ABSTRACT
The general method to be pursued in the analysis of contract is the same as that already explained with regard to possession. The common element of all contracts might be said to be a promise, although even a promise was not necessary to a liability in debt as formerly understood. In the old cases of debt, where there was some question whether the plaintiff had shown enough to maintain his action, a “contract precedent” was spoken of several times as raising the duty. If the legal consequence is the same in all cases, it seems proper that all contracts should be considered from the same legal point of view. The foregoing analysis is believed to show that the result which has been reached by the courts on grounds of practical good sense falls in with the true theory of contract under the common law.
