SCOTTIN verʃus STANLEY, et al.
J
OHN M. TAYLOR had put a veffel on the ftocks, and contracted with the different tradefmen. When the fhip was a little advanced, he fold one half to Stanley, and one quarter in Joʃeph Carʃon, or rather interefted them each fo much in the concern. Taylor continued to be fhip's hufband, fitted out the fhip, received the bills of difburfements, and was paid by the other partners their refpective proportions of the building and outfits. While the fhip was on her firft voyage, Taylor failed— The plaintiff, who was the painter, commenced his action agianft all three, Stanley and Carʃon refufing to pay his bill.On the 12th of Auguʃt the caufe came on for trial. It did not appear in teftimony when Stanley and Carʃon became interefted ; but it was admitted to be after the contract. The plaintiff made his charges in his book “ to Ship Hannah” , and fhewed, that on the 4th of April, Stanely and Carƒon liable for a contract made with Taylor only, and on Taylor's fole credit, and that his cafe was particularly ftrong, it being proved that they had each paid their proportions already to the fhip's hufband, Taylor.
But SHIPPEN, Preʃident, inftructed the jury, that as the work was performed after they had become owners, and appeared avowedly fo, it was certainly done on their credit ; and not only the fhip's hufband, but all the real owners at the time of the work done, were liable.
Lewis, for the plaintiff, cited and relied on Cowp.636.