Noscitur.L

It is known. Noscitur a sociis. It is known from its associates or associations. A word or a par- 1 8 Bl. Com. 376. "See Pratt v. Hull, 13 Johns. 334 (1816); Eunyon v. Central E. Co., 2S N. J. L. 656 (1856). ' Oscanyan v. Arms Company, 103 U. S. 264 (1880). * Pleasants v. Fant, 22 VFall. 121 (1874), cases, Miller, J.; Randall v. Baltimore, &o. E. Co., 109 U. S. 482 (1883), cases; Suydam v. Williamson, 20 How. 436 (1857), cases; Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Doster, 106 U. S. 32 (1882), cases; Carter v. Goff, 141 Mass. 125 (1886), cases; 69 Ga. 619; 15 Kan. 244; 58 Me. 384; 106 Mass. 271; 40 Mo. 151; 89 N. C. 464; 49 N. J. L. 671; 91 N. T. 141; 64 Pa. 201; IS S. C. 23, 32. 'North Pennsylvania E. Co. v. Commercial Nat. Bank of Chicago, 123 U. S. 733 (1887). • See Garvin v. Dean, 115 Mass 378 (1874); Howard v. agraph is to be read in the light of its context or surroundings. A word is best understood by the meaning of associated words.' Wliere " printed matter " was named in a list with engravings, maps, chai'ts, and illnstrated papers, it was held that printed pietui-es (lithographs) were naturally associated with those articles." When several particulars are enumerated, followed by a general provision, the latter will be limited to things of like kind:' In a penal act, " things," in the expression " obscene books, pamphlets, ballads, printed paper or other things," means other things of like kind.* The principle extends to the interpretation of every species of writing, as, letters, libels, contracts, wills, as well as statutes." It is analogous to the principle of circumstantial evidence.*