vsoe-d states v. pimotsb. 805 �The United States v. Pinoveb. {District Court, 8. D. Km York, June 24, 1880.) �1. Notice— Papbb CoNTAisnira Notice.— A pereon chargeable wîth the �duty of giving a notice does not perform that duty by handing the party entitled to notice a paper containing such notice, especially if the person to -vehom it is handed is directed to use it in a particular way and for a particular puipose, which does not require him to examine or read it. �2. Aqbnct— Patmbnt— MisTAKB.— It is a general rule that an agent, �known and treated with as such, cannot be compelled to pay back money received by him under a mutuai mistake of faot, and pàid over to his principal. �Bank of Commerce v. Union Bcmh, S N. T. 230, and T?ie Kingston Bank v. Ettinge, 40 N. T. 391, considered. S. Samb— Samb — Same— Assistant Tubasitreb of the United States. — In such case an agent is liable for money received from an assistant treasurer of tho United States upon the redemption of a stolen bond, containing a forged indorsement, although the money has been paid over to the principal, upon the ground that such treasurer had no power to bind the United States by payment of the money, or to con- sent that such agent should pay the same over to his principaL �Cooke V. United States, 91 U. S. 389, followed. 4. Pkactice — GENBRAii AND Spbciai, VERDICTS. — Where a special verdict is inconsistent with a general verdict the former controls the latter, and the court must render judgment accordingly. �N. Y. Code of Civ. Proc. S 1188. �fil. L. Woodford, District Attorney, and P. L. Butler, As- sistant District Attorney, for plaintiff. �M. M. Bvdlong, for defendant. �Choate, D. J. This was an action brougbt by the plaintiflF to recover of the defendant the amount of a $500 government bond, paid by the assistant treasurer, at New York, to the de- fendant, on the presentation of the same at his office in New York. The bond was payable to the orderofEobertMickle. It had indorsed upon it an assignment purporting to be signed by Eobert Mickle, transf erring it to Levi H. Borne. It was over- due when presented for redemption. The defendant pre- sented with it a power of attorney, duly acknowledged, from Levi H. Borne, who lived in Indiana, authorizing him, as aitorney ofsaid Borne, to sell and assign or collect the said �v.3,no.6— 20 ����
