the case if his servants had the property in their possession for the purposes of their master's business. A lien would not attach to goods consigned to the order of a third person, or for the purpose of being transferred to some other place, or person. The charges for which the lien is maintained must be those of the party claiming it, and he cannot assert the right of another to a lien on goods in his possession. Mathews, 3 Bos. and Pul., 485). (Houghton v. Lien is personal to agent. A lien can be lost by voluntarily parting Lien, how lost. with the goods to which it attaches; for as a lien is a right to retain possession, if the possession is lost, the lien is also lost. (Hutton v. Bragg, 7 Taunt., 14). It may be lost also by a surrender of the right to retain possession of the goods, as by holding them for a third person, or by taking some other security than the goods. If a person has a lien upon goods, and he causes them to be taken in execution at his own suit, and becomes the purchaser of them at the sale, although such goods have never left his premises, he loses his lien; for in such a case he parted with the possession to the Sheriff, and has therefore lost his right through surrender. (Jacobs v. Lawton, 5 Bing., 130). A factor's lien attaches to the goods Factor's lien. Lien not barred by statute of limitations. forwarded to him for sale, and if he parts with the possession of the goods in the ordinary way of trade, his right attaches to the proceeds of the sale, and also to the securities for such goods in his own hands. (Drinkwater v. Goodwin, Cowp., 251). A lien, when it is valid, is not affected by the statute of limitations, but is as valid at the end of six years as it was at the beginning, although the remedy for the recovery of the debt would be barred by the statute. (Higgins v. Scott, 2 B. and Ad., 413). Goods in the possession of the person entitled to the lien cannot be taken in execution for the principal's debt. (Smith on Mercantile law, 8th Edn., Legg v. Evans, 6 M. and W., 36).. CHAPTER XV. PRINCIPAL AND AGENT.-Continued. DISSOLUTION OF AGENCY. The relation of principal and agent may be dissolved in various ways. It may take place from the act of the principal, as by revocation of his authority, or from the act of the agent, as by renunciation. It may take place by effluxion of time, as when the agency has been established for a certain number of years, which have expired, or by the occurrence of some event, on the happening of which the agency was to cease. One effectual method by which the agency can be terminated is by the death of either party. We will briefly deal with these causes. Agency, how dissolved: will, First, as to dissolution by revocation. by revocation at Where the agency is at will, and in the absence of express agreement, it would seem that the principal can, at any time, revoke his authority to the agent. (Warwick v. Slade, 3 Camp., 127. See also Blasco v. confidence. by destruction of Fletcher, 14 C. B. N. S., 147). The bond of union between the two being faith and confidence in each other, the principal has a clear right to dissolve that union when the confidence that was its basis is destroyed, and under those circumstances, no agent would insist on the relations between them continuing. If, however, an agent has partly acted in any matter in pursuance of where contract his principal's authority, in such a case can Dissolution incomplete. Revocation by express agreement. the principal revoke his authority as to such act either wholly or in part? It seems to be clearly laid down, that if the act in which the agent is engaged can be divided into parts, the principal can revoke his authority as to the part remaining undone, but must take the liability of what has been done. (as to this see Blasco v. Fletcher, supra.) But he cannot revoke his authority at will if the parts of the commission are not separable. The revocation may be effected by express words, by writing, or by deed, if the appointment was made under seal. It may also be effected if the principal becomes a bankrupt, although, in such a case, it has been held that an agent acting under a particular authority after his master's bankruptcy (which was not known to him) will not be liable to his assignees, but he would be if his authority were a general one. (Pearson v. Graham, 6 A. and E., 900. Smith's Mercantile Law, 150). renunciation. Second-The agency may be determined Dissolution by by the renunciation of the agent, either before, or after, he has acted under his appointment. Unless the appointment is for a valuable consideration, the agent will not be responsible for the loss sustained by the principal in consequence. He must, however, give the principal due notice of his renunciation. effluxion of Third-The agency would be dissolved Dissolution by by effluxion of time if it were originally time, created by the principal to last for a year, or any other fixed time. On the expiration of the term, the agency would be dissolved without any necessity for any further proceedings. The same result would follow the performance of some particular act when the agency had been created for that purpose. or performance of particular act. death of agent, Fourth-The death of the principal or Dissolution by agent is also a revocation; in the first case, principal or because after his death there is no principal to act for, and, in the second, because he is incapable of acting. The authority of the principal only extends to the time during which he can exercise it, so that any act done after his death would be done in the name of a principal who did not exist, and would be invalid. Fifth-This method of dissolution is one Dissolution that takes place by the extinction, or to act. by impossibility |