bolton vers HILLERSDEN at guildhall S C salk holt vide comb vin pl master  liable for the contract of his servant where the consideration come to his use  and he have not pay a equivalent for it the defendant be a merchant his  apprentice deliver a note to the plaintiff oblige his master to pay to the  plaintiff or his order accord to the custom of merchant upon this note  assumpsit be sue against the defendant and upon evidence at the trial the  plaintiff prove this note to be the write of the apprentice and that the  apprentice have once give such a note to Mr monpesson for money receive by the  apprentice of Mr monpesson which money be apply to the master use and that Mr  monpesson have recover the money of the master the Lord Raymond er p proof for  the defendant be that he do not trust his apprentice to give such note and  that be prove by several who have be his apprentice the apprentice himself  swear that he have lose of his master S money at play and that the day follow  a foreign bill be draw upon his master which he can not pay and the money  which he have lose at play both therefore he resort to the plaintiff Bolton  with who Hillersden usual have deal and because the person who bring the  foreign bill Lord Raymond will not receive guinea be the only money that he  have he persuade the plaintiff to receive the guinea and pay the foreign bill  which the plaintiff do and that the apprentice give this note to the plaintiff  for money receive of he to pay the which he have lose at game and per holt  chief justice in stowell case it be resolve that though Stowell give ready  money to his servant to buy provision yet the servant take they upon tick and  because they come to the use of Stowell he be adjudge liable but he doubt of  it so in the case of sir Robert Wylands keb sir Robert Wylands every Saturday  give the servant money to discharge the expense of the week the servant do not  pay the money due for several week together though he receive it of his master  yet the vender recover against Wylands for good deliver to the servant because  every man ought to take care what servant be make use of and if the master  happen to have a have servant it be more reasonable that he shall suffer for  the negligence or villainy of his servant than a mere stranger by holt chief  justice if a master have never entrust a servant to charge he by sign of note  in the master name yet if the money for which such note be sign come to the  use of the master or if in this present case the servant give the note to  raise money to pay the foreign bill charge to his master which be for the  benefit of his master such note will bind the master though he never permit  the servant to sign such note before but if in this case the note be give for  the money which the apprentice have lose at game and which do not come to the  master use the master ought not to be bind by it but the jury give a verdict  for the plaintiff which holt well approve