snow, and such other duties attended to as cannot well be neglected. This is understood to be part of the contract when one engages by the month for such service.

29. One of our traveling salesmen takes an order on credit from a firm in Missouri. On face of this order, under signature of the purchaser, our salesman writes "accepted, goods to be shipped at once," signing our name thereto. Under the laws of this State or Missouri would we be liable for damages (if any could be proven), were we nevertheless to decline to fill said order?

A. If the salesman had no real or apparent authority to confirm a sale until it was approved by his principal, such an indorsement would not legally bind his employers.

A party

30. We manufacture cotton yarn and are merchants. claiming to represent a wholesale house calls to sell us a bill of goods. We tell him we will give him an order if he will take our yarn in payment for the bill at a certain price. He agrees to do so. We give him an order. In due time the goods arrive. We write to the agent (who is known to us personally and in a neighboring town) that the goods have arrived and the yarn is subject to his order. He directs us to ship to A B one bale of yarn, which is worth about one-fourth our bill with his house. We do so, and wait for further instructions regarding the balance; hearing no more from him we write to him, but have no reply. We then write to the house direct in Philadelphia. They claim that they had no such trade, and refuse to allow credit for the bale of yarn sent to A B, or to take yarn for the bill. The agent personally is insolvent; so is A B. How are we to settle this?

A. If "the party claiming to represent" the wholesale house really was the authorized agent of such house, the case in law and equity is very clear, and the sellers of the goods can be held to the contract. But if, as appears likely from the narrative, the agent acted without due authority, his claim having no proper foundation in fact; or if he was an agent, but there is no available evidence of this claim, our correspondents are in either case without redress. They must pay for the merchandise and lose the yarn.

31. If our salesman takes an order for goods at a lower price than authorized, are we compelled to fill the same, or are we liable for damage in case we decline to do so?

A. The salesman having general authority to transact the business in question, any private instruction as to price would

not affect the validity of his sales, and the firm is bound by his contract, and must either fill it or pay damages.

32. If we do not choose to fill any order taken by our salesman for any reason whatever, are we legally holden for damage?

A. A traveling salesman who solicits orders for a commission, and is not held out as the special agent of a particular house, would not necessarily bind the latter to execute his contracts; but for one who is in the regular service of a firm, and so presented to the public, the principals are as much bound within the scope of his apparent authority as for their own undertakings.

33. A buys through B, who is a broker, from C, who is agent for D, who is a manufacturer, 100 barrels of merchandise for future delivery. Three days after C has confirmed the sale, and B has given certificates of purchase and sale to A and C, C notifies A that as D would not confirm the sale the goods would not be delivered. From whom is A to claim damages in case of non-delivery of the merchandise?

A. If D gave to C as his agent real or apparent authority to make the contract in question, then he is bound by it, and cannot thus repudiate it; or if he does, can be made to respond in damages for its violation. If C had no such real or apparent authority, then the contract is void; but if, through his undertaking in excess of his lawful authority, he has inflicted any loss or damage thereby on A, then C can be held liable to A for whatever he may suffer directly from the failure.

34. Is there any law in this State which renders necessary the giving of notice to quit as between an employer and domestic servant, who is hired (verbally) by the month; and if so, will you state its provisions?

* *

A. "A hiring at so much a day, week, month or year, no time being specified, is an indifferent hiring, and is determinable at the will of either party." (Wood's Master and Servant, 272.) We know of no New York statute changing this rule; but generally speaking our civil justices are a law unto themselves in disputes between employers and their servants, the former having little chance where there is any sort of a leg for the servant's case to stand upon. It is therefore

wise to give a notice that will be accepted as sufficient by the servant, or to have some agreement before witnesses concerning the termination of the contract.

35. A needy borrower applies to the treasurer of a savings bank, who is also its attorney and counsel, for a loan of money. This treasurer and counsel agrees to furnish the bank's money at legal interest on the borrower paying all legal expenses (examining and searching the title to the land offered as security, drawing the bond and mortgage and recording the same), and also paying him, the treasurer and coun sel, a bonus (called a commission) of 5 per cent on the amount loaned. The bank itself gets none of this bonus; but its treasurer and counsel, its agent for loaning its funds, gets all of it. The bank knows nothing about it. If the bank shares in the commission the loan would clearly be tainted with usury, which if pleaded all the money lent would be lost. But how is it where its treasurer and attorney, its agent, demands and receives such commissions? I hear that the courts have recently decided such a case, but don't hear when or where.

A. We have seen no report of such a decision as that indicated by our correspondent, and so far as we know the question raised has never been directly decided. In the case of an agent, it has been held in this State and elsewhere that usury taken without the knowledge of the principal does not affect the security. (Condit v. Baldwin, 21 N. Y., 219.) On the other hand, with respect to corporate officers, it is said that "if the officer or agent of a corporation is clothed with a certain power, either by charter, statute, or by the lawful act of the corporation, and if he uses that power for an unauthorized or even prohibited purpose, or fraudulently, yet the corporation will be answerable for his action to any innocent third person affected thereby." (Morse on Banking, 106.) In the case specified, something would probably depend upon the extent to which the business in hand was left to the treasurer and counsel, and this may have been so complete as to make it easy for a court to decide, in accordance with our citation, that his act was that of the bank, notwithstanding that he alone received the profit of the usurious exaction. We have no doubt that the so-called commission would be held to constitute usury, in harmony with existing adjudications.

36. Cr.-In April, 1879, we hired a man to work on our farm for a year, we to furnish him rent and fuel and a certain sum in money per month besides. There was no written agreement. A few days

ago he said he had found another job and was going to leave, which he did two days afterward. He does not deny that he was hired for a year, nor had he found any fault with his position.

1. Is he liable for the loss and inconvenience arising from his leaving without notice?

2. Is he liable for the rent of a house, which may be unoccupied the remainder of the year?

3. While he was with us he lost some 20 days, visiting and otherwise. Can he be charged with fuel and rent during this time, as his family occupied the house all the time?

4. Is he entitled to his wages for the last month? He worked only three weeks of it.

5. If the conditions had been reversed, and we had turned him off without notice, how far should we have been liable?

6. If there had been a written agreement would it occasion different answers to the above questions?

A. Where a servant improperly leaves his employment during the currency of the week, month, quarter or year by which he is paid, he is not entitled to wages for any part of that week, month, quarter, or even year, though there has been a strong judicial protest in New Hampshire against the hardship of this rule when applied to a yearly hiring and payment, and the Connecticut courts may ultimately decide to follow the exception rather than the rule. They have already decided that if one is wrongfully discharged during the term, he may treat the contract as rescinded, and sue for the labor actually rendered. (Ryan v. Dayton, 25 Conn., 194.) This decision furnishes an answer to query No. 5. As the law now stands, the answer to query No. 4 is that no part of the last month's wages are due. In accordance with the reason of the rule first above stated, our correspondent's third question should be answered in the affirmative; but we know of no direct adjudication on the point. As to Nos. 1 and 2, it may be said that the delinquent employee can be charged with direct actual damages arising out of his breach of contract, but we are inclined to think it doubtful if he could be made responsible for the house rent beyond the period of his occupancy. These answers would not be different if the contract had been in writing.

37. CT.-"Can a man collect wages for services rendered on Sunday."

A. The Sunday laws are variously interpreted in the different

States. In Connecticut only "works of necessity and mercy" can be legally performed " on the Lord's day." If the wages were fairly earned by the performance of any such works as are within the exception, they can be legally collected.

REAL PROPERTY.

1. Can a foreigner hold and transfer real estate in this State, he never having declared his intentions of becoming a citizen ?

A. An unnaturalized alien cannot hold and is not authorized to convey real estate in New York without making a declaration of his intention to become a citizen. But a law was passed in 1877 declaring that the title of any citizen to real estate shall not be questioned by reason of any alienage of former owners, so that a title from an alien would seem to be good if given to a citizen.

2. Some 70 years ago a native of New York settled in one of the British West India Islands, married and had issue there a son and daughter, who settled in England, married there and have children.

Query: Can these children born in England inherit or take by devise real estate in this State? Further, does the last treaty between the United States and Great Britain, negotiated by Mr. Reverdy Johnson, alter the statutes of claims relative to bequests or inheritance of real estate, and supersede State law?

A. The statutes of New York provide that aliens may inherit real estate and take such property by devise. The son and daughter first in descent above noticed would be citizens of the United States, and if they were ever in that country their children would also have the same right.

3. A B has sold to Y Z a plot of ground on which to build two houses, to be paid for, with interest and taxes within one year from date of sale, or as soon as the houses are completely finished. Now supposing that after the houses are partly built Y Z fails, and a mechanic's lien is established for the benefit of the dealers who supplied the building materials, will the lien attach to the land as well as to the buildings, the fee being still in A B, who by his contract is only to give a deed on actual payment of the purchase money? And if so, how can he protect himself?

A. By the New York county lien law (chap. 379, Laws of 1875) it is expressly provided that the land on which a building