On the question as to whether W. acted as agent for plaintiff or defendant, a charge that, in this connection the jury should consider from whom W. got his pay, whom he asked to pay him, and the fact that W. had authority to sell the lot in question, is erroneous, as giving undue prominence to the fact as to who paid for the service, and allowing the jury to infer previous authority to sell from the fact of payment for services in selling. Williamson v. Tyson, 105 Ala. 644, 17 S. 336.