12 N.J. Eq. 48 | New York Court of Chancery | 1858
The only question is, who must bear the loss occasioned by the dishonesty of William E. Winans ? I think it is very clear that Winans must be regarded in the transaction as the agent of Headley, the defendant. He employed him, confided in him, and paid him for his services.
Again, the defendant paid him fifty dollars for his services in making the loan. This fact is inconsistent with the statement in the answer, that he thought the money was Winans’. There is enough in the account which he gives in his answer of his settlement with Winans to show that he understood he was not dealing with him as the principal who made the loan. He understood per-perfectly well that Winans borrowed the money for hixn, and it was for his services as his agent in doing so that he remunerated him. The defendant insists that Winans was Cooper’s agent. It is certainly very extraordinary, if the defendant so regarded him, he should have paid the agent of Cooper for the services rendered.
The complainant is entitled to a decree, and to be charged with the interest only which he actually received. The defendant had no authority to pay the interest to Winans.