Il8 HARVARD LAW REVIEW, consideration for a new promise, as held in Haigh v. Brooks,^ Wil- ton V. Eaton,^ Churchill v. Bradley,^ and many other cases ; if the formal release under seal of an unfounded claim forms a sufficient consideration for a promise, as so often held ; if a covenant under seal never to sue a claim, which is in law not enforceable, is a good consideration, why is not a simple agreement to forever forbear to sue a meritorious claim, honestly made, though invalid in law, a good consideration to pay for such forbearance? May we not, therefore, reasonably conclude that a perpetual forbearance to sue a claim honestly and fairly made is a good consideration for a promise to pay for such forbearance, although the suit forborne would have proved unsuccessful? Edmund H. Bennett, Boston, June, 1896. 1 10 Ad. & El. 309; 2 Perry & Dav. 477. 3 ^g Vt. 403. 2 127 Mass. 174.
