740 ; Here the plaintiffs, who were ship-auctioneers, were

employed by defendant to sell b}^ auction the steamship

Bessemer : it was agreed that if the ship was not sold by

auction, but a sale was subsequently effected to any one

Introduced by the plaintiffs, or " led to make such offer in

consequence of their mention or publication for auction

purposes," the plaintiffs should receive 1 per cent, on the

purchase money. The ship was not sold by auction, but

was ultimately bought by a person who had not seen the

advertisement, though he undoubtedly made his offer

through having heard of such advertisement. The Court

of Common Pleas, whose judgment was affirmed by the

House of Lords, held that it was not necessary, in order

to entitle the plaintiffs to recover commission, for the pur-

chaser or his agent thein.selves to have seen the publication,

RIQIITS OF AN AGENT AGAINST HIS FRIXCIPAL. 55

as the words " in consequence of " included indirect as well

as direct consequence ; and that the question for the jury

was whether the purchaser had been induced to make his

offer by " the publication for auction purposes,"

Where an agent has carried out his part of the business,

but the business, through no default of his, is not com-

pleted, he (the agent) is nevertheless entitled to his full

commission.

Green v. Lucas (1876), 33 L. T. 584. C. A. ; here an

agent was employed to borrow money upon a leasehold

security : he found a person able and willing to lend the

money ; but the negotiations went off by reason of such '

person discovering unusual covenants, which the agent had

not been informed of by his principal. The Court held

that the agent was entitled to the full commission agreed

upon for procuring the loan.

Fisher V. Drewett (1878), 48 L. J. Ex. 32 ; here the

defendant agreed with the plaintiff, that if the plaintiff

procured him a loan of ВЈ2000 or such other sum as he

should accept, that he would pay him a commission of

2^ per cent, on the money received. The plaintiff found

a person able and willing to lend ВЈ1625, if the defendant

showed a good title to his security : the defendant accepted

the offer, but failed to show a good title to his security,

and therefore no money was received by him. The Court

of Appeal held that, as it was owing to the defendant's own

default that he had not received the money, the plaintiff

was entitled to his full commission upon the ВЈ1025. In

giving judgment, Bramwell, L.J., said; "The current of

modern opinion is to the effect that those who bargain to

receive commission for introductions have a right to their

commission as soon as they have completed their portion

of the bargain, irrespective of what may take place sub-

sequently between the parties introduced. And it is

reasonable that it should be so."

56 The law of agency.

Grogan v. Smith (1890), 7 T. L. R. 132. C. A.; here the

owner of a house in London employed the plaintiff to find

him a purchaser for it : the plaintiff found a person who

offered a certain sum for it, upon certain terms. A negotia-

tion ensued by letter, in which there were various proposals

and counter-proposals, but in the end the negotiation went

off, and there was no sale. The Court of Appeal held

that the plaintiff was not entitled to his commission ;

and laid down that to entitle the plaintiff to his com-

mission he must be able to show that he had found a

person able and willing to buy, and that the vendor and

purchaser were really agreed as to all the terms of the

contract, and that it was only prevented from becoming

a binding contract by reason of the default of the defendant