Consensus voluntna multornm ad qua: i-ea pertinet, aimul jnncts. Consent is the united will of severai interested in one sub- ject-aiatter. Davis, 48; Branch. iPrinc.
CONSENT. A concurrence of wills.
Empress consent is that directly given, either vizva voce or in writing.
Implied consent is that manifested by signs, actions, or facts, or by inaction or silence, which raise a presumption that the roiisent has been given Cowen v. Paddock, 62 Hun. 622. 17 N. Y. Supp. 338.
Consent in an act of reason, accompanied with deliberation, the mind weighing as in ii balance the good or evil on each side. 1 Story. E41. Jur. i .922; Piummer v. O0m.. 1 Bush (_Ky.) 76: Dicken v. Johnson, 7 Ga. 492: liactier v. Frith. 6 Wend. (N. Y) 114. 21 Am. Dec. '262: People v. Studwell, 91 App. Div -160, 86 N. Y. Supp. 967.
Th--re is a difference between consenting and Iiihniiliing. Every consent invoives a submis- Iiou; I-iit si more submission does not necessarrilv invoive consent. 9 Car & P. "fl. —Consent decree. Sec Dr:CREE.—Consent judgment. Sec JUDGMENT.
CONSENT-RULE. In English practice. A supeisedcd instrument. in which a defend- ant in -in action of ejectment specified for what pui pose he intended to defend, and undertook to confess not only the flctitious lease. entry, and ouster, but that he was in DOSSUEIUD.
Cunsentientes at agents: pari pmnn plectentux-. They who consent to an act, and they who do it, shall be visited with equal punishment 5 Coke, 80.
Cunsentire mntrimonio non posannt infra [ante] annoa nnhilea. Parties cannot consent to marriage within the years of marriage. [before the age of consent.) 6 Coke, 21‘!
Connaqnentiin non eat oonseqncntis. Bac. Max. The consequence of a consequence exists not.
CONSEQUENTIAL CONTEMPT. The aacicnt name for what is now known as “constructive" contempt of court. Ex parte Wright. G5 Ind 508. See O0NTl'.'MP'i‘.
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGE.}} Such damage, loss or injury as docs not flow di- rrtlly and ininiediritely from the act of tile pnrtv, but only from some of the consequences or results of such act. Swain v. Copper Co., lil Tenn. 430. 78 S. W. 93: Pearson v. Spartzinhiirg County. 51 B. C. 480. 29 S. El. 193.
The_ term “consequential damage" means E0lnFUl11(‘s damage “"l)iCll is so remote as not to be actiouahie: sometimes damage wh Llioiigh r-iniewhnt remote, is actionable: or rl ll¢(‘ I‘_‘lll‘l, though actionahic. does not follow him "S[ll_V. in point of time. upon the doing
of the act complained of. Eton v. Railroad Co., 51 N. H. 504. 12 Am. Rep. 147.
CONSEQUENTS. In Scotch law. Impiied powers or authorities. Things which follow. usually by Implication of law. A commission being given to execute any work, every power necessary to carry it on is impiled. 1 Kames. Eq. 242.
CONS]-JRVATOR. A guardian; protect- OF: preserver.
“When any person having property shall he found to be incapable of managing his alfairs, by the court of probate in the district ln which he residea, ‘ ‘ ' it shall appoint some person to be his conservator. who, upon giving in probate hond, shall have the charge of the person and estate of such D incapable person." Gen. St. Conn. 1875. p. 346. § 1. Treat v. Peak. 5 Conn. 280.
—Con:ex-vators of rivers. Oommissioners or trustees in whom the control of a certain river is vested. in England, by act of parii:imcat.— Conservator: of the peace. Officers autlior- E ized to preserve and maintain the public peace. In England, these officera were iocally elected by the [ieopie unlii the relgn, of Ed“'ll'd III. when their appointment was vested in the king. Their duties were to prevent and arrest for hreaches of the peace, but they had no power to arrnign and try the olfcnder_ until about F ‘[360, when this authority was given to them hv act of pariiamant, and "then they acquired the more honornhle appelintion of justices of the peace." 1 Bl. Comm. 351. Even after this time. however, many piihiic officers were styled “conservators of the -peace," not as a distinct office but by virtue of the duties and o.uthori— G ties pertaining to their offices. In this sense the term may include the king himseif, the lord ohanccilor. justices of the king's hench. master of the rolls, cnroneis, sherilfs. conatahlcs. etc. 1 Bl. Comm. 350. See Smith v. Ahhott. 17 N. J. Law. 358. The term is stiii in use in Tex- as, where the constitution provides that county H be conservators of the peace.
judges slinll %6§912-5: Jones v. State (Tex.
Coast. Tex. art.
Or. App.) 65 S. CONSIDERATIO CURIE. The judgment of the court. I CONSIDERATION. The inducement to
a contract The cause. motive, price, or impeiling influence which induces a cantracting party to enter into a contract. The reason or material cause of a contiact. In- J surance 00. v. Raddin. 120 U. S. 183. 7 Sup. Ct. 500. 30 L. Ed. 644: Eastman v. Miller. 113 Iowa. 404, 85 N. W. 635: St. Mark's Church v. Teed. 120 N. Y. 583, 24 N. E. 1014; Fertilizer Co. v. Dunan, 91 Md 144. 46 Atl. 347. 50 L. R. A. 401; Kemp 1'. Bank. 109 Fed. K 48. 48 C. C. A. 213; Streshiey v. Poweil. 1:: B. l\Ion. (Ky.) 178; Roberts v. New York.
5 Ahh. Prac. (N. Y.) 41: Rice v. Almy. 32 Oonn. 297.
Any benefit conferred, or agreed to be cnn- L ferred. upon the promisor, by any other person, to which the promisor is not inwfully entitled, or any pi ejudicc suffered, or agreed to he suffered, by such person. othcr than such as he is at the time of consent lawfully
bound to suffer, as an inducement to the M