Judgment of the Court
GWYNNE J.-At the time when the agreement which is the subject of consideration in this case was entered into, there were executions in the sheriff's hands against the goods and chattels of West, one of the parties to the agreement, so that if the contention of the appellants should prevail, then eo instanti that the goods of Hatfield came into the possession of West and his wife, they became West's property under the agreement, and would be liable to the executions in the sheriff's hands. Now it is, I think, apparent upon the terms of the agreement, although I admit that this might have been more perfectly expressed, that the intention of Hatfield was to make impossible such a result. The parties never contemplated a sale of the goods by Hatfield to West, or to him and his wife. There is nothing in the agreement warranting such a construction
There is no provision that West and his wife, or West, shall pay anything to Hatfield as the price of the goods to be placed in the possession of West and his wife under the agreement; in fact the construction of the agreement appears to me to be that Mrs. West should supply the shop where the goods should be sold; that she and her husband, acting as agents of Hatfild, should weekly render a statement