¶1The paper, relied upon by the plaintiff, is *600not, of itself, a contract; there are no sufficient parties to the paper to make a contract; there is no promisee. If the paper had been shown to the plaintiff, and he had accepted it, and had become assignee and performed the services upon the strength of the paper, that might have formed a contract, upon which the plaintiff might, perhaps, maintain this action. But it does not appear that the plaintiff ever saw or heard of this paper, till after he accepted the office of assignee, and performed all the services of the office, for which he now claims compensation. So that it does not appear that he accepted the paper, or performed any services upon the strength of it, or in reliance upon it, or did any thing whatever to create a good consideration and make a contract between him and the defendant’s intestate ; and therefore no contract of the defendant’s intestate with the plaintiff is shown, upon which the plaintiff can recover. Exceptions overruled.
61 Mass. 599
Ball v. Newton
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided September 15, 1851
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1851-09-15
This was an action of assumpsit against the administrator of Horace Newton, founded upon the following writing: “ Worcester, January 19,1847. For value received, we jointly and severally promise to pay the master’s, clerk’s, messenger’s and assignee’s fees, respectively, in the case of Joseph Battles, an insolvent debtor; provided the same are not otherwise paid within six months. Joseph Battles.
Decided 1851-09-15