
    ELLA M. SEYBOLD, Respondent v. WILLIAM BOSTELMANN, Appellant.
    
      Agency—When party lending money may be the disbursing agent of the debtor—Plaintiff at defendant's request advanced certain moneys to aid in the prosecution of a certain enterprise in which defendant was interested. Some of the money was paid by check to plaintiff's . husband who was defendant’s agent in charge of the work. The remainder was paid directly at the oral request of the agent in charge to discharge obligations incurred in the prosecution of the work. Held, that the only question was as to advances not made by check drawn to the order of the agent in charge, but made to others at his request. As to such payments, plaintiff may be regarded as the disbursing agent of defendant. To have first put the money in the hands of the agent in charge would have been a mere ceremony.
    
    Before Sedgwick, Ch. J., and McAdam, J.
    
      Decided May 2, 1892.
    Appeal by defendant from judgment entered on a verdict in- favor of plaintiff, and from an order denying motion for a new trial. The action was brought to recover money advanced by plaintiff to defendant.
    
      James Demarest, attorney, and L. Laflin Kellogg of counsel, for appellant.
    
      A. G. N. Vermilya, for respondent.
   The Court held (Per Curiam),

as stated in the head note. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.  