The things furnished, to come within the term "necessaries," must concern the person of the infant, and not his estate. An infant, therefore, is not bound by contracts for things necessary to carry on a business into which he enters.90 He is not liable for materials purchased and used for the erection of a house on his land,91 and it has even been held that he is not liable for the expense of repairing his dwelling house on a contract made by him therefor, although the repairs may have been necessary to prevent immediv. Wilson, 10 Mo. 451; Guthrie v. Murphy, 4 Watts (Pa.) 80, 23 Am. Dec. 6S1; note 86, supra. See "Infants" Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 50; Cent. Dig. §§ 114-127.

88 Hoyt v. Casey, 114 Mass. 397, 19 Am. Rep. 371; Bainbridge v. Pickering, 2 W. Bl. 1325; Ewell, Lead. Cas. 55; Wailing v. Toll, 9 Johns. (N. Y.) 141; Gurhrie v. Murphy, 4 Watts (Pa.) 80, 28 Am. Dec. 681; Decell v. Lew-enthal, 57 Miss. 331, 34 Am. Rep. 449; Kline v. L'Amoureux, 2 Paige (N. Y.) 419, 22 Am. Dec. 652; Perrin v. Wilson, 10 Mo. 451; Trainer v. Trumbull, 141 Mass. 530, 6 N. E. 761; Jones v. Colvin, 1 McMul. (S. C.) 14; Elrod v. Myers, 2 Head (Tenn.) 33; Kraker v. Byram, 13 Rich. Law (S. C.) 163; Freeman v. Bridger, 49 N. C. 4, 67 Am. Dec. 258; Hull's Assignees v. Connolly, 3 McCord (S. C.) 6, 15 Am. Dec. 612. A complaint, however, is not demurrable for failure to allege refusal of the parent or guardian to supply the infant, or that there was no person who could and would support him. Goodman v. Alexander, 165 N. Y. 2S9. 59 N. E. 145, 55 L. R. A. 781. See "Infants," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 50; Cent. Dig. §§ 114-127.

89Burghart v. Hall, 4 Mees. & W. 727. But see Rivers v. Greggs, 5 Rich. Eq. (S. C.) 274; Barnes v. Toye, 13 Q. B. Div. 410. See "Infants," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 50; Cent. Dig. §§ 114-127.

90 House v. Alexander, 105 Ind. 109, 4 N. E. 891, 55 Am. Rep. 189; Mason v. Wright, 13 Metc. (Mass.) 306; Stern v. Meikleham, 56 Hun, 475, 10 N. Y. Supp. 216; Paul v. Smith, 41 Mo. App. 275; Decell v. Lewenthal, 57 Miss. 331, 34 Am. Rep. 449; Merriam v. Cunningham, 11 Cush. (Mass.) 40; State v. Howard, 88 N. C. 650; Wood v. Losey, 50 Mich. 475, 15 N. W. 557; Dilk v. Reighley, 2 Esp. 480; Wallace v Leroy, 57 W. Va. 263, 50 S. E. 243, 110 Am. St. Rep. 777 (even though he derives his living from the business). See "Infants," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 50; Cent. Dig. §§ 114-127.

91 Wornock v. Loar (Ky.) 11 S. W. 438; Freeman v. Bridger, 49 N. C. 1, 67 Am. Dec. 258; Price v. Jennings, 62 ind. I11. Nor is his property subject to a mechanic's lien therefor. Bloomer v. Nolan.. 36 Neb. 51, 53 N. W. 1039, 38 Am. St. Rep. 690. See "Infants," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 50; Cent. Dig. §§ 111,-127.

ate and serious injury to the house.92 So he is not liable on a contract of fire insurance.93 While an infant is liable for a reasonable attorney's fee for services rendered in connection with his personal relief, protection, or liberty,94 yet on principle and by the weight of authority he is not liable for services rendered by an attorney in connection with his property or estate.95