
    A. D. Drew vs. E. G. Tarbell & wife.
    Middlesex.
    January 14.— 15, 1875.
    Ames & Endicott, JJ., absent.
    The testimony of a husband that he was authorized by his wife in a private conversation between them to borrow a sum of money on her account, and to include it in promissory notes made jointly by the husband and wife to the lender, is inadmissible to charge the wife upon the notes.
    Contract on two joint and several promissory notes payable to the plaintiff and signed by both the defendants. The defendants answered severally, admitting the signing of the notes, but denying consideration, and the wife also pleaded her coverture. Trial in the Superior Court before Aldrich, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows :
    The notes were procured by the husband and passed to the plaintiff without any communication between the plaintiff and the wife in regard thereto.
    For the purpose of charging the wife, the plaintiff called the husband as a witness, and offered to prove by him that, in a private conversation between the husband and wife, the husband was authorized by the wife to borrow $75 of the amount included in the notes for her and on her account and credit; and that the husband so told the plaintiff and borrowed and received that amount in pursuance of the said authority, and the notes were given in pursuance of the agreement.
    
      Upon objection by the wife, the judge ruled that the husband could not be allowed to testify as to such private conversation with his wife; the jury found for the defendants, and the plaintiff alleged exceptions.
    
      F. H. Graves, for the plaintiff.
    
      W. S. Stearns & J. H. Butler, for the defendants.
   By the Court.

The judge rightly refused to allow the husband to testify to a private conversation with his wife. St. 1870, e. 393, § 1. Dexter v. Booth, 2 Allen, 559. Bliss v. Franklin, 13 Allen, 244. Exceptions overruled.  