An agent acting within the scope of his authority is not liable to third persons upon a contract made by him as agent for a principal whom he discloses, which does not by its terms purport to bind the agent personally,1 as for the sale of a forged note,2 or for receiving money which he has not paid over to his principal,3 or for money which he has paid over to his principal.4

The known agent of a corporation who is authorized by it to make ultra vires contracts incurs no personal liability thereby.5 So if the agent discloses his lack of authority and signs the name of his principal he is not liable.6 One who purports to contract as agent is liable if he contracts in excess of his authority, and thereby induces the party contracting with him to believe that he possesses such authority.7

638; Ballou v. Talbot, 16 Mass. 461; 8 Am. Dec. 146; Lingenfelder v. Leschen, 134 Mo. 55; 34 S. W. 1089; Hopkins v. Everly, 150 Pa. St. 117; 24 Atl. 624.

1 Read v. Buffum, 79 Cal. 77; 12 Am. St. Rep. 131; 21 Pac. 555; Wittenbrock v. Bellmer, 57 Cal. 12; Lampson v. Arnold, 19 Ia. 479; Clendenning v. Hawk, 10 N. D. 90; 86 N. W. 114.

2 Clendenning v. Hawk, 10 N. D. 90; 86 N. W. 114.

3 Pollock v. Cohen, 32 O. S. 514.

4 Read v. Buffum, 79, Cal. 77; 12 Am. St. Rep. 131; 21 Pac. 555.

1 Baldwin v. Bank, 119 U. S. 643; Whitney v. Wyman, 101 U. S. 392; Monticello Bank v. Bostwick, 71 Fed. 641; Gulf, etc., Co. v. R. R. Co., 121 Ala. 621; 25 So. 579; Anderson v. Timberlake, 114 Ala. 377; 62 Am. St. Rep. 105; 22 So. 431; Tevis v. Savage, 130 Cal. 411; 62 Pac. 611; Merrill v. Williams, 63

Cal. 70; Stevenson v. Mathers, 67 111. 123; Lewis v. Harris, 4 Met. (Ky.) 353; Worthington v. Cowles, 112 Mass. 30; Huston v. Tyler, 140 Mo. 252; 41 S. W. 795; 36 S. W. 654; Sleeper v. Weymouth, 26 N. H. 34; American National Bank v. Wheelock, 82 N. Y. 118; Hall v. Lauderdale, 46 N. Y. 70; Kurzaw-ski v. Schneider, 179 Pa. St. 500; 36 Atl. 319; Wilson v. Wold, 21 Wash. 398; 75 Am. St. Rep. 846; 58 Pac. 223; Johnson v. Welch, 42 W. Va. 18; 24 S. E. 585; Moody, etc., Co. v. Church, 99 Wis. 49; sub nomine, Moody, etc., Co. v. Leek, 74 N. W. 572.

2 Bailey v. Galbreath, 100 Tenn. 599; 47 S. W. 84.

3 Huffman v. Newman, 55 Neb. 713; 76 N. W. 409. (The third person suing to recover it.)

4 Wilson v. Wold, 21 Wash. 398; 7.3 Am. St. Rep. 846; 58 Pac. 223.

While some courts try to limit this rule to cases in which the agent acted in bad faith or carelessly,8 the weight of authority as shown by the cases cited is to ignore such distinction. Thus an agent with authority only to arbitrate disputes about insurance policies issued by the principal, who submits other disputes to arbitration is personally liable for the amount of the award.9 The chief exception to the rule is in cases where the agent once possessed full authority to act, and subsequent events, unknown to him, and which could not have been ascertained with due diligence, such as the death of his principal,10 have revoked such authority. The agent is personally liable where he fails to disclose the fact of his agency,11 or the identity without authority should not relieve him from liability.19 If the contract does not purport to bind the agent personally, the logical view, entertained by a majority of the courts is that his liability is not on the contract as a principal in violation of its terms, but on the breach of the implied warranty of his authority, or in tort for his fraud and deceit.20 Some authori-ties hold that the remedy is exclusively on the breach of warranty of authority,21 while others insist on the liability in tort.22 Even if the agent discloses the fact of his agency and the identity of his principal he may nevertheless so contract as to bind himself individually.23

5 Thilmany v. Bag Co., 108 Ia. 357; 75 Am. St. Rep. 259; 79 N. W. 261.

6 Kansas National Bank v. Bay, 62 Kan. 692; 54 L. R. A. 408; 64 Pac. 596.

7 Frankland v. Johnson, 147 111. 520; 37 Am. St. Rep. 234; 35 N. E. 480; Terwilliger v. Murphy, 104 Ind. 32; 3 N. E. 404; Duffy v. Mal-linkrodt, 81 Mo. App. 449; Patterson v. Lippincott, 47 N. J. L. 457; 54 Am. Rep. 178; 1 Atl. 506; Arger-singer v. Macnaughton, 114 N. Y. 535; 11 Am. St. Rep. 687; 21 N. E. 1022; (Farmers', etc., Co.) Trust Co. v. Floyd, 47 O. S. 525; 21 Am. St. Rep. 846; 12 L. R. A. 346; 26 N. E. 110; Rosendorf v. Poling, 48 W. Va. 621; 37 S. E. 555.

8 Newman v. Sylvester, 42 Ind. 106.

9 Macdonald v. Bond. 195 111. 122 ; 62 N. E. 881.

10 Jenkins v. Atkins, 1 Humph. (Tenn.) 294; 34 Am. Dec. 648.

11 Murphy v. Helmrich, 66 Cal. 69; 4 Pac. 958; Nelson Morris & Co., v. Malone, 200 111. 132; 93 Am. St. Rep. 180; 65 N. E. 704; Bick-ford v. Bank, 42 111. 238; 89 Am. Dec. 436; Scaling v. Knollin, 94 111. App. 443; Fritz v. Kennedy, 119 Ia. 628; 93 N. W. 603; Thompson v. Investment Co., 114 Ia. 481; 87 N. W. 438; Lull v. Anamosa National Bank, 110 Ia. 537; 81 N. W. 784; Blackmore v. Fairbanks, 79 Ia. 282; 44 N. W. 548; Stevenson v. Polk, 71 Ia. 278; 32 N. W. 340; Jones v. Johnson, 86 Ky. 530; 6 S. W. 582; Jutt v. Brown, 5 Litt. (Ky.) 1; 15 Am. Dec. 33; Nolan v. Clark, 91 Me. 38; 39 Atl. 344; Brighan v. Her-rick, 173 Mass. 460; 53 N. E. 906; Bartlett v. Raymond. 139 Mass. 275; 30 N. E. 91; Mitchell v. Beck, 88 Mich. 342; 50 N. W. 305; Amans of his principal.12 But the agent of an originally undisclosed principal is not personally liable on contracts made after his principal is disclosed.13

One who purports to contract as agent for a principal who has no legal existence or status is personally liable thereon,14 except where there is an express agreement against personal liability.15 Thus a personal liability rests upon a committee of citizens who have charge of constructing a highway as agents of a citizens' meeting,16 or on an agent of an unincorporated military company.17 Special illustrations of this doctrine are given elsewhere.18 The nature of the agent's liability in the foregoing cases is a question of some difficulty. If he has so contracted as to bind himself personally he can be held on the contract in any event, and the additional fact that he acted v. Campbell, 70 Minn. 493; 68 Am. St. Rep. 547; 73 N. W. 506; Porter v. Merrill, 138 Mo. 555; 39 S. W. 798; Jackson v. McNatt (Neb.), 93 N. W. 425; Elliott v. Bodine, 59 N. J. L. 567; 36 Atl. 1038; McClure v. Trust Co., 165 N. Y. 108; 53 L. R. A. 153; 58 N. E. 777; De Remer v. Brown, 165 N. Y. 410; 59 N. E. 129; Argersinger v. Macnaughton, 114 N. Y. 535; 11 Am. St. Rep. 687; 21 N. E. 1022; Keokuk, etc., Co. v. Mfg. Co., 5 Okla. 32; 47 Pac. 484; Lindsay v. Pettigrew, 5 S. D. 500; 59 N. W. 726; Royce v. Allen, 28 Vt. 234; Poole v. Rice, 9 W. Va. 73; Morris v. Grocery Co., 46 W. Va. 197; 32 S. E. 997.

12 Welch v. Goodwin, 123 Mass. 71; 25 Am. Rep. 24; William Lin-deke Land Co. v. Levy, 76 Minn. 364; 79 N. W. 314; (overruling, Rowell v. Oleson. 32 Minn. 288; 20 N. W. 227) ; Long v. McKissick, 50 S. C. 218; 27 S. E. 636; Hughes v. Settle (Tenn. Ch. App.), 36 S. W. 577; Hoge v. Turner, 96 Va. 624; 32 S. E. 291.

13 Brackenridge v. Claridge, 91

Tex. 527; 43 L. R. A. 593; 44 S. W. 819; reversing, 42 S. W. 1005. Some authorities tend to restrict the liability of one who discloses his agency but conceals the identity of his principal to cases where the contract shows the intention of the agent to bind himself, a distinction however, generally repudiated.

14 Lewis v. Tilton, 64 Ia. 220; 52 Am. Rep. 436; 19 N. W. 911; Blakely v. Bennecke, 59 Mo. 193; Codding v. Munson, 52 Neb. 580; 66 Am. St. Rep. 524; 72 N. W. 846; Winona Lumber Co. v. Church, 6 S. D. 498; 62 N. W. 107; Steele v. Mc-Elroy, 1 Sneed (Tenn.) 341.

15 Codding v. Munson, 52 Neb. 580; 66 Am. St. Rep. 524; 72 N. W. 846; Comfort v. Graham, 87 Ia. 295; 54 N. W. 242; Heath v. Goslin, 80 Mo. 310; 50 Am. Rep. 505; Button v. Winslow. 52 Vt. 430.

16 Learn v. Upstill, 52 Neb. 271; 72 N. W. 213.

17 Blakely v. Bennecke. 59 Mo. 193.

18 See Executors. Guardians. Surviving Partners, Trustees, Receivers.