The question raised by the wife’s exception is whether she is liable on a contract she made with the plaintiffs for the benefit of a partnership composed of herself and her husband — not whether she would be liable on a contract her husband made for the benefit of the partnership. In other words, the question is not whether she is liable on a contract made by her husband, but on one she made with the plaintiffs, and that she is, is not open to question. P. S., c. 176, s. 2.

Exception overruled.