Court Opinion

ID: 6412681
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-06-25 11:53:52.498998+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:51:25.459380
License: Public Domain

Bigelow, C. J.
Under a contract for supplying labor and materials and making a chattel, no property passes to the vendee till the chattel is completed and delivered, or ready to be delivered. This is the general rule of law. It must prevail in all cases, unless a contrary intent is expressed or clearly implied from the terms of the contract.
In the case at bar, no such intent appears. The contract of the builders was to finish the vessel, and have her ready for sea at a specified place on or before a day certain. The vendees were to pay a fixed sum when the vessel was completed and ready for delivery. They were also to advance certain sums, from time to time, amounting to less than half the stipulated price, in anticipation of the completion of the work, but the sums so to be advanced were not graduated or measured by the amount of work done or of materials furnished or the progress made towards the final fulfilment of the contract. There was no stipulation to pay instalments at certain specified successive stages of the work ; it was a mere agreement to make certain payments, by way of advance, which were fixed upon *518arbitrarily, without reference to the extent of the labor and materials actually expended and used for the construction of the vessel at the time they were to be made. Nor was there any right reserved to the vendees to control or direct the work, or to exercise any superintendence or control over it, during its progress. It is true that the agent of the vendees was allowed to be present in the ship-yard where the vessel was building, but this was by permission only granted by the builders. It was no part of the original contract, and the builders might, at any time, have revoked this permission, without violating any part of their agreement.
The case at bar is clearly distinguishable from the cases determined by the English courts, which have been cited in the argument. To say the least, some of those decisions rest upon very questionable grounds. They have been carefully reviewed, and the validity of the reasons by which it is attempted to vindicate them has been impugned by approved textwriters, and in judicial decisions by courts in this country. The case of Andrews v. Durant, 1 Kernan, 35, contains an elaborate discussion of all the decided cases, and an exposition of the application of the rule of law to contracts for the building of ships, adopted in the State of New York, and confirmed by subsequent decisions. Judgment for the defendants.