HINTZE VS. STINGEL. 285

misapprehension or mistake; and, especially, is it under an ob-
ligation to do so, when it has just grounds for supposing, that
the acts or declarations of the officer employed by it to make
the sale, has been the cause of such surprise, misapprehension
or mistake.

Now, in this case, in view of the facts stated by the trustee
in his report, and of the grounds set forth in the petition of the
defendant, sustained as that is by the evidence of disinterested
parties, there is, I think, scarcely a doubt, that the trustee did,
from inadvertence, misinform the defendant in regard to the day
of sale; or, at all events, from his (the defendant's) imperfect
knowledge of our language, he misunderstood the trustee upon
the subject.

It would seem impossible to doubt this; and the deposition
of James Slater, a witness whose veracity is not questioned,
and of whose ability to pay no doubt has been expressed, says,
but for the information which he received from the defendant,
as to the time of sale, he would have attended, and if present,
he would have given two thousand dollars for the property. It
is true, there is some discrepancy between the evidence of this
witness, as to the precise day on which he says the defendant told
him the sale was to take place, and the statement of the defendant,
in his petition. But, it is clear, beyond dispute, that the
defendant was under a misapprehension upon the subject;

and the evidence of Slater shows, that this misapprehen-
sion caused the defendant to make to the witness an erro-
neous statement as to the day of sale, which resulted in a loss
of nearly one-half the value of the property.

It appears to me, that the following facts are indisputably
established in this case :

1st. That the defendant did call on the trustee a few days
before that on which the sale was made, for information
as to the day of sale.

2d. That the trustee either incautiously misinformed him upon
the subject, or, that the defendant misunderstood the trustee,
owing to his (the defendant's) imperfect knowledege of our lan-
guage; and,