— Part V.
.
Authority of the Agent.
money
165
nor has a servant, merely from the {k) pledge his master's credit (/.). In certain cases, however, an agent has implied authority to pledge his principal's credit, e.g., the general manager of a railway company for medical attendance to a servant of the company {m), or the matron of a hospital, as agent of the managing committee, for meat supplied to the hospital (//). authority to borrow
358. Where
Sect.
3.
fact of service, authority to
Implied
Authority,
in the ordinary course of business for the agent Receiving' such payment should, generally payment, In general the agent has no speaking, be received in cash (o). implied authority to receive payment by cheque (p), by bill(^), by or before it becomes due (s) nor may he give other goods (r) But a reasonable custom to receive payment in any credit (t). particular mode may be proved {a) to receive
it is
payment
for his principal,
,
,
359. Whether an agent or servant has implied authority to give Authority persons into custody has been considered in many cases the test ^^^^ cu-Stodv is whether in so doing he is acting within the scope of his ordinary If he is, duties, and also within the scope of the employer's powers. if not, it is otherwise (c) and it is for he has implied authority (b) the person asserting the existence of the authority to prove it (d).
••••
•
For the authority of the manager of a public-house, see Daun (1880), 41 L. T. 783). {k) Hawtayne v. Bourne (1841), 7 M. & W. 595 and see Dickinson v. Valpy But the (1829), 5 Man. & E. 126 ; Bnrmester v. Norris (1851), 6 Exch. 796. directors of a banking or trading company may borrow for the business of the company (^e Ha7niUons Windsor Iromuorhs (1879), 12 Ch. D. 707; Maclae v. Sutherland (1854), 3 E. & B. 1 ; and Royal British Bank v. Turquand (1855), 5
L. S. V.
1
Q. B. 97.
Simmms
E.
&
B. 248).
Wright v. Glyn, [1902] 1 X. B. 745 (a coachman is not an agent to pledge his master's credit for forage). (w) Walker v. Great Western Rail. Co. (1867), L. E. 2 Exch. 228, but not so a stationmaster for medical attendance to an injured passenger {Cox v. Midland Counties Rail. Co. (1849), 3 Exch. 268); see p. 161, note (c), ante. [n) Real and Personal Advance Co. v. Phalempin (1893), 9 T. L. E. 569. (o) Legge . Byas, Mosley & Co. (1901), 7 Com. Cas. 16, 19 ; Williams v. Evans (1866), L. E. 1 Q. B. 352 Sijkes v. Giles (1839), 5 M. & W. 645. Blumherg v. Life Interests and Reversionary Securities Corporation, [1897] ( })) (/)
Hine Brothers
{q) (r)
Howard
v.
(s)
Breming
v.
(t)
Wiltshire v.
Steamship Insurance Syndicate, Ltd. (1895), 72 L. T. (1831), 4 C. & P. 508. Mackie (1862), 3 E. & F. 197. v.
79.
Chapman Sims
(1808), 1
Camp.
258.
See p. 168, post, and Bridges v. Garrett (1870), L. E. 5 C. P. 451 (payment by cheque); Hine Brothers v. Steamship Insurance Syndicate, Ltd., supra (by bill) Pelham v. Hilder (1841), 1 Y. & C. Ch. 3 (giving credit). And where the principal authorises the agent to receive payment, intending that be shall thereout pay himself a debt due from his principal, the agent may receive payment in any manner {Barker v. Greeniuood (1837), 2 Y. & C. Ex. 414). An agent appointed, on the dissolution of a partnership, by a retiring partner to liquidate the partnership affairs, has no authority to accept bills in the name of his principal {Odell v. Cormack Brothers (1887), 19 Q. B. D. 223). {b) Loive v. Great Northern Rail. Co. (1893), 62 L. J. (q. b.) 524. (r) Walker v. South Eastern Rail. Co. (1870), L. E. 5 C. P. 640 Moore v. Metropolitan Rail. Co. (1872), L. E. 8 Q. B. 36 but see, as to actions for false imprisonment arising out of this class of offence, Kniglit v. North Metropolitan Tramiuays Co. (1_898), 14 T. L. E. 286 Charleston v. London Tramiuays Co., Ltd. (188S), 4 T. L. E. (a)
{d)
GofY. Great Northern
Rail. Co. (1861), 30 L. J.
(q. b.)
148.
to
