If one partner contributes the use of a boat, team of horses, building, or machine or other property, the accidental destruction of this property will be his loss, since the title is in him. While in a few jurisdictions it has been held that the loss of money invested as capital was not to be shared by a partner who contributed only his skill or experience, the ruling evidently must be based on the ground of an implied contract. The loss of money in trade evidently is not "lost money" in the sense of the loss of a building by fire or the loss of a horse by accident or by robbery. So if one of many partners contributes expressly only the use of capital to the firm in money, and this is "lost" in trade, he is yet entitled to its return on dissolution of the firm. It is a trade loss from misfortune or mismanagement of the firm to which each member stands bound to contribute his share. If the use only of money is contributed, the contributor has lost his interest on the same and his opportunity to make profitable investments, while the other members have lost their labor and skill or rather their opportunity to employ them to advantage, and the courts will assume that these in equity balance or were supposed to when the parties made the contract, and the loss of the money capital, which is the loss by the firm of what has been property of the firm without limitation upon its disposition, should be shared by all alike who constitute the firm.6

4 Krapp vs. Aderholt, 42 Kan., 247.

5 Sangston vs. Hack, 52 Md., 173.

And in fact there can be no distinction between contributing the use of money and contributing the money itself except as to the time of repayment, which, if it is before dissolution, makes the advancement a loan. There is no way to keep and use money at the same time; the use of money is compensated by interest or a share in the profits, but the loan to and use by another constitutes a debt as to the principal sum as well as the interest or profit share, and no title, of course, can be retained in the money. It is only when money is deposited with another for safe keeping without right of use that the title is retained and no debt incurred. It is otherwise with goods, chattels, and lands. These may be either turned over absolutely into the hands of the firm subject to consumption, to sale or other disposition as property of the firm, and to be treated as money would be treated, or it is in the power of the owner to retain his title and contribute the use in specie only, in which latter case, he sustains the risk incident to the ownership. So if a partner is accidentally killed in conducting the partnership business his kin have no claim against the partnership. His skill and abilities are not a part of the firm capital.

6 Juilliard vs. Orem, 70 Md., 465; Whitcomb vs. Converse, 119 Mass., 38; 20 Am. Rep., 311;

Woelfel vs. Thompson, 173 Mass., 301; but see Curd vs. Ridgway, 9 Ky. L. Rep., 237.