Macke v. Camps, 7 Phil 522 (1907).

VILLAFUERTE

Doctrine: Unless the contrary appears, the authority of an agent must be presumed to include all the necessary and usual means of carrying his agency into effect.

Facts: (Note: Isko and I digested the same case so I just copied his case facts for consistency. However, kindly note the difference in the issues and doctrines.)

Macke and Chandler are partners doing business under the firm name of Macke, Chandler & Company, allege that during the months of February and March !"#, they sold to $ose Camps and deli%ered at his place of business, kno&n as the '(ashington Caf),* %arious bills of goods amounting to +,# .#"- that Camps has only paid on account of said goods the sum of + ./- that there is still due them on account of said goods the sum of + ...#" +laintiffs made demand for the payment from defendant and that the latter failed and refused to pay the said balance or any part of it. Macke, one of the plaintiffs, testified that on the order of one 0icardo Flores, &ho represented himself to be the agent of $ose Camps, he shipped the said goods to the defendant at the (ashington Caf)- that Flores (agent1 later ackno&ledged the receipt of the said goods and made %arious payments thereon amounting in all to + ./- that belie%es that Flores is still the agent of Camps- and that &hen he &ent to the (ashington Caf) for the purpose of collecting his bill he found Flores, in the absence of Camps, apparently in charge of the business and claiming to be the business manager of Camps, said business being that of a hotel &ith a bar and restaurant anne2ed. 3 &ritten contract &as introduced as e%idence, from &hich it appears that one 4almes, the former o&ner of '(ashington Caf)* subrented the building &herein the business &as conducted, to Camps for year for the purpose of carrying on that business, Camps obligating himself not to sublet or subrent the building or the business &ithout the consent of the said 4almes. 56his contract &as signed by Camps and the name of 0icardo Flores as a &itness and attached thereon is an in%entory of the furniture and fittings &hich also is signed by Camps &ith the &ord 'sublessee* belo& the name, and at the foot of this in%entory the &ord 'recei%ed* follo&ed by the name '0icardo Flores* &ith the &ords 'managing agent* immediately follo&ing his name.

7ssue: (89 acts of Flores may be presumed acts of an agent acting &ithin the authority gi%en by his principal.

:eld: ;es.

Unless the contrary appears, the authority of an agent must be presumed to include all the necessary and usual means of carrying his agency into effect.

7n the case at hand, Flores, as managing agent of the (ashington Cafe, had authority to buy such reasonable <uantities of supplies as might from time to time be necessary in carrying on the business of hotel bar may fairly be presumed from the nature of the business, especially in %ie& of the fact that his principal appears to ha%e left him in charge during more or less prolonged periods of absence- from an e2amination of the items of the account attached to the complaint, &e are of opinion that he &as acting &ithin the scope of his authority in ordering these goods are binding on his principal, and in the absence of e%idence to the contrary, furnish satisfactory proof of their deli%ery as alleged in the complaint.