is disclosed but the principal not named.

Where, in making an informal contract, the fact of agency was disclosed but no principal was named, the principal is liable;22 even though the plaintiff when making the contract rounding circumstances would have understood that the agent was acting for a principal indicated, though not named, the contract is with the principal and not with the agent.28 And if the person with whom the agent dealt knew in fact that he was acting as agent for a specific principal though the agent did not himself disclose the fact, the case is not dealt with as one of undisclosed principal and the agent is not personally bound by the contract.29

21 In Shields v. Coyne, 148 Ia. 313, 127 N. W. 63, 29 L. R. A. 472, a contract was made to lend an agent money on his note and mortgage. It was held that the principal could not enforce an obligation to lend money on his own note and mortgage, though the mortgage covered the agreed property. Here it will be observed that the execution of a specific instrument was contemplated,-the agent's note-and the party dealing with the agent could not be required to accept any different note. So in Birmingham Matinee Club v. McCarty, 152 Ala. 571, 44 So. 642, and Pancoast v. Dinsmore, 105 Me. 471, 75 Atl. 43, a contract by an agent to give a warranty deed was held not fulfilled by the tender of the principal's warranty deed. On the other hand, a contract with an agent to pay for property sold by the agent may be enforced by the undisclosed principal, since the obligation of the agent for the correct performance of his contract would not be lost by paying the price to the principal. Rice, etc, Co. v. International Bank, 86 111. App. 136; Hawkins v. Windhorst, 87 Kans. 176, 123 Pac. 761. Such cases must be distinguished from offers to contract made to an agent or assignor but accepted by a principal or assignee. Only the offeree can accept an offer, whatever its character, but after a contract has once been formed a different problem is presented. See infra, Sec. 432. See further, illustrating the effect upon the doctrine of undisclosed principal caused by the personal nature of the contract, Walton v. Davis, 22 Cal. App. 456,134 Pac. 795; National Bank v. Diefendorf, 90 111. 396; Cowan v. Curran, 216 111. 596, 75 N. E. 322; Kelly v. Thuey, 102 Mo. 522, 15 S. W. 62, 143 Mo. 422, 45 S. W. 300; Barns v. Barrow, 61 N. Y. 39; Navarre Hotel Co. v. American Appraisal Co., 156 App. Div. 795, 142 N. Y. S. 89; King v. Batterson, 13 R. I. 117, 43 Am. Rep. 13.

22 Higgins v. Senior, 8 M. & W. 834; Anderson p. Beard, [1900] 2 Q. B. 260; charged the matter on his books to the agent and made out an invoice in the agent's name,23 the principal can also sue.24 These rights and liabilities are not affected by the circumstance that the contract is written, if it is neither under seal nor a negotiable instrument.25