Is it so? If he had made a demand of what belonged to the entire
 partnership, all would equally have shared what then came in. Now, when he demanded what
 was a part of his own share, did he not demand for himself alone what he got? What is the difference between him who goes to law for himself, and him who is assigned
 as agent for another? He who commences an action for himself, makes his demand for
 himself alone. No one can prefer a claim for another except him who is constituted his
 agent. Is it not so? If her had been your agent, you would get your own, because he had
 gained the action. But he preferred this claim in his own name; so what he got he got
 for himself, and not for you.