The Cattle Partnership That Could Not Be Settled in Court

In the Supreme Court of the Territory of Washington, December Term, A.D. 1871. Benjamin L. Stevens vs. D. S. Baker et al. Some time in June, A.D. 1869, D. S. Baker and others entered into a contract of co-partnership with B. L. Stevens regarding a band of cattle, known as the Nodi cattle. Defendants in error agreed to furnish all the capital; Stevens agreed to furnish his personal services and skill in the purchase, herding, driving, and sale of said cattle. The cattle were purchased and driven from Walla Walla County to the State of Nevada, and there sold. Stevens claimed there was a loss in the enterprise and that no more money was due; the defendants claimed there would be between three and four thousand dollars due them. An action of Assumpsit was commenced in the District Court in Walla Walla to recover said alleged balances. The principal question raised here is: Did the amended complaint state facts constituting a cause of action at law? We think not. The rule is almost universal that one partner cannot sue his co-partner at law without alleging and proving a settlement of the partnership indebtedness—the accounting together of the co-partners, and the ascertainment of a balance. It is argued that the Legislature of the Territory has abolished all distinctions between law and equity and adopted one form of action. If the Legislature had the power to do what it has attempted to do, proceedings in the District Court were regular. But we are clearly of the opinion that the Legislature possessed no rightful power to destroy the distinction between law and equity. The Organic Act is to all intents and purposes the Constitution of this Territory. The Supreme and District Courts respectively shall possess Chancery as well as common law jurisdiction. We cannot resist the conclusion that the principles, usages, rules, and forms of equity procedure are binding on the courts of this Territory.