Richmond Iron Works v. Hayden

The only question presented by this bill of exceptions is whether the court rightly admitted the acts and declarations of Taylor. This depends upon the question whether there was competent evidence to show that Taylor was the agent of the plaintiffs.

The established rule is, that acts or declarations of a supposed agent cannot be put in evidence to affect the rights of the alleged *191principal, unless there is proof of the fact of agency, and this cannot be proved merely by his own admissions or assertions. Haney v. Donnelly, 12 Gray, 361.

A majority of the court is of opinion that in this case…