Cheever v. Smith

If a man deals with another's agent, and gives the agent a receipt for a sum of money, which the agent had a right to pay, and on the faith Qf that receipt the principal settles with the ag.nit, and pays him money, the party giving jthe receipt is concluded from looking to the principal, for he _ shouldhave given him notice of ’the mistake in the first instance ; and his only remedy is against the agent.'

THIS was an action of debt on a bond for the performance of the covenants contained in articles of agreement; and the only question in dispute was, whether the defendants were to be charged with the sum of 5,000 dollars, mentioned in the receipt of the 29th of October, 1814, given by the defendants, Smith and Pardee, to Nathaniel Allen, the agent of the plaintiff. Smith and Pardee, two of the defendants, the others being their sureties, contracted with Cheever, to supply the forces on the northern frontier, during the late war, with beef. Funds were placed by the plaintiff in the hands of N. Allen, to be advanced to Smith and Pardee, as occasion should require. Allen, and Smith and Pardee, settled their accounts every month, when receipts in full were given, and the balance carried to the next month’s account. In November, 1814, Smith stated to Allen and his clerk, that he had been charged with 5,000 dollars, in the October preceding, more than he had received. They denied that any mistake had been made. Smith continued to sign receipts in full on ¡every monthly settlement, but still urged the adjustment of the alleged mistake. The plaintiffs and Allen settled their accounts on the 11th of July, 1815, when there appeared to be due to Allen a balance of 4156 dollars and 6 cents, allowing him the 5,000 dollars in dispute. This balance the plaintiff paid to Allen. The plaintiff bad not been on the northern frontier between the time pf the alleged mistake and his settlement with Allen. The above facts having been admitted, or proved on the trial, the defendants then offered to prove that they were charged by Allen on the 29th of October., 1814, with the sunq of 10,000 dollars, when he had, in fact, paid them hut 5,000 dollars. The testimony was objected to on the part of the plaintiff, on the ground that no notice of the alleged mistake had been given to the plaintiff previously to his settlement with Allen, and it was rejected by Mr. J., Van Ness, before whom the cause was tried. A verdict having been found for the plaintiff, the defend- , ants now moved for a new trial.