ices in and about the billiard hall and in selling the liquor. Bixby sued for his compensation. Point Involved: Whether a contract the consideration for which is partly legal and partly illegal, and indivisible in its nature, can be enforced as to the legal part. 66* SMITH, J., delivered the opinion of the Court: The plaintiff would have been entitled to the reasonable worth of his entire services if no part of them had been rendered in an illegal business. It must be conceded he cannot recover for his services in the sale of liquor; but he claims a portion of his services was rendered in a legal employment and that he can recover the value of that portion. * "If the consideration for the defendant's promise to pay the plaintiff a reasonable compensation was the plaintiff's promise to perform both classes of services, the illegal as well as the legal, it is clear the defendant's promise cannot be enforced. A contract is invalid if any part of the consideration on either side is unlawful. * * "The questions arising in this case-what services did the plaintiff agree to perform? Was it an entire contract? Were there separate contracts upon separate considerations as to the legal and illegal services?—are all questions of fact. In the present case, however, there is no room for but one conclusion: the plaintiff made an entire promise to perform both classes of service; this entire promise formed an entire consideration and a part of this indivisible consideration was illegal. (Certain cases) cited by the plaintiff are not in point. In those cases the different articles sold were valued separately in the sale. * It is not contended that it is customary to pay saloon tenders separate prices for sweeping, for building fires, for acting as billiard markers, and for selling liquor. Judgment for defendants. Question 121: (1) State the facts, the question presented and the decision of the Court in the above case. (2) Suppose in this case Moore had had two separate places and had employed Bixby for $10 a week to work in the forenoons at the place legally conducted and $10 a week to work in the afternoons in the place illegally conducted. Do you think he could have recovered for his legal employment? CHAPTER 12. FORM AND EVIDENCE OF CONTRACTS. A. The Formal Contract or Contract under Seal. B. Contracts Required by Law to be in Writing. § 108. (Contracts, Sec. 76.) General statement. (Note: Knowing now the elements that we must have to make a simple contract, whether oral, written or implied, we may now turn our attention to a consideration of the form and evidence of the contract, and the requirements as to form and evidence.) A. The Formal Contract or Contract Under Seal. § 109. Definition of sealed instrument. § 110. Effect of seal in early law. § 111. Instruments requiring seal at common law. § 112. Modern legislation in respect to sealed instruments. § 109. (Contracts, Sec. 77.) Definition of sealed instrument. Case 122. Warren v. Lynch, 5 Johnson's New York Reports, 238 (1810). Facts: Lynch made and delivered a promissory note in usual form except that he signed it "Thomas Lynch (L. S.)," payable to order of Hopkins Robertson. Plaintiff, Warren, having acquired the note sues Lynch who claims that the note is not a negotiable instrument for the reason that it bears a seal and that Warren therefore cannot maintain a suit on it as a negotiable instrument and is subject to defenses that would have been good against the party from whom he acquired it. Warren claims, however, that by the law of New York where the instrument is payable, a mere scrawl is not a seal, and therefore the letters "L. S." mean nothing. Point Involved: Whether under the common law (then in force on that point in New York) a scrawl "L. S." was a seal. KENT, C. J.: "We have never adopted the usage prevailing in Virginia and some other states of substituting a scrawl for a seal; * "A seal, according to Lord Coke (3 Inst. 169), is wax with an impression. A scrawl with a pen is not a seal and deserves no notice. The law has not, indeed, declared of what precise materials the wax shall consist; and whether it is a wafer or any other paste or matter sufficiently tenacious to adhere and receive an impression is perhaps not material. But the scrawl has no one property of a seal. The policy of the law consists in giving ceremony and solemnity to the execution of important instruments by means of which the intention of the parties is more certainly and effectually fixed and frauds less likely to be practiced upon the unwary. * * * * * Question 122: (1) Were the letters "L. S." (locus sigilli— place of the seal) sufficient under the common law to make a seal? What was the form of the seal under the common law? Was the note in the above case a sealed instrument? Why? Would it be a sealed instrument under the law in New York today? Case 123. Ankeny v. McMahon, 4 Illinois Reports, 12. Facts: A suit in ejectment. A paper was offered in evidence by defendant which plaintiff objected to as not being under seal as the law required. It had after the signature the letters "L. S." which were printed on the form used. Point Involved: That under the practice and statutes in Illinois (and now practically all states) a seal may be in the form of a scrawl or scroll and such scrawl or scroll may consist in the letters "L. S." printed upon the paper. TREAT, JUSTICE: The paper in question is described in the body of it, as sealed with the seals of the parties, and the letters 'L. S.' are in print opposite the names of Ankeny and Logan, respectively. The first section of 'An act concerning practice' provides 'that any instrument of writing, to which the maker shall affix a scrawl by way of seal, shall be of the same effect, to all intents, as if the same were sealed.' This statute gives equal solemnity to instruments to which signers affix their scrawls, as to those which they affix their seals by impression on wax or other tenacious substance. But it is urged that to give them the dignity of sealed instruments, the scrawls should be actually affixed by the signers. We do not perceive any good reason for this distinction. The printing of the scrawl, or the characters representing a seal, is as legible and durable as if made with a pen by the party, the only other usual mode of affixing a scrawl by way of seal; and it equally indicates the intention of the signer as to the character of the instrument. "If he places his signature opposite a scrawl already made, he thereby adopts it and makes it his own. These views are strengthened by reference to the decisions in 1 McLean, 462; 2 Blackf. 322; and 3 Blackf. 162. Question 123: In what form may a seal consist under modern statutes? If the seal is printed upon the contract before signature, is it a good seal? (Note by Editor: In Chancellor Kent's opinion in Case No. 122 (not completely given) he argues that the object in requiring a seal was not to designate the parties, as argued by some, but to give solemnity to the execution of important instruments by requiring a certain ceremony, namely, the use of the wax and the impression thereon by means of a seal. He was, therefore, of the opinion that a scrawl with a pen is not a seal "and deserves no notice." Legislatures have, however, differed with him by providing that a seal may be by way of scrawl. It does appear to the editor to be true that the addition of the letters "L. S." whether written or printed serve no practical pur |