« AnteriorContinuar »
second place. Thinking of the magic orator, the tion of an issue remained in force, so that then no reprofound lawyer, logician and scholar, I recall Ben.
trospective examination was necessary to discover the
point in controversy. This was made necessary, for Jonson's memorable words on the wonderful power
the nature of the issue determined the mode of proof Lord Bacon, for they are all applicable to Mr.
cedure by which a decision might be arrived at. If Choate: “There happened in my time one noble
the issue were one of law, the judge determined it; if speaker, who was full of gravity in his speaking. one of fact, a different tribunal determined it. Again, His language (where he could spare or pass by a if the issue were one of fact, from various forms of jest) was nobly censorious. No man ever spoke
proceeding the appropriate one must be selected.
Thus far the old system of pleading seemed admiramore neatly, more pressly, more weightily, or suf
ble, for its simplicity was its great recommendation. fered less idleness, in what he uttered. No member
It was the object of all judicial proceedings to proof his speech but consisted of his own graces. His duce this single, certain, material issue; but it soon hearers could not cough or look aside from him began to happen, from the complex, artificial system without loss. He commanded where he spoke, and of rules which sprang up, that the parties found thembad his judges angry and pleased at his devotion.
selves at issue on a point in no way involving the
merits of the case. Then, by compelling the party to No man had their affections more in his power. The
select one certain ground of defense, this system of fear of every one that heard him was lest he should
special pleading excluded him from the use of other make an end!” And that was just the fear we all defenses which otherwise might be perfectly available. had when Choate was speaking, - lest he should The same arbitrary rules dividing the forms of actions, stop, lest the sound of his perfect voice should
and courts of law and of equity affected pleading too,
until it became known as a science of “endless techcease, - lest he too should make an end. I cannot
nicality, trivial niceties, and of excessive refinemeut but lament that those who have more recently put
and prolixity.” on the legal robes, and whose steps are yet on the The great technicality and other defects growing threshold of life, can have no chance of ever hear- | out of this system of special pleading, were to some ing those magic tones which so thrilled the young extent remedied by the permission of numerous
amendments and repleaders, and very greatly by the students of my time, and realized to us that sove
introduction of general pleading, whereby the parreign genius which unites the faculty of reasoning
ties were allowed the widest scope in tbe proof of with the faculty of imagination.
facts not appearing upon the record; but eventually, My letter is already too long. Pardon my prolix as we shall now see, these equitable provisions worked ity, and believe me, dear sir, most cordially yours, endless confusion.
JAMES T. FIELDS.
In assumpsit the plea was non-assumpsit; but under this plea the defendant might give in evidence
any thing going to show that the plaintiff had no THE NEW YORK SYSTEM OF PROCEDURE.
cause of action at the time the suit was brought.
Boyd v. Weeks, 6 Hill, 393; Young v. Rummell, 2 id. ITS THEORY, HISTORY AND PROGRESS IN THE UNITED STATES, ENGLAND AND INDIA.
In a debt on a bond the defendant might plead that (Continued.)
he did not execute the bond, and then show that he WE have before pointed out in what respects the executed it under duress of imprisonment. Nil debet
W administration of law and equity differed; and was good as a plea where nothing was due at the comsince the Code has provided for a uniform course of mencement of the action, and the defendant might give proceeding in the pursuit of legal or equitable reme iu evidence performance, or a release, or the statute of dies, it remains for us to discuss in what manner the limitations. Thus the defendant, pleading by way of differences formerly existing in the two courts, as to special plea, had it in his power to make it eutirely pleadings, mode of trial, mode of proof, and mode of | uncertain to the plaintiff what the defense would be, relief, have been barmonized or disposed of in pro who, in cousequence, would be compelled to make cedure under the civil action.
elaborate and exact proof of the allegations the declaIn courts of common law originally the pleadings rations contained. Moreover, the introduction of were oral; and the presiding judge so managed the equitable principles in the statement of a cause of acmutual allegations of the two parties, that eventually tion worked parallel confusion. We have already seer: an issue was produced, that is, a point reached where that, no matter how just might be the claim, nona fact was affirmed on one side and denied on the suit followed an improper choice of the form of acother. Subsequently, about the time of Littleton, tion. the pleadings were reduced to writing; but the prin To obviate this harshness the old pleaders resorted ciple governing them as to the ultimate production of to this device: Several counts, that is, several different au issue remained in force as before.
statements of one and the same cause of action, were This issue, a distinctive feature of our pleading, orig introduced; and in all cases where there were several inated, it is supposed (and we believe truly so), when counts, no matter whether there were several causes the court and pleaders had to depend upon their mem of action, or whether there was but one, on its face ory alone for the retention of the various statements, each purported to disclose a distinct and separate and the final arrival at some precise question of dis cause of action; so that, as the writers on the subject pute would obviate the necessity of reviewing the admit, there were as many causes of action as the several allegations, and the issue developed would declaration contained counts. Consequently, the evihave to be remembered only. As we have said, whendence of a trial could alone make plain whether the pleadings became written the principle of the produc- ' plaintiff sought recovery upou oue of these rights of
action, or upon several. Then, on the introduction pleadings, no statement of the claim or defense till the of assumpsit, money counts were permitted to be used. cause is called for trial; for I regard the declaration They were designed to state every possible form of upon the common counts, and the general issues, as indebtedness which might arise in transactions in good for nothing in any useful sense. They secure not volving the interchange of money; so that, in a suit one of the purposes for which the present system of upon a promissory note, where several of these money | pleading is so much praised - not one of the purposes counts were used, no one but a skillful lawyer could for which written statements are desirable. You know the real claim from the declaration alone. The might just as well require the parties to copy and action was often brought long after the transaction file each a verse of the Iliad, and call that coming to had occurred, and this fact would add to the uncer an issue.” tainty of the lawyer and client in ferreting out the The objects alluded to in the last quotation were to nature of the claim, and in determining upon the facilitate the preparation of a case for trial, and to character of the defense which should be interposed. place the facts alleged, denied or admitted, in such a The introduction of counts for labor, services, etc., shape as to be most readily intelligible to judge and jury. framed with an intent similar to that of money counts, Now we have shown, we think conclusively, that had a similar result.
rarely was any information conveyed to the respective In Rand's Chancery Jurisdiction this subject of parties of the nature of the demand, or the character counts is referred to, and he gives some very striking and scope of the defense; and what was unintelligible to illustrations of the abuse of an equitable innovation. the parties themselves must have afforded little light In one case there mentioned, there were 98 counts in to those who were to disentangle the law from this a declaration on one pound uotes. Upon notes for a mass of verbiage, or to pass upon the facts. guinea there were 286 counts, besides the money How could our former system of pleading have rencounts. More surprising than either of these in dered the claim or defense intelligible to the jury? stances was an action in debt for penalties, where Had there been but one single, certain, material issue, there were 480 counts in one declaration. These cases as was first intended, doubtless the praise so lavishly occurred in the English courts, which were more leni bestowed upon the common law system of pleading ent than ours in striking out all unnecessary counts; might in a degree have been merited; but when we yet the judges refused, with costs, to reduce the num remember that there were in nearly all cases several ber. Our own reports are evidence that use was made counts, and several pleas to each count, and again of this system of counts to an extent equal, at least, several replicatious to each plea, making in the end to that which prevailed in the courts of England. ten, fifteen, or, as in one case we have cited, thirty Then the statute of Anne allowed as many different separate and distinct issues, this claim of merit as to pleas as one wished to make to the allegations of the its clearness and simplicity must, we think, be abandeclaration.
doned. Our courts went thus far and even farther; for by The eulogists of the old system contended, however, our Revised Statutes several different replications that the evidence on the trial made sufficiently clear were allowed to the same plea; and in The People ex the nature and extent of the claim and defense. This rel. Bishop v. The Kingston and Middletown Turnpike may have been true where the object of the action was Road Co., 23 Wend. 193, the Attorney-General re not wholly defeated by the excessive technicality of plied to the plea with thirty replications.
the old forms of pleading; yet we must remember Pleadings did not stop here in their intricacy and that the trial always has this result, and that it should detail. After the replication there came from the de be the object of all pleading, by outlining that claim fendant the rejoinder; then the plaintiff followed and defense, to provide in some degree beforehand with the sur-rejoinder; the rebutter might then be for that result. introduced, and with the sur-rebutter the pleadings Moreover, under the old forms of actions, where a would usually end, though we can find no authority case having steered clear of nonsuits was prosecuted which fixed any limit to the pleadings. In theory the to judgment, the necessity that the jury should bring parties might go on with this cross-fire forever. The in a verdict, parts of which were not based upon, but courts, moreover, placed the narrowest construction | really contradicted by, the evidence of the trial, upon the language used, and required an absolute cor seems not the absolute perfection of logic or good respondence of proof and allegation. Rule after rule sense. regulating the form of proceedings served but to mys In no better position was the court. The pleadings tify and confuse the whole subject, and the system ostensibly were intended to separate the issues of law of pleading at common law degenerated into a science and fact; but the cumbrousness of the methods by of pedantic forms and clumsy machinery.
which this result was sought to be accomplished, so Stephen remarks, after stating at length various ob | clogged the way, that it became impossible to reach jections to this system of pleading: “Another objec | this end. The multiplication of issues, some material, tion to the system of pleading, and one more formida others not, but the materiality of which only evidence ble, perhaps, than any that has been above suggested, could determine, surely was of little assistance to is to be found in the excessive subtlety and needless the judge in disentangling what should have been precision by which some parts of it are characterized. separated and arranged systematically for him beforeThe existence of these faults cannot fairly be denied, hand. nor that they bring upon suitors the frequent neces The pleadings in the court of equity were more simsity of expensive amendments, and sometimes ooca ple and direct. sion an absolute failure of justice upon points of mere The bill of the complainant corresponded to the form."
declaration in a court of law. The bill was divided Said one of the greatest lawyers this country ever into several parts, termed, respectively, the stating produced: “What with the common counts and the part, the charging part, the interrogatory part, and general issues, we have now in most cases really no 'the jurisdictiou clause.
The stating part contained a statement of facta supposes himselt entitled. If the recovery of money upon which the complainant would prove his case, be demanded, the amount shall be stated. and all collateral circumstances strung out in detail The answer of the defendant, in similar plain and and with great minuteness - the facts themselves, concise language, shall contain a denial, either general and not the conclusions of facts, being set forth. or specific, of each material allegation of the complaint
The object of the charging part of the bill was to controverted by the defendant, or of any knowledge force the defendant, if possible, to acknowledge the or information sufficient to form a belief, and a statefacts as alleged or "stated.” Then followed the inter ment of any new matter constituting a defense or rogatory part, which consisted of several questions, counter-claim. The answer must contain the whole of framed in various forms and shades, and the defend the defense; for the defendant is not allowed to prove ant under oath was obliged to answer them, if he could on the trial what the answer does not disclose as a avail himself of neither plea nor demurrer. The defense. jurisdiction clause set forth simply that the acts oom Where there is a statement of such new matter conplained of had no adequate remedy at law.
stituting a defense or counter-claim, the plaintiff may The defendant might interpose a demurrer when reply or demur, or do both, that is, demur to one or the objection to the bill was apparent, and this would more of such defenses or counter-claims, and reply to raise an issue of law. When the grounds of objection the residue of the counter-claims; and in some cases were such as did not appear on the face of the bill, the even, where the new matter does not amount to a counplea or answer must be resorted to.
ter-claim, the court in its discretion, on application of The plea was used when it would reduce the contro the defendant, will compel a reply to be made. versy to a single point; while the answer was properly A demurrer is allowed to the complaint, answer and interposed when the defendant went over the various reply, so that a demurrer to the reply is the final pleadparts of the bill, either denying or admitting them. ing under the Code. The provisions as to the striking The replioation, a reply to the plea or answer, closed out of sham, frivolous, and irrelevant answers, are the pleadings in equity.
ample; while, the use of the demurrer is carefully The great object of the pleadings in equity was to guarded by providing, that it must in all cases specify compel the discovery of evidence residing in the distinctly the grounds of objection, or it will be disknowledge of the defendant, of which the complain regarded. ant desired possession to aid him in the prosecution The equitable provision contained in section 169 of his suit. Sometimes this was the sole object of obviates any harshness which the rules governing the suit, as in the bill for discovery, where the further pleadings might cause: "No variance between the prosecution of the suit must be in the courts of law. allegation and the proof shall be deemed material,
So, whether the suit were simply for discovery, or unless it have actually misled the adverse party to for further relief, the bill set forth matters in detail his prejudice in maintaining his action or defense not allowable in a court of law, and was framed to
upon the merits." subject the defendant to a searching examination of At a glance it will be observed, that the pleadings the facts stated.
in the courts of equity, freed of their arbitrary, Thus simple were pleadings in the Court of Chan formal rules, have been the model after which the very originally; but in the course of time, as this court commissioners have fashioned the system of pleading began to extend its jurisdiction, the system became under the Code. one of complexity and intricacy second only to that of No technicality or trivial objection any longer pleadings at common law.
interferes with or defeats the plaintiff's claim, or the Story says it became eventually a science of great defense of the defendant; but the means of most complexity, and a very refined species of logic, which readily arriving at a decision upon the merits of the it requires various talents, long experience, vast learn case are always adopted. ing, and a clearness and acuteness of perception Before we have dismissed from our attention the belonging only to gifted minds to master in all its subject of pleading, it remains to consider one other various distinctions and subtle contrivances, and to matter referred to in the second clause of section 140, apply it with sound discretion and judgment to all the with reference to the rules which under the Code are diversities of professional practice.
to determine the sufficiency of pleadings. The secFor a reform of those abuses of pleadings, the Code | tion, though amended in 1849, was changed back in provides, in section 140, that “all forms of pleading 1852 to its original form, in which it now stands. heretofore existing are abolished, and hereafter the We must bear in mind that many of the old rules forms of pleadings in civil actions, and the rules by to determine the sufficiency of pleadings were founded which the sufficiency of the pleadings is to be deter on grounds of logio, while others were the product of mined, shall be those prescribed by this aot."
minds whose chief delight seems to have been to devise In subsequent sections it is provided, that the only rules as supremely technical and productive of delay pleadings on the part of plaintiff shall be the com as possible. Hence it became a matter of great plaint and a demurrer, and in some cases a reply; moment to know how far the Code had interfered while the defendant is confined to the answer and the with, or actually abolished the application of these demurrer.
equitable, logical rules to the system of pleading it The complaint shall contain the title of the cause, inaugurated. Thus, in Wooden v. Wafle (1851), Justice specifying the name of the court where the action is Selden said, in the course of his opinion: “In that brought, and the county in which the plaintiff desires state of transition through which the forms and modes the trial to take place, and the names of the parties to of judicial proceedings are now passing in this State, the action, plaintiff and defendant, and shall plainly there is nothing which occasions more just anxiety and concisely set forth the nature of the plaintiff's than the settlement of those rules and principles claim as he expects to prove it. It shall, in addition, which are hereafter to govern parties in making their contain a demand of the relief to which the plaintiff | respective allegations."
The extent to which the changes as to the determin whose existence was logical and whose intent equitaing of the sufficiency of pleadings went, was for a long ble, remained as they were, untouched by the innovatime a matter of doubt and discussion, several dis tion of the Code; and the abolition of the rules of tinguished judges holding directly opposed views in pleading went only to the abolition of those rules opinions in cases in the first half-dozen volumes of whose existence was made necessary by the retention Howard's Practice Reports.
of the forms of action. It is unnecessary for us to go into an enumeration, To sustain our position, we quote in conclusion the much less an examination, of these opinions, delivered remarks of a learned judge, in Buddington v. Harris, 6 at a time when, as a learned justice remarked, “ with How. Pr. 412: “The principles of pleadings, whatshaken nerve he started out to relay the foundations
ever the system, are always the same. Its office is to of the science of legal pleading," which in his opinion present the cause of action on one side, and a defense had been entirely broken up. It will be sufficient for on the other. This is not less true under our present our present purpose to state briefly why we believed system than under the former. Names are changed, the justice erred in supposing that the Code had broken useless forms and technical rules are abolished, but up the real science of pleading.
the principles remain unchanged.” To the same When the wheels of the new legal machinery, effect is the opinion of Judge Duer, in Fry v. Bennett, unclogged by the bias and opposition of our judges, 1 C. R. 250. had begun to run smoothly, the incorrectness of many
(To be continued.) of the early views as to the object and effect of the Code reform became evident. Some part of this incorrectness we have already seen in our examination as to
CHRIST AND THE LAWYER. how far the distinctions of law and equity were abol
MANY towns boast of a rural beauty found within ished in the general amalgamation of the two systems
| M their precincts, which they display for the purof procedure. The commissioners in every part of
pose of picture-making from a neighboring belfry or their work show that they intended to abolish form,
other available heighth. not substance. No fiat of a legislature could abolish
If the town has sufficient age and the maples and elms the distinctions between law and equity. Their sepa
have spread so as to "touch and kiss ” from opposite rate existence is inherent in the nature of things; and
sides of the street, the boast rarely fails of justification. all the Code proposed to and did do, as we have
Possibly the landscape is uniform in flatness, but that endeavored to point out, was as far as possible to
is relieved by the refreshing coolness of the shade sugcombine and blend the administration of law and
gested and the cheerful associations running along equity into one system, adopting for the expedition of
with it. justice a remedy common to both, but leaving the Not unfrequently in these pictures is seen, breaking inherent differences of each intact.
up their sameness, the tall cone of the Lombard popApply now this principle running all through the lar, its slender form giving prominence to it in such Code to the point under discussion. Many of the old
places; but it associates no alluring shade and suggests rules established in reason and good sense were of the
heat and conscription and that which gathers to itself greatest use for the furtherance of justice. Take, for
| indeed but puts forth all efforts in one direction - upinstance, the old rules providing that pleadings should wards — and covers in the end when it falls merely a not be hypothetical, nor argumentative, nor untrue, I line on the earth. nor in the alternative. These were rules which no one 1 Among men, every calling in life, the professions could reasonably suppose the Code proposed to abol- included, presents to the leisurely observer a similar ish; for without them there could be no possible hope picture; since in their divers aggregates men attain to that the reform would touch any vital part of the old about the same growth and development excepting abuses. The Code moreover calls, in the complaint, here and there the swelling dome of an oak or the for a plain and conoise statement of facts constituting graceful form of an elm listlessly swaying above its a cause of action, without unnecessary repetition, and neighbors. The view in whatever field taken, howmakes similar provisions as to the language of the ever, will disclose some zealots thrusting themselves answer and reply; yet this result could never have sharply into sight, whether it lies among lawyers, been arrived at from the enactments of the Code, physicians, clergymen, scientists or manualists. But should there have been an abolition of those old rules, zealots, like the Lombard poplar, grow only on a line; whose object was to secure directness and conciseness they thrust their root downward for support and their in the statement of the claim or defense.
stem upward for glory. They serve in such scenes Many of these rules were framed to regulate the chiefly as comfortless breakers-up of flat uniformity. proper introduction of testimony. “It is not neces A zealous clergyman recently preached from an sary to state matter of which the court takes notice influential desk, taking for his text Luke x, 25: “A ex-officio," ran the old rule of pleading; and as a rule certain lawyer stood up and tempted him, saying, of evidence alone Greenleaf reproduces the rule • Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?' " He intact. Chitty, under the old rule that “it is not also read and commented upon the parable connected necessary to allege what the law will presume," says with this passage, as a part of his sermon. that, in an action for words, as for saying a man is a If the Sabbath is a day for sweet repose and calm thief, the plaintiff has no occasion to aver that he is reflection, a delight, this clergyman did not improve not a thief; and it were idle to affirm that any differ the occasion rightly, nor allure any one into such eut rule is in force under our present system of plead enjoyments; nor did he present Christ as “ The Great ing. On the same principle, no one now would, in an Physician," the “ Balm of Gilead," so desired by all, action on contract, think of alleging that the defendant but rather as the supernatural controversialist, who was not an infant.
tripped and threw in the most admirable manner his All needless, arbitrary forms and rules were abol- interlocutor. Nor did the lawyer appear as a well-read ished; but the great principles of our common law, scholar and disciplined thinker, devoted to the learning of the law and eminent among his countrymen as and that that will not meet the requirement. He will such, but as an impudent and sharp-witted fellow answer by passages little quoted by the Jews of that whom it became necessary to meet and put down; nor day, but which express the spirit of all the law. And a was the lawyer made an unwilling witness, even, to the wonderful answer it is. Christ immediately sets his correctness of Christ's teaching and claims to the Mes approval upon it. How many sermons preached could siahship, but a subtle trap-setter, whom Christ caught Christ approve so fully? Not only does he approve and in this net he had spread.
pronounce the answer right, but he adds “do this and It is not proposed, however, to keep within the thou shalt live." heated air of that discourse, and report so hot a phil This remarkable answer consists of two passages of ippic, but to get into cooler atmosphere and point out scripture quoted from widely separated portions of the in this article some things very germane to the text law and are brought into juxtaposition here for the which the clergyman did not say.
first time on record. They express the doctrine of, It matters little so far as the scripture lesson is con- not the liturgical Jews, but of accepted Christianity, cerned whether lawyer” is the proper rendering of the and yet are taken bodily from the Mosaic law. The original vopLKOS or whether it should be ecclesiastic first sentence, being the words of Moses, is found in as the Germans have it in their version, or legis inter- Deut. vi, 5, “ Thou shalt love the Lord thy God witb pres, “jurist,” as Beza has it in his, since it doubtless all thy soul and with all thy might;" and the second means one skillfully versed in the jurisprudence of is part of the xivth verse of the 18th chapter of Levitithe Jews, or one thoroughly up in the Mosaic law; cus, being the words of the Lord to Moses, “and thy besides,
neighbor as thyself." 1st. The word tempted was the tap-root of the ser These two propositions constitute a perfect syllabus mon in question, as it is of all others of like strain, and of the law of Sinai — of the first and second tables — it was pushed earthward to steady the cone going sky. | the Ten Commandments. ward. But the word is an unfortunate and incorrect 2nd. It is a theological as well as a political truth, that rendering of the Greek exteipaswv, trying, proving, whose a rule or canon has just such force and authority as root is telpa, proof, as in this sentence from Demosthe-| the received interpretation allows it. Give to the Devil nes TW telpav epyy 8e8wxeval, the proof to be given by work. In the interpretation of the scripture and it matters not Beza's rendering the word is tentans, testing. In the that it is God's revelation, it will work no good. The French it is eprouver, to prove, and in the German it is Jews interpreted the word neighbor as they did all of versuchte, tried. Vide Am. Bible S. Pub. in these lan- | the law so as to apply it to themselves only and to guages. In short, the word does not predicate any ill, exclude all gentiles. A Jew should love a Jew and not even a questionable act or thought on the part of befriend him, but he might without violation of the its subject, the lawyer. Nor does the context. received interpretation of the law hate and wrong a The question put by the lawyer is in the first person, gentile. Thus we can see how wise and far-seeing was "what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" not what this remarkable man — "a certain lawyer." He had shall others do, nor in the abstract what must be done? eliminated from out of all the law the two propositions It is a direct personal inquiry of the Master and about that perfectly expressed its spirit. There only rehimself.
mained the interpretation. The first proposition of The lawyer reasoned doubtless, “I have observed his answer had come through the rough experience of this rabbi, his fame is all over the land. He is no ordi the Jews to withstand all debate. It was correctly nary person. He leads in the synagogue; when he interpreted to exclude all idols and idolatry and inrises no one else speaks. He invites inquiry, and cluded only the accepted Jehovah. But the second answers with more than Solomon's wisdom. It is proposition was exposed to a misleading controversyasserted that he is the very Messiah, but other men who was “thy neighbor?" He well understood the have claimed to be Him and have proved impostors. I commonly received interpretation of the term and know from my reading that the Messiah is to come, doubted it. Moreover, he saw that the Master did and it is of the utmost importance for me to know not, no more than had Jehovah in history, confine whether this one is He. How shall I determine it? his beneficence exclusively to the Jews; and so He talks constantly of the eternal life, and we dispute he, willing to justify himself, asked “who is my among ourselves how we shall obtain that life. If he | neighbor?" is the expected Messiah he certainly knows and will We have in tempted" above and here in “willing" plainly tell. I will put to him a pertinent question. | and “justify" correlative translations; so designed, Accordingly he rose in the face of the synagogue and doubtless, as to place an ill construction upon the mocourteously propounded the question of a sincere | tives of the lawyer in his questioning of Christ, a design inquirer.
that the narrative does not warrant and which the Christ hears him in the temper in which the inquiry Greek does not at all sustain. The word “willing," is made. There is no reproof, no unmasking a discov benwv, should be rendered desiring and“ justify," Bégaiety, ered duplicity in return, but a ready recognition of the palpably means to set right - to sct himself right, as used learning and worth of his interrogator. Christ appeals | in connection with the accompanying pronoun, that is, to his already acquired knowledge and as to one who | to do that which is right. really did know and asks him "What is written in the Christ understood the lawyer, and answered him by law-how readest thou ?" i. e., how, reading, under | the parable of the Good Samaritan, closing with the standest thou it ? avayıvwkeus.
simple question: “Which now of these three thinkest The lawyer and the rabbi are now in accord - the thou was neighbor unto him that fell among the honor of being asked by so renowned a teacher- per thieves ?" And he said, “He that showed mercy on haps by the Messiah Himself to state before the people him.” Then said Jesus unto him “Go and do thou likehis knowledge of the law is accepted in all its worth.
wise." He does not hesitate. He knows the letter of the law, Thus this narrative discloses an occurrence in the but he knows too qui hæret in litera, hæret in cortice, history of Christ deeply interesting and instructive.