The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-02-07
PRINCIPAL AND AGENT
Guignon Wins His Suit Against
the First National Bank.
AN IMPORTANT DECISION
Questions OF Law Involved Which Hava
Never Before Been Passed Upon
by Montana Courts-Two
Other Opinions.
Special Dispatch to the STANDARD.

1
/ Helena, Feb. 6.--The supreme court to-
day affirmed the Judgment that Charles
Guignon secured few months ago in the
alstrict court OF Lewis and Clarke cou,l-
~ against the suspended First National
pank OF Helena and Eugene T. Wilson. as
receiver, for the sum of S1,926 This rep
resented a draft for G40O that Guignon
gave the First National bank to collect ON
| the Standard Bank of South Africa Ton.
don, England, Aug. s, 1885, one month be-
tore the Helena bank went to the wall.
The collection was made, but Guisnon
was unable to secure his money and he
| commenced the action which terminated
| in to-day's decision
Chief Justice Brantly prepared the deci
sion of the court, which reviews the evil
dence and the law bearing upon 1t. This
court says that the relation of principal
ana agent was clearly established be-.
tween Guignon and the Helena bank by
his depositiEg the draft for collection. Tho
draft was deposited with directions to col
tect and notify plaintiff. and not for
credit, says the court. Though the plains
III at that time had an open account with
the bank subject to check, this fact is Of
no weight in view OF the specific directions
given by him.
Furthermore, the record does not show
that the defendant bank ever gave notice
TO the plaintiff or credited him with the
amount of collection. In our view of this
case the mere act of crediting the amount
to the plaintiff upon the books Of the de-
fendant bank would not change the rela-
ton of the bank to plaintiff from that Of
agent to that of debtor until 1t had ac-
tually received the money from the LON
dor bank. The plaintiff could still pur-
sue the funds in the hands of the latter
SO long as he could Identify them The
tit.e to the draft did not pass to the First
National bank. We conclude, also. that
the fact that its Office was that Of mere
collecting agent, because we must pre-
sumo, in the absence of proof to the con-
trary, that 1t obeyed it's instructions and
transmitted the draft for collection ais
plaintiffs agent.
The sub-agent bank in London must,
therefore, have understood the nature Of
the transaction upon receipt of the draft.
In conclusion, the court finds that the
plaintiff successfully showed that his
property, as a specific fund, passed into
the hands of the receiver. and that the
latter has in his hands the money belong
ing to Guignon. H&t
The case presented some interesting
points that. SO far as known had never
been raised'in the Montana courts before.
and the decision Is viewed by attorneys
as an important one. H'
The court passed upon two other an
peals. both from the district court of
Jefferson county. Both were decided by
the whole court and both reversed the
lower court. 7I HA"
James Glass and Alex Glass. VS.. the Ba-
sin Mining and Concentrating company,
was an action to secure a right of way for
a f1ume over the defendants mining prom
erty to the mill of the plaintiffs at Ba-
sin. The court finds that the complaint
and replication filed by the plaintiffs fell
SO short of the requirements of the law
that they really had no standing in court
and because of the lower courts lack of
jurisdiction the judgment rendered in IA
vor of plaintiffs under those circumstances
would have to be set aside 1t is not very
often that the supreme court quotes po-
etry in its opinions. In this case however,
the plaintiffs in their replication had
drawn upon the muse to back UP their
contention by stating that if allowed to
build the flume they would make i, Sc
cure. 'and like the deacon's shay, they
Will make it strongest In the weakest
points, The court comments facetiously
upon this. remarklng that the proceed
ngs, instead of the fume. should be
strengthened, and from Holmes famous
poem finds another couplet that fits the
SasS. I1oWeSeE, DIS lar as tney nave gone
their case Is truly like the deacon's shay
says the court; at has collapsed entirely.
and like the deacon, they are on the rock,
fer they are out of court; end of the won
derful one-horse shay, logic Is logic, that's
all 1 say Judgment reversed
The third case was that In which the
Basin Mining and Concentrating company
was plaintiff and Wallace Mac. White de-
PENDANT. The issue was the right of pos
session to the Hope mining claim at Ba-
sin. Mac. White applied for patent to
the Cannon lode and the plaintiff filed an
adverse claim. 1t seems that when dep
uty United States mineral surveyor was
the Hope he was misinformed in
some particulars and made an error in
the survey. As soon as the error was
discovered 1t was promptly rsctifed. Mac
White claimed that there had been aban-
donment. and obtained judgment in the
lower court. The supreme court, in send
ing the case back for another trial, criti-
cises the allegation of abandonment as
follows: tFafg
1--WE decline to lend the Judgment of the
court to any such result. The evidence
rot only positively disproves any aban-
donment of the plaintiff of the ground in
question, but 1t shows every intent and
wish, to retain 1t, and we know of no prin-
ciple of law by which the owner of min
ing claim seeking patent can be de-
prived of his property because of an err
ror by United States surveyor in the
survey. which the owner In good faith
takes steps to cure, and does cure by
permission of the interior department,
within few days after his discovery of
its existence. Respondent CMac. White)
vas a trespasser when he went on the
ground included within the limits of the
Hope, and by no act of appellant (Basn
Mining company has he ever acquired
all OF it,,Ia oi,,cf