
    Thomas Provost v. Philo Harwood, appellant.
    
    
      Gontract.
    
    A person may recover for the time he labors under a contract for an entire period, but in which he reserves the right to quit at any time if he is dissatisfied, if he does become dissatisfied and leaves, though it be capriciously and without any good reason.
    Book account. The plaintiff claimed to recover of the defendant for two months’ work at twenty dollars per month, in reference to which the auditor found and reported the following facts:
    The plaintiff hired out to the defendant to. work bn his farm in Rupert for the term of five months at twenty dollars per month, provided they both liked, the plaintiff reserving to himself the right to quit at any time if dissatisfied, and giving the defendant the right to discharge him in like manner. He commenced work on the 1st day of May, 1855, and worked for the space of two months wanting two days, when he quit the service of the defendant, saying he was sick; but the sickness was but a slight indisposition, and within about ten days thereafter he hired out to, and worked for one Phelps one month during the haying season for the sum of thirty dollars. The plaintiff also complained of the board which the defendant furnished, but he was permitted to and did board with the defendant’s family.
    The auditor found that the plaintiff’s services were reasonably worth sixteen dollars per month and allowed for them at that rate. The county court, March Term, 1856,— Pierpoint, J., presiding,— rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the amount reported by the auditor. Exceptions by the defendant.
    
      J. B. Bromley and D. E. Nicholson, for the defendant.
    
      F. Potter, for the plaintiff.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Isham, J.

This action is brought to recover compensation for two month’s labor at the rate of twenty dollars per month. It is stated by the auditor that the plaintiff agreed to labor for the defendant on his farm for five months, provided they loth Weed. The plaintiff reserved to himself the right to leave the defendant’s service at any time, if such Were his inclinations; and for the same reason the defendant reserved the right to discharge him from his service. The plaintiff’s complaint in relation to his board and sickness, th'e auditor states, had no reasonable foundation in fact* and was no just ground for leaving the defendant’s service ; but still, each party had the right to terminate the contract of service if for any reason they did not like to have it continued. In leaving the defendant’s service the plaintiff violated no contract, though his dislike may have been formed without good reason, and even capriciously; for it was a right he reserved, and which the defendant agreed he might exercise. Under the provisions of this contract we think the plaintiff is entitled to recover for the services he has rendered for the defendant, as reported by the auditor.

Judgment affirmed.  