Fledging a Husband's Ciedit.

Feilding Star, Volume XIX, Issue 54, 1 September 1897, Page 2

Fledging a Husband's Ciedit.

The question whether a wife can pledge her husband's credit by borrowing money to pay for necessaries without bis authority arose before the Chief Justice at Melbourne on the bearing of an order to review the decision of the Justices at Willianostown on a complaint brought by Charlotte Moon against Richard Worlond for £4, balance of money lent. The Justices mado an order in favor of the complainant for the sum claimed and costs. It appeared that tb« moDey was lent to the defendant's wife, who had borrowed it from the complainant without any authority from her husband, and unknown to him. On the hearing before the Justices the defendant's wife was put into the box as a witness for the complainant, and she stated the above facts, and that the money was used by her in paying for necessaries. It was sought to review the Justices' decision, ou the ground that by the evidence adduced in support of the claim it appeared that tbo defendant was not liable for the loan. The Chief Justice held that the law was quits clear that a wife bad no implied authority to borrow money for wbicb her hnsband could be made liable, even thoucb that money was expended in purchasing necessaries suitable for the wife. While it was permissible for a wife to bny necessary goods on her busband's credit without bis antbority, yet this did not extend to permit ber to borrow money for that purpose. Tbe law was clearly against tbe Magistrate's decision, bnt the merits appeared to be entirely with the complainant, and therefore tbe order would be absolute, bat without costs.