Higginson v. Weld
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Action of contract upon a written agreement executed in Boston on the 13th of March 1854, of which the following are the material parts: “ Memorandum of an agreement between J. & F. Higginson of Boston, and Wm. F. Weld & Co., also of Boston, owners of the ship Humboldt.
Read the full summary
Action of contract upon a written agreement executed in Boston on the 13th of March 1854, of which the following are the material parts: “ Memorandum of an agreement between J. & F. Higginson of Boston, and Wm. F. Weld & Co., also of Boston, owners of the ship Humboldt. It is understood that the said ship is now on a voyage to Australia, thence to Calcutta, where she is to load for Boston ; and said J. & F. Higginson hereby agree to furnish one hundred and fifty tons of goods for her return cargo from Calcutta, paying a freight of fourteen 50-100 dollars per ton on the same.” “ Said Wm. F.…
1Opinion of the CourtHoar, J.
The principal question to be determined in this ease is the construction of the contract of the parties. The defendants contend that this contract was conditional, and was only to become obligatory upon them in case the ship Humboldt arrived at Calcutta, and there loaded for Boston. But we cannot conceive that such was its true intent and meaning. The agreement seems to us to have been an absolute one; that the defendants would receive at Calcutta the cargo which the plaintiffs on their part undertook to furnish for the return voyage, and that the only exception was of “ the dangers of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tayloe v. T. & S. SandifordSupreme Court of the United States · 1822
3Cited by4 opinions
- Benedict v. . PincusNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
- CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation AuthorityDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2010
- Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co. v. Pinkerton's Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1986
- Lind v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1909