Freud’s Theory of Psychosexual Development Essay Example for Free

Freud’s Theory of Psychosexual Development Essay Sigmund Freud, born in 1856 was an Austrian neurologist who would later go on to found the discipline of psychoanalysis. He is best known for his theories of the unconscious mind and repression and his concept of the dynamic unconscious suggesting that it is our unconscious mind that determines how we as individuals behave, Freud also believed that the unconscious mind established sexual drives as the dominant motivation of human life. He considered the unconscious mind as being the source of mental energy which determined behaviour, basing his findings on the results of his use of hypnosis where he found that he was able to produce and remove symptoms of hysteria. There have been numerous approaches in the field of psychology that have put forward the belief that behaviour is directed by an individual’s goals but the idea behind a goal-directed unconscious is an original Freudian concept. The main underlying belief of this theory is that any individuals’ behaviour is the direct result of the influences that prior experiences have had on them where these influences have an even greater effect if they are from our childhood. Freud believed that our early experiences formed the solid foundations on which we would build the structure of our life and that the adult personality is indeed formed in childhood according to the situations, treatment and feelings experienced as a child. Freud defined the human psyche as comprising of three parts, the unconscious or sub-conscious containing material that we are unable to bring into our conscious awareness and therefore unknowable. The preconscious which consists of information that is not at the present moment in our conscious awareness but is stored in our memory and can if need be easily recalled to the conscious level; and the conscious part of our mind which is where all current and new incoming content is processed. Within these parts operate the Id, the Ego and the Super Ego that work together to create complex human behaviours. The Id is the only part of our personality that is present from birth and is entirely unconscious, seeking instant gratification and fulfilling instinctive human needs. The Id is governed by the pleasure principle desiring the fulfilment of all desires, needs and wants. If these are not immediately satisfied this results in a state of anxiety or tension. The Id serves of great importance early on in life, a child will cry as a  result of their Id if they are hungry or in discomfort and ensures that their needs are met. Later on in life it is not always realistic or indeed possible to immediately satisfy such needs, it would be morally and socially unacceptable for us to just help ourselves to other peoples things in order to satisfy our own needs and wants and so later in childhood our Ego comes in to play. The Ego is responsible for dealing with reality and acts to ensure that the impulses of the Id are satisfied in a way that is acceptable to the real world and functions in the conscious, preconscious and unconscious parts of our mind. The reality principle weighs up the pros and cons of an action before deciding whether or not to act upon the impulse. Often the impulses of the Id can be satisfied but through delayed gratification with the Ego allowing the behaviour at an appropriate time and place. The Ego is a part of the Id th at has been somewhat modified and rounded by external factors in the environment in which we live. Freud originally used the word Ego to mean a sense of self but later revised it to represent a set of psychic functions such as judgement, control, intellectual functioning and memory. Finally we develop our Super Ego. The Super Ego is the part of our personality that holds our morals and ideals that we have acquired from our parents and environment and acts as a voice for right and wrong. As with the Ego it is present in the conscious, preconscious and unconscious parts of our mind. The Super Ego consists of two parts, the Ego ideal which sets out the rules and standards for good behaviour. Conformity to behaviours that are approved of by our parents and people in positions of authority give us feelings of pride and accomplishment. The second part of the Ego is the Conscience which holds information on all the things that are viewed as being bad by our parents and the society in which we live. Behaviours that are forbidden or at the very least frowned upon and fill us with feelings of guilt and remorse. The perfection principle of the Super Ego strives to suppress any unacceptable desires of the Id and to make our Ego act upon idealistic rather than realistic standards. One of Freuds better known theories and also one of the most controversial is that of psycho-sexual development. He proposed that an instinctual libido is present in all of us from birth and develops in five stages. First is the oral stage which occurs from birth up until around the age of eighteen months. The main focus here being the  gratification and pleasures the infant receives through feeding. Children in this stage place objects into their mouths in order to orally explore their environment. At this young age the child is entirely dependent on their carers and thus develops a sense of trust and comfort in relation to those carers. This stage is dominated by the Id as at this point the Ego and Superego have not yet fully developed and all actions are based on the â€Å"Pleasure Principle†. The key experience for a child in the oral stage of development is weaning, allowing the child to become less dependent on their caretakers. Freud said that too much or too little gratification may lead to an oral fixation, which Freud claimed could result in them developing a passive, immature, manipulative personality. This fixation could present in an adult as issues with eating, smoking, nail biting and aggression. The second stage of psycho-sexual development is the anal stage taking place between around 18 months to three years old. Freud believed at this stage that the primary focus of the libido was on controlling bladder and bowel movements. Toilet training is the key experience here which brings into conflict the Id that demands immediate gratification and the Ego that demands delayed gratification. The resulting outcome of this conflict is heavily influenced by the parenting style that a child receives during toilet training. The ideal resolution of this conflict is a gradual adjustment whereby the child adjusts to moderate parental demands, learning the values of physical cleanliness and self control. Freud suggested that if parents over-emphasized toilet training or punished accidents then the child may develop what we term as an anally retentive personality, with the potential to become obsessively concerned with neatness and order. On the other hand if the parents were too lenient then the child may develop an anally expulsive and destructive personality whereby they are self-indulgent, messy and wasteful. Faeces and money are often linked in psychodynamic literature and according to Freudian theory; attitudes to money can reveal what the individual experienced during toilet training. The third stage of psycho-sexual development is the phallic stage taking place between the ages of three and six. During this time a child begins to gain awareness of its body and also the bodies of their parents and other  children, in particular genitalia. They begin to explore their genitals and learn the physical differences between male and female. During this stage boys experience what Freud termed as the Oedipus complex whereby the child wishes to remove his father in order to gain full attention of his mother’s affections. This urge to eliminate the father is controlled by what he termed as castration anxiety and so instead the child learns to imitate the father. Girls experience what Carl Jung in 1913 termed as the Electra complex where instead she wishes to remove the mother in order to gain full possession of her father. Freud however rejected this term as being psycho-analytically inaccurate believing that the reasoning behind the Oedipus complex applied only to male children and that it was wrong to share this analogy between the two sexes. He did however believe that girls experienced what he termed as penis envy and that initially the child experiences a lot of anger towards their mother for not sharing the same appendage as their father but in time they learn to identify with their mother in order to possess their father. Freud was very much influenced by the death of his father in 1896. In the three years following the death of his father, Freud became preoccupied with self-analysis where he realised that he had repressed feelings of anger and resentment against his father. He believed that as a small boy he had been in love with his mother and was jealous of his father. Freud based his theory of early sexual development on personal theory instead of exploring further using empirical methods. The fourth stage of psycho-sexual development is the latency stage taking place from around the age of six up until puberty. During this stage the child enters into a sexually dormant period, consolidating the habits of the previous three stages. The Ego and Superego take precedence over the Id due to the childs defence mechanisms repressing its instinctual drives during the phallic stage. Now that gratification is delayed, the child is driven to derive pleasure from external activities such as friendships, education and hobbies. Any neuroses established during this fourth stage of psycho-sexual development may be due to the unresolved issues of the Oedipus complex or the Egos failure to focus on socially acceptable activities. The fifth and final stage of psycho-sexual development is the genital stage  that spans from puberty throughout the remainder of adult life. As with the phallic stage the genital stage is focussed upon genitalia but in this instance the sexuality is consensual and more often involving another adult in the form of a relationship rather than being solitary and infantile. This is due to the establishment of the Ego which shifts attention away from primary-drive gratification to secondary process thinking and to satisfy desire in a more symbolic and intellectual way through loving relationships, friendships and family. The genital stage is the time when a person is able to resolve any psycho-sexual childhood conflicts that they may have and allows psychological detachment and independence from their parents. In previous stages focus was placed solely on individual needs, now the welfare of others comes strongly into play and if all stages have been completed successfully then Freud believed that the individual should be a well-balanced and fully functioning person. Unfortunately it isnt all that simple and the Id, the Ego and the Super Ego continuously come into conflict with one another. The Ego has to work to control the demands of the Id whilst at the same time having regard for the restrictions placed upon it by the Super Ego. At times these desires and constraints cause conflict that our Ego is unable to deal with resulting in anxiety and stress. Freud identified three types of anxiety, firstly neurotic anxiety which occurs through fear that we will lose control of the Ids urges and the resulting punishment for inappropriate behaviour. Secondly reality anxiety which is a fear of external events often culminating in phobias, we are able to reduce such anxiety by avoiding the threatening object or situation. Thirdly is moral anxiety from a fear of violating our own moral principles and values that have been set down by our Super Ego. Neurosis also figured heavily in Freuds psycho-analytical theory. He proposed that neurosis occurs when the Ego is unable to deal with desires that produce feelings of guilt and a sense of wrong. Through repression these thoughts manifest themselves through symptoms that have no physical dysfunction. The mental illness acts as a replacement for the guilt ridden desires of the Id allowing the Ego to avoid the conflict between itself and the Id. Such symptoms however are worse than the conflict they set out to hide, not only stopping the individual from being accepting of their repressed desires but  also causing them to become socially incapable of enjoying a happy and healthy life. He also believed that neurosis can be triggered by a traumatic childhood event that the individual is unable to handle. Often such experiences give rise to feelings of guilt that we seek to repress through use of various displacement mechanisms. Sometimes these repressed memories make their way back into our conscious minds in a different form producing a great amount of anxiety in turn triggering psychological disorders that seek to block out the real cause. Psychoanalytical therapy has proved productive in being able to help a client uncover unconscious defence mechanisms and help them find better ways of dealing with their anxiety or removing it all together. Psycho-analysis opened up a new view regarding the treatment of mental illness, suggesting that psychological distress could be reduced through talking about their problems with a therapist. The work of Freud was responsible for bringing about a greater understanding of behaviour that was unusual and differences were no longer automatically equated as unacceptable, with understanding comes greater tolerance. He radically changed the view of sexuality making it an acceptable topic of conversation and a natural part of a healthy, happy life. The approach is also credited with highlighting the importance of childhood and our unconscious mind. Despite the influential effect of his theories Freud is open to numerous criticisms. Many psychologists have adopted his ideas but there has been a great deal of modernisation on his original views. Carl Jung who was a pupil of Freuds even disagreed with certain aspects of his theories; in particular Freud’s reliance on sex as the answer to many problems. Jung went on to develop his own theories known as Analytical Psychology. Erich Fromm rejected Freuds view that the drives of the human being are solely biological, believing instead that it was down to our freedom of choice and ability to choose our own destiny. He believed any conflict arose as a result of the fear or uncertainty which that freedom entailed. Feminists are particularly critical of the work of Freud due to the sexist nature of many of his ideas. Neo-Freudian Karen Horney proposed that instead of penis envy girls in fact developed power envy and that in their inability to bear  children men develop womb and vagina envy. Scientifically the validity of Freuds theory of psycho-sexual development is brought in to question due to his perceived personal fixation on human sexuality and the phallic stage of development proved controversial for being based upon clinical observations of the Oedipus complex. Many were critical of the fact that a lot of Freuds ideas were based on case studies or clinical observations rather than empirical, scientific research. Contemporary criticism questions the universality of Freuds theory of personality and psycho-sexual development. Anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski studied the matriarchal society of the Trobriand where young boys are punished by their maternal uncles not their fathers and thus suggested that in this case power is the source of Oedipal conflict not sexual jealousy. Contemporary research has also confirmed that although personality traits corresponding to the oral, anal, phallic, latent and genital stages are observable they are not necessarily fixed stages of childhood or indeed adult personality traits that were derived from childhood. While there is no denying that Freud is of great historical significance and he developed many ground breaking theories and ideas some of which still hold relevance today although many over time have been discredited. It must then be said that Freud’s theory of psychosexual development may in some cases offer us a limited understanding of a client’s issue it would not be ethical practice to rely entirely on this theory when working with a client. Due to its lack of credibility in many areas, Freud’s theory cannot be implemented as a full explanation or means with which to begin the process of understanding and healing. Bibliography Frankland, A. and Sanders, P. 1995. Next steps in counselling. Manchester: PCCS Books. pp.70-76 Hough, M. 2006. Counselling Skills and Theory. 2nd ed. London: Hodder Arnold, pp. 59-86. Malinowski, B. 1927. Sex and repression in savage society. [e-book] London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. http://openlibrary.org/books/OL17967917M/Sex_and_repression_in_savage_society [Accessed: 1st July 2013]. Cherry, K. n.d.. Freuds Stages of Psychosexual Development. [online] Available at: http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/ss/psychosexualdev.htm [Accessed: 19 Jun 2013]. Copperwiki.org. 1950. Human Centred Psychotherapy CopperWiki. [online] Available at: http://www.copperwiki.org/index.php?title=Human_Centred_Psychotherapy [Accessed: 01 Jul 2013] En.wikipedia.org. 2013. Psychosexual development Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. [online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosexual_development [Accessed: 01 Jul 2013]. http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0072969806/286620/fei69806_ch02

Stereotypes and Stereotyping of Native Americans in The Last of the Moh

The Last of the Mohicans and Stereotyped Native Americans [1] Native Americans were part of this country long before our founding forefathers. They were the people that Christopher Columbus found inhabiting this land. There is even evidence to show that they have been on the American continents for thousands and even tens of thousands of years. Yet, somehow the European powers dominated these people, forcing them from their land to make it â€Å"ours.† In the early part of the twentieth century, a new industry began to develop; we call it the film industry. Along with the industry came movies that were made and are still made for the amusement of a mass audience. Some flaws did come with this industry, and among them was the depiction of Native Americans. â€Å"Anonymity is a feature of the Indian portrayed in film†¦many do not have names or speaking parts† (Bataille and Hicks 10). Native Americans often speak with a broken dialect or â€Å"baby† English. They are not able to fully understand or expre ss complete thoughts in the English language. This makes them appear to the audience as a lesser character. The second role of Native Americans in film is that of a sidekick or crony of some white hero, like Tonto in The Lone Ranger (1938). In these films â€Å"The Native American The Native American was placed into one of the following four roles: the first isthe comedic Indian, the jester of the frontier court. This Indian spoke in simple is clearly secondary in importance† and was never the hero (Crowdus 297). The two most significant roles of the Native American are the bloodthirsty savages and their counterparts the â€Å"noble† savages. [2] These two opposite characteristics were adopted from the â€Å"images and stereotypes wh... ...l, Stuart. â€Å"The Question of Cultural Identity.† Modernity and Its Future. Ed. Stuart Hall, David Held, and Tony McGrew. Cambridge: The Open University, 1992. 273-316. McWilliams, John. The Last of the Mohicans: Civil Savagery and Savage Civility. New York: Twayne Press, 1995. Pearce, Roy Harvey. Savagism and Civilization: A Study of the Indian and the American Mind. Los Angeles: University of California UP, 1988. Rosenstone, Robert A. Visions of the Past: The Challenge of Film to Our Idea of History. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1995. Schlesinger, Arthur M., Jr. The Disuniting of America. New York: Norton. 1992. Schwartz, Seymour L. The French and Indian War, 1754-1763: The Imperial Struggle for North America. New York: Simon &Schuster, 1994. Steele, Ian K. Betrayals: Fort William Henry and the â€Å"Massacre†. New York: Oxford UP, 1990.

Agency relationship Essay

1. INTRODUCTION Agency is a fiduciary relationship created by express or implied contract or by law, in which one party (the agent) may act on behalf of another party (the principal) and bind that other party by words and/or actions. The etymology of the word agent or agency says much. The words are derived from the Latin verb ago, agere (the respective noun agens, agentis). The word denotes one who acts, a doer, force or power that accomplishes things.1 Agency is the exception to the doctrine of privity under the law of contract. 2. LIABILITY OF A PRINCIPAL AGAINST THIRD PARTIES Lord Alverstone CJ in THE QUEEN V KANE2 defined an agent simply as ‘any person who happens to act on behalf of another’. A principal is one who authorizes another to act on his or her behalf as an agent. The general rule is that where an agent makes a contract on behalf of his principal, the contract is between the principal and the third party and prima facie at common law, the only person who can sue and be sued on the contract is the principal. The agent acquires no rights under the contract, nor does he incur any obligation. Having performed his task by bringing about a contract between his principal and a third party, the agent drops out of the picture subject to any outstanding matters between him and principal.3 The onus is on the person alleging that he entered into a contract with another person through an agent to prove that in fact the agent was acting as such. Agents of the state can never be personally liable for the state’s failure to perform a contractual obligation as stated in STICKROSE (PTY) LIMITED V THE PERMANENT SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE 4. In law, agents are recognized as having the power to affect the legal rights, liabilities and relationships of the principal. In CAVMONT MERCHANT BANK v AMAKA AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS5, the Supreme Court held that where an agent in making the contract discloses both the interest and the names of the principal on whose behalf he purports to make a contract, the agent as a general rule is not liable to the other contracting party. Apart from having the power to affect the legal rights, liabilities and relationships of the principal, the agent may also affect the legal position of his principal in other ways. For instance, he may dispose of the principal’s property in  order to transfer ownership to a third party or he may acquire property on his principal’s behalf. Sometimes the actions of the agent may make the principal criminally liable as illustrated in the case of GARDENER v ACKEROYD 6.  The rights and liabilities of principal and agent against third parties may differ according to whether the agency is disclosed or undisclosed. The distinction between disclosed and disclosed agency is important as it affects the principal’s ability to ratify the agent’s actions. Furthermore, the agent’s liability to third parties may depend on whether the agency was disclosed or not. Agency is disclosed where the agent reveals that he is acting as an agent; if the agency is disclosed it is of no legal significance that the principal is not named. If an agent contracts with a third party without disclosing that he is acting as an agent the agency is undisclosed. 7 An undisclosed principal can intervene on the contracts of an agent within his actual authority. Where an agent makes a contract disclosing the agency, the normal rule is that a direct contractual relationship is created between the principal and the third party and either party can sue the other on the contract. It is important to note that only a disclosed principal can ratify an unauthorised contract. In KEIGHLEY MAXTED v DURANT8 a principal authorized an agent to buy wheat at a given price in the joint names of the principal and the agent. Having failed to purchase wheat at that higher price, the agent bought wheat in his own name at a higher price. The principal being satisfied with this act purportedly ratified the wheat purchase agreement at a higher price but failed to take delivery of the wheat. The seller then sued the principal arguing that the sale contract had been ratified. It was held that the action could not succeed because the agent’s act was unauthorized and since the principal’s identity had not been disclosed to the sellor, the principal could not ratify and consequently was not liable on the contract. Where the principal is disclosed, he and not the agent is liable on the contract and may sue and be sued. In GADD v HOUGHTON & CO.9 Houghton & Co. sold to the buyers Gadd, a quantity of oranges under a ‘sold note’ which stated, inter alia, that ‘we have this day sold to you on  account of James Morand & Co †¦.’ and signed ‘Houghton & Co.’ The seller having failed to deliver the oranges, the buyer sued Houghton & Co for damages for non-delivery. The action failed, since by the words of the sold note Houghton & Co had clearly indicated that they were not to be personally liable. They were merely brokers. Lord Mellish stated that â€Å"where you find a person in the body of the instrument treating himself as the seller or character, you can say that he intended to bind himself.† In SUI YIN KWAN & ANOTHER v EASTERN INSURANCE CO. LTD10 it was held that the doctrine of undisclosed principal applied. Where an agent acts within his actual authority the undisclosed principal may intervene and acquire the rights/liabilities of the agent. In this case, the agents acted within their actual authority and therefore, the relatives could recover from the insurance company. Lord Lloyd summarized the law as follows: (1) an undisclosed principal may sue and be sued on a contract made by an agent on his behalf, acting within the scope of his actual authority. (2) In entering into the contract, the agent must intend to act on the principal’s behalf. (3) The agent of an undisclosed principal may also sue and be sued on the contract. (4) Any defence which the third party may have against the agent is available against his principal. (5) The terms of the contract may, expressly or by implication, exclude the principal’s right to sue, and his liability to be sued. The contract itself, or the circumstances surrounding the contract, may show that the agent is the true and only principal. Sometimes the agent contracts with third parties after disclosing the fact, that he is an agent but without disclosing the name of his principal. In such cases, the principal is bound by the contracts made on his behalf. And thus, the principal is liable to third parties for his agent’s acts done on behalf of the principal. However, such acts must be within the scope of the agent’s authority, and the unnamed principal must be in existence at the time of contract. As a matter of fact, when the agent contracts after disclosing his representative character, the contract will be the contract of the principal. For all such acts, the agent is not personally liable. However, the agent is personally liable if he declines to disclose the identity of the principal when asked by the third parties. 11  When there is undisclosed agency, the contract is initially between agent and the third party and each may enforce the contract against the other. However, if the third party later discovers the principal’s existence, he may enforce the contract against either the agent or the principal. Provided that the agent acted within the scope of his actual authority, the principal can intervene and enforce the contract against the third party. 12 3. CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN AN AGENT MAY BE HELD PERSONALLY LIABLE If an agent continues to act after his authority has been terminated, he may incur personal liability for breach of implied warranty of authority. Sometimes an agent may suffer a potential risk when his authority is terminated automatically without his knowledge. In the case of YONGE v TOYNBEE13 where solicitors were acting in litigation for a client who, unknown to them, became mentally incapacitated so that the agency was considered to be terminated. However, they continued to litigate for the client and were held liable for their breach of warrant of authority and were ordered to pay the costs of the other litigant. There are three exceptional cases where the undisclosed principal cannot sue or be sued, by the third party. The first is where the contract between the agent and the third party expressly provides that the agent is the sole principal U.K MUTUAL STEAMSHIP ASSURANCE ASSOCIATION v NEVILL14. The second is where the terms of the contract are inconsistent with agency. In HUMBLE v HUNTER15, an agent signed a charter-party in his own name and described himself as â€Å"owner† of the ship. It was held that his undisclosed principal could not sue. The third case where an undisclosed principal cannot sue is where the identity of the principal is material to the third party. One such case is where the contract made between the agent and the third party is too personal to permit an undisclosed principal to intervene, for example, contracts for personal service. In the case of SAID v BUTT16, a theatre critic knew the management of a particular theatre would not sell him a ticket because of articles he had written. He obtained a ticket through an agent. It was held that the theatre could prevent the principal from  entering the theatre. McCardie J said that â€Å"the critic could not assert a right as an undisclosed principal since, as he knew, the theatre was not willing to contract with him†. Even where the undisclosed principal’s existence is discovered, the agent remains liable on the contract and the third party may choose to enforce the contract against either principal or the agent but not both. This is known as the right of election. A third party has an elective right to sue either the agent or the principal where the agent does not disclose the principal. In BOYTER V THOMSON17 the seller instructed agents to sell on his behalf a cabin cruiser under a brokerage and agency agreement. The buyer purchased the boat thinking it was owned by the agents and he was not told that the agents were acting as such nor the name of the owner nor that the owner was not selling in the course of a business although he was aware that the boat was being sold under a brokerage arrangement. The boat proved to be unseaworthy and was unfit for the purpose for which she was purchased. The buyer sued the seller for damages which were granted. The seller appealed to the House of Lords where goods were sold by an agent acting in the course of business for an undisclosed principal the buyer was entitled to sue not only the agent but also the principal. Once the third party elects to sue one party, his option to sue the other is extinguished. However, not any action by the third party suggesting action against one party in preference for another will be construed as the exercise of the right of election. In CURTIS v WILLIAMSON18, one Boulton appearing to act on his own behalf purchased some gunpowder from the plaintiff. Later, the plaintiff discovered that Boutlton was acting on behalf of an undisclosed principal, the defendant mine owners. Boulton then filed a petition of liquidation and the plaintiff filed an affidavit in those proceedings in an attempt to recover the debt owed for the gunpowder. However, the plaintiff changed their mind and sued the defendant principal. It was held that once an undisclosed principal is discovered the third party may elect to sue that principal; and secondly, that the filing of the affidavit against the agent did not prevent the action against the principal. The third party will not be bound by an election unless he has unequivocally indicated his intention to hold one party liable and release the other. The doctrine of the undisclosed  principal exists for purposes of commercial convenience, it is important to maintain protections for the third party. In the situation where the agent has failed to pass the payment to the third party, either the principal or the third party will lose and it seems fairest to place the loss on the principal.19 4. HOW AGENCY MAY BE DETERMINED As the relationship between the agent and his principal is based on consent, actual authority is of paramount importance. An agent is only entitled to be paid if he acts within his actual authority. If he acts outside his authority he may be liable to his principal. The relationship between the principal and a third party depends on the agent’s power to bind his principal. However, what is of concern to the third party is the agent’s apparent authority as this is what he relies on in the ordinary course of events. There are several types of authority. These are: a) Express Authority – the agreement between a principal and agent may be express or implied. Express agreement may be made orally, in writing or by deed. In general, if an agent is appointed to execute a deed his appointment is by deed called a power of attorney. b) Implied Authority arises where, although a particular action is not sanctioned by express agreement between the principal and the agent, the principal is nevertheless taken to have impliedly consented to the action or transaction in question. In GARNAC GRAIN CO. v H.M.F. FAURE AND FAIRCLOUGH20 the House of Lords stated that â€Å"the relationship of principal and agent can only be established by the consent of the principal and agent. They will be taken to have consented if they have agreed to what amounts at law as a relationship even if they do not recognize it themselves and even if they have professed to disclaim it. An agent who has express authority to carry out a particular task may also have additional authority to do certain acts incidental to his authorized task For instance, an agent authorized to sell the principal’s property has implied incidental authority to sign a contract of sale.† c) Apparent Authority – a person may be bound by the acts of another done on his behalf without his consent or even in breach of an express prohibition if his words or conduct create the impression that he has authorized the other person to act on his behalf. This is described at law as â€Å"apparent agency or  authority† or â€Å"ostensible agency or authority†. The distinction between actual and apparent authority was explained by Diplock L.J. in FREEMAN & LOCKYER V. BUCKHURST PARK PROPERTIES21. â€Å"Apparent† or â€Å"ostensible† authority, is a legal relationship between the principal and the contractor created by a representation, made by the principal to the contractor, intended to be and in fact acted on by the contractor, that the agent has authority to enter on behalf of the principal into a contract of a kind within the scope of the â€Å"apparent† authority, so as to render the principal liable to perform any obligations imposed on him by such contract. To the relationship so created the agent is a stranger. He need not be (although he generally is) aware of the existence of the representation. The representation, when acted on by the contractor by entering into a contract with the agent, operates as an estoppel, preventing the principal from asserting that he is not bound by the contract. It is irrelevant whether the agent had actual authority to enter into the contract. d) Agents of Necessity – A person who acts in an emergency, for instance, to preserve the property or interest of another may be treated as an agent of necessity. His actions will be deemed to have been authorized even if no actual authority is given. Like apparent authority, an agency of necessity can arise even in the absence of consent from the principal. Agency of necessity only arises in extreme circumstances where there is actual and definite commercial necessity for the agent’s actions. The following must be satisfied for an agency of necessity to exist: (i) There must be an emergency – something unforeseen. (ii) It must be practically impossible to get instructions for the principal. (iii) The agent must act bona fide in the interest of the principal rather than to advance his own interests. He must not take advantage of the principal. (iv) The agent must act reasonably in the circumstances. e) Agency arising out of Co-habitation – It is argued that a wife has authority to pledge the credit of her husband for necessities (or vice versa). However, others argue that social conditions now make it old fashioned to suggest that actual or apparent authority should not arise  between husband and wife. The law recognizes the following as agents even though they do not bear the title of agent22: (a) Company Directors and other company officials – being an artificial person, a company has to act through human agents. Then authority to act as company agents is vested in the board of directors. This authority may be delegated to one or more executive directors by the articles of the company to allow him to manage the day-to-day operations of the company. (b) Partnerships – as a partnership has no separate legal identity from its members, every partner in a firm is an agent of the firm as well as all other partners for the purpose of the business of the firm. Thus, a partner who performs an act for the purpose of carrying out the business of the firm, binds the firm as well as the other partners. (c) Employees – may be servants working under a contract of service or an independent contractor working under a contract for services. An employee e.g. a shop assistant is the agent of the shop owner for the purposes of making a contract of sale for the owner. He has the authority to make statements about goods that are binding on the shop owner, his employer. (d) Professionals – acting on behalf of clients may be the agents of those clients. E.g. a lawyer conducting litigation is his client’s agent and may have authority to settle the case and that settlement will bind the client. Thus the lawyer, not the client, normally signs a consent judgment. Similarly, an accountant’s agreement or statement to ZRA will bind his client in accordance with agency principles. The relationship between principal and agent depends on consent. If withdrawn, the agency will automatically end, as well as the agent’s actual authority to bind the principal. An agency relationship may be terminated in the following ways: (a) By mutual consent between the agent and the principal. (b) By either party unilaterally withdrawing consent. (c) An agent may have been appointed for a fixed period of time or for a specific task or set of tasks. Once the time elapses or the task(s) is/are completed the agency will terminate. (d) By operation of law e.g. if the  performance of the agency relationship becomes illegal (e.g. one party becomes the citizen of an alien enemy) or impossible (where it will be ended by the agency contract being frustrated). Death of either party will also terminate the agency and any contract made between them. If an agent becomes insane, the relationship is automatically terminated. The bankruptcy of either the agent or the principal will also end the agency.23 The Effect of Termination vis a vis Third Parties The agent may continue to have apparent authority even if actual authority has been terminated. If the principal’s conduct is such as to suggest to a third party that the agent continues to have authority. Until the principal brings the termination of the agent’s authority to the notice of a third party, the agent may continue to have apparent authority on the strength of the principal’s representation. DREW v NUNN24 the principal became insane but his wife, who was his agent, continued to act in his name. When he recovered from his insanity he tried to disclaim liability for acts done by his wife during his insanity/incapacity. Held: The agent i.e. his wife, had apparent authority and therefore he was bound. However, where an agent’s actual authority is terminated by the principal’s death or bankruptcy the agent will automatically cease to have apparent authority.

The Peloponnesian War - Causes of the Conflict

Many excellent historians have discussed the causes of the Peloponnesian War (431–404 BCE), and many more will do so in the future. Thucydides, however, wrote the most important contemporary chronicle of the war. Importance of the Peloponnesian War Fought between the allies of Sparta and the empire of Athens, the crippling Peloponnesian War paved the way for the Macedonian takeover of Greece by Philip II of Macedon and, following that, Alexander the Greats empire. Before the Peloponnesian War, the city-states (poleis) of Greece had worked together to fight off the Persians. During the Peloponnesian War, they turned on each other. Thucydides on the Cause of the Peloponnesian War In the first book of his history, participant-observer and historian Thucydides recorded the causes of the Peloponnesian War: The real cause I consider to be the one which was formally most kept out of sight. The growth of the power of Athens, and the alarm which this inspired in Lacedaemon, made war inevitable.I.1.23 History of the Peloponnesian War While Thucydides seemed quite certain that he had settled the question of the cause of the Peloponnesian War for all time, historians continue to debate the origins of the war. The main reasons proposed are: Sparta was jealous of other powers and desired more power for itself.Sparta was unhappy at no longer having all the military glory.Athen bullied its allies and neutral cities.There was a conflict among city-states between competing political ideologies. Historian Donald Kagan has been studying the causes of the Peloponnesian War for decades. His 2003 book provides a detailed breakdown of the politics, alliances, and events that led to the war. Athens and the Delian League Many historical accounts make brief mention of the earlier Persian Wars, which undervalues their importance as a contributing factor to the later war. Because of the Persian Wars, Athens had to be rebuilt and it came to dominate its group of allies politically and economically. The Athenian empire started with the Delian League, which had been formed to allow Athens to take the lead in the  war against Persia, and wound up providing Athens with access to what was supposed to be a communal treasury. Athens used these communal funds to build up its navy and, with it, its importance and power. Spartas Allies Earlier, Sparta had been the military leader of the Greek world. Sparta had a set of loose alliances by means of individual treaties that extended to the Peloponnese, excepting Argos and Achaea. The Spartan alliances are referred to as the Peloponnesian League. Sparta Insults Athens When Athens decided to invade Thasos, Sparta would have come to the aid of the north Aegean island, had Sparta not suffered a natural disaster. Athens, still bound by alliances of the Persian War years, tried to help the Spartans, but was rudely asked to leave. Kagan says that this open quarrel in 465 BCE was the first between Sparta and Athens. Athens broke off the alliance with Sparta and allied, instead, with Spartas enemy, Argos. Athens Gains an Ally and an Enemy When Megara turned to Sparta for help in its boundary dispute with Corinth, Sparta, which was allied with both city-states, declined to come to their aid. Megara broke its alliance with Sparta and proposed a new one with Athens. Athens needed a friendly Megara on its border since it provided gulf access, so it agreed in 459 BCE. Doing so, unfortunately, set up lasting enmity with Corinth. About 15 years later, Megara joined back up again with Sparta. Thirty Years Peace In 446 and 445 BCE, Athens, a sea power, and Sparta, a land power, signed a peace treaty. The Greek world was now formally divided in two, with two hegemons. By treaty, members of one side could not switch and join the other, although neutral powers could take sides. Historian Kagan writes that, for possibly the first time in history, an attempt was made to keep the peace by requiring both sides to submit grievances to binding arbitration. Fragile Balance of Power A complicated, partially ideological political conflict between Spartan-ally Corinth and her neutral daughter city and strong naval power Corcyra led to Athenian involvement in Spartas realm. Corcyra appealed to Athens for help, offering to Athens the use of its navy. Corinth urged Athens to remain neutral. But since Corcyras navy was powerful, Athens was concerned that it would fall into Spartan hands and disrupt whatever fragile balance of power the city-states were maintaining. Athens signed a defense-only treaty and sent a fleet to Corcyra. Fighting ensued and Corcyra, with Athens aid, won the Battle of Sybota against Corinth in 433. Athens now knew that direct battle with Corinth was inevitable. Spartan Promises to Athens Ally Potidaea was part of the Athenian empire, but also a daughter city of Corinth. Athens feared a revolt, with good reason, since the Potidaeans had secretly acquired a promise of Spartan support, to invade Athens, in violation of the 30 years treaty. Megarian Decree Athens former ally, the polis Megara, had allied with Corinth at Sybota and elsewhere, and Athens, therefore, put a peacetime embargo on Megara. Historians are not clear on the embargos effects, some saying that Megara was merely made uncomfortable, while others claim that it set the polis on the brink of starvation. The embargo was not an act of war, but Corinth took the opportunity to urge all allies disaffected with Athens to pressure Sparta now to invade Athens. There were enough hawks among the ruling bodies in Sparta to carry the war motion. And so the full-fledged Peloponnesian War began. Sources Kagan, Donald. The Peloponnesian War. Viking, 2003Sealey, Raphae. The Causes of the Peloponnesian War. Classical Philology, vol. 70, no. 2, April 1975, pp. 89-109.Thucydides. The History of the Peloponnesian War. Translated by Richard Crawley, J.M. Dent and Sons, 1910.