^0, VEEDER: A CENTURY OF JUDICATURE 783 acterization of the distinction sought to be made in Derry v. Peek, 14 App. Cas. 337, between legal and actual fraud: " I do not think we need trouble ourselves about ' legal fraud,' nor whether it is a good or bad expression, because I hold that actual fraud must be proved in this case to make the defendants liable, and, as I understand, there is never any occasion to use the phrase * legal fraud ' except when actual fraud cannot be established. ' Legal fraud ' is only used when some vague ground of action is to be resorted to, or, generally speaking, when the person using it will not take the trouble to find, or cannot find, what duty has been violated or right infringed, but thinks that a claim is some- how made out." In commercial law, in particular, he was a recognized authority. His powerful dissenting opinion in the Vagliano case (1891), A. C. 107, shows his familiarity with the subject. It was he who suggested the theory of limited liability. In the domain of torts, the application of the doctrine sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas in Rylands v. Fletcher was due, in the first instance, to Bramwell, who dif- fered from the other judges in the Exchequer. Probably he was at his best sitting with a special jury. There, what has been aptly called the high initial velocity of his mind in mastering facts, assaying evidence and apply- ing general principles to particular facts, came into full play. His insight into human nature was keen ; he knew its weaknesses and its faults, and humbug had no chance before him. The force of common sense and caustic humor could go no further than his admirable charges to juries. In a case where a farmer was charged with shooting at a boy who was stealing apples, after a lengthy argument by the counsel for the defendant, Bramwell charged the jury as follows: " Con- sidering the materials he had, I am surprised, gentlemen, that the learned counsel did not make his speech longer. I, however, shall leave the case to you in eight words: The prisoner aimed at nothing and missed it." He had, more- over, rare skill in putting his view of a case before a jury without seeming to take a side. His highly original and in- dependent mind contributed much to enliven the reports of his time. His clear and analytical intellect expressed itself
