%dribat flock, but is held between the parties in four lots, performino-
fervice to the manager one day, and to the flock-proprietor three days,
alternately:— contrary to the former cafe.
bargaining’01' I f a manager be poffeffed of a thoufand dims, and therewith pur-
t d “ , Chaf<5 a flaVe’ but neglea paying the price to the feller, and the thou-
lofing the fand dirms perifh in his hands, the proprietor of the flock mufl, in
have recourfe this cafe’ make over another thoufand to the manager, and the Mo-
id oyer for" ftoek is tllen two thoufand dirms.— The reafon of this is, that
another flock, as the flock is merely a depofit with the manager, he therefore cannot
to fulfil hVm be confidered as having duly received the price in virtue of his feiziu
engagement. [Qf the one thoufand dirms,] fince a receipt in virtue of feizin is not
eflablifhed unlefs it involve refponfibility.— Now as a due receipt of
the price, by the manager, is not eflablifhed, it follows that he is
entitled, even repeatedly, to take the price from the flock-proprietor;
that is to fay, i f he take the price from the proprietor, and it be ao-ain
loft in his hand, he. may again take the price from him; andfo°on,
repeatedly, until the feller’s demand be fatisffed;-and the whole of!
what the proprietor thus makes over to the manager Becomes flock.—
It is otherwife in the cafe of an agent commiffioned'to purchafe a
fpecific flave for one thoufand fpecific dirms,~where the. conftituent
delivers the price to the agept before the purchafe, and they are loft
in his hands after the purchafe; for in this cafe the agent cannot take
the price from his conftituent more than once, fince it is poflible
to confider him as having already made a due receipt of the price
from his conftituent; for agency is not repugnant to refponfibility,
but is rather involved with i t ; — as where, for inftance, an
ufurper is commiffioned by the proprietor to fell the thin°- he' has
ufurped. It is to be obferved that, in the cafe of agency° as here
adduced; the agent reverts to his conftituent only om’— ’lf, however,
the agent were firft to make the purchafe, and then to rt-,
ceive the price from his conftituent, he cannot afterwards revert
I to him at a ll; becaufe, as the agent becomes endowed with a right to-
II call upon his conftituent on the inflant of the purchafe; it follows T that his feizin of the price, after that was- due, is a complete receipt
on his part:— he is therefore confidered as having duly received the
price, in virtue of his feizin of it after the purchafe:— on the con-
t■ trary, what the conftituent makes over to. the agent before the pur- l chafe is merely a depoft in his hands t -and cfter the purchafe it Hill
I remains a depofit with him, fince, in this- inftance, no caufe of re-
■ fponfibility appears even after the purchafe.— T h e agent, therefore,
in this cafe,, is not confidered as having duly received the price ; and
I confequently, upon that being loft in his hands, he may take it again.
■ fr°m the purchafer:— but if, again, it be loft in his hands, he cannot
again revert upon the purchafer, fince here a due receipt has been
I ellabliffied, as before explained.
I
C H A P . V.
Of Difputes between the Proprietor of the Stock, and
the Manager.
I * the manager have two thoufand dirms in his. hands, and fay to the
I ll°^ ‘proPnetor> “ y ° u entrufted me with one thoufand, and one
I J w ant* bas ac!crued as profit,” and the proprietor reply, “ I en-
■ “ ed you. with-/w» thoufand,”— the aflertion of the manager is to
^ be
ita difputey
refpe&ingthe
acquifition of
profit upon
the exiflinjp
flock, the afto