C H A P . II.
Of gratuitous or voluntary Compofitions; and of the
Appointment of Agents for Compofition.
I f a perfon appoint another his agent for compofition, and the ao-ent
accordingly enter into a compofition on his behalf, he [the agent] is
not refponfible for the thing to be given in compofition, unlefs, in
fettling the contrad, he flipulate it as a condition that “ he himfelf
“ fhall be anfw.erable for it.”— This is where the compofition is on
account of wilful bloodjhed, or of fome claim in the nature of debt, in
either of which cafes the compofition is a mere annulment; and as the
agent, in either cafe, is merely a meffenger, he is therefore fubjed to
no refponfibility, any more than an agent for marriage ;■— unlefs he
himfelf engage in the refponfibility,— in which cafe he becomes an-
fwerable, becaufe of his contrail o f fecurity, but not from his contrail
o f cpmpojition.— Where, however, the compofition is o f property for
property, it is equivalent to a fale, and the rights of it appertain to the
agent.— In fuch a cafe, therefore, the claim for the property (that is,
for the article to be given in compofition) lies againft the agent, not
again!! the conftituent.
poMons“ ™' F a zo o l e e compofitions (that is, fuch as are concluded by a
fcripdons* ftran&er> in Behalf o f the defendant, without his defire) are o f four
kinds.
by property; Where a perfon compounds for a claim o f debt by property,
(for which and makes himfelf refponfible for the property:— in which cafe the
compofition
An agent for
compofition
in a cafe of
blocdjhed or
debt is not refponfible
for
the con federation,
unlefs
he exprefsly
agree to be
fo:
but he is refponfible
where the
compofition
is o f property
fo r property %
compofîtioïi' is compltete, becaufe the defehdant- acquires' nothing front’ the emit
but is merely exempted' from a debt,- and in this refpeft a flranger SpS#*.)™
and the'party that- is the defendant are confidered1 as the iâmëh—It i§:
alfo proper to remark further, that- in the famé manner as the condition
of refponfibility for the thing to be given in ebmpofitiwids laWful
to the defehdant, fo alfo is it lawfulto' tfèfe fraftger: a flrariger, therefore,
iS‘ capable of Handing as the principal in compofition, and in the
obligation of the property, when he makes himfelf refponfible for the
thing to be given in compofition ; in the fame manner as a Fazoolee
who concludes a Khoola in behalf of a wife.—In other words, if a'perfon
propofë' a Khoola to his wife, and another, without the defire of
the wife, conclude the contrail of Khoola with the hufband on' her
behalf, making himfelf refponfible for the Confideration öf Khoöla.; it
is valid, and he is refponfible for the confideration ;—and fo alfo in the:
cafe in queflion, the Fazoolee is refponfible for the thing, to be given
in compofition.—He, moreover, Hands, with refpeft to the defendant,
as one who a£ts gratuitoufy, in the fame manner as a perfon
who voluntarily pays the debts of another, in as much as he exempts
the defendant from refponfibility ; he therefore is: riot entitled1 to any
retufn from the defendant : but it isotherwfife where the Coriipounder
aftsfoy the defire of the defendant, for iri that cafe he’is not a voluntary
agent. The compounder in queflion, moreover, is riot- erititled-
to any part of the debt ; but that is cancelled with refpeft to the defendant;
for the principle, with refpedt to the legality of the compofition,
in this cafe1, is that the plaintiff anriuls the operation of thé
debt upon the defendant, and not that he renders the compounder
proprietor of it,—and this, whether the defendant acknowledge the
debt, of deny it ;—in a cafe of denial, evidently, becaufe tbe défendant
does not in his own opinion owe any thing, and the opinion or belief
of the plaintiff cannot operate upon him ;■—and in a cafe-of. acknowledgment,
alfo, becaufe the property of, or right to the debt, cannot
be conveyed to another but by the perfon who is immediately indebted:
it is therefore impöffible, in this inflance, to render the compofition
valid