3. Agreement is the expression by two or more persons, either by words or by conduct, of a common intention to affect the legal relations of those persons.4 There must be a meeting of two minds in one and the same intention.
From the very nature of agreement the first essential is the consent of the parties. There must be a meeting of two minds in one and the same intention. In the absence of this element there can be no agreement, and, therefore, no contract.
It is manifest that at least two parties are necessary. There may be more than two, but there cannot be less. It is therefore impossible for a man to make an agreement or contract with himself.5
Distinct Common Intention-It is also essential that there be a distinct intention, and an intention which is common to both parties; or, as it is sometimes expressed, the parties must assent to the same thing in the same sense.6 If there is doubt or difference, there is no meeting of minds, and hence no agreement. If a person, when asked whether he will do a certain thing, says, "Very possibly," there is doubt, and no agreement is reached;7 and if he says he will do something else, there is a difference, and therefore no agreement.
4See Anson, Cont (4th Ed.) 3. "(1) An agreement is an act In the law, whereby two or more persons declare their consent as to any act or thing to be done or forborne by some or one of those persons for the use of the others or other of them. (2) Such declaration may consist of (a) the concurrence of the parties in a spoken or written form of words as expressing their common intention, or (b) a proposal made by some or one of them, and accepted by the others or other of them." Pol. Cont. 1.
5 Thus a promise made by a person in his individual capacity to himself as executor is void. See GORHAM's ADM'R v. MEACHAM's ADM'R, 63 Vt 231, 22 Atl. 572, 13 L. R. A. 676, Throckmorton Cas. Contracts, 3, in which it is said, per Tyler, J.: "Until the concurrence of the two minds, there is no contract." Another reason why a man cannot enter into a contract with himself is because he cannot be under a legal obligation to himself. Post, p). 6. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) §§ 11-13; Cent. Dig. §§ 42-40.
6American Can Co. v. Agricultural Ins. Co. of Watertown, N. Y., 12 Cal. App. 133, 106 Pac. 720; Luckey v. St Louis & S. F. R. Co., 133 Mo. App. 589, 113 S. W. 703. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-'No.) § 14; Cent. Dig. § 1,8.
7 "I think I might purchase your horse at $200, the price you ask me," does not constitute an acceptance of an offer to sell the horse at $200. Stagg v. Compton, 81 Ind. 171. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Keg-No.) | 14; Cent. Dig. § 1,8.