The cases considered in the preceding section should be distinguished carefully from those in which the form or character of the promise leads to the conclusion that the plaintiff did not rely upon it as a contractual obligation but trusted the fairness and liberality of the defendant. In the latter there is not only no contract, but no misreliance upon a supposed contract, and consequently no legal obligation whatever. Thus, where the plaintiff rendered services under an agreement that such compensation would be made "as shall be deemed right," Lord Ellenborough said: "This was throwing himself upon the mercy of those with whom he contracted," and Bayley, J., added: "it was to be in the breast of the committee [the defendants] whether he was to have anything, and if anything then how much." 2