March 9, 1917
My darling,
I have been terribly occupied since I saw you last. All day yesterday in Court, and all evening till past midnight with a number of men who formed a new and rather large crucible company. All this morning and afternoon in Court, and now, a little past five, in the office, Charles says that Stella has some meeting for the evening, so he'll be alone "why can't we go to the office and look over some things". Yes, why can't we?
Your card today was good. Speaking of goodness, do you know that you were the most adorable gal Thursday. I could hardly realize it, for you know what I think already of you.
It almost tempts me to go down Wednesdays for a while, till I don't have to go anywhere to see you , excepting home.
I rather Smiled at that queer article you sent me. You wont believe it, but I haven't changed my opinion yet. The article doesn't help me to, either; for from the slight facts stated it appears that the son had made arrangements by wireless for the body to be brought to New York, and the boat then failed to do so. Isn't that a case of simple breach of contract? Is not is like a case where I order a crate of grapefruit, and then the party fails to deliver it after he accepted the order? And the damages in the ship case are rather enhanced by sentiment, but isn't it, at the bottom a breach of contract, a contract to bring the body and then a violation of it? If you say "yes" how is such a case equivalent to one where a man would sue because his father was buried at sea? The nature of the suit is different. If the man had 4 sons, naturally one would make arrangements for the funeral, and if he was thwarted, he could sue. But if one son could sue on general principles, why not all. If he was a Mormon, ye gods - but - why argue it?
My Saturday plans are again changed. I think I'll go down as usual. Maybe a little earlier, but I doubt it. The 4:10 looks good to me, now.
With love I am
Your
Joe
The next letter is March 12
No comments:
Post a Comment