Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Summary

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Graham v. United States (231 U.S. 474…

It is objected that the judge called the jury's attention to Graham's testimony concerning his expectation when he contracted. The judge had a right to do more than that if he left the decision to them. Universal distrust creates universal incompetence. In the courts of the United States the judge and jury are assumed to be competent to play the parts that always have belonged to them in the country in which the modern jury trial had its birth.
Source: Wikisource

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Graham v. United States (231 U.S. 474…

In case of failure to prosecute the work diligently in the judgment of the superintendent of construction, Green or his successor was given power, 'with the sanction of the regents of the Smithsonian Institution, to annul' the contract by notice in writing, whereupon payments under the contract were to cease, etc., and the United States was given the right to recover from Graham any excess over the contract price expended for completing the contract, which it was authorized to proceed to do.
Source: Wikisource

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Graham v. United States (231 U.S. 474…

The undisputed testimony is that this delay was due to their being unable to get cars at the quarry to take the stone, and so, under the instructions, the jury must have found; so that the responsibility for it depends upon who was bound to furnish the cars. By the contract the government was to furnish the granite free on board the cars at the quarry, and Graham agreed to transport it from that place.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature