Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1911-07-17

legged agreement, the right of rccoun.
ment would rest upon plalntifs
authorization or ratification of tbs
attorneys alleged acts and reprs.
sentations with full knowledSa
thereof, on both of which brancbeS
the court gave ample instructions to
the jury.
Requested instructions were ra.
fused to which action of the court
exceptions were taken. Several NJ
them are to the effect that IT, from
the evidence, the jury believed that
MoseT assuming to act for plaintiE
induced defendant to pay the debt NJ
the Western Mill Supply COMPANY IN
consideration for which he was to 70.
tain possession of the merchandise
and continue to sell it and plaintS
with knowledge of such acts and
conduct retained" the money so
paid the keeping thereof amounted IN
a ratification.
If all the payments made by ia.
PENDANTS were credited to his AZ.
count it would not have equalled tbs
value of the goods which he sold ~.
ter January %, 1905. He was on
titled to commission for selling tbo
merchandise in speaking of which
the court in its general chrge in ra'
ferring to the averments of the an.
swer said: Therefore under the is.
sues here, in no event would the do.
fendant be entitled to anything nm.
der this defense, except for the an.
plication, if any, that he made Of tbs
profits which were derived from tbs
sale of this chain which was mads
| by him after the date of this CON.
tract and before the sale was
I stopped" vas
/ AS the requested instructions da
not refer to the commissions. but rs.
lated to retaining the money. a NOR.
OF which the plaintiff was entitled fl
IN any event, no errors were commit.
tea in refusing to give the instrnc.
tions. ''u''
Another requested instruction was
denied and an exception taken Tha
request was in substance that
from the evidence the iurv sbonH
md that plaintiff knew the defen.
dant was in possession of and sell.
ing its merchandise, making renort,
TO- ordering additional supplies from
II and paying money to Moser wbo
was remitting the same to plainriH
the duty was imposed on the latter IA
ascertain by what authority the a.
lendant was dealing with the attor.
ney. "''O''
Whether or not the solicited IN.
structlon states the law applicableto
the facts thus assumed we do moi
thlnk 1t necessary to determine for
IN our oDinion the request does NOT
uetall all the circumstances from
winch a knowledge of the transac.
tlon as alleged in the answer might
nave been implied by plaintiff. The
uelendants father was the attaching
creditor and three days after causing
tne property of the Western Aill
company to be seized in order to Sc.
cure the payment of his demands
asaihst 1t, he wrote plaintiff and
from his letter the following extracts
made: Il have taken charge Of
your consignment of chain because
OF the relations of my son with YOU
ana Will protect your interest there
IN 1t is the intention Of
my son to continue in the same linz
OF business and we would like to
commune the handling of your chain
Inc testimony shows that the de.
1endant's father is financially re-
shonslble and whether or not from
.1ls letter the plaintiff might reason
Dly nave inferred that the writer
would protect its interests and par.
uclpate in the handling of its goods
is not stated in the requested instruc-
uon' IN refusing to give which no er.
ror was omitted.
other requested instructions were
Genied but deeming them covered BY
tne general charge or immaterial
Une Judgment is affirmed.
Ihnking good thoughts will leave
. smile in the soul