PURVEYANCE.

*

The clause of the Declaration of Inde | which lies between the caption and the rependence affirming the right of men to pursue pealing clause. Thus it seems that it means happiness means "the right to pursue any nothing more than the body of the act. But lawful business or vocation, in any manner what is the meaning of the body or purview not inconsistent with the equal rights of oth- of the act? * * All such parts of forers, which may increase their prosperity or mer acts as were within the purview or body develop their faculties, so as to give them of this act are repealed. The word 'purthe highest enjoyment." Butchers' Union view,' in this place, is a mere expletive. EiSlaughter House, etc., Co. v. Crescent City ther that, or the word 'meaning' must be Live Stock Landing, etc., Co., 4 Sup. Ct. 652, useless. If the provisions of a sub660, 111 U. S. 746, 28 L. Ed. 585. sequent statute are commensurate with the evils redressed by the former, it operates as an entire repeal; otherwise, it is a repeal pro tanto. In this view of the subject it is essential that not only every part of the same act should be taken into consideration, but all statutes made on the same subject, in order that it may be seen how far one statute repeals another, as well as to ascertain the meaning of the Legislature by comparing different parts of the same and other acts on the same subject. Lord Coke, in Foster's Case, 11 Coke, 63, 64, lays down the rule to be that, if a subsequent act can be reconciled with a former one, it shall not be a repeal." Smith v. Hickman's Heirs, 3 Tenn. (Cooke) 330, 337.

The prerogative of "purveyance," in England, was that "whereby the crown enjoyed the right of buying up provisions and other necessaries for the use of the royal household at an appraised valuation, and in preference to all others, even without the consent of the owner." At one time it prevailed pretty generally throughout Europe, and was regulated in England by Magna Charta, but is now abolished there. In re Barre Water Co., 20 Atl. 109, 110, 62 Vt. 27, 9 L. R. A. 195.

PURVIEW.

The meaning usually attached to the term "purview" by writers on law seems to be "the enacting part of a statute, in contradistinction to the preamble; and we think the provisions of the act repealing all acts or parts of acts coming within its purview should be understood as repealing all acts in relation to all cases which are provided for by the repealing act, and that the provisions of no act are thereby repealed in relation to cases not provided for by it. Payne v. Conner, 6 Ky. (3 Bibb) 180, 181; Patterson v. Caldwell, 58 Ky. (1 Metc.) 489, 493; Grigsby v. Barr, 77 Ky. (14 Bush) 330, 339; Commonwealth v. Watts, 2 S. W. 123, 126, 84 Ky. 537; State v. Reynolds, 9 N. E. 287, 289, 108 Ind. 353.

Where a statute repeals a prior statute so far as the prior statute comes within the purview of the later one, the word "purview" applies to the enacting part, the body or subject of the act, in contradistinction from the other parts thereof, such as the preamble, the saving, and the proviso; and hence the repeal is not confined merely to such parts of the former act as are inconsistent with the provisions of the repealing act. The San Pedro, 15 U. S. (2 Wheat.) 132, 139, 4 L. Ed. 202.

In construing the meaning of a statute providing that all laws and parts of laws coming within its purview and meaning were thereby repealed, the Supreme Court of Tennessee reasons as follows: "It cannot be perceived that the addition of the word 'purview' makes any difference in the meaning of the Legislature. Lord Coke informs us that the purview is all that part of an act

The word "purview," as used in the repealing clause of an act stating that all laws within the purview of this act are repealed, etc., means within the limit or scope of the act. Hirth v. City of Indianapolis, 48 N. E. 876, 878, 18 Ind. App. 673.

PURVIEW OF THE RULE.

By purview of the rule is meant the spirit of the rule. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. United States, 23 Sup. Ct. 120, 122, 187 U. S. 315, 47 L. Ed. 194.

PUSHERS.

The means for ejecting horse-shoe nails from the die after they have been sheared are termed "pushers." Bensley v. Northwestern Horse Nail Co. (U. S.) 26 Fed. 250, 254.

PUSHING.

As the term is used in railroad parlance in relation to the switching of cars, "pushing" means the act of an engine in the rear of a car in pushing it into the position which it is to occupy. Mark v. St. Paul, M. & M. Ry. Co., 20 N. W. 131, 132, 32 Minn. 208.

PUT.

A will directing the executors to "put" a sum on interest, to be well secured, means to loan money at the legal rate of interest on the security of a mortgage or judgment. The testator had in his mind a loaning on real estate and in no other mode, for that is its common and ordinary acceptation, and is

the sense in which it is received by the mass of the community in which the testator resided, which was an agricultural district and among farmers. In common parlance, neither among agriculturalists, traders, nor dealers in stock do the words "put on interest" convey the idea of a purchase of bank or other corporation shares. In re Nyce's Estate (Pa.) 5 Watts & S. 254, 257, 40 Am. Dec. 498.

The words "put and keep." in a lease in which the landlord agrees to put and keep a roof in repair, do not imply a confession that it is out of repair, in the absence of any circumstances to indicate a probability of its being out of repair, and therefore the covenant does not impose on the landlord the duty of repairing without notice to him of the necessity of repairs. Thomas v. Kingsland, 14 N. E. 807, 108 N. Y. 616.

itable house, but not so where the pulling down and expelling was contemporaneous. Perry v. Fitzhowe, 8 Q. B. 757, 779.

PUTS HIMSELF UPON THE COUNTRY.

The form, "And of this he puts himself on the country," used as the concluding part of an answer under the old system of pleading, means that the pleader desired to have the truth of the alleged facts tried by a jury. Bell v. Yates (N. Y.) 33 Barb. 627, 629.

PUTTING AWAY.

Where the master of a parish apprentice proposed to him that he should go to a farm in a different parish occupied by the master's sister, and the apprentice assented and worked for the sister for four years, there was a "putting away" of the apprentice without the consent of the justices, within the meanInhabitants of Shipton, 8 Barn. & C. 88.

The word “put," as used in a lease giving of St. 56 Geo. III, c. 139, § 9. Rex v. ing the lessor a lien as security for the payment of the rent on all goods, implements, 'stock, fixtures, tools, and other personal property put on the leased premises, is used in its broad general sense, and includes crops planted on the premises, and also includes the hay, though, while in the form of growing grass, it was a part of the realty. Caffrey v. Woodin, 65 N. Y. 459, 469, 22 Am. Rep. 644.

PUT IN CIRCULATION

Mc

The term "issued or put in circulation," in a statute providing that no banking association shall issue or put in circulation any bill or note, have a restricted. special, and almost technical meaning, relating exclusive ly to the moneyed currency of the country, and, in the language of the general banking law, to circulating notes in the similitude of banking notes. Curtis v. Leavitt (N. Y.) 17 Barb. 309, 341.

PUT INTO HIS HANDS.

"Put into his hands," as used in a declaration in an action against a constable for neglecting and refusing to serve a writ, the allegation being that the writ was put into the hands of the constable, means that the writ was offered to the constable and made subject to his control, and would include, in case the constable is unable to manually take the writ, the putting of it into his pocket, or in fact in his possession in any way. Patten v. Sowles, 51 Vt. 388, 391.

PUT OUT.

The words "ejected, expelled, put out, and removed" relating to trespass, may be satisfied under some circumstances by proof that the house was destroyed in the plaintiff's absence, and by his being prevented from returning to it and re-entering it because finding it existing no longer as a hab

Where a parish apprentice, bound for seven years to A., served him for four years, when A. agreed with B., who carried on the same business in another parish, that the pauper should work for B., B. to pay A. a certain sum out of the pauper's earnings, there was a "placing out or putting away" of the apprentice within St. 57 Geo. III, c. 139 § 9, and no settlement was gained by the service under B. Reg. v. Inhabitants of Wainfleet All Saints, 11 Adol. & El. 656.

PUTTING CHARACTER IN ISSUE.

An action putting character in issue is an action in which the character of the parties, or some of them, is of particular importance. Actions for criminal conversation, slander, etc., are of such a character. Ward v. Herndon (Ala.) 5 Port. 382, 386.

"Putting character in issue" is a technical expression, which does not mean simply that the character may be affected, but that it is of particular importance in the suit itself, as the character of the plaintiff in an action of slander, or that of a woman in a suit for seduction. In those excepted cases character affects the amount of the recovery. The jury was by law bound to consider it in assessing damages, and it is in that sense that it is said that "the nature of the action puts the character in issue." Stark v. Publishers: George Knapp & Co., 61 S. W. 669, 674, 160 Mo. 529.

"Putting character in issue," as was said in Porter v. Seiler, 23 Pa. (11 Harris) 424, 62 Am. Dec. 341, "is a technical expression, which does not signify merely that personal reputation is incidently involved in the consequences or results of the action, but that the action in its nature directly involves the question of character." American Fire Ins Co. v. Hazen, 1 Atl. 605, 608, 110 Pa. 530.

PUTTING IN FEAR.

The words "putting in fear," as used in

the definition of robbery as the felonious and forcible taking of the property of another from his person against his will by violence or by putting in fear, is equivalent to constructive violence, and the demands of the law are met by proof of fear excited with respect to apprehended injuries to the person, property, or character. Though there need be no great degree of terror or fright for personal safety excited in the person robbed, the fact must be attended with such circumstances of terror or intimidation, such threatening by word, gesture, or manner, as in common experience is likely to create an apprehension of danger, and induce one to part with his property for the safety of his person. The terror which would lead the person robbed to apprehend an injury to his character was never deemed sufficient to support an indictment for robbery, except in the particular instance of its being excited by means of insinuations against or threats to destroy the character by accusations of sodomical practices. Simmons V. State, 25 South. 881, 882, 41 Fla. 316.

Property obtained by a trick, or by threats of illegal arrest, criminal prosecution, or insinuation against character, is not a taking by putting in fear, within the meaning of Rev. St. 2398, defining robbery. Simmons v. State, 41 Fla. 316, 318, 25 South. 881,

882.

party, if innocent. In re Hall, 70 N. Y. Supp. 406, 410, 61 App. Div. 266.

In El Diccionario de Legislacion putative matrimony is defined to be a marriage which, being null on account of some dissolving cause, is held notwithstanding for a true marriage, because of its having been contracted in good faith by both or one of the spouses in ignorance of the dissolving cause. Smith v. Smith, 1 Tex. 621, 628, 46 Am. Dec. 121.

PUTS.

As used in reference to transactions on boards of trade, a "put" is defined to be the privilege of delivering or not delivering the thing sold. Pearce v. Foote, 113 Ill. 228, 234, 55 Am. Rep. 414; Pixley v. Boynton, 79 Ill. 351, 353; Wolcott v. Heath, 78 Ill. 433, 437; Osgood v. Bauder, 39 N. W. 887, 890, 75 Iowa, 550, 1 L. R. A. 655; Minnesota Lumber Co. v. Whitebreast Coal Co., 43 N. E. 774, 778, 160 Ill. 85, 31 L. R. A. 529; White v. Barber,. 8 Sup. Ct. 221, 230, 123 U. S. 392, 31 L. R. A. 243.

A speculative option, where the object of the parties is not a sale and delivery of the goods, but a settlement in money on differences, is commonly called a "put." In re Chandler (U. S.) 5 Fed. Cas. 443, 444.

designate a contract by which one of the par

"Put" is a term used by stockbrokers to

ties thereto purchases a privilege to deliver certain stock at any time within a certain period and receive a certain sum therefor; "so that, in case the market should decline to any point below that figure, the person owning the privilege under the protection thus secured could deliver the stock at the agreed price." Hopper v. Sage, 47 N. Y. Super. Ct. (15 Jones & S.) 77, 78.

"Puts," or the privilege, for a nominal consideration, of delivering a large quantity of grain within a certain time at a specified price, where no delivery of the grain was contemplated by the parties, and they expected to settle the differences as established at future prices, are simple wagers, and void as against public policy. Ex parte Young (U. S.) 30 Fed. Cas. 828, 831.

The true idea of an option is what are called, in the peculiar language of the dealers, "puts" and "calls." A "put" is defined to be the privilege of delivering or not delivering the thing sold, and a "call" is de fined to be the privilege of calling for or not calling for the thing bought. Carroll v. Holmes, 24 Ill. App. 453, 456 (citing Pearce v. Foote, 113 Ill. 228, 55 Am. Rep. 414).

"Put" is distinguished from "call," which is the privilege of calling for or not calling for the thing bought. Minnesota Lumber Co v. Whitebreast Coal Co., 43 N. E. 774, 778, 160 Ill. 85, 31 L. R. A. 529.

Q

1