110 Ill. 427 (Ill. 1884), National Furnace Co. v. Keystone Manufacturing Co.

• Citation: 110 Ill. 427
• Opinion Judge: Mr. CRAIG, JUSTICE.
• Party Name: NATIONAL FURNACE COMPANY v. KEYSTONE MANUFACTURING COMPANY
• Attorney: Mr. FREDERIC ULLMANN, for the appellant. Messrs. MANAHAN & WARD, and Mr. C. H. ROBERTS, for the appellee.
• Case Date: May 19, 1884
• Court: Supreme Court of Illinois

Page 427

110 Ill. 427 (Ill. 1884)

NATIONAL FURNACE COMPANY

v.

KEYSTONE MANUFACTURING COMPANY

Supreme Court of Illinois

May 19, 1884

Page 428

APPEAL from the Appellate Court for the First District; -- heard in that court on appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. SIDNEY SMITH, Judge, presiding.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. FREDERIC ULLMANN, for the appellant.

Messrs. MANAHAN & WARD, and Mr. C. H. ROBERTS, for the appellee.

OPINION

Page 429

Mr. CRAIG, JUSTICE.

This was an action brought by the Keystone Manufacturing Company, a corporation located at Sterling, Illinois, against the National Furnace Company, a corporation engaged in manufacturing pig iron at Depere, Wisconsin, to recover damages for the breach of a contract, under which it is claimed defendant sold plaintiff all of a certain quality of pig iron, known as "Lake Superior charcoal iron," which

Page 430

plaintiff should need, use or consume in its business during the then ensuing season of such business, to-wit, from the 9th day of July, 1879, until July 1, 1880, such amount supposed by said parties to be about seven hundred tons.

It appears from the testimony, that A.B. Meeker & Co., of Chicago, were the sole agents of the appellant company for the consignment and sale of its entire product. This firm was composed of Meeker and Brown, who owned one-half of the capital stock of appellant. Smith and Hunt, the president and secretary, owned the balance of the stock. In 1879 William M. Cox was doing business in Chicago as a dealer in iron and coal, under the firm name of William M. Cox & Co. In 1878, Cherrie & Co., the firm of which Cox was then a member, had supplied appellee with the iron used that year in its business, Humphrey, who traveled for Cherrie & Co., having made the sale. In 1879 Humphrey was traveling for Cox & Co., and he made the sale of the iron in question for Cox & Co., who claimed to act by authority of A.B. Meeker & Co.

The first position of appellant is, that A.B. Meeker & Co. could not authorize Cox to bind the National Furnace Company by the contract in question, because they did not possess the power to bind the company by a contract for the future delivery of iron to be thereafter manufactured. The authority of Meeker & Co. to act for appellant will be found in a resolution adopted by appellant, as follows:

"Resolved, That A.B. Meeker & Co., of Chicago, be and are hereby appointed and employed by this company as its sole agents for the consignment and sale of its entire product, they to receive a commission," etc.

This resolution, it is claimed, only authorized the sale of the product of the furnace, -- not to contract to sell its future product. We think this construction of the authority...