Year: 1863

would be weak evidence of itself to convict man of
antedating contract for fraudulent purpose.


But, the Agent had executed his actual authority,
if the purchaser did not know 1.-THE principal is
bound, unless the Agent went beyond the usual scope
Of business. If there are any unusual limitations il
must be in evidence that the party dealing with the
Agent knew them. 1t is admitted that the sale was
be made in the usual course of business. Now unless
express stpuatiOns are imposed upon to sell by
retail, should regard within his discretion to sell
In any quantity he deemed advantageous his employ
ers Indeed, sales for importers by the quantity
preferred and may be called the usage and the sales
by retail exceptonals, and which, to justify the Agent
would require particular limitations; still these ma-


tons cannot affect the right of the purchaser. who dealt
with the Agent in ignorance of them. The respondents
testimony is not sufficiently explicit to fix any lmita
tons for while he testes that the Agent had author


y to dispose of such portion Of the cargo he pleased
1t was his impression that it be sold in bulk
although he says, there express prohibition and
If there had been, it is not evidence that the CON-
panant Fnew IT, and therefore, affect his rights
Ii n person puts goods into the custody of another
whose common business 1t is to sell without limiting his
authority he thereby confers an implied authority upon
him to sell them. An authority to sell implies an
thority to sell Ona credit if that be usual pickering
Us. Bush, 10 East. 38: Soltus Everett. 20 Wend
267. 2e0 Anderson Coonley. 81 ID 279: Valentino
Us Piper. p Pick 92.) In this case the cargo was
consigned TO the H'o market in the first place. and
Spencer bad the usual powers of a commission mer-
chant IN making the sale, and, therefore, whatever was
done hin within the legitimate scope of such author
ity was obligatory tis pTiaepal commission
merchant shOcd be very causioGs in making sales in
advance Of .he arrival OF the cargo for it is his duty
to see hat his principal shall have the chances Of
pro6t-at the tme if his conduct is not judicious
while he acts within the scope of his authority, third
parties are not to be injured by it. his contract with
them to be defeated, and especially when it would I'M
plicate three respectable men-and when two of whom
had sworn that the contract made on the date it
purpOrts to be.


In the letter of Mr.. Walker to Mr.. Spencer Of the


18th February he upon the advantages of the
sale to Levers tending to advance the price of lum
ber and that would be for his interest, by giving him
the control of it, but he does not intimate that his sale
should supercede Spencers, because, he had author
ity to make the sale at Hlo.


The authority having been conferred upon the Agent
at Hilo, continued until withdrawn, and. therefore,
sale made at Hilo while the authority subssted OBJ


gatOry the principals and it is not alleged that the
authority given him, when the memorandum of the
cargo made had been withdrawn, in any degree
modified, at the time of sale to complainant.


The decree therefore, is that the respondents deliver
to the complainant the lumber on board the brig
Mary Ellen, and that which has been unladen from her
since her arrival in the port of Honcluluand for costs


Mr.. HARRIS for Plaintiff


Mr.. MONTGOMERY, for Defendant


May, 1861.