The authority of an agent to bind his principal may cease by expiration of time,1 or the accomplishment of the purpose for which he was appointed,2 or by express3 or implied revocation arising out of the intention of the principal to revoke.4 It may also be revoked by operation of law regardless of the intention of the principal, as by the death of either,5 or by insanity,6 as by the principal's lunacy known, though not adjudged,7 or by bankruptcy of the principal,8 or assignment for the benefit of creditors.9 However, the appointment of a receiver for the principal does not revoke the agency, where the receiver accepts the services of the agent.10 It has been said that the death of the principal does not always, as a matter of law, revoke the authority of the agent.11 The cases cited, however, are those in which payment has been made to an agent after the death of the principal, such payment has been transmitted to the legal representatives of the principal, and accordingly as they have received and retained the benefits of the transaction they are estoppel to deny the authority of the agent.

8 Cobban v. Hecklen, 27 Mont. 245; 70 Pac. 805; Smith v. Browne, 132 N. C. 365; 43 S. E. 915; Brod-head v. Reinbold, 200 Pa. St. 618; 86 Am. St. Rep. 735; 50 Atl. 229. See Sec. 692, 693.

9 See Sec. 965.

1 Gundlach v. Fischer, 59 111. 172.

2 Short v. Millard, 68 111. 292; Moore v. Stone, 40 Ia. 259; Ahern v. Baker, 34 Minn. 98; 24 N. W. 341; Hermann v. Ins. Co., 100 N. Y. 411; 53 Am. Rep. 197; 3 N. E. 341.

3 Sheahan v. Steamship Co., 87 Fed. 167; Duffield v. Michaels, 97 Fed. 825; Linder v. Adams, 95 Ga. 668; 22 S. E. 687; Ballard v. Ins. Co., 119 N. C. 187; 25 S. E. 956; Hitchcock v. Kelley, 18 Ohio C. C. 808; 4 Ohio C. D. 180; Flaherty v. O'Connor, 24 R. I. 587; 54 Atl. 376. As by demand for a power of attorney and surrender thereof. Kelly v. Brennan, 55 N. J. Eq. 423; 37 Atl. 137.

4 Walker v. Denison, 86 111. 142;

95

Chenault v. Quisenberry (Ky.), 56 S. W. 410; 57 S. W. 234; Elliott v. Barrett, 144 Mass. 256; 10 N. E. 820. A power of attorney to convey realty is revoked by a conveyance to the agent as trustee. Chenault v. Quisenberry (Ky.), 56 S. W. 410; 57 S. W. 234.

5 Long v. Thayer, 150 U. S. 520; Pacific Bank v. Hannah, 90 Fed. 72 ; Krumdich v. White, 107 Cal. 37; 39 Pac. 1066; Lanaux's Succession, 46 La. Ann. 1036; 25 L. R. A. 577; 15 So. 708; Brown v. Cushman, 173 Mass. 368; 53 N. E. 860; Mills v. Ins. Co., 77 Miss. 327; 78 Am. St. Rep. 522; 28 So. 954; Martine v. Ins. Co., 53 N. Y. 339; 13 Am. Rep. 529; Duckworth v. Orr, 126 N. C. 674; 36 S. E. 150; McDonald v. Black, 20 Ohio 185; 55 Am. Dec. 448; Kern's Estate, 176 Pa. St. 373; 35 Atl. 231; Triplett v. Woodward, 98 Va. 187; 35 S. E. 455.

6 Blake v. Garwood, 42 N. J. Eq. 276; 10 Atl. 874.

No one can appoint an agent in a hostile country during a war.12 War revokes the agency of citizens of the one hostile country appointed by a principal domiciled in the other, as far as the execution of such power involves communication with the principal or transmission of property to him.13 Other powers are not revoked by war.14 Thus, a power to sell, where advantageous to the donor of the power, is not revoked by war.15

A power coupled with an interest cannot be revoked, and is an exception to the rules as to revocation.16 Thus power to colfeet rents and apply proceeds on a mortgage,17 or power to sell and apply the proceeds,18 or an assignment of a life insurance policy with power to the assignee to collect it,19 is not revoked by the death of the principal.

7 Matthessen, etc., Co. v. McMa-hon, 38 N. J. L. 536.

8 In. re Daniels, 6 Biss. (U. S.) 405.

9 Elwell v. Coon (N. J. Eq.), 46 Atl. 580.

10 Leupold v. Weeks, 96 Md. 280; 53 Atl. 937.

11 Meinhardt v. Newman, - Neb. -; 99 N. W. 261; Deweese v. Muff, 57 Neb. 17; 73 Am. St. Rep. 488; 42 L. R. A. 789; 77 N. W. 361; Ish v. Crane, 8 O. S. 520; s. c., 13 O. S. 574.

12 United States v. Grossmayer, 9 Wall. (U. S.) 72; Hubbard v. Matthews, 54 N. Y. 43; 13 Am. Rep. 562.

13 New York, etc., Co. v. Davis, 95 U. S. 425; Howell v. Gordon, 40

Ga. 302; Conley v. Burson, 1 Heisk. (Tenn.) 145.

14 Williams v. Paine. 169 U. S. 55; Ward v. Smith, 7 Wall. (U. S.) 447; Robinson v. Society, 42 N. Y. 54; 1 Am. Rep. 490; Darling v. Lewis, 11 Heisk. (Tenn.) 125; Ma-loney v. Stephens, 11 Heisk. (Tenn.) 738; Manhattan, etc., Co. v. Warwick, 20 Gratt. (Va.) 614; 3 Am. Rep. 218.

15 Williams v. Paine, 169 U. S. 55.

16 In re Hannan's, etc., Co. (1896), 2 Ch. 643; Hunt v. Rous-manier, 8 Wheat. (U. S.) 174; Walker v. Denison. 86 111. 142; Baker v. Baird, 79 Mich. 255; 44 N. W. 604; Durbrow v. Eppens, 65 N. J. L. 10; 46 Atl. 582; Wheeler v.