
    Saunders Glover & Co. vs. Admr. of A. Ott.
    “What are necessaries for an infant is a question of law for tlie court. IIow much and of what quality, must depend upon the infants pecuniary circumstances, and of these, the jury are to judge. 
    
    Lodging, clothing, food, medicine and education are necessaries to eve; ry infant; such articles, therefore, as come under such heads, must be allowed; but liquor, pistols, powder, saddles, bridles, whips, fiddles, fiddle-strings, &c. are not to be allowecj.
    TíIIS was an action on an open account. The defendant relied on the plea of infancy. The replication stated that the account was for necessaries furnished. On this, issue ■was joined. The whole account amounted to 5560G 95, of which $329 SO, had been paid. The items in the account were various. Some for clothing, medicine, hooks, and others for saddles, bridles, whips, liquor of different kinds, fiddles and fiddle-strings, powder and pistols.
    The verdict rendered, was for $267 45.
    A motion was now submitted for a new trial, on the ground that the verdict includes articles that are not necessaries.
    
      
      
         See Rainwater vs. Durham, 2 Nott & McCord, 524. “ An infant, (says Judge Brevard, in the case of Bouchell vs. Clary, at Columbia, 1815,) may bind himself, or contract for necessary meat, drink, apparel, physic, schooling, and the like; suitable to the circumstances and situation of the infant in life, and the society in -which he moves. The articles in such case, ought to appear to be necessary for him, and plainly and clearly so, and to be furnished at reasonable prices.” IÍ.
    
   Mr. Justice Huger

delivered the opinion of the court.

What are necessaries for an infant, is a question of law for the decision of the court. How much, and of what quality the necessaries should be, must depend upon hi a pecuniary circumstances, and of these, the jury are the judges.

Lodging, clothing, food, medicine and education, are, necessaries to every infant. Such articles, therefore, as come under these heads, must be allowed. The others, such as liquor, pistols, powder, saddles, bridles, whips, fiddles, fiddle-strings, &c. amounting to $111 53 1-2, ought not to have been allowed.' A new trial must' therefore be granted, unless the plaintiff shall remit so much of the verdict.

Justices Nott, Richardson and Colcock, concurred.

Felder, for the motion.

Glover, contra.

Mr. Justice Gantt:

I concur in the opinion, so far as it relates to the specified deductions, but I think it should go back for the jury to say whether all the remaining articles were necessary or not, particularly as respects the quantity of cloth charged.  