Acknowledgment
»
proceeding
from a competent
per-
fon, is binding
upon the
acknowledger,
but not upon
any uL&ffrper-
fon.
The points
that eiiai^lifh
competency
are freedom,
c h a p. r.
W h e n a perfon pofteffing fanity of mind, and arrived at the age of
maturity, makes an acknowledgment of a right, fuch acknowledgement
is binding upon him, whether the fubjedt of it be known or unknown;
becaufe acknowledgment (as has been already explained), is
an avowal, of the right of another upon one’s felf, and'by acknowledgment
the right of another becomes binding;— and this argues the
eftabliftiment of fuch right; becaufe, property being defired- by all
men, it is not likely that any perfon would falfely eftablifti the right of
another to a part of his own. Befides, the prophet ordered Mdaz to
be ftoned in confequence of his acknowledgment of whoredom,_It is
proper,, in this place, to obferve that acknowledgment is a defective
proof,— in other words,, it operates only upon the perfon of the acknowledger,
and not upon that of another, finGe over that he has no
power.— Freedom is eftabliftied as a- neceflary qualification in an acknowledger,
in order that his acknowledgment may be valid, abfo-
lutely,— (that is to fay, with refpedt to property and the like:) for
although a privileged Have be, virtually,, the fame as a freeman with
refpeft to acknowledgment, yet the acknowledgment of an inhibited
Have is not valid with refpeft to property, but merely with refpedt to
punijhment, or retaliation.■— T h e reafon of this is that the acknowledgment
of an inhibited Have induces the obligation of a debt upon
himfelf; and his f e lf being the property of his mafer, it is confe-
queiuly the lame as if Ire had made an acknowledgment in regard to
another, which is not lawful.— It is otherwife with refpedt to a privileged
{lave; for h,is acknowledgment is valid, as his mafter, in privileging
him, does virtually aflent to his contra&ing debts.— It is
otherwife, alfo, with refpedt to the acknowledgment of inhibited
" Haves,
{laves, in cafes of punifhment and retaliation; for if an inhibited Have
fhould fey “ I have committed whoredom with a'certain woman,”—
or “ I have killed a certain perfon,”— his acknowledgment would in
thefe cafes be valid ; fence a {lave,, in matters relative t’o puniftiment
.and retaliation, is. allowed to iffnmt his original condition! offreedom ; .
(whence it is that the acknowledgment of his mafter with regard to
him in thefe cafes is invalid.)— Sanity of mind, and maturitvof years, ' ( J j j * and maturity.
are alfo neceflary conditions in acknowledgment, becaufe the acknowledgment
of an infant or an idiot is invalid, as neither has any power
to affume an obligation upon himfelf. The acknowledgment of a
privileged infant is, however, valid, as be is virtually a major.
Ignorance, with refpedt to the fubieft, is not deftructive o 1 f the Acknow- .. J . ledgment is
validity of acknowledgment, Alice it fometimes happens that an an- not iiivaik-
known right is due; as where, for inftance, a perfon deftroys fome- ^o™ccofdre
thing belonging to another, of which the value was not known to the **$**»
owner,— or gives- a perfon a wound, of which the fpecific fine is not
known at the inftant,— or, where a perfon has accounts to fettle with
another, and of which he knows not the exaft balance in favour Of
the other. Acknowledgment, moreover, is an intimation of the right
of another; and the acknowledgment of an unknown right is therefore
valid.— (It is otherwife where the perfon in whofe fervour the ackmow- ivi ir is fo,
ledgment is made is unknown; for this is invalid, as a1 right or claim bftleS™
cannot reft in an unknown perfon.)— As the acknowledgment, there- in wh^fe fa-
fore, of an unknown right is valid, the acknowledger mull be re'*- knowledge-
quired to define the unknown thing, fince it is with him that the-iv^ mentismilde-
norance originates;— in the feme manner as where a perfon emancipates
one of two Haves,— in which cafe he is required to fpecify the
one to whom the emancipation applies.— If the acknowledger Ihould
refufe to make the fpecification,. then the Ka%ee muft: compel him;
fince it is incumbent upon him to difengage himfelf from the refpon-
fibility founded' upon a valid acknowledgment,, which-he has incurred,
and this cannot be efFe&ual but by a Ipecification.
T 3 If