SIR FREDERICK POLLOCK, BART., LL.D., CORPUS PROFESSOR OF JURISPRUDENCE IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD. 2 RUSSELL-2 BARNEWALL & CRESSWELL-3 DOWLING & LONDON: SWEET AND MAXWELL, LIMITED, 3, CHANCERY LANE. BOSTON : LITTLE, BROWN & CO. 1896. PREFACE TO VOLUME XXVI. In the equity part of this volume the case of most general interest is Abernethy v. Hutchinson, p. 237, which for many years remained the leading and indeed only authority on the right to restrain the publication of matter publicly or privately communicated by word of mouth. The later decision of the House of Lords in Caird v. Sime, 12 App. Ca. 326, has by no means exhausted the questions of this class that may yet arise. The judgment of Bayley, J. in R. v. Harvey, at p. 343, contains a lucid and, I think, an early declaration of the principle "that a party must be considered, in point of law, to intend that which is the necessary or natural consequence of that which he does; " a principle carried by the modern development of the law of damages to a degree of exact refinement which seventy years ago would have been thought chimerical. |