c sir John WOLSTENHOLM v davies S c Eq can ab at the bolls payment to a  scrivener ante case and note the plaintiff have borrow pound of the defendant  testator upon bind which be procure by William a scrivener two the old Bailey  when the bind be seal it be deliver to the obligee the plaintiff pay several  year interest to William the scrivener and pound part of the principal money  which the scrivener pay to the obligee but the last pound of the principal  money be pay to the scrivener he break before he pay it to the obligee and the  question be whether sir Jo W the plaintiff be to lose the money or the obligee  and the master of the roll say that it be the constant rule of this court that  if the party to who the security be make trust his security in the hand of the  scrivener but the presumption of authority from the possession of the  instrument may be repel by evidence that it be obtain by fraud or give for  some other special purpose than receive payment Paley law of agent and the  party who take property by assignment from another who have no authority to  dispose of it be guilty of a conversion for which trover lie at commonlaw  MCombie v Davies east the hardship of any particular case will not induce the  court of commonlaw to relax the strict principle by which such case be there  govern Stephens v elwall Mau and Sel relief however as we learn from the text  above may he have in equity where circumstance call for it it may be proper to  observe that if a scrivener or other agent have be in the habit of receive the  interest accrueing due from time to time upon a bind and subsequent call in  the principal which be duly pay to he whereupon the obligee send he the bind  take his note either to deliver back the bind or to pay the money then though  the agent fail so that the money never come to the hand of the obligee who get  back the bind and put it in suit upon a bill bring by the obligor to be  relieve and to have the bind deliver up it will be so decree with eastern S  abington v Orme Eq can ab that payment to the scrivener be good payment but if  he take the security into his own keep payment to the scrivener will freeman  not be good payment unless it can be prove that the scrivener have authority  from the party to receive it and although in this case the scrivener have  receive the interest and part of the principal and pay it to the obligee yet  that do not imply that he have any authority to receive it but as long as he  pay it over all be well and any one else may have carry to the party as well  as he and the plaintiff not prove that the scrivener have any authority from  the obligee to receive he be force to pay the last pound again although the  master of the roll declare that he think it a very hard case