Bilbo´s treachery

[Faramir Jones]

The two jurisdictions that spring to mind are the Shire or the newly re-established Kingdom under the Mountain. The first, because the contract was made there; the second, because there could be an argument that the contract was governed by dwarf law.

There would also be the political background. Would anyone want to do business with a state whose ruler failed to keep his promise to properly reward the person who helped to restore it?

[Leaf]

A point about the legal discussion of the contract between Bilbo and Thorin: I think this contract is void (from the beginning) since there's no sovereign who could defend (and establish) the validity of the contract against both of the contracting parties. There's no legal instance which could force one (or both) of the parties to act according to the contractual clauses, or issue punishment otherwise.

Aside from the legal discussion, Bilbo's so called treachery is the thing I admire the most about his character in The Hobbit. In the end Bilbo doesn't follow a pack mentality, but does what he thinks is the right thing to do. To archive that he considered the means at hand.

I'd like to close my post with a quote that answers a similar accusation, but in a different context:

Originally Posted by The Silmarillion, Of the flight of the Noldor

But Olwë answered: 'We renounce no friendship. But it may be the part of a friend to rebuke a friend's folly.'