalriejnuneiigntenti in the identical words
of aseal was wanting whch"the.com- yoTntfflsTGring cither Debt or Assumpsit. Now
charm
.-.. !. LJ l.Zt4ur4k4
ltiuii taw uau uaiunvu
r h.j hoiinu-awi nnn inprniore. uiiuii
full argument itwaseoided that the heirs 6t
the grantor should -recover -backhejOanq
though it had been in the possession -of II
phiicpr twpnlo vpnra A small'bit Of W3.
wafer would have turned the question me oiuer
way. We do not say this decison wasillcgal
but we do say that it 13 a stigma upon the law
that it can be made the instrument of such abem-
inable injustice. (12 Johns. 73.) -
Againin Shepard's Touchstone we have
the followhigjMdoctrine. ' If a man seal "and
deliver anjSBipty piece of paper or parchment
albeit 5P do therewithal give command that an
obligation or other matter shall be-writtenin it
and this be accordingly done yettnis is no good
deed.' (Touch. 54.) Butit is abundantly set
tled that if a man write his name on a blank
piece of paper and hand itto another to.write
a promissory note over the slgnatureVsu'ch note
is obligatory upon the maker though he was
not present when it was filled up and never af-
ter assented to it (5 Cranch 142.) Now
here all depends upon the presence b absence
of a seal. The question arose in the Supreme
Court of Ohio on thc'following facts. A per-
son was indebted to another in a sum not ex-
actly ascertained. He made his seal and
wrote his name upon a blank paper in the pres-
ence of a subscribing witness and authorized
the other to write over it an obligation for the
sum which should turn out to be due. The
writing was filled up according to the direction
and there was no pretence that it was not for
the proper sum. But sad to say the porten-
tous scrawl was there ; the writing was a speci-
ality whxh could not be made over a seal and
signature in blank. Had the scrawl been omit-
ted the legal obligation would have been per-
fect ; but this same scrawl which upon the
whole theory of seals implies deliberation and
considerate acquiescence and therefore much
more than a mere signature ought to bind the
obligor was the soul cause of his being un-
righteously released from his obligation. This
is no doubt law but it is not common sense or
common justice. (1 Ohio Rep. 3GS.)
Still again in Phillips nn Evidence we find
the following doctrine. An acknowledgement
of the obligor himself admitting that he execu-
ted a sealed instrument will not dispense with
the testimony of the subscribing witness.' (1
Phil. Ev. 412.) This point has been solemnly
adjudged both in England and in this country ;
and an unhackneyed man can hardly suppress
his indignation when he reads the cases. The
generous spirit of Lord Mansfield though it
submitted to the technicbal rule was constrain'
ed to denounce it. He commenced his decisi
on by saying: lo be sure this is a captious
objection ; but it is a techuichal rule that the
subscnbingwitness mustbe produced.' (Doug.
21G.) It is indeed a purely technicbal rule
without the remotest similitude of reason to
support it. The confession of a party against
his interest is the best possible evidence that he
executed a deed. And what makes the absurd-
ity of excluding such confession as glaring as
the noon-day sun is the fact that precisely the
contrary doctrine is held respecting instru-
ments not under seal. We give a sketch of two
cases decided in New York one in 1S07 the
other in isos.
In the first a promissory note which had a
subscribing witness was produced. The ma-
ker had recently confessed the execution of the
note but this evidence was objected to on the
ground that the subscribing witness must be
called. The court at once overruled the ob-
jection and the language and reasoning of
Judge Spencer would equal!' embrace the case
of specialties. Among other things he says :
'From these considerations that we arc unfet-
tered by any positive adjudication anterior to
the revolution; that the party's own confession
is the highest evidence and that you may con-
tradict the subscribing witness I think it re-
sults that an instrument though attested by a
subscribing witness may be proved by the con-
fession of the party who gave it The notion
that the persons who attest an instrument are
agreed upon to be the only witnesses to prove
itis not comformable to the truth of transactions
of this kind and to speak with all possible deli-
cacy is an absurdity.' (2 Johns. 452.) But
the nextyear that terrible emblem of solemni-
ty aseal was frowningupon the court and'it
shrunk back from its former ground. JuJge
Kent however pronounced the opinion. It
had been urged that tlie former case decided
this; but Judge Kent said: I do not consider it
in that light That case arose upon a promis-
sory note and this is upon a deed. The rules
of evidence maybe more safely relaxed in the
one case than in the other.' (3 Johns. 470.) It
was then the seal the consecrated wax or wa-
fer which made all the difference; and the plain-
tiff as turned out of court because he produc-
ed no better proof of the execution of a bond
than the unextorted and deliberate confession
of the party himself. In these two cases both
instruments. were obligations to pay money.
Thelfirst had no seal and the principles of en-
lightened common sense were allowed to pre-
vail: The second had a seal and the same prin-
ciples were set at nought That the very able
judge who gave this decision would have been
glad to have decided otherwise if he had not
found himself hampered by precedent wc have
no doubt But this only proves the necessity
of legislative interposition.-
Such are some of the pitiful technicalities.
the empty and insignificant observances upon
which our legal rights are made to depend in
consequence of the doctrine of seals. Exam
ples might be multiplied indefinitely for they
cover the books. But we trust enough has
been said to convince every unbiased mind that
seaungis no more than a naked useless absurd
formality expressing nothing meaning noth-
ing proving nothing; while at the same time
the most important legal consequences arc suf-
fered to depend upon it It can be hardly ne-
cessary to add that our remarks are confined
entirely to those private unofficial seals which
in themselves contain nothing to designatethe
maker and whose only effect is to make that
instrument a deed which otherwise would only
be a written contract
If we do not greatly overrate the force of
the foregoing remarks they show that even
without reference to the.cpnsolidation'of ac-
tions the use of seals ought to be abolished
were it only to preventthe unjust and absurd
consequences which follow from their use.
The way is then clear for the examination
of our second proposition which is that one ac-
tion of contract'may be safely substituted for
the three which are now used.
And here we observe that it is quite immate-
rial to the argument whether this on action to
be substituted be a new one in name an1 in th
forms of pleading or be one of the three origi
nal actions' as lor instance Assumpsit AH
we contend is that there is no good reason for
three.
As the matter now stands if a: man agrees
under seal to do a thing and fails you must
bring covenant for your damages; if he agrees
tcithout seal to do the self-same thiag in the
self-same words and fails you must bring As-
sumpsit. If he makes a scaled agreement to
pay a specific sum of money and fails you
muii unng eiiuer jLeMqrL;o venant; it he makes
we hold thesedistinctions to be utterly arbitra
ry nncr; tinheeesaary. Without entering into
the labyrinth of details in which these actions
abound this simple statement evinces a com-
plexity iri the remedy upon contracts altogether
uncalled for by thb nature of the. subject. Un-
doubtedly a technical reason can be given for
every distinction which has been taken but this
does not falsify our assertion. Judges are bound
py- precedent What their predecessors have
established they support and amplify. Hence
the present practice in actions of contract forms
part of an immense artificiaLsvstem commenc
ing at first in accident ignorance or inadver-
tence and becoming more and more complicat-
ed and involved from age to age down to the
present moment It is a propensity always
cHftrayteristic of the profession to draw nice
metaphysical distinctions. Lawyers have ever
beerrti!'. j 'to divide a hair 'twixt north and
norlhwcR" side.' This is well in the main; but
the consequence in relation to actions of con
tract is that it requires volumes to point out
wnai is peculiar to each of the three forms; and
when you have pored over the subject until
your brain is almost addled you are frequently
at a loss which is the proper action for your
case.
Wc ask again is'there any thing in the ab-
stract and essential nature of contracts which
requires such diversity? Were a remedy now
for the first time to be devised for all cases of
contract would a committee of such men as
Marshall and Story and Webster and Wirt
be likely to hit upon anyjhing in the most re-
mote degree resembling our present forms?
On the contrary looking to that disposition to
simplify and generalize which is inherrent in
strong minds is it not almost certain that such
a committee would recommend a single reme-
dy which would apply to every possible case
of contract broken?
We have aheady said that the bare abolition
of seals would do away the ground of differ-
ence between Covenant and Assumpsit. Now
supposing Debt and Assumpsit to be thus left
in possession of the field every lawyer knows
that the distinction between these two actions
has long since dwindled into mere form. In a
large majority of cases as the law now stands
they are concurrent remedies; one may be
brought as well as the other. There are how-
ever some exclusive cases of which the follow-
ing may serve as samples. The payee of a
promissory note may sue the maker either in
debt or assumpsit; but the indorsee can only sue
the maker in assumpsit. Again any indorsee
may sue his immediate indorser either in debt
or assumpsit; but he can only sue a remote in-
dorser in assumpsit. Now it only requires one
touch of the legislative wand to banish such
subtleties forever and make either action in
every respect as appropriate a remedy as the
other. Let us remark however that to effect
the reform wc contend for it is not indispensa-
ble that seals should be done away though we
hope we have shown sufficient reasons for their
abolition independently of this. But it is obvi-
ous that the three actions could be consolidated
even if seals continued in use though perhaps
not quite so easily.
To convince any unprejudiced man that these
three actions as they now stand arc separated
and distinguished by no great and fundamental
principles which would be confounded by the
proposed consolidation it is only necessary to
advert to the fact that no system of general
rules can be laid down which will indicate with
any thing like precision the proper form of ac-
tion for any particular case. The elementary
authors Chitty and others do make something
like an attempt to do this; but to every rule
proposed there arc about as many exceptions
as instances. The fact is this is a matter al-
together beyond the power of analysis or clas-
sification. All that the clearest-headed writers
can do is to marshal the authorities it makes
very little difference in what order and leave it
to the memory of the reader to treasure up the
multitude of particulars. We appeal to every
student to say whether he has not risen from
the best digested treatises on these actions with
a confusion in his ideas very much resembling
the descriptions of chaos. Now this could nev-
er be the case if the grand dividing lines exist-
ed in the nature of contracts; for then a strict
analysis of the subject matter would result in a
system of rules which would guide the inquirer
unerringly to the wished for result.
Now if what we have stated be true is it not
high time that the law of contracts should be
relieved-from the imputations of obscurity un
certainty and technicality which fainv iv(
upon !:: . uele are precious gems under all
this rubbish which wc would have brought out
to view.. Whatever is of the essence of a con
tract we would not have touched. We would
propose nothing which should impair its obliga-
tion. It would be harmless if wc did for the
constitution has taken care of that We would
cling tenaciously to the statute of frauds and
require every important contract to be reduced
to writing. We would require greater formali
ty in the conveyance of land than of any other
property. But we would have all the empty
distinctions relating to the remedy abolished.
They can have no other effect than to render a
knowledge of the law of contracts tenfold more
difficult of attainment than it need be without
aiding in the least towards the futthcrancc of
justice. We speak not merely of the years of
toil which are thereby superadded to what
would otherwise be necessary for the thorough
preparation of a lawyer although this is un
doubtedly an evil worth reforming. We refer
more particularly to the utter impossibility that
any other person than a lawyer should be able
to penetrate the mysteries of a contract veiled
as they now are. Yet all men are bound by
the legal effect of the contracts they enter into
and ignorance of the law forms no excuse.
This necessary maxim becomes cruel or hu-
mane precisely in proportion as the law is
mystified or simplified. At present the law of
contracts is just as inaccessible to the mass of
'mankind as if locked up in an unknown tongue.
Nor is this all. The inevitable tendency of
the present artificial system is to cause litigated
cases to be decided on points of form. Take
the whole number of reported decisions both in
England and America on the subject of con-
tracts and wc venture to affirm that a majori-'
ty yes a large majority have gone off on ques-
tions of form. This is a stupendous evil. No
wonder that the law suffers under the imputa-
tion of Uncertainty and of a- tendency to en-
courage quibbling and chicanery. The suitor
who is turned out of court on a point of form
when he knows that he has right on his side has
good reason to consider himself oppressed and
to rail against doctrines which deserve no rev-
erence. It is in vain to tell him that law is the
perlection of reason the gathered wisdom of a
thousand years; thatits seat is in the bosom of
God and its voice is the harmony of the world.
He feels the contrary. His own experience
has taught him to believe that it is a system of
snares and traps; a. collection of hooks to hang
doubts upon; a labyrinth through which alone
' '
justice can be reached but yet so full of devious
paths .that ten to one he may never reach her
sanctuary even with the ablest counsel for his
guide. No wonder if with such impressions
he imbibes a hatred both of the law and its ministers.
Let it not be objected to the reform we pro-
pose that the treasures of learning contained in
the reportson the subject of contracts would
thereby be rendered useless. No such conse
quence would follow. For as the proposed ac-
tion would be a substitute for the three actions
of covenant debt and assumpsit it would lie
in all cases where either of these would lie be-
fore; and provision might be easily made that
all the reported decisions which did not turn
upon matters of form but went to the merits of
the question should continue to be authorities.
Or if one of these three actions should be adopt-
ed as the substitute the provision might be
modified to suit this case. Thus all that is re-
ally worth preserving in the records of the
common law would be preserved; and the
sooner the rest is consigned to oblivion the bet-
ter. Should any man who is not a lawyer chance
to run over these pages he will be apt to doubt
the truth of our statements. He will hardly
believe that such abuses would have been suf-
fered to cross the Atlantic and cumber the
laws of this free land. As laws arc not con-
sidered here as intended for the good of the
lawyers but for the good of the people at large
whose interest it is that they should be as sim-
ple as possible he will deem it unaccountable
that such a host of subtleties should have been
so long tolerated. But the truth is that through-
out the United States lawyers have been al-
ways the most influential legislators; and if
any body is interested in the continuance of the
present state of things it is they. For they arc
the high priests of these mysteries. With dis-
mal perseverance they have delved amid black
letter through the hey-day of life to muster
these abstruscnesscs; and what would become
of these years of toil if the fiat of legislation
should proscribe this hidden lore? The mere
stripling in the law would then stand upon the
same vantage ground as they. If therefore so
highminded a class of men as our whole histo-
ry proves American lawyers to have always
been could yield to the suggestions of interest
they have precisely the same motive to resist a
reformation in the law that the priests had to
resist the reformation in religion. Technicali-
ties are to them a sort of franchise a vested
right a monopoly. To legislate them away
would be to legislate bread out of their mouths;
and we can hardly wonder if they should think
more than once of the weary days and nights
they have consumed over the most dry anel te-
dious inquiries which the mind ever prosecuted
before they would join with alacrity in the
measures of reform. But let us do the mem-
bers of the profession justice. Interest would
not be the sole cause of their reluctance. They
have feelings as well as other men. They have
been long accustomed to technical distinc-
tions; they have won laurels in the forum
by their skill in applying them; they have
seen case after case decided by means of them;
and estate after estate pass according to them;
and for all these reasons they have become sin-
cerely attached to them. The musical enthu-
siast would not feel more keenly the absence
of notes from a favorite old tunc than would
the worthy sage of the law feci the absence of
those hallowed formalities upon hich his
thoughts have so often dwelt. But notwith-
standing these causes of reluctance wc have
in the present Lord Chancellor of England an
illustrious cats in point to show that a great
lawyer is not necessarily a great bigot; and so
far from being nn opposer is likely to be the
ablest advocate of legal l eform.
We are fully aware that innovation is not al-
ways improvement. As applied to judges we
bow to the maxim stare decisis; though we
think that even they may carry ir too far. In
their zeal to tread super anliquas via wc tuo
often find them endorsing absurdities because
so arc the precedents. For example in looking
over the Ohio Reports where we did not expect
to discover a very great veneration for ancient
abuses knowing how fearlessly the Ohio legis-
lature has applied the knife to the excrescences
of the common law were surprised to find tlnee
of the judges sanctioning that ineffably puerile
doctrine that an immaterial averment in adec-
laiation must be proved; in other words that if
out of abundant caution you happen to state
that which it was totally unnecessary to state
as not affecting your light of action you are
strictly held to prove it simply because you
have stated it. But at the same time we arc
rejoiced lo find one of the judges Judge Pease
dissenting from this doctrine. Though we have
never seen this gentleman wc can never cease
to respect him for the following f c"'.ijents.
'II iuG fact averred be every way immaterial if
it form no part of the plaintiff's light to recov-
er and if the contrary would constitute no de-
fence to the action; then it would not only be
useless to prove it but would bean unnecessa-
ry waste of time and money and a trifling with
the administration of justice. If the avciment
betwholly immaterial it is my opinion that it
nd not be proved and I would overrule any
authority to the contrary.' (1 Ohio Rep. 1SG.)
This example will serve to illustrate our opin-
ion as to how far judges are bound by prior de-
cisions. We think them justified in ovei ruling
palpable absurdities though they should never
disturb the landmarks of the law.
But legislators are untrammelled and it is to
them that we look for reform. As it must be.
that doctrines which originated in an age of
darkness will sometimes be unfitted for an age
of light; and that doctrines established under
feudal domination will sometimes fail to har-
monize with the spirit of free institutions; and
as it is only in very palpable cases that the most
independent judges will feel at liberty to depart
from precedents; it is on legislators that the
great duty of reform devolves. We are aware
that there is danger in going to the extreme; but
this is not what we recommend. We invite in-
vestigation of the plan we have proposed. If
there be any danger in adopting it we hope it
will be pointed out through the medium of this
journal that the antidote may follow the banc.
In the mean time we may take occasion in
some future number to discuss the question of
reform in some other particulars. But we re-
peat that we are no advocates of theoretical
speculative codification. We admire and rev-
erence a great portion of the 'common law and
should utterly despair of finding a substitute
therefor in legislation. At the same time to
deny that this system could be impi o ved would
be to .deny that the law is an improvable sci-
ence: a doctrine to which wc can never sub-
scribe.
The sales of cotton lately in Liverpool have been
very large. The week ending the 7ih August sales
amounted to-10000 bales; ending the Hth ihey amount-
ed to 46000 with an advance to a small amount on infe-
rior qualities.
The British Queen on her last trip was seized by the
Custom-house Officers in England in consequence of
a suspicion that a large quantity of Tobacco was 10 be
smuggled by the crew. About 1300 lbs. was found
stored away about the engincs.and gunner's room. The
penally of the law was executed agiinst the gunner and
carprnter of the ship.
aa-ySg;
ill
The English barque Elizabeth capt. Swan arrivedat
MatagordaonthcSllh nit. from Liverpool. ThcEliza-
beth bronghi out 10 emigrants.
Mehcmet Ali has refused to accede to the ultimatum
of the Four Powers.
The Rail Koad from IJoston to Albany is rapidly pro-
gressing: 2000 laborcrsarc employed on iulayaad aig.'U.
Kent the whig candidate for Govcrnorin Maine his
succeeded over his competitor by a majority of 1520
votes.
The steam packet Uritania brought out on her late
voyage 20000 letters; the largest number ever brought
by one packet.
Tex.ib money remains as before quoted.
M. SEELIGSOX
WHOLESALE AND RETAIL
Grocerios and Provision Store
Corner of the Custo:i Housi: Shuare
Oct. 13 GAIVESTOX TEXAS. 7-.
TO THE PU5JMC.
PRECLUDED as I am by olficial duties from im-
mediate attention to pi irate business and bcinij
exceedingly anxious to liquidate the lawful claim"
against mo in the most summary way I have this day
conveyed intrust tomy friend Tucnus J. Green oftlie
county of Brazoria the whole oi my properiv real per-
sonal and mixed for the accomplishment of the above
design.
The unexampled deficiency of par funds combined
with the almot unparalleled depreciation of our circu-
lating medium has had tliecfi'ect to destroy the value of
properiv and materially to affect the credit of the coun-
try. These considerations have induced me to surrender
the proceeds of ten years exertion in this country for
the payment of an amount u hieli in otdinary fiscal circumstance-'
would not have been fell. I therefore re-
spectfully cill the attention of bn vers to a list of valua-
ble property w hich Gcn'l. Greenwill sell on advantage-
ous terms to those disposed to purchase.
15. T. ARCHER.
City of Austin Sept. 23 IS 10.
B3- virtue of the deed of trust above referred to I will
cxposcnt public auction at ihc Court House dooriu the
town of Brazoria on the 28th irM. the several
Tracts of Laml
mentioned in said deed a description of which can be
seen by reference to the Recorder's Office in Brazoria
or so much of said land as will be sufficient to pay the
debts mentioned in the deed.
The terms will be made know on ihc dav of s-ile.
TIIOS. J. GIIEEX Trustee.
October 8 1810. Tills.
LOOK AT THIS.
5 sometime since adveitiscd several tncts of valuable
land for sale in hopes to finda purchaser.to whom
I would sell on ihc most reasonable terms- and bv that
mean pay off mv debts that beincr the sole reason for
olferins mv propertv for sale at this time. But soma
unprincipalled villians uisliing to odd to mv embar
rassment have frequently interfered when I had sup-
posed a trade had been almost consumatcd by propaga-
uiij; iiiuueiuws uusenoyus 10 my injury o saying my
lands were all under mortgagc.'or som'c other diiitculty
therebv arresting all mv prospects of salcby insinuating
I could not givca legal title vie.
This is therefore to make known that I neither otTer
nor will I sell any property to which I cannot make a
clear nncUatisfacfory title fhcsl.-inder of mv vindictive
cnemiestothecontrary notwithstanding. 1 am yetanxi-
ous to sell for the reason above stated and u ill' be ql.ul
to sec any gentleman disposed to purchase at my resi-
dence Cedar Grove near ihcmouth of Cancr.
Sept. 31 1S10-7.3: TIIOS. CAYCE.
EVT3R1SJ3TTJ3 & CO.
.IIJLWTH CO.lT.mSSlO.S' .7.VW rou-
II tHItT.-'Cl MEiscn.i.vrs
Co:i;rcss fatrcct Houston Texas.
rjjnilREE YEARS constant application to the above
jl. business lias cnaoieit us to cstablisti an extensive
and valuable acquaintance xi ith coimtrv dealers; Mexi
can and Indian traders. Therefore tho-e who have
anv thing of great or simll amount to convert into cash
will do well to favor the subscribers with 5 share of
patronage.
N. B. Connected w ith the above wc have SUiiics
and Yard for the purchase and sab of carriages farm-
ing utcntials horses and mules oxen cows iVc. &c.
EVERRETTE & Co.
Sept. II 1810. 3-3m-S12
TO HOUSE CARPENTEIiS.
S7" ANTED to contract witlua first rate workman
' V to erect upon the corner of Centre & Exchange
streets San Luis city a COTTAGE HOUSE tur
Chailes K. Rhode- Esq. The house to be 30 by 20 feet
on the ground one and a half stories high with a piazza
in front eight teet wide crouned with a balcony and
baliislr. de upon the roof; and a Kitchen attached in the
rear 15 feet square. The whole to b; done in lhene.it-
cst Grecian style according to plans and specifications
which v. ill be exhibited. Applv to
San Luis. Aug. 2J-tf " C. G. BRYANT.
BRAZORIA YELASCO
SAX LUIS AND CAtVESTOX.
THE new and fast -siiling Sloop BRAZORIA. T.
Lomlmrl mister will r"in to and from the above
ports durins the season. Tor freight or passage applv
on board or 10 JOHN BUTLER nraznria;
JURIS DOCKRILL Wasco;
SAM'L. J. DURNETT &zr. Luis;
Aimust2'5 -t-Cin F. L. JONES & CO Galccston;
Tar. is:
Ausl.'n
cay D?r;r.Titr.T7
. August 21 IS KM
1 oi 1 IE si xtli sals of lots in the CUy of Alistin and the
jL tract adjoining will commence at Austin on -"Monday
the 30ih Nov ember next. The same terms and con-
dition1; will be observed as at pre; ious sales.
WM. SEVEY
Sept. If). 1-tds Act. Sec. of th Timwtij.
:YThe scleral newspapers in the Republic and the
N." Orleans Bulletin and Picayune -fill insert the above
v eekly until the 15th Not ember.
To TVIII1 YTriIiiS and Carpenters.
7ANTED tocontract with a first rate workman
to erect a WIND Mil! for the grinding ot
corn vc in ban .uns cuy iot ouui in :i neai ami sub-
stantial manner and r.ccciding to plans and specifica-
tions whicu will be exhibited. Apply to
San Luis. Aug. 2J.-I-tf CHAS. G. BRYANT.
NOTICE.
rglHE partnership heretofore cxi'stins under the.stylc
JL of JACK & TOWNES is dissolved. The un-
finished business will receive the ioint attention of the
terenil pailuers. WM. IL JACK
P. C. JACK
Arazoria March 2 1310. R. J. TOWNE3. 1-tf
W. H. JACK & R. J. TO WNES.
WILL continue the practice of law together un-
der the style of Jack and Toirncs.
W. II. JACK
Brazoria March 2 1810.-l-tf U. J. TO WNES.
J. W. HARRIS & E. M. PEASE
ATTOKXEYS T VI) COUN"s!F.ITiOHS AT IjAIV
liliAZOlHA TEXAS.
WILL attend all the Courts of Brazoria county
the District Courts for the counties of Matagor-
da Colorado Austin Fort Bend and Harrisburg and
the Supreme Court of the Republic.
June 4 lSlO.-l-lf
ANDREWS & IIAMMEKEN
COJUJKlSSIOJV.HEllCn&JVTg
Aus- 2G. SAN LUIS. 1-tf
BENNETTS HOTEL
SAN LUIS BRAZORIA CO.
npHE subscriber has opened Ins house for
-- the accommoiialion of Travellers and
Boarders. CHARLES II. BNNETT.
San Lufs August 2G IS 10. - 1-tf
L.AW NOTICE
A. C. IIINTON
ILL atlend the different Courts of the Republic
and fti vc his attention to the admstment of claims
from Ihe United States. Office Galveston Texas.
lielerii) lion- ALner t. urscoiiB I
Sec of Slate. J
Austin.
Col. JlMKS LoVK
l.Ii
McKiwir & Wiu.hus.
Galveston.
MAILS 10 kegsrs'-orted sizes in More and lor sale
lir ANDREWS & IIAMMEKEN.
Sepi II 3 tf
5j-TIic ;-chr. Delaware captain Crookfidd
leave to-day at 12 octock for New Yorlc-
iCX.vi. .'''; . jiryji
-?.
COMMERCIAL
XniV ORLEANS JXONEY MARKET.
Cvrrcctcd from the Uulklin.
NEW OiiLiass August 13 If 10.
liicnange on i-.ngianrt 10 a
do on Tans Gf.7J a
do on N. Y. at M:;ht 3 a
p. c. prcm.
5f! 10
3p.e.prem.
U.S.
" l(l nilill dm"; nrrr n.
-j ......
1 p. c. prem.
U. S. Treasury A"ntP5
. u.uijiiioies..
.par a
...C a
lp. c.ptcm.
7 p. e. picm.
American Gold
Sovereigns cj
Spanish Doubloons 17
C a 8 p.c.picm.
7i ;v. on
10 a
ma
(vl iX
17 25
16 C-21
Mexican do ig
30 a
3IISSISKIIMM SfflWt'.V.
?'?!ch y a IOp.cdis
Uivcr (specie paying banks) f) 10 do
Union Bank Pot Aotes 57 a CO do
Ilarttcr'slhnkrostJfotcsv'atchcz.Sj a 37 do
u.aniiuim : 03 a D5 do
i-iKC Washington 05 a GO
Com. and R. R. Bank of Vicksburg CO a (Ti
Lankof Vicksburg 55 a 70
Aricfcburg WatcrVurks f3 a 70
1 ombigby 85 t 90
Citizens Bank of MadVo'ii Connty.'.OO 00
Commercial Bank of Columbus 15 a 20
Lrandon Bank m a 00
;''V!A;rAsrc:ic paying Banks. ..2 a 0
Xl!!nc ----- 8 a 0
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
do
du
du
wisiw uiniois Indiana Kentucky)
and Missouri I
ARKANSAS ..
CWNTONand Tort Hudson
TEXAS Treasury Tunes
1 a 3 do
.10 a -15
Sd a 70
.11 a 73
do
do
do
CUSTOMHOUSE RATES OF GOLD.
Hales a.lotrcl xnlhc Ctabmhovsc for galit coins us vcr
tut nj Cungress pfU&ljJixiagths vuLu: thereof.
. . -. . . S c
unucu oiares Uiglc old emission
u u Vcw- .... ..
Ens'nnd Guinea
Sovereign
" Se-.cnshillingpieee
rrance Double Louis (before 1780)
10 fi'I
10 00
5 7
1 SI
1 ;
1 a.)
r3t
i) 15
t 57
7 70
3 &
1 6j
Louis..
Double Louis (since I78C)..
Louis "
" Doib.'cISapnlconot SO frrncs
" XapoKm of 20 francs
" Same as :he new LouisGuinea
Tmnkfort 0.1 the Main Dncat
Himburg "
Malta Double Louk .'.'."..'."."."."..."."
" Loiis
Demi Louis
Mexico Doubloons
Holland Double Rir Dollar
" IUr Dollar
' Dncat
9 27
t &5
2 33
15 50
12 23
C 31
" Ten Guilder piece 1 no
Portugal Dobraon 32 70
" Dohra '.. 17 30
" Johannes 17 r
Spanish Doubloons 1772 i(J 2
' " since 1772 15 53
" Fistolc :t KR
Columbia Doub'oons 15 53
3j- The Presbytery of Brazos stands adjourned! t
meet at Columbia Brazoria co. on the first Thursday
of Novcmbernext it 12 o'clock. M.
AVILLIAM Y. ALLE3L
Sep1- 21. Sr.TED Cubic.
IJrjizoa' ami Galveston Bail Uoail
Company.
A T a meeiins oi ihe Directors of the Brazos and
1'A. Galveston Rail Roid Company it was
licsalral That the instalments remaining to be paid
on thesharts cf stock of said company shall be payable
asionows;
On the 1st October 1810 - -"
1st Jannarv.lSll -"
1st April" " - -"
1 t Julv "
" 1st October "
" IstJpnuarv ISI2. -"
1st April' "
" 1st Julv : -
'' 1st October "
" 1st Januarr 113.
Five per cent.
Five per cent.
Five per cent.
Five per cent.
Ten per cent.
Ten pcrcen-.
Ten percent.
Ten per cent.
Ten per cent.
len percent.
IlcsulralThat the aforesaid instalments shall be paid
in at the Company's office at the citvof San Liiw tn
the Treasnrer of the company who is heribj-authurii
zed to receipt for the ame. And should" any of Ihe
stockholders adi ancc any instalment prior to ils becom-
ing due as per foregoing resolution the treasnrer it
authorized to disconnt the" same at the rate of ten pet
cent per annum.
llcsolccd. That the President be. and he is hcrpbr .-in-
thorized to open new subscriptions for slock forfeited
for non payment of the instalment; and mar rc-donatc
the lob in the city of San Luis corresponding to the
shares forfeited.
I2-:solccd That thcscproccedingabcpt.blishcdoncca
month in the Texas Sentinel and is the New Orleans
Bee.
GEO. L. IIAMMEKEN President.
By order of the Board.
M.AttTi.v Dky.iv Secretary pro tem.
S:m Luis June 3 1310. 5-tf
TO BRIDGE BUrXJ3J2KS.
ANTED To contract with ru-ponsible person
V to build bridges over the scleral smjll i;.tv
and Creek between San Luisand Brazoria on the rout
located for a county road b' the commissionersappoint-
ed for that purpose by the County Court the work must
he doncin a neat and substantial manner the bridges du
les than twenty feel v. ide and completed by the lOlh ot
December next.
Any information in regard to the situation 'D"th
and construciionofsaid Lw! will 1-c given on "api
plication tn :h- Jlia. crlbjr who will receive sclerals pro-
posals forbuilding each ofsaid bridges uniil tne lOihof
October next. CHAS. G. BRYANT.
San Lui Sept. 23 ISI0. 5-tf.
Arcliitcct JKnsrineer ami Builder.
VVTi HE subscriber having located himsclfin the City
J"L of San Lnis Texas offers his services as an Af-
ciitccl nisincer find JSililer to the citizens of the Re
public. By his experience in the business he Hatters
himself he'ean give satisfaction to any who may wish lo
erect buildings or o'.her works of any ccscrirtioti.
Drawings Specifications and Estimates madeat short
notice and in the stalest am! mon correct manner am!
lurwaided to any part of the Republic for Dwellings
Stores WnicHouses Churchc Factories Mills Brui-
ses Rail Roids and Canal-- ic. Ac. ANo Maps and
Charts' drawn 01 Lands Cities Towns Harbor &a
The subscriber will leave Sin Lnis fur the State of
Maine in a few- weeks and will rctnrn to San Luis
again in Novcmbernexl. Any person desirous of hav-
ing buildings of any description erected in San Luis or
in the vicinity xvould do well to contract with the sub-
scriber as he will be able by taking contracts before he
leaves lor the North to erect buildings for much less
than they can be built for here byanyotherrcrion and
finish them in the neatest and most substantial manner.
TIu
he subscriber has thehonorof rclenmg to
Matthew Hopkins Esq )
Jnd"cH Andr"Ws.
Sl
San Luis.
G. L. HammckinEsil. )
Ilon.iM. 1'. rsorton i
J. S. Sydnor E-q Galveston.
Col. James Lore. )
Messrs. Adams & Ilnrri Ifons'i-n.
Hon Timothy Pillsbury. )
Mai. Frederics Sawyer. J re-'"'
Win. II. Jack Esii ...
Jnd2e Crane. l'l:la:ce.
CHARLE G. BRYANT.
Sail Luis August 2(j 1310. I-tf.
TO TilC CITIZENS OI-' IIKAZOKI.Y COUNTY.
I take this method of presenting myself to
you as a candidate for the office of Sheriff of
this county. I am induced to do so upon the
following considerations :
1st In all governments were the people se-
lect their agents to transact public business ro-
tation in office is a governing principle.
2d. Where the people are oppressed and
weighed down by the seventy of the times
where good money as it is termed is almost
impossible to be had I hold it to be the duty
of every oilicer of the Goverament to conform
to the law and require Texas money only in
payment of their fees.
The second Congress passed a law requiring
all officers to take Texas Promissory Notes
and prohibiting them from demanding their fcea
in any other currency. The Sheriff of this
county has demanded par money. I will tal'o
such money as the law authorises me to charge
I have been a sufferer in common with mv fel-
low citiiiens and have detei mined to slep'ia tn
the relief of both plaintiffs and defendant at
law with a determination to devote my best ser-
vices to the county and country at larae
1 beg Iravc to subscribe myself " " " '
Your obedient fellow citizen.
August tin. VM a LULL.
-
W"t
"
mA ifil iiSssil
-r .
.-. C5ra
- jjfl
i.
Kl
MWRSfejS
s-
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Durnett, S. J. San Luis Advocate (San Luis, Tex.), Vol. 1, No. 7, Ed. 1, Tuesday, October 13, 1840, newspaper, October 13, 1840; San Luis, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth79934/m1/3/?q=%22%22~1: accessed July 16, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting The Dolph Briscoe Center for American History.