This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1854. Excerpt: ... Hennessey r. Farrell & another & Trustees. retain the remaining twenty-five per cent until the work should be completed and accepted; and that when the whole section should be completed and accepted, according to contract, the balance due should be paid to the defendants. It appeared, also, that the defendants having failed in the performance of the contract on their part, the contractors determined that the same had been abandoned, according to the stipulation above mentioned. At the time of this determination, the defendants had completed one month's work, for which they had been paid, according to the contract, seventy-five per cent, amounting to $401.58. They had also worked a part of a second month, but the work had not been estimated by the engineer. Deducting one quarter from the amount of the second month's work, as stated by the supposed trustees, the balance in their hands for that month was $262.51. The quarter part of the whole work done by the defendants, together with the said balance of the second month's work, the supposed trustees contended, by their answers, was forfeited to them, on the ground, that " the defendants abandoned their work and failed to perform their contract." The cases came by appeal to this court, where they were argued in writing by F. Halt, for the plaintiffs, and J. C. B. Davis and S. B. I. Goddard, for the trustees. Shaw, C. J. A preliminary exception is taken by the plaintiffs in their argument, that three trustees are summoned, and one only has answered. In examining the case, it appears, that the plaintiff seeks to charge the three trustees on a joint liability from them to the principal defendants; that one has answered for himself and the other two, jointly, and stated the joint account. We think this is prima ...