The Portland daily press., 1880-12-07
Supreme judicial Court.
keecripts received from the Law court in cases
pending in this county:
CUMBERLAND COUNTY.
Daniel h RrackAtf 70 G..orna Rra~ar

heecrtpts received from the law court in cases
pending in this county:
CUMBERLAND COUNTY.
Daniel Il. Bracket vs.. George Brewer.
Rescript BY Virgin. 1.-The plaintiff and certain
othe advanced certain sum Of mo ey to the de-
sendsnt for the purpose of paying q mortgage on
certain meeting house upon an alleged oral promise
purpose and to cause he meeting -house 70 be con-
veyed to the pla ntiH and his associates which at
Ter promise the defendant refused to full alleging
odist Episcopa, Society of the place. and that the
plaintiff knew It. In sssnmp it by the plaintiff to
exception to that part Of The charge which come ID
the rustses Of that church with the case at barr
too general. when eight OF the eleven pages OF the
ton. Also held that the refusal instruct the Jury
naet1 .ses - !, sns defendant q any time bad become
ers that the church property should be- couv.yaa
20 the plaintiff In consideration of money paid to
him by the plaintiff amt her., and tue defendant
control tn. verdict should bs for the piaintiff IL
the defendant neglected to make such conveyance
an rds no ground to he plaintiff for exception.
especially when there IL no evidence that he held
the properly under his control trustee or other
wise An oral contract TO execute and deliver
An exception to the refusal TO give requested in
struction i'll not be tained when the request a
not based ON some specific evidence In the case Ex-
willism H Bailey vs.. Trustees of the Methodist
Episcopal church Of FIeeport.
Reseript BY Virgin. J.-By tha provisions of R. s.,
chap. IL, IL tho trustees OF the Methodist Epis.
copal church., are 30 far corporations as taxe in
sonal est ste made to their churches to them and
their uccess0rs. Such corporation has no author
,ty 70 create debt for the erection of meeting
for materials which entered into the construction of
ameeting- house, IL ultra pires and cannot be en-
Forced against 1t. Exceptions sustained.
PENoBsCoT COUNTY.
IT al A Ii
ais.
Rsscript by Symonds J.--It Is true as as general
PROPOSE ion hat part owner of vessel in undis-
puted possession, will bs regarded having implied
authority 70 ind the other owners for things nec-
esssry for the vessel and empo sment unless the
evidence discloses sino hing to indicate that such
inplcation of ageney Ia contrary to the fact. From
the sct that vessel like any other cha:tel, Is in
the possession and management Of one part owner,
that the business In which the yes sci s engaged is
conducted by his authority and that this state of
things Is acquiesced in by the other owners. GER
tain presum ton arises that such possession of the
common property aud contfuctof the business per-
tanning to It, are 10 the nteress and for the benefit
Of ALL that the others assent to such use of this
pr. perty and expect 70 share the burdens and the
gans urder an, state of facts which leaves this
Presumption In full force. the plaintiff is entitled
recover against III tor debts 80 incurred by the di
rect authority Of one upon the credit of al AS TO
one who furnishes materials AXE the vessel sea-
worthy, upon the order of part owner in such poe-
session. even II 1t be in the home p,rt the pre-ump
ton remains uniess there is something more than
ment, or Of the owners residence to remove 1t;
something to indicate that the controlling owner
was not acting and mapagin the vessel for ALL with
their At east tact a.se :, but on the contrary
proceeding independently of the others, in his own
behalf either in disregard Of he righs of his asso
ciate. and against their will. or by arrangement
with them 50 that his assumption of authority to
bind them was wro gful If The residence of the
owners. not consulted at the port of eupoly was
fact not known to the creditor. but particularly Ii
nothing was within the knowledge which Intended
TO remove the .rina facie presumption of authori-
~, and 70 put him upon enquiry; and more espec-
islly sun 4 the case when presented sh at least
b fair evidence that the possession and manage
nent by one had been scqussced in BY al without
di sent-ali Of which conditions met by the pres
ent case then by the direction of the one 50 IN
pos ession, ench necessary repairs and outfit
may be charged to all and recovery may be had
aga Inst them. The report does not show an at
tempted delegation by one part owner of the power
to bind another 1t shows rather the act II The
principal, the part owner. by her servant. he
srou' OF liability Is the possession and manage
mcnt BY the principal owner without dissent BY the
others made known even TO her, and with ut any
thing to show that her conduct the business was
not. ami wa not understood to be, for all. Lxcep
lions oyerruled.