void (a); but a general restriction as to time would not of itself unlimited reavoid the contract (b). That an agreement for restraint of trade may be valid, it must set forth the cause or consideration for the restraint, and the circumstances which rendered such a restraint reasonable; and it is for the Court, and not for the jury, to determine the reasonableness or unreasonableness of the contract (c). All contracts for mutually abstaining from trade, or taking away the freedom of action on the part of the individual to carry on trade, are void (d). straint void. Condition to the validity of the agree ment. Agreement for mutual ab staining from trade void. patents Agreements for the sale of patents of invention and secrets of Agreement for trade are not void, though unlimited as to time and space (e). FOREIGN LAWS. France. A contract for restraint of trade would be invalid under the section 1131 of the Civil Code, which avoids all obligations either based on an unlawful consideration or contrary to public order. Whatever is contrary to what the Legislature holds as a public good is illegal. United States of America.-All contracts which restrain the exercise of a man's talent in trade are detrimental to the commonwealth, and therefore void (ƒ). A contract prohibiting the pursuit of any trade or employment throughout the State of New York would be regarded as a contract in total restraint of trade within the rule of the common law. sale of valid. Contracts against the public good void. Contracts de trimental to the commonwealth void. SECTION IV. RESTRAINTS OF TRADE FOR WANT OF UNDERSTANDING. MINORS. TORY OBSER In the primitive state of society men were divided into INTRODUCimpuberes and puberes, a distinction based on the physical VATIONS. phenomena of man, the acquisition of the power of speech and procreation; speech being the condition of personal liability; procreation the essential condition of marriage. To this (a) Hitchcock v. Coker, 6 Ad. & E. 47; Thompson v. Harvey, 1 Show. 2; Com. Dig., "Trade;" Gunmakers' Company v. Fell, Willes, 389. (b) Archer v. Marsh, 8 Ad. & E. 959. (c) Mallan v. May, 11 M. & W. 653; Hutton v Parker, 7 Dowl. P. C. 739. (d) Hilton v. Eckersley, 6 E. & B. VOL. I. 47. In Scotland a contract of service (e) Bryson v. Whitehead, 1 Sim. & (f) Nobles v. Bates, 7 Cowen, 201 Story on Contracts, 551. C ; Roman law on material distinction another was added by jurisprudence, puberes and impuberes. Scotch law on infancy. Laws of foreign countries. founded on the moral rather than on the physical development These distinctions of the Roman law still prevail in many systems of jurisprudence. In Scotland two periods are recognised that of pupillarity, or a state of absolute incapacity, extending from birth to fourteen years of age in males, and twelve in females; and that of minority, or a state of limited capacity, from those ages to twenty-one. During the latter period a minor is held capable of consent, but of inferior judgment or discretion, requiring the protection of the law. The law of France is the same as in Scotland. But in England a minor under twenty-one years of age cannot bind himself, except for his education and necessaries. This complete disability of minors is not even modified by the law relating to emancipation, which prevails everywhere on the Continent. In France a minor may be emancipated at fifteen years of age complete, by the simple declaration of his father or mother; and, if without father or mother, at eighteen, if the conseil de famille think him capable. If an emancipated minor engages in trade, he is deemed a major for his acts in such a trade and has full right to buy and sell, to sign bills and notes, and to bind himself for his acts of trade. In Holland, where the majority is attained at twenty-three, a minor may be emancipated at eighteen. In Prussia emancipation is only granted at the age of twenty to a man, and eighteen to a woman (a). By means of emancipation. the inconvenience arising from the disability of minors is practically avoided. BRITISH LAW. Minor not liable for his act of trade. May bind him self for neces saries. Liability of father for ne cessaries. A minor, or a person under twenty-one years of age, is not liable on contracts made by him in the course of trade, and cannot be made a bankrupt (b). He can, however, bind himself for necessaries, including food, raiment, lodging, education, and such like, according to the state and condition of the minor himself; and whenever the contract is, at the time he makes it, plainly and unequivocally for his benefit, he becomes bound to fulfil his contract (c). A father is not liable for necessaries supplied to his son, though under age, if beyond the age of nurture, unless there be some contract on his part to pay for them (d). Contracts by minors are either good, void, or voidable. They Contracts of minors good, are good when they are entered into for necessaries; void when void, or voidthey are to their prejudice; and voidable when they are of uncertain nature as to benefit or prejudice (e). A minor cannot What he canappoint an attorney, state an account so as to bind himself, or do any act to prejudice his rights. He would not be bound by a bill of exchange, though given for necessaries; and he would not be bound by an agreement to refer any dispute to arbitration (f). He may bind himself as apprentice, though no action May bind lies on such covenant. He may be a shareholder in a jointstock company, and be bound to the payment of calls made during his minority (g). On his becoming of age he may repudiate the share, but if he continue to hold the same he becomes (a) Prussian Code, § 719. (b) 1 Roll. Abr. 729; Ex parte Sydebotham,1 Atk. 146; Belton v. Hodges, 9 Bing. 365; Ex parte Moule, 14 Ves. 603. (c) Chapple v. Cooper, 13 M. & W. 252; Wood v. Fenwick, 10 M. & W. 195; O'Brien v. Corrie, 3 C. & P. 283 ; Zouch v. Parson, 3 Burr. 1801; Maddon v. White, 2 T. R. 161. (d) Rolfe v. Abbott, 6 C. & P. 286; Shelton v. Springett, 11 C. B. 452; Law v. Wilkins, 6 Ad. & E. 718; (e) Goode v. Harrison, 5 B. & Ald. 156. (f) Oliver v. Woodroffe, 4 M. & W. 650; Williamson v. Watts, 1 Camp. 551; Trueman v. Hurst, 1 T. R. 40; Milner v. Lord Harewood, 18 Ves. 274. (g) Caper v. Hutton, 2 Russ. 357; North Western Railway Company v. able. not do. himself apprentice. must do on What a minor his becoming of age. Ratification. Fresh consideration not necessary. Minor representing himself of full age. Privileges of minors personal. Conditions necessary to to trade. liable for all calls, even for those made during his minority, and no act of ratification would be necessary on his part. Contracts which are voidable during minority may be ratified when the minor becomes of age. But in order that the ratification, after full age, of a contract entered into during minority may be valid, the same must be made in writing by the party to be charged therewith. The essential of a written ratification is the confirmation of the debt or promise. All other particulars may be established by parol evidence (a) A fresh consideration is not necessary to make securities given by a minor valid, if he ratifies them, after attaining twenty-one, with full knowledge and complete information respecting them (b). A minor representing himself of full age, and obtaining credit or money upon the faith of such representation, is precluded from pleading infancy, and will, in case of bankruptcy, be made responsible for his acts (c). The privileges of a minor are personal, and no one can take advantage of them but the minor himself; therefore, though by his contract he incurs no obligation, he is not thereby precluded from suing upon it the adult contracting party (d). FOREIGN LAWS. France.-Majority for both sexes is fixed at twenty-one years enable a minor of age complete, for all acts except marriage (e). A minor emancipated, of the age of eighteen years complete, may be a trader, and is held to be of age for all his acts relative to trade, provided he be authorised by his father and mother, and in their absence by a family council; and provided such authority has been posted up in the Hall of the Tribunal of Commerce. That a minor may be able to bind himself by his acts of trade, four conditions are therefore necessary. He must be emancipated in legal forms or by marriage; he must be eighteen years of age complete, even though he has been emancipated; he must be authorised by his father or mother, and such M'Michael, 5 Exch. 123; Dublin, Cork, (a) Williams v. Moor, 11 M. & W. (b) Kay v. Smith, 21 Beav. 522. (c) Ex parte Unity Joint Stock Bank Company, Re King, 6 Week. Rep. 640, Ch.; Price v. Hewett, 8 Exch. 146; Johnson v. Pye, 1 Sid. 258. (d) Warwick v. Bruce, 2 M. & S. 205; Davies v. Manington, 2 Sid. 109. (e) French Code Civil, § 388. authorisation must have been enrolled in a registry, and affixed for one year in the Hall of the Tribunal. But notwithstanding such authorisation, neither the minor, or the tutor for him, can borrow money without a deliberation of the conseil de famille, or sell his real estate, or do any act beyond those of simple administration, without the formalities prescribed for the transfer of real estates by minors (a). Acts of minors United States of America.-The age of majority is twenty- voidable only. one years complete. The tendency of American decisions is to make the acts of minors voidable only, and subject to their election, when they become of age, either to affirm or disavow them (b). Even the bond of an infant has been held to be voidable only at his election (c). If the deed is voidable only, there are three modes by which it will be held to be affirmed on his becoming of age. 1. By an express ratification. 2. By acts which reasonably imply an affirmance. 3. By the omission to disaffirm in a reasonable time (d). In the case of voidable contracts it will depend upon circumstances, such as the nature of the contract and the situation of the infant, whether any overt act of assent or dissent on his part be requisite to determine the fact of his future responsibility. Germany. The age of majority here is twenty-four. Bavaria, Norway, Denmark, and Mexico.-The age of Age of majo majority in these countries is twenty-five. Austria.-The age of majority is twenty-four years, but a minor may obtain permission to trade from the magistrate or tribunals. British India.-The full age of Hindoos and Mohammedans not under the Court of Wards is sixteen years complete. Male Arminians are of full age at eighteen. East Indians, or persons of European extraction in India, are governed by the laws of the nations from which they spring, though in a recent case the Sudder Court did not object to an East Indian obtaining his majority at eighteen. Buenos Ayres.-Every person of eighteen years of age may engage in trade, provided he is emancipated, and has property of his own; or, in case he has no father, that he has received (a) French Code Civil, §§ 2206 and 487; Code of Commerce, §§ 2 and 3. (b) Kent's Comm., vol. ii., p. 251, 8th ed.; Wamsley v. Lindenberger, 2 Randolph's Rep. 478. (c) Conroe v. Birdsall, 1 Johns. Americ. Rep. 127. (d) Curtin v. Patton, 11 Serg. & Rawle, 305; Richardson v. Bright, 9 Verm. 365. rity in different countries and effects of emancipation, |