
    William T. Sargent versus Chistopher B. Ashe.
    If tlio defendant goes into ills occupation of a house by the permission of the plaintiff and another, and promises the plaintiff, by parol, to pay Lhn ono half of the rent therefor, this may be regarded as a consent on the part of the defendant to hold and. occupy one half of the house under the plaintiff-, for which lie may bo entitled to a reasonable amount of rent, for the time the defendant so occupied.
    A parol agreement concerning the amount of the rent to be paid, made at the commencement of the occupation, is competent evidence, in determining what would be a reasonable amount of rent.
    This case was to have been argued in writing, but no arguments have been furnished.
    
      McCrillis and Robinson, for the plaintiff.
    
      J. JL. % M. V. Poor, for the defendant.
   The opinion of the Court was by

Whitman C. J.

In this case a default was entered by consent, which is to stand unless the Court should be of opinion that, from the evidence, the plaintiff is not entitled to recover. The action is for the use and occupation of a certain dwelling-house. There seems to be no reason to doubt, that the defendant went into the occupation of the tenement by permission of the plaintiff, and one John Sargent, jr. And it was in evidence that he promised to pay one half of the rent therefor to the plaintiff. Although this was by parol, we think it may be regarded at least as evidence of consent, on the part of the defendant, to hold and occupy one half of the dwelling-house under the plaintiff, for which he may be entitled to a reasonable amount of rent, for the time the defendant so occupied. The agreement concerning the amount of the rent, also, may be regarded as evidence of what would be a reasonable reñí. We think therefore that the default should stand; and that, a reasonable rent being ascertained, judgment should be entered therefor.  