Meaning: The quote you have provided is from Frederick Pollock, a renowned English legal scholar and jurist. In this quote, Pollock is questioning the concept of mutual promises being considered sufficient consideration for each other. To understand this quote, it is essential to delve into the legal and philosophical concepts it touches upon.

In the realm of contract law, consideration is a fundamental principle. It refers to something of value that is exchanged between parties to a contract. In traditional contract law, consideration is essential for a contract to be enforceable. It is often described as the price for which the promise of the other is bought. This principle is based on the idea that for a contract to be binding, each party must give something of value and receive something of value in return.

Pollock's quote challenges this traditional understanding of consideration by using the metaphor of "the two lean horses of a Calcutta hack who can only just stand together." This metaphor conjures an image of two emaciated horses barely able to stand, symbolizing the fragility and insufficiency of mutual promises as consideration. By invoking this vivid imagery, Pollock questions the logic of considering mutual promises as adequate consideration.

The quote reflects a philosophical and legal skepticism towards the traditional understanding of consideration. It challenges the assumption that mutual promises alone are inherently valuable enough to form the basis of a binding contract. This skepticism aligns with the broader philosophical discourse surrounding the nature of promises, value, and the enforceability of agreements.

Pollock's inquiry into the logical reason behind the sufficiency of mutual promises as consideration invites a critical examination of the foundational principles of contract law. It prompts us to question whether the mere act of promising something in return for a promise is inherently valuable enough to create a binding obligation.

In contemporary contract law, there has been considerable debate and evolution regarding the concept of consideration. Some legal scholars and jurisdictions have questioned the rigid application of the traditional consideration doctrine, advocating for a more flexible and pragmatic approach to contract enforcement. This includes recognizing moral or equitable considerations as valid forms of consideration, in addition to the traditional monetary or material exchanges.

Furthermore, the quote also invites consideration of the broader ethical and moral dimensions of contractual relationships. It raises questions about the nature of reciprocity, trust, and the true value of promises in human interactions. By likening mutual promises to the precarious balance of lean horses, Pollock challenges us to reflect on the inherent worth and integrity of the agreements we make with one another.

In conclusion, Frederick Pollock's quote challenges the conventional understanding of mutual promises as sufficient consideration in contract law. It sparks critical reflection on the nature of promises, value, and the ethical dimensions of contractual relationships. As legal and philosophical discourse continues to evolve, Pollock's inquiry serves as a thought-provoking catalyst for reevaluating the foundational principles of contract law and the broader implications of mutual promises as consideration.