atkins case brook executor of Hobart v galley April the that easter term SC  barn Ch Rep la schoolboy contract a debt of pound for burgundy champaign  claret c withG a victualler in five month time in a few day after he come of  age g prevail on he to give a note for the pound without produce any account  or deliver he a bill l rd Hardwicke upon the circumstance of the case decree  the note to be deliver up to be cancel the bill be bring by the plaintiff as  executor of Hobart against the defendant to have a note deliver up to be  cancel which Hobart have give to the defendant upon a charge of fraud and  imposition Lord chancellor state the case in the follow manner a young  gentleman admit to be a infant and know to be a schoolboy at Montigniacks  French school near Oxford chapel take it into his head to resort to galley  coffeehouse or rather victuallinghouse as all sort of meat and liquor be sell  there and the master of it suffer a schoolboy just turn of twenty to contract  a debt of fiftynine pound in the space of five month from April to the  September follow when his allowance in pocketmoney by the guardian be only  seven shilling aweek and in my opinion very sufficient the thing for which he  contract the debt be for meat either for himself his friend or be dog or for  liquor send to his lodging which be the school in one day claret to the amount  of pound burgundy pound S champaign pound S in the whole pound S pound S be  charge another day for rack punch send to his lodging another day coffee and  jelly which if it have rest there may have be excusable if do once or twice  only but it be by no mean commendable to give a infant such long credit as six  month for even these thing the defendant tell Mr Montigniack when he come to  inquire after his scholar behaviour that it be no business of his be a very  improper answer to the schoolmaster and a evidence that he be do wrong and  want to conceal it as to the young man himself he appear to have be often in  liquor and the fact speak itself consider the great quantity of wine c which  be so frequent send he in two or three day at most after Hobart come of age  galley prevail upon he to give a note for the pound though no account appear  to have be keep of the deal nor any bill deliver after Hobart come of age  atkins this case will turn upon two general consideration first as to the  transaction between Hobart and galley before the promissory note be give and  before he be of age second on the alteration that have be make by a promissory  note be give and upon the circumstance at the time it be give as to the first  they be transaction of such a nature as ought to be discountenance in a court  of equity the law lie infant under a disability of contract debt except for  bare necessary and even this exemption be mere to prevent they from perish  vide zouch v parson burr the reason why the law lie they under such  restriction be to prevent their be impose upon unknown to their parent or  guardian neither law nor equity know any difference between a infant of  sixteen or seventeen and one turn of twenty there be a precise time fix for  their come of age and the latter may be equal relieve with the former for till  he arrive at twentyone he be consider as a infant from all the circumstance of  the case which I have state before the give of the note it be very plain that  the defendant act mala fide by give evasive answer and by endeavour to secret  what he be transact with the infant as to the second point it be true say on  the part of the defendant that if a infant take up good before VI atkins er p  he come of age and give a note for it after he be of age if there be no fraud  it be good at law smith v French post it have be likewise say the executor of  Hobart the plaintiff be a mere volunteer but I shall not consider he as such  for as stand in the place of Hobart who if he have be live and have wake out  of his drunken sleep may have be relieve he be equal entitle to relief as sue  in his right where it be manifest there have be a unconscionable bargain make  with a infant before he come of age the take a note of hand from he in two or  three day after he be of age atkins to substantiate it be a suspicious  circumstance and have always be a material ingredient to direct the conscience  of this court oldin v Samborne ante it be very strange that there shall be no  account subsist for deal of five month nor any pretence of a bill deliver  after Hobart come of age nor be there any evidence that a bill lie before he  for his consideration at the time he give the note so that here be a note  without any previous consideration which to establish will be contrary to the  rule of this court see Chennel v churchman bro Charles Rep in note Minshaw v  jordan bro Charles Rep in note if the care and education of youth have be  think of consequence in former age or of public concern by the parent to give  any encouragement to a transaction of this kind will entire defeat that care  and be extreme fatal to the health the manner and every thing else that be  valuable in young person the case the near to this be the imposition upon  young heir in the lifetime of their ancestor who though of full age at the  time of the fraud yet if his necessity extravagance or the severity of his  parent make he submit to the imposition this court will give relief mere to  discourage attempt of this nature see ante freeman v bishop post gwynne v  Heaton bro Charles Rep Stanhope v cope post I think it necessary to make a  example of the defendant in westminsterhall as it be so near a neighbour of  Westminsterschool and upon the whole circumstance of the case do decree the  note to be deliver up to the plaintiff to be cancel but if the defendant shall  be mind to bring a action at law for good sell and deliver he shall not be  enjoin from do it and I will likewise direct the executor to admit asset and  not to insist upon the statute of limitation pendent light in the court of  chancery but at the same time I shall limit he to bring his action by  Michaelmas term at further that he may not through vexation defer it as long  as he think proper and his lordship make a order accord