THE LAW AND ITS LIMITATIONS. 201 Many instances of the effect of this devotion to precedent will occur to the reader, the inferior nomenclature of the law being perhaps the most common.^ But there is one instance so striking that I think it worth while to mention it at length. Before the case of Priestly v. Fowler,^ there was a rule of conduct, known now as the fellow-servant rule, so regularly observed that the courts had never had occasion to pass on it. A servant simply never thought of suing his master for injuries caused by the negli- gence of a fellow servant. Priestly v. Fowler was decided in 1837. A little before this time machinery had made its appearance as a factor in civilization, and business corporations were formed to put it in general use. There then grew up a class of persons employed in operating this machinery and earning dividends for these cor- porations, a class now called employees,^ which had not before existed. They were as different from servants as servants were from soldiers. The servant occupied a close personal relation towards his master, ministering to his master's wants and doing his master's bidding, and fighting in his defence, if necessary.* A son could not do much more,^ and a loss of service meant the loss of much that a son might do for his father.^ In short, the relation was that of a status, and the servant owed his master a certain allegiance. To kill his master was more than murder, it was petit treason.'^ This close personal relationship gave the con- ception of a servant a dignity that made it at once suited to polite society and applicable to the highest relations. If you accepted a challenge, you stated that you were very much at the gentlemen's service. If you received a formal communication, you were in- formed at the end of it that the writer had the honor to be your ^ " The ambiguity in the meaning of terms, which is perhaps the chief reproach of our law. . . ." Gray, The Rule against Perpetuities, page iv. 2 3 M. & W. I. 8 According to Murray's Dictionary, "employe" first appeared in English in 1834, and was used by John Stuart Mill in 1848. " Employee" first appeared in America in 1854.
- A servant could justify an assault in defence of his master. 2 Roll. Abr. 546.
^ Blackstone describes the duties of a child as " subjection and obedience " during minority, i Bl. Comm. 453. 6 An action for loss of service was (and is) the only remedy by which a parent could recover for injuries to a child. Grinnell v. Wells, 7 M. & Or. 1033, 1041. " And petit treason doth presuppose a trust and obedience in the offender, either civil, as in the case of a wife or servant, or ecclesiastical. . . ." Coke, 3d Ins. 20. " If a child live with his father as a servant," to kill his father was petit treason, but not otherwise, i Hale P. C. 380. Itwas petit treason to kill a former master from a grudge taken during the time of service. lb.
