Shang Before R, A. Mowar, Esq, Am Cuaxo v. Joux Hamp., snd_had charged different prices according to arrangement with them—somo $1 50, others $2, and one for the carpenter at 3, according to his statement, his arrangement with defendant was for $3 also, On Sunday Inst, he took the defendant's Fe tirew a dollar down on the deck and went cture on board and handed it to him, when
down below, taking the picture with him, Plaintiff thereupon left the ship, and on Monday issued the summons, Defendant, who had paid §2 into Court, said the arrangement he male with plaintiff was for §2. When he took the picture below on Sunday, he merely went to fetch another dollar, but when he came on deck again, in about half 9 minute, plaintiff was gone, an ho heard no more about it until he received the summons. On a former occasion, about three weeks ago, plaintiff brought the picture t on board, and wanted $3, which he (defendant) refused to pay. Plaintiff tien took the picture away, and did not come again until Sunday last. He had no fault to find with the picture, but he thought he ought not to pay more than others. He believed the carpenter only paid $2.
Plaintiff produced a book in which persons entered their own orders, Defendant had is in the usual way, but had signed me. There was no price mender. He was sure the price the carpenter was $3, and that he arranged with ti defendant to pay $3, because ie was not a common sailor.
Hosovr said it was very silly on the part of the defendant to sign a fictitious name; it would not enable him-to evade: his liability, because he would be bound by it
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.