Pratt v. Tunno

4 S.C.L. 449

Opinion

The court,

after hearing Ward, for the defendants, and Cross, for the plaintiff, determined that defendants should have the benefit of a new trial, on the ground that many of the articles appeared to be luxuries, and not necessaries; and that the amount of the supplies-was extravagant and unreasonable. Some of the judges were of opinion the general rule does not authorize masters in the porff where the owner resides, to bind the owner for necessaries.