On the issue, whether real estate brokers suing to recover commissions for effecting an exchange of property, who had stipulated for commissions from both parties, were agents for both parties so as to forfeit their right to compensation, or mere middlemen, the court charged that no recovery could be had if the contract was one of agency, instead of that of middlemen; that the brokers claimed that all they agreed to do was to find a man willing to make the trade; and that defendant claimed that they agreed to take the property and do the best they could with it; and that, if defendant's contention were true, the brokers could not recover commissions, unless defendant knew, before employing them, that they had stipulated for commissions from the other party. Held, that the instruction was sufficient. Friar v. Smith, 120 Mich. 411, 79 N. W. 633, 46 L. R. A. 229. See also Sec. 314.