§ 1464, May give receipt or discharge. An agent authorized to collect has implied authority to give to the debtor upon payment such a receipt or discharge as the payment entitles him to receive. Thus, if the debt be evidenced by a note or other security, the agent, upon payment, may deliver the security to the debtor.1

VI.

BY WHOM PAYMENT TO BE MADE.

§ 1465. By purchaser or his agent.-Payment to be operative must of course ordinarily be made by the purchaser or by his agent whose act has either been previously authorized or subsequently ratified.

§ 1466. By stranger. The effect of the payment of a debt by a stranger to it is a question upon which there is a conflict among the authorities. Early English cases, followed by cases in this country, have held that such a payment does not constitute a satisfaction of the debt, unless such payment was previously authorized or subsequently ratified by the debtor in some other way at least than the mere reliance upon such payment as a bar.2

$ 1467.. But the rule sustained by the weight of authority seems to be that where the stranger, acting in behalf of the debtor, tenders the money as payment to the creditor, who accepts it as such, the debt, so far as the creditor is concerned, is extinguished, and can no longer be enforced by the creditor against the debtor. As to the person who so pays, it

1 Padfield v. Green, 85 Ill. 529. 2 See Grymes v. Blofield, Croke, Eliz. 541; Simpson v. Eggington, 10 Exch. 845; Edgecombe v. Rodd, 5 East, 294; Goodwin v. Cremer, 18 Q. B. 757; Kemp v. Balls, 10 Exch. 607; Jones v. Broadhurst, 9 C. B. 173; Belshaw v. Bush, 11 C. B. 191; James v. Isaacs, 12 C. B. 791; Lucas v. Wilkin

son, 1 H. & N. 420; Bleakley v. White, 4 Paige (N. Y.). 654; Clow v. Borst, 6 Johns. (N. Y.) 37; Daniels v. Hallenbeck, 19 Wend. (N. Y.) 408; Atlantic Dock Co. v. New York, 53 N. Y. 64; Whiting v. Insurance Co., 15 Md. 297; Stark v. Thompson, 3 T. B. Mon. (Ky.) 296.

3 See Crumlish v. Central Improve

is said that he may then, by suit in equity, either compel the debtor to ratify the act as one done on his account and thus make himself liable to refund, or, if the debtor refuse to ratify, that the debt be enforced in the payor's favor as an equitable assignee against the debtor.1

ment Co., 38 W. Va. 390, 18 S. E. R. 456, 45 Am. St. R. 872, 23 L. R. A. 120, and note; Gray v. Herman, 75 Wis. 453, 44 N. W. R. 248, 6 L. R. A. 691; Leavitt v. Morrow, 6 Ohio St. 71, 67 Am. Dec. 334; Harrison v. Hicks, 1 Port. (Ala.) 423, 27 Am. Dec. 638; Webster v. Wyser, 1 Stew. (Ala.) 184;

Cain v. Bryant, 12 Heisk. (Tenn.) 45;
Martin v. Quinn, 37 Cal. 55; Harvey
v. Tama County, 53 Iowa, 228, 5 N. W.
R. 130.

1 See Crumlish v. Central Improve. ment Co., supra, and the exhaustive note in 23 L. R. A. 120.

1253

BOOK V.

OF REMEDIES FOR NON-PERFORMANCE.

CHAPTER I.

PURPOSE OF BOOK V.

§ 1468. In general.

1469. How remedies classified.

§ 1468. In general.— In previous portions of this work attention has been given to the making of the contract of sale, to its effect in passing the property, to the means and occasion for its avoidance, and to the question of its performance, if not so avoided. There remains finally to be considered the question of the remedies of which the respective parties may avail themselves if the contract be not performed.

§ 1469. How remedies classified. This question of the remedies naturally presents two aspects: 1. The remedies of the seller; and 2. The remedies of the buyer.

Of the remedies of the seller there may be two sorts: Remedies against the goods, and remedies against the buyer personally.

The remedies of the buyer, however, are chiefly, if not entirely, personal in their character.

The treatment, therefore, will be in the following order:

I. The remedies of the seller against the goods.

II. The remedies of the seller against the buyer personally.
III. The remedies of the buyer against the seller.

Each of these will be made the subject of a separate chapter.

1255

CHAPTER II.

OF THE REMEDIES OF THE SELLER AGAINST THE GOODS.

So lien not lost if posses- 4. Revival of Lien on Insolvency of