place where it is celebrated, in a manner full of public inconvenience. Still, I must admit that the subject is not unattended with difficulties, and I await with interest the final decision of the Lords. Nothing would afford me greater gratification than to visit England. Truly, from the bottom of my heart, upon touching its soil, I should exclaim, Salve, magna parens — magna virum! The great obstacles which I have to overcome, are my perpetual round of duties, professorial and judicial. There has been recently published in America, a new edition of my work on Bailments, with large additions. I beg you to accept the copy which I shall transmit, as a mark of my great respect for your character and attainments. Believe me, with the highest respect, your faithful and much obliged servant, JOSEPH STORY. A present from Mr. Wigram1 of his able treatises on Points in the Law of Discovery, and on the Admission of Extrinsic Evidence in the Interpretation of Wills, was acknowledged by the following letter: TO JAMES WIGRAM, ESQ., ONE OF HER MAJESTY'S COUNSEL, ETC. SIR : Cambridge, July 23d, 1840. I had the great pleasure of receiving a short time ago the copies of your works on Points in the Law of Discovery, and on the Admission of Extrinsic Evidence in the Interpretation of Wills, which you had the kindness to send me. I can truly say, that no present could have been more acceptable to me, or have afforded me inore sincere gratification. I hope that you will allow me to say, what is my real opinion, that they are works of extraordinary merit, ability, and learning, and 1 Now Vice-Chancellor Wigram. eminently useful to the profession. The work on Discovery I had read with great care in the first edition, and it is highly improved in the second. I confess that my own private judgment went along with yours as to the leading principle of the work. Upon principle, (however it may stand upon authority,) I have found it difficult to understand how the manner in which the defendant refers to his own title, and documents in support thereof, can give the plaintiff any right to any discovery of that title or the documents, to which otherwise he would not by law be entitled. My general habit of obedience, however, to authority, makes me less sure in my own judgment on this point than I should otherwise feel I ought to be. The other work I had not before an opportunity of reading. It is highly instructive and satisfactory, and of constant practical use. I have been greatly puzzled by the authorities on this subject, apparently in conflict with each other on many occasions. You have done much to clear the doctrine of its doubts and difficulties. I have long been satisfied that the Courts have in some cases gone too far in the admission of extrinsic evidence, and especially of parol evidence, in the interpretation of wills. It is a favorable moment to get back to the true principle, and to retrace our false steps. I beg you, to believe me, with the highest respect, truly your most obliged friend and servant, JOSEPH STORY. Two interesting pamphlets, by Edwin W. Field, Esq. of London, are thus acknowledged by my father: DEAR SIR: TO EDWIN W. FIELD, ESQ. Cambridge, July 24th, 1840. I return you my sincere thanks for your kindness in sending me your two pamphlets, the one on the Organization and Practice of the offices attached to the Equity Courts, and the other on the Law respecting Marriages abroad, by English subjects, within the prohibited degrees. I have read them both with very great pleasure and no small instruction. That respecting the Equity Offices and the system of costs, is full of new information to me, for in the comparatively simple practice in our Equity Courts, such a vast apparatus and complicated machinery are scarcely known. It is impossible to overlook the importance of your suggestions, and the manliness, as well as the intrinsic force of your appeal to the profession for some effective remedies on this subject. Such a system could not exist in America, without calling forth legislative interference to prevent delays, to lessen costs, and to give simplicity to proceedings. Indeed, I am well persuaded from my own experience as an Equity Judge, that a thorough revision of the whole system is indispensable to a due administration of public justice. And I am sure that the whole practice of the Courts can be extensively and benefi cially simplified; but I should be led too far were I to pursue this topic; and it would be impracticable for me to explain my views without more time than I can devote to the purpose. The other topic is eminently important, and is growing more and more so, in a practical sense, every day. It appears to me that every nation will soon be compelled to yield up some portions, perhaps large portions, of their own municipal regulations on the subject of marriages, in order to meet the new exigencies of society arising from the great extent to which intermarriages now take place between the subjects of different countries, in foreign places. In America I have no doubt that our Courts will be compelled, from a sense of public convenience, as well as international comity, to hold marriages abroad to be generally valid and good by their local law, wherever the question of their validity may afterwards be contested, as well with regard to their own subjects as with regard to foreigners. The exceptions will practically be reduced to the narrowest space, and include only such cases as clearly, in the sense of all Christians, are contrary to Christian morals. I shall certainly avail myself of your valuable labors in the next edition of my work on the Conflict of Laws, which I am now preparing for the press. I hope that my health may allow me to complete the revision during the next autumn. I am, with the highest respect, Truly, your much obliged friend and servant, JOSEPH STORY. The election of General Harrison as President took place during this year. The views of my father as to the course his administration should take, are thus stated: MY DEAR SIR: TO RICHARD PETERS, ESQ. Cambridge, December 4th, 1840. Somehow or other your letter of the 8th of November slipped from my memory amidst my various and almost distracting duties in Court and out of Court; and I now catch the passing moment to thank you for it, with a certainty that if I do not write you now, the tide of pressing business will sweep away this among other unexecuted wishes and intentions. I hope that the Court will have a harmonious session; and I am sure that the Chief Justice and a majority of my brethren will do all that is proper to accomplish the purpose. The change in the Administration will produce no change in my own conduct. I mean to stand by the Court and do all I can to sustain its dignity and the public confidence in it. Indeed, I should think myself utterly inexcusable if I could be brought to act otherwise. The new Administration will go into power under favorable auspices; but after all, there are many delicate and difficult duties which it will have to perform. The selection of the heads of departments will be important, and yet not without embarrassment. I hope General Harrison will take advice freely from his friends on this point. It is exceedingly important to the success of his Administration. If I were in either Clay's or Webster's situation, I should decline office and remain in the Senate. If I did not decline office, I should choose to go abroad. We want a Secretary of the Treasury of tried principles and discretion and sagacity, to restore the finances; an Attorney-General of acknowledged ability and learning; a Secretary of State of great caution and sound judgment. The times are critical. Already public confidence begins to revive, and with it public credit. Business is beginning to work out of its sluggish channels. The Administration must make many removals from offices in order to restore things to a state of honest confidence, and of right and justice. But I hope General Harrison will firmly state that while he will remove all those who have abused the functions of their offices for party and political purposes, he at the same time will remove no other man for opinion's sake, who has been honest and is capable. I hope General Harrison will require Congress again to take the purse-strings in their own hands, and to demand back what they have so unconstitutionally surrendered to Jackson and Van Buren. The power of removal may, and ought to be regulated by Congress. Give my love to all your family, and believe me, JOSEPH STORY. In acknowledgment of a copy of Mr. Dana's "Two Years before the Mast," my father writes as follows: |