This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1810 edition. Excerpt: .of the mill until he should be remunerated from the profits, as to all the surplus labour, &c. which he might hereafter do in completing it.

That the defendant promised that the plaintiff should have entire possession of the mill until he was remunerated according to the intent of the arbitrators; but in fact no more work was done by the defendant, for he immediately sold his moiety to one Hastings, who soon after sold it to the plaintiff. That subsequent to these sales the plaintiff finished the mill. Now what implied promise can be raised in law from these facts? The defendant to pay his proportion for the labour, &c. in finishing this structure. When Ido work on another s building at his request, the law implies a promise in him to pay me a reasonable compensation for my labour; but not so when I labour upon my own property. It seems by the specification, that the parties were ill-assorted partners; that the plaintiff was careful not to advance any sum beyond his precise proportion in the progress of the work. He had obtained an award that our client should pay him 200 dollars for his surplus advances, and had the entire possession of the mill pledged to him, the profits of which were to be a fund for the payment of it; but not content here, he claimed a further possession of the mill with its profits, as a security against any further possible loss. In this state of the business, our client very prudently sold his share in the building to Hastings, who took by the purchase all the defendant s right, with all its encumbrances, and soon after the plaintiff purchased the same share of Hastings, and took it with all its privileges and encumbrances.

The plaintiff now holds a moiety in the mill in his own proper right, .