RECEIPT OF DOUCEUR BY AOENT FROM SELLER. 547 



sion of the horse and appearing to be the owner to have all the powers 

 of an owner, in respect of the sale ; the authority may, under such 

 circumstances as are last referred to, be implied, though the circum- 

 stances of the present case do not create the same inference. It is un- 

 necessary to add, that if the seller should repudiate the warranty made 

 by his agent, it follows that the sale would be void, there being no 

 question raised upon this point." 



Limiiation of parUcidar of horses sold. — Under a particular specifying 

 horses sold by the plaintiff to the defendant, the plaintiff cannot recover 

 the price of horses sold by the defendant for the plaintiff as his agent 

 (Holland v. Hoplcins). 



Receipt of douceur hy agent from seller. — WUson v. Sfevetis was an 

 action against Mr. Stevens, a veterinary surgeon, for having kept for an 

 unreasonable time a horse which he had been employed by the plaintiff 

 to sell, and for having, when employed by the plaintiff to examine and 

 purchase a horse for him, bought an unsound horse, and received a 

 bribe of £5 from the seller for the same. The plaintiff, Mr. Wilson, 

 was recommended to the defendant as a man in whom he might safely 

 confide to purchase horses for him, and it was agreed that Mr. Stevens 

 should charge £2 2s. for each of such purchases. Several dealings took 

 place, some satisfactory, some otherwise, before the purchases of the 

 horses which were the subject of this action. The charge was two-fold, 

 and related to two horses. A horse was bought of Mr. Eice, for the 

 plaintiff, for £105. After some time, not being quite pleased with it, 

 Mr. Wilson sent it to the defendant for sale. It was kept by Mr. 

 Stevens for 113 nights without being sold, Mr. Wilson being absent 

 almost the whole of that time in Scotland. On his return, finding it 

 still in the stables, he took it away, and sent it to Lawrence's stables, by 

 whom it was sold in a very few days, for £G0. Mr. Stevens brought an 

 action against Mr. Wilson for the keep and care of this horse, which 

 Mr. Wilson resisted. It was tried at Guildhall, when it appeared that 

 no legal defence could be offered, and a verdict was given for the 

 plaintiff. 



In the course of this trial, it came out that Mr. Stevens had received 

 £10 from Mr. Rice for selling this horse to the plaintiff; and there- 

 upon Baron JIartin told the jury that an agent had no right to 

 take a single farthing from the party with whom he was dealing ; that 

 it was a disgraceful and dangerous transaction; and, although they 

 could not reach it in that action, Mr. Wilson had another remedy ; and 

 he directed them to deduct the £10 so received from the amount 

 claimed by the plaintiff. Upon this Mr. Wilson made further inquiries, 

 and hence the present action. Mr. Stevens had previously bought for 



N N 2 



