Western sentinel. [volume] (Winston [i.e. Winston-Salem], N.C.) 1856-1886, 1884-01-17

IOr OeclSlOIlS 10 tIlS erect. 1OILer VS..
Sturgis, Dev 10; Deep River Gold
Mining Co. vs. Fox, 4 r. Eq. 20 /;
Waring vs. Richardson, II Ir. II
Moore VS.. Hyman, II II. 3S; Hyman
vs.. Gray, 4 Jones, 155; Kevitt VS.
Massey, So n. c., 240.
The cases in which a demand is held
to be necessary and when made to put
the statue in motion will be found to
be concluded or finished agencies when
nothing remains to be done but to ac-
count for and pay over the fund. They
are inapplicable to continuous in
definite agency, in which, froia the
confidence reposed in the agent, he as
sumes fduciary relations toward his
employer in the management of inter
ests committed to his charge and be-
comes q trustee While this relation
subsists, though there may have been
unheeded calls en- him for information,
by the mutual aquiesence of the parties,
it cannot be hostile 50 as to permit the
running of the statute The demand
necessary to convert the fidiciary into
hostile relation, must be one intend
ded to put an end to the agency and
withdraw the authority conferred, and
then the statute begins to run unless
the parties Y subsequent acts recog-
nize the prolonged existence of the
agency.
When the agent becomes trustee,
charged with the execution of fiducia-
ry duties, until the trust is put an end
to, the statute does not begin to oper
oto In, tI.iI- + ron "a
until sufficient time elapses after their
close. This is decided in numerous
cases Fall VS.. Tarrance, 4, Hanks,
412. Edwards w. University, D q b.
| Eq. 325. The same is the rule as to q
bailee Collins VS.. Poe, l Dev. Eq. %.
Then Pearson G. J. remarks: "When
a confidential relation is established
between Justices either by act Of law
as in the case OF copartners tenants In
common, etc, or by agreement of the
parties themselves as in case of a trust
or agency, the rights incident to that
relation continue until that relation is
put an end to, and the statute of limi-
tations and lapse Of time have no ap-
plication" BIount VS.. Robson, 3
Jones Eq 10. To the same effect as
to an overclosed trust as Davis VS..
Gotten, 2 10. Eq. 430, and Mast VS..
Sloan, 3 Jones Eq. =.
In McNair VS.. KEENAN,, 3 Menph
1919, when upon the dissolution of a
co-partnership one of the members
undertook to collect what debts were
due to it and to account for Tie pro-
ceeds as often as the plaintiff should
require. He did accordingly exhibit
a balance sheet, the paper set up in
the plea as s. stated account, while the
business Of collecting was yet in prog
ress. Delivering the opinion, Taylor,
c.. j. remarks: In this state of things
the statute of limitations could not at
tach upon the demand. The state
ment furnished by Kennon was to
show from time to time the progress
he was making. The moneys were re-
ceived by him in the character Of q
trustee, liable to pay what he received
when his copsrtners should require it,
and it was only when they did require
it and he refused that the fduciary
character was put an end to-"
In South Carolina it has been held
that in the case Of q general agency
when the business runs through con-
siderable period, the statute of limita-
tions does not begin to run until the
expiration of the agency, especially
where there is current account. Hop
kins VS.. Hopkins, + Stob. Eq. 207.
Paris vs.. Cobb, . Rich. 133.
The continuance of the agency until
the death OF the agent is fully proved
by the testimony OF the defendant Lem
" who says:
81 transacted about all his business
as financial agent from his appointment
to his death"
CAS- the conpons on these bonds fell
due cut them of and applied county
funds to their payment. | received all
funds paid into the bank for the pur-
pose by county authorities-placed it to
the credit of l. e. Lash, as financial
agent and gave certificates of deposit.
| would then draw checks, sign Lash 8
name to them rs financial agent-some-
times signing per Lemly" and some
times q. G. Lash financial agent" as
appears by the checks themselves now
exhibited to me, then check out the
money and apply it to the payment. of
bonds and coupons. / sometimes drew
orders and sent to the board OF commits
sioners to be passed by them-my hand
writing will show which ones"
The witness also testified to the i'll
ness of his intestate for two or three
years preceding his death, contining
him to his bed and when no one was
| allowed to see him on business.
This testimony showing an uninter-
rupted continuance of the financial
agency during the life of the intestate
and the management of its business by
the witness fully warrants the findings
of the jury and removes out of the way
any defence arising out of the lapse of
time.
Aside from any final demand the
death of the agent necessarily put a
termination on the agency. Story
Agency Sec. 4G2, 468, 400.
The maxim expressed in the words
"delegatus non potest delegare' Is invok-
ed for the protection Of the principal
against liability sought to be impos-
ed by the agent of an agent, to the for
mer of whom no authority is given and
in whose discretion no confidence has
been reposed, and even in such case
he may perform some services for his
superior, Of subordinate character
which will be deemed to have been
rendered by the appointed agent. But
this is rule under which in a proper
case the principal may shield himself
Al