*1 ANOTHER.1 AND E. SMITH TRIBUNE v. J. DULUTH NEWS 17, 1926. December 25,608. No. advertising by agent. attorney Power sufficient authorizing attorney gave Where defendant 1. sites, platted on the attorney a number of cabin to sell and terms purposes, for such resort shore of a lake for summer may. fit, to do and see with full at- to authorize sufficient same was torney sale and cabin sites for to advertise such thereof. Finding plaintiff for sustained. finding justify sufficient held 2. Evidence examined advertising. of such for the amount favor strictly. conferring construed Formal instrument law that a a well settled rule 3. strictly can strument, will construed expressly given and those which are include which are ex- effect those are and essential pressed. prevail. power of should

Intention of language parties appears from intention of the 4. Where the and, such intention should permit, should be that construction the instrument. which will 34; 42; 46; p. New, p. Agency, p. n. 2 C. J. 556 n. 557 n. p. 81; p. 612 n. 69 New. 578 n. p.

Contracts, 13 39. C. J. 780 n. municipal court appealed Defendant Grant new motion trial. Funck, denying his Duluth, J., for.

Roderick Dunn, appellant. for respondent. á

Goldberg Lindquist, Cohen and O. G. 1 Reported in 211 N. 322.W.

DULUTH NEWS TRIBUNE V.

Quinn,

In 1924 Peter Ontario. Grant, Arthur, lived at Port unmarried, bordering He owned a tract of about 35 acres county, Carlton *2 upon had Light Torch lake. A the tract portion of been Light which Cabin platted, was referred to “Torch Lake as agree- Sites.” In the an spring 1923 into oral Grant entered ment arrangement with Smith to sell the for him. property This proved unsuccessful. Grant executed June, 1924, sell attorney, seal, appointing Smith in fact and convey such etc. Smith During the summer of 1925 procured plaintiff’s certain advertising, paper, amounting in upon paid the he aggregate to which $480.15, $67.15. This against action is Grant and Smith to brought both recover the unpaid balance.

The complaint charges that advertising furnished accepted who defendants, $436.52, same, agreed price at the which promised amount defendants that thereof pay; payment has been demanded and not alleges has been made. Grant in his answer that, advertising alleged such contracted for, as it complaint, was not done on his behalf. The of Smith defense is that he never at any time was the “Torch engaged as business Light Lake Pavilion” alleges partnership with Grant. He that he personally contracted for advertising and that is he owing plaintiff therefor $413.

Appellant forth 8 assignments sets error. The first two relate denying motion to amend the which is not findings, an appealable Assignments order. 4 to 8 are not for consideration because such assignments relate to the rulings upon admissi- bility striking and the excepted out of testimony, and to. question

The decisive in this upon rests construction lawsuit given to the power attorney. is a well rule settled the law of instrument, will be construed strictly and can include given are expressly and those which are necessary and essential carry into effect expressed. those which are Johnston, Harris v. 169 How, 312; Gilbert v. Am. St. Minn. N. 177, 970, 55 W. cited cases list of 724, 22 Am. St. 643, N. W.

Minn. 21 R. C. L. 881. note 13, from appears the intention Where intention should that construction should language will permit, instrument. and carried out which authority to sell query is: In the instant case Does other as it is in sites, numerous cabin used implication by with it expressed instrument, in the and inde- distinct sites for sale? While a advertise such ity implication brought by existence pendent power cannot be specific yet authority another distinct grant power, whatever implication carries with to effectuate the authorized. expressed in instrument “was sell ** * *3 parcels tracts title interest in all or right, and parcels pieces name and and to sell same in such or stead, to may and and terms as he see fit and decide, at such or pay- or purchase moneys all receipt money receive and accept, executing and same therefor, deed, grant able to and may conveyance that he delivering any and and instruments and full and to do necessary, deem with neces- perform every thing all and act and * * * might I sary to could do premises, be personally present.”

It in accord- in each instance was to be clear conception judgment agent. ance with the of the It steps might call the atten- ized him to take such deem best to The tion has for sale. people of the the cabin which he to sites distance out premises on lake, the shore of a rea- population. It would seem to be centers prop- to necessary sites sonable but in order effect n expected erly advertise them. Grant must have understood provisions of the general such to be done. of the purpose The DULUTH NEWS TRIBUNE V.

strument must to look agent have been intended after and just the instrument necessary things. When is considered in all of its adver- implied authority provisions, tise, perform every act his all and necessary in order to effect sale done, is but a reasonable deduction therefrom. general power to do all and premises to be done in connec- must be construed tion with precedes. what sales. evidently making refers to It gives the agent authority selling act for his in conveying. Suppose he had made several sales and about conveyances execute could contended that therefor, it be agent should might draw the instruments himself or he, general power, employ scrivener the work and principal therefor? So with of a no more advertising, would be forced construction provisions of the instrument before inus one case than in other. The service of the scrivener would no more accomplish proper manner in the one case than in the other. either acts case, the agent would necessarily bind the principal incurred.

Stone,

I concur in the result.