norm v. Mmnow sparse nisrinnmo co. 37
and the fact that he may have taken the note or acceptance of such
buyer for the goods before discovering the principal, will not affect his
right to pursue the real principal. So, too, if the party making the
purchase in fact purchases the property, not for himself, but for the ·
use and benefit of a third party, and if such third party, knowing of
such purchase, takes the property and appropriates it to his own use
and benefit, he is liable for the value thereof to the seller, although
the seller may not have known, when he made the sale, that such
third party was the real party in interest, and may have understood .
at the time that he was making the sale to the party with whom he
directly dealt, and may have made the sale on the credit of such party.
It is also a principle of law that where the purchaser of goods upon
credit is known to the seller to be an agent of a known principal, and
the seller with such knowledge gives exclusive credit to the agent by
taking his note or acceptance for the goods, tl1e agent alone is respon-
sible to the seller.
Applying these principles to this case, if you should End that Wirth,
when he purchased the malt and barrels in question, was in fact the
agent of the defendant company in making the purchase; that he pur-
chased the property for the defendant, and for its use and benefit;
and that the plaintiffs were at the time ignorant of such agency,-then,
on discovery that the defendant was the real principal in the trans-
actions, the plaintiffs had the right to assert their claims against the
defendant, and, upon such state of facts being established, they are
entitled to recover from the defendant the value of the property so
sold, although they took the personal acceptances of Wirth for the
property. Or if you should find that, although Wirth had not orig-
inal authority to make the purchases, he did in fact purchase the
malt and barrels for the use and benefit of the defendant, and on its
behalf, and that the defendant company, by its president and general
manager, knew of such purchase, and with this knowledge received
the property, and had the use and benefit of it, then the plaintiffs are
entitled to recover, although they may not have known, when they
made the sales, that the defendant was the real party in interest, and
may have understood at the time that they were selling to Wirth, and,
in ignorance of the real party in interest, may have taken his accept-
ances for the property. But if Wirth was the authorized agent of
the defendant in the purchase of the property, and if the plaintiffs
knew such to be the fact, and knew the Meadow Spring Distilling
Company to be his principal, and to be liable on the purchases, and
the property was sold on the exclusive credit of Wirth, the plaintiffs
electing to trust him and not the defendant company, then the plain-
tiifs are not entitled to recover. Further, if Wirth was not the author-
ized agent of the defendant, and did not purchase the `malt and bar- -
rels for the use and benefit of the defendant, or on its behalf, but
purchased them for himself, in his own individual right, and on his `
own account, then he became the owner of the property, and was