6o%
or by his aft*
ing as agent
for the feller.
He may< re*
fume his
right where-
he had re-
linquifhed it
upon mifin—
formation
concerning^
the price»*
S H A F F A . B o o k X X X V I i r ,
for as, whilft a power of option remains in the feller, his property is-
not totally extinguifhed, it follows that the ground of Shaffa (namely,
a conjunction o f property} Bill continues.
If the Shafee aft as agent of the feller, and fell the houfe on his
behalf, his right, of Shaffa is thereby invalidated;— whereas if he aft
as agent for the purchafer, and purchafe the houfe on his behalf, his
right of Shaffa is not invalidated. In fhort, it is a rule, that if a perfon,
as agent for another, fell the land, &c. of that other, the right
of Shaffa in both is thereby in validated; whereas, i f an agent (fuch as
a manager, for inftance) purchafe land, or fo forth, the-right of both
continues unaffefted; for the former, if he were afterwards to conteft
his right, muft in fo doing labour to annul the fale which, was completed
by him,— whereas the latter, in fo doing, does not annul, the
purchafe made by him, the taking of a property in virtue of Shaffa
being itfelf a fort of purchafe. In the fame manner alfo, if the Shafee
become Zamin he'l D irk, ox bailfor what may happen*,, by engaging
to be refponfible to the purchafer for the amount of the price in* cafe
the houfe foould afterwards prove the right of another perfon, his
right of Shaffa is thereby invalidated.. So alfo, if a man fell a houfe,
ftipulating the option, o f a third, perfon, meaning the Shafee, and he
[the Shafee] confirm the fale, he thereby forfeits his right of Shaffaa
whereas,, if a man purchafe a. houfe, ftipulating the option-of a third
perfon, who is the Shafee, and he [the Shafee] confirm the purchafe,
his right of Shaffa is not- invalidated..
If intelligence be brought to the Shafee; of the houfe which is the
fubject of his right being fold for one thoufand dirms, and he relinquifh
his right of Shaffa,. and-afterwards learn that the houfe was fold for a.
lefs price, his refignation is not binding, and he may ftill afl'ert his.
right, of Shaffa for it was the deamefs o f the price which induced.
* For an explanation o f this phrafelee V o l. I I . i-- 397-
him:
C h a p . IV . S H A F F A .
him to refign; but upon the diminution of the price becoming known,
the reafon o f his refignation no longer exifts, and it is confequently
void In the fame manner alfo, i f news be brought that the houfe is
fold for cnie thoufand ^r«r, and tho Shafee afterwards learn that it
was fold for a quantity of wheat or barley equivalent to one thoufand
dirms or even more, his refignation is void, and he may ftill take his
^ b e c a u f e it is to be fuppofed that his reafon for refigning it was
his inability to furnifh the amount of the price in that fpecies (namely
djrms) for which he firft heard the houfe was fold; but upon his underfunding
that it was fold for wheat or barley, it is probable that he
may be able to furnifh the quantity, fince it frequently happens that
men who are unable to pay one thoufand dirms are capable of furnifh-
mg an equivalent, or even more than an equivalent, in barley or
wheat. This rule alfo holds regarding every other article fold bv
weight or meafure, or which differs fo little in its fpecies that it may
be fold by number, (fuch as eggs or walnuts,) in the fame manner as
with refpefl to barley or wheat. It is otherwife with refpedt to goods
or effeBs-, for i f the Shafee, hearing that the houfe is fold for one
thoufand dtrms, refign his right, and afterwards learn that it was fold
for goods equal m value to one thoufand dirms, or more, his r e f l a tion
is neverthelefs binding, and he is not entitled to his Shaffa \ e
caufe he would in this cafe be liable for tho price o f the M B
confifts o f dirms znA deenars.-So likewife, his refignation is binding
i f he afterwards learn that the houfe was fold for a certain number o f
deenars equivalent to one thoufand dirms, or more.
I f the Shafee be firft mformed that a particular perfon is the pur- oorr tthh e
Chafer, and thereupon refign his Shaffa, and he afterwards learn that cha/t
the purchafer was another perfon, he is ftill entitled to his Shaffa,
becanfe a man might not wife to have one perfon for his neighbor]
although he may very readily chufe to have another. In the fame
manner alfo, i f he afterwards learn that two perfons are the pur-
4 ^ 2 chafers.