after stating the foregoing facts, delivered the opinion of the court.

The findings of fact of the judgment appealed from are accepted.

Among the letters exchanged between the Banco Español, now the Banco de Puerto Eico, and Primo Cosgaya are the following:

*524“ ‘San Juan, P. R., August 19, 1898. Mr. Primo Cosgaya, Arecibo. Dear Sir: The new collector of that town informs us under date of yesterday that it has been impossible to come to an agreement with you with respect to the delivery of books and documents, for the reason that you demand the simultaneous return of the bond furnished by you to answer for the office from which you have resigned. We regret very much that we cannot accommodate you, because the return must be preceded by the delivery, of which the proper committee of this bank will take cognizance, as it will also pass on the return of the bond. We understand that a misunderstanding only could have caused the delay in the delivery of that office. We appeal to your well known good judgment in order that upon becoming convinced hereof you will assist us to the last moment by delivering the books, documents, etc., in order that the new collector may enter upon his duties. Assuring you again and offering to reciprocate by the return of the bond as soon as the memorandum of the delivery shall reach our hands, and which we shall submit for the necessary approval, we remain yours, etc. (Signed) Armando de la Hera. ’

“ ‘San Juan, P. R., September 23, 1898. Mr. Primo Cosgaya. Dear Sir: We confirm our letter to you of September 13th, and again request you to deliver everything relating to taxes to Mr. Morroceau, because the contract with the public Treasury having been rescinded, it is urgently necessary and of interest to all that the collection be hurried and former fiscal years be liquidated. As the collector of customs of that place is to take charge of everything pertaining to the current fiscal year, you might at once terminate that delivery to Mr. Cosgaya (1) and render an account of the result for the return of your bond. With regard to the compulsory proceedings, we have no doubt that they will be authorized by the collector of that place, facilitating your delivery to Mr. Cosgaya. (2) Your obedient servant, etc., Carlos María Soler, Deputy Governor. Rubricated.’ “(1) (2) We believe that instead of Mr. Cosgaya it should be Mr. Morroceau, because it cannot be supposed that Cosgaya would deliver to himself what he had to deliver to Mr. Morroceau.”

1. The question presented in this litigation is whether the return of the bond furnished the Banco cle Puerto Bico by Primo Cosgaya, as tax collector of Arecibo, appointed by said hank, is subordinate to the approval of its' accounts by the Insular Treasury, or if, having rendered them to said *525bank, the latter should at once return the said cash bond to his widow and heir, Isabel Córdova y Stuart, the plaintiff.

2.Obligations arising from contracts have the force of law between the contracting parties, and must be complied with in accordance with the terms thereof, whatever form they may be entered into, but it is necessary, in the event of judicial controversy, that each party prove, by the means recognized in law, the action and exceptions respectively alleged in the complaint and in the answer.

3. There is no specific and concrete evidence from which an exact knowledge can be obtained of each and every one-of the obligations which the bank alleges the plaintiff assumed when he accepted the office of agent, but, on the contrary, the two letters inserted in the last finding of fact show that from the moment said collector first began to present his claims legal bonds existed only between the latter and the banking institution which appointed him, without absolutely anything-being found to permit of a conclusion that the former engaged not to demand the return of his cash bond until his accounts should have been approved by the former General Intendancy of the Public Treasury, and now by the Insular Treasury.

4. An agent who does not fail to comply with any specific-instructions or with an obligation expressly imposed by the agency, but, on the contrary, complies with the terms of the-latter, as shown by the acts of the principal, cannot be held responsible for such acts, if, as a consequence, fault, indemnity and delinquency is incurred; and this being the case, it is neither just nor equivalent that, after nearly seven years of continuous demands, the cash bond should continue .to ■ guarantee the discharge of an office which terminated with the-delivery, without objection, of the accounts of the discharge of such office.

5. It is not venturesome to suppose that the delay in the approval of the accounts of the collections in Arecibo by the *526Insular Treasury is due to the change of sovereignty and the radical transformation in matters of taxation, hut it does not appear that even formerly the collector and .now his heir were obliged to request their previous approval, nor has she capacity therefor, and in any event she could never be held responsible for events which could not have been foreseen, or which, having been foreseen, were inevitable.

6. In this case the damages on account of the delay in the return of the amount deposited may be offset by the payment of legal interest.

7. The costs should be taxed against the party defendant.

In view of sections 1058, 1072, 1075, 1182 and 1183 of the Revised Civil .Code, 333 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and the opinion of the Supreme Court of Spain of April 20, 1894, we adjudge that, reversing the judgment of the District Court of San Juan of November 30, 1903, we should adjudge and do adjudge the Banco de Puerto Rico to return to Isabel Cór-dova y Stuart, widow of Cosgaya, within five days, the equivalent in American gold of the sum of 1,072.42 pesos, provincial money, deposited as a bond in said bank by Primo Cos-gaya, with legal interest from the date of the filing of this complaint, and we also adjudge the bank to pay the costs. It is ordered that a certified copy of this opinion be sent to the court of San Juan for the proper purposes.

DISSENTING OPINION OP

The undersigned justice regrets exceedingly that he is obliged to dissent from the respected opinion of his learned colleagues, and formulates a dissenting opinion as follows:

The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the judgment appealed from are accepted.

Although under the conditions established in the contract entered into between the Banco Español de Puerto Rico and *527tlie General Intendancy of the Treasury on June 27, 1894, when the former assumed charge of the collection of the territorial and industrial and commercial tax in all the towns' of the Island, the bank was authorized to appoint agents or delegates to effect the collections in its name and under its liability. The appointment of these agents was to be approved by the General Intendancy of the Treasury, which reserved the right to demand their removal under grave circumstances and when the interests of the State might require it, and after having been appointed and approved by the In-tendancy, they were to be considered for all legal effects as the collectors then existing and as having the character of agents of the public Administration, and were to subject themselves in the performance of their duties to the legal provisions in force at that time, and to the special provisions concerning them contained in the schedule of conditions governing said contract.

As, according to the conditions of the contract, the accounts of collections to be rendered at the end of every quarter by the collectors, with the counter signature of the governor of the bank, were to be submitted for examination and verification to the respective local administrators and collectors, without prejudice to the general statement to be presented by said governor, within the six months’ extension, to the General Intendancy of the Treasury of the accounts relating to each budget, in order that they might both be examined by the bureaus or offices to which presented, and after the settlement by the bank of-any discrepancies found therein, approved in due form, within the shortest period possible, it is evident that the Treasury authorities are those who must finally decide as to the approval of these accounts, and consequently on the acceptance of the receipts which might be returned by the collectors on account of lapses and discontinuances in discharge of the liability of the bank. This is confirmed by the twelfth clause of the contract referred to, which *528provides that the receipts delivered to the bank by the Treasury for collection, and the amounts which it might receive for occasional fees and licenses, shall constitute the charge against the bank, and the sums turned into the Treasury and the receipts whose return might be accepted by the Treasury on account of lapses and discontinuances shall constitute the credit in its favor; hence, until the approval of these accounts is obtained the liability of- the bank to the Treasury cannot be considered to have ended, nor that of the collectors to the bank, because being agents of the latter, as they are, they must indemnify it for all loss and damage which it might suffer through the improper performance of their duties.

As the accounts of the tax collectors of A recibo for the fiscal year 1897-98, of which Primo Cosgaya y Villegas had charge, have not as yet been approved, as shown by the certification issued by the Treasurer of Porto Rico, which appears at folio 101 of the record of these proceedings, the liability of Collector Cosgaya to the bank continues in force, and, therefore, the plaintiff, his widow and heir, has no right of action to demand of the former the return of the bond which he furnished it for the specific purpose of guaranteeing the liabilities which the Treasury might seek to enforce against it on account of the fault of the collector.

Although at the -time of the delivery of the taxes collected in Arecibo, of which Primo Cosgaya y Villegas had charge, corresponding to the fiscal year 1897-98, no charge was-made agaist the collector nor any discrepancy found, this does not imply that the bank had approved the account presented by the former, because apart from the fact that it was not the bank which had the power to approve it, the official having-charge of its receipt set forth in the memorandum thereof its result only, without making any statements which were not within his province, in discharge of, the liability of the collector.

Although when Primo Cosgaya accepted the agency con*529ferred on Mm by the Banco Español de Puerto Eico in placing him in charge of the collection of taxes in the district of Arecibo, no document whatever was executed between him and the bank setting forth the respective obligations and rights of both parties, it is to be assumed, in view of the special nature of this agency and the acts of the parties both prior and subsequent to its establishment, that it was to be carried out with the mutual understanding that the parties were to submit to the conditions stipulated in the contract entered into between the Intendancy and the bank, especially when Primo Cosgaya having held the office of collector of taxes previously, it is to be presumed that he was perfectly aware of the manner and form in which the collections were to be made and the liabilities which they entailed.

The bank being directly liable to the General Intendancy of the Treasury for all the acts of Cosgaya in the collection of the taxes, it is logical to deduce as a natural consequence of the contract entered into between Cosgaya and the bank' that until the liability of the latter towards the Treasury is not definitely settled, the liability of the collector towards the bank must be considered to stand, in accordance with the provisions of article 1258 of the former Civil Code, concordant with section 1225 of the Code in force, according to which ‘ ‘ contracts are perfected by mere consent, and from that time they are binding, not only with regard to the fulfillment of what has been expressly stipulated, but also with regard to all the consequences which, according to their character, are in accordance with good faith, use and law.”

The two letters transcribed in the judgment and addressed on August 19 and September 23, 1898, to Primo Cosgaya by Armando de la Hera and the deputy governor of the bank, Carlos María Soler, respectively, calling upon him to turn over the collections to his successor appointed by the bank, under the promise of returning him his bond, are not opposed to these conclusions, inasmuch as this offer could not be con*530strued otherwise than in the sense that his bond would he returned to him, provided the delivery should not show any liability to the bank, but as this did not occur, as the memorandum of the delivery shows the return by the collector of receipts for the territorial tax and the commercial tax for more than 5,000 pesos, until the Treasury, which has the power to decide this matter, does not pass on the admission of these receipts, the liability of the bank towards the Treasury continues, and, consequently, that of the collector towards the bank continues also in force, and, therefore, the bond furnished by the former to the latter to answer for any loss or damage which the bank might suffer in connection with the collection of taxes which it placed in his charge also continues in force.

The costs should be taxed against the party whose claims are totally rejected.

In view of the legal provisions applicable to the case, and especially articles 661, 1091, 1709, 1718, 1886 and 1871 of the former Civil Code, reproduced by sections 669, 1058, 1611, 1620, 1767 and 1772 of the Code in force, we adjudge that we should affirm and do affirm the judgment appealed from, with the costs against the appellant.