 | Sir Jonah Barrington - 1827 - 510 páginas
...first offence, and then (after one fire) B may explain away the retort by subsequent apology. RULE 2. But if the parties would rather fight on, then, after...(but in no case before,) B may explain first, and A apologize afterwards. NB The above rules apply to all cases of offences in retort not of a stronger... | |
 | Robert Walsh - 1827 - 674 páginas
...offence, and then (after one fire) B may explain away the retort by subsequent apology. " RULE 2. — But if the parties would rather fight on, then, after...(but in no case before,) B may explain first, and A apologize afterwards. " NB The above rules apply to all cases of offences in retort not of a stronger... | |
 | Sir Jonah Barrington - 1827 - 504 páginas
...first offence, and then (after one (ire) B may explain away the retort by subsequent apology. RULE 2. But if the parties would rather fight on, then, after...shots each, (but in no case before,) B may explain firat, and A apologize afterwards. NB The above rules apply to all cases of offences in retort not... | |
 | Robert Walsh - 1827 - 686 páginas
...apply to all cases of offences in retort not of a stronger class than the example. " RULZ 2.—But if the parties would rather fight on, then, after...(but in no case before,) B may explain first, and A apologize afterwards. "Ruiz 3.—If a doubt exist who gave the first offence, the decision rests with... | |
 | Sir Jonah Barrington - 1853 - 572 páginas
...then, after two shots each (but in no case before) B. may explain first, and A. apologize afterward. NB The above rules apply to all cases of offences...retort not of a stronger class than the example. RULE 3. — If a doubt exist who gave the first offence, the decision rests with the seconds : if they won't... | |
 | Lorenzo Sabine - 1855 - 414 páginas
...offence, and then (after one fire) B may explain away the retort by subsequent apology. "RULE 2. " But if the parties would rather fight on, then, after...(but in no case before), B may explain first, and A apologizes afterwards. "JS. B. The above rules apply to all cases of offences in retort not of a stronger... | |
 | John Lyde Wilson - 1858 - 54 páginas
...offence, and then, (after one fire,) B. may explain away the retort by subsequent apology. " Rule 2. — But if the parties would rather fight on : then, after...(but in no case before,) B. may explain first, and A. apologize afterward. " Rule 3. — If a doubt exist who gave the first offence, the decision rests... | |
 | Sir Jonah Barrington - 1869 - 442 páginas
...offence, and then (after one fire) B may explain away the retort by subsequent apology. RULE 2. — But if the parties would rather fight on, then, after...before), B may explain first, and A apologise afterwards. }. — The al,ovc rules apply to all cases of offences in retort not of a stronger class than the example.... | |
 | Sir Jonah Barrington - 1871 - 428 páginas
...first offence, and then (after one fire) B may explain away the retort by subsequent apology. NB—The above rules apply to all cases of offences in retort not of a stronger class than the example. RULE 3.—If a doubt exist who gave the first offence, the decision rests with the seconds : if they won't... | |
 | George W. Hooper - 1874 - 324 páginas
...first offence ; and then (after one fire) B may explain away the retort by subsequent apology. Rule 2. But if the parties would rather fight on, then, after...(but in no case before), B may explain first, and A apologize afterwards. N". B. — The above rules apply to all cases of offences in retort, not of a... | |
| |
The above rules apply to all cases of offences in retort not of a stronger class than the example. 3. — If a doubt exist who gave the first offence, the decision rests with the seconds ; if they won't decide, or can't agree, the matter must proceed... 
