LAW OF THE FARM. 299 



The common law, therefore, provides that no matter what may be the 

 equities or private understanding or agreement between you and the person 

 to "wliom you give your note — no matter what claim, by way of set-ofi or other- 

 wise, you may have against the original payee of the note, one who buys it or 

 becomes the holder in good faith, before maturity, without any notice of your 

 equities, takes it relieved of all these equities. 



It frequently happens that some vendor of patent rights or peddler of some 

 other worthless truck by lying and fraud obtains the note of a farmer due 

 sometime hence, and immediately sells it to a bank or broker. The broker 

 knows nothing of the swindle, and is a holder in good faith, having paid a 

 valuable consideration. The consequence is that the farmer is compelled to 

 pay the uttermost farthing, no matter how grievously he may have been swin- 

 dled in his patent right, or other truck speculation. This sort of business 

 has become so common, by reason of the facility by which farmers may bo 

 imposed upon by scoundrels who ply that business among them, that the Leg- 

 islature has endeavored, as far as possible, to protect them, without changing 

 the common law. 



The statute provides that whenever any promissory note shall be given, 

 the consideration of which shall consist in whole or in part of the right to 

 make, use, or vend any patent invention, or inventions claimed to be patented, 

 the words "Given for patent right" shall be prominently and legibly written 

 or printed on the face of such note, above the signature thereto. This is to 

 warn everybody to whom the note is offered. Therefore, if the farmer who 

 gives his note for a patent right, will see that these ominous words are promi- 

 nently and legibly written or printed on the face of it, above the signature, he 

 will have a defense to the note in case his trade proves to be a swindle, as is 

 usually the case. How many farmers will observe this statutory precaution, 

 remains to be seen. Indeed, if every farmer, when he gives a note, would 

 write on his own signature what it is given for, it would be very apt to save 

 him much serious trouble. 



Take another illustration. The statute does not point out the duties and 

 obligations pertaining to the farmer and his hired man. These are mainly 

 regulated by the common law. Your obligations respecting your hired man are 

 not confined to the simple payment of his stipulated wages, by any means. 

 As a general rule, you are liable for any injury occasioned by the negligence 

 or unskillfulness of your hired man in the course of his employment; and 

 sometimes even when he goes contrary to your orders. 



In one case where a hired man drove his employer's team along a public 

 street so negligently that it came in collision with a carriage, and thereby 

 caused the horses attached to the carriage to take fright and run away, doing 

 serious damage, it was held that the employer was liable. So, when a farmer 

 sent his hired man to cut timber in a designated direction upon his land, and 

 the hired man inadvertently cut timber upon the land of an adjoining neigh- 

 bor, it was held that the farmer was liable for the trespass. So, when one 

 sent his son for his cattle in a certain pasture, and the boy not only drove 

 home his father's cattle but two of his neighbor's heifers, it was held that the 

 father was liable. So, when a man was employed to clean out a certain gar- 

 ret, carelessly threw a keg out of the window, which fell on the head of a boy 

 and injured him. So, when a hired man in the course of his employment 

 obstructed the highway from which a traveler received an injury, the employer 

 was held liable for damages. 



Sometimes the current of the common law changes. It may run for many 



