Executors and administrators are officers of the court appointed for the purpose of settling decedent's estates. In the absence of statutory provision or of authority given by will they have, in general, no power to bind the estates of their decedents by their own contracts so as to change any pre-existing liability which might have been enforced without such contract, or to incur additional liability,1 even if for the benefit of such estate.

1 Neal v. Bleckley, 51 S. C. 506; 29 S. E. 249. To the same effect is Sanders v. Warehouse Co., 107 Ga. 49; 32 S. E. 610; Kupferman v. McGehee, 63 Ga. 250.

2 Mosely v. Norman, 74 Ala. 422; Steele v. Steele, 64 Ala. 438; 38 Am. Rep. 15.

3 Clapton v. Gholson, 53 Miss. 466.

4 Norton v. Phelps, 54 Miss. 467.

5 A trustee may deduct reasonable expenses for a foreclosure suit and for investigating the title to property. Wordin's Appeal, 71 Conn. 531; 71 Am. St. Rep. 219; 42 Atl. 659. A trustee cannot be paid for legal services rendered by himself.

Marks v. Semple, 111 Ala. 637; 20 So. 791.

6 Casey v. Lockwood, 24 R. I. 72; 52 Atl. 803 (where the remaindermen authorized the trustee to pay the funeral expenses of the life-tenant).

7 Kofold v. Gordon, 122 Cal. 314; 54 Pac. 1115.

1 Taylor v. Crook, 136 Ala. 354; 96 Am. St. Rep. 26; 34 So. 905; Pike v. Thomas, 62 Ark. 223; 54 Am. St. Rep. 292; 35 S. W. 212; Tucker v. Grace, 61 Ark. 410; 33 S. W. 530; Sterrett v. Barker, 119 Cal. 492; 51 Pac. 695; Schlicker v. Hemenway, 110 Cal. 579; 52 Am. St. Rep. 116; 42 Pac. 1063; Taylor

Where no authority to contract on behalf of the estate exists, the order of the court is ineffectual to create such power.2 Thus executors cannot create debts against the estate,3 even by borrowing money to pay the debts of the estate, or by giving their notes therefor,4 or by indorsing notes of the estate,5 or by accepting a draft,6 or by giving a note for a debt barred by limitations in the life of decedent.7 The executor cannot bind the estate by a contract for legal services,8 as by a contract to pay a conv. Mygatt, 26 Conn. 184; Wilson v. Mason, 158 111. 304; 49 Am. St. Rep. 162; 42 N. E. 134; Clark v. Ross, 96 Ia. 402; 65 N. W. 340; Chicago Lumber Co. v. Tomlinson, 54 Kan. 770; 39 Pac. 694; Baker v. Moor, 63 Me. 443; Davis v. French, 20 Me. 21; 37 Am. Dec. 36; Durkin v. Langley, 167 Mass. 577; 46 N. E. 119; Kingman v. Soule, 132 Mass. 285; Luscomb v. Ballard, 5 Gray (Mass.) 403; 66 Am. Dec. 374; Smith v. Brennan, 62 Mich. 349; 4 Am. St. Rep. 867; 28 N. W. 892; Brown v. Farnham, 55 Minn. 27; 56 N. W. 352; Stirling v. Winter, 80 Mo. 141; Richardson v. Palmer, 24 Mo. App. 480; Doolittle v. Willet, 57 N. J. L. 398; 31 Atl. 385; Schmittler v. Simon, 101 N. Y. 554; 54 Am. Rep. 737; 5 N. E. 452; Austin v. Munro, 47 N. Y. 360; Ferrin v. Myrick, 41 N. Y. 315; Lucht v. Behrens, 28 O. S. 231; 22 Am. Rep. 378; Patterson v. Craig, 1 Baxt. (Tenn.) 291; Fine v. Freeman, 83 Tex. 529; 17 S. W. 783; 18 S. W. 963; Rich v. Sowles, 64 Vt. 408; 15 L. R. A. 850; 28 Atl. 723; Adams v. Adams, 16 Vt. 228; Fitzhugh v. Fitzhugh, 11 Gratt. (Va.) 300; 62 Am. Dec. 653.

2 Valley National Bank v. Crosby, 108 Ia. 651; 79 N. W. 383.

3 Germania Bank v. Michaud, 62 Minn. 459; 54 Am. St. Rep. 653; 30 L. R. A. 286; 65 N. W. 70; Curtis v. Bank, 39 O. S. 579; McGrath v. Barnes, 13 S. C. 328; 36 Am. Rep. 687; Rich v. Sowles, 64 Vt. 408; 15 L. R. A. 850; 23 Atl. 723.

4 Christian v. Morris, 50 Ala. 585; Sterrett v. Barker, 119 Cal. 492; 51 Pac. 695; Cornthwaite v. Bank, 57 Ind. 268; Valley National Bank v. Crosby, 108 Ia. 651; 79 N. W. 383; Rice v. Strange (Ky.), 72 S. W. 756; Ellis v. Merriman, 5 B. Mon. (Ky.), 297; Rittenhouse v. Ammer-man, 64 Mo. 197; 27 Am. Rep. 215; First National Bank v. Collins, 11 Mont. 433; 52 Am. St. Rep. 695; 43 Pac. 499; Morehead Banking Co. v. Morehead, 122 N. C. 318; 30 S. E. 331; Smith v. Hayward, 5 Ohio N. P. 501; Boyd v. Johnston, 89 Tenn. 284; 14 S. W. 804; Gregory v. Leigh, 33 Tex. 813; Robertson v. Breckenridge, 98 Va. 569; 37 S. E. 8.

5 Johnston v. Bank, 37 Miss. 526.

6 Perry v. Cunningham, 40 Ark. 185.

7 Claghorn's Estate, 181 Pa. St. 600; 59 Am. St. Rep. 680; 37 Atl. 918.

8 Pike v. Thomas, 62 Ark. 223; 54 Am. St. Rep. 292; 35 S. W. 212; Tucker v. Grace, 61 Ark. 410; 33 S. W. 530; Argo v. Blondel, 100 Ia. 353; 69 N. W. 534; Wait v. Holt, 58 N. H. 467; Parker v. Day, 155 N. Y. 383; 49 N. E. 1046; tingent fee in the event of the recovery for the death of the decedent.9 Accordingly the court cannot fix the amount which an administrator must pay for legal services.10

Some courts seem to hold that an executor may bind the estate by a reasonable contract for attorney fees,11 as to pay a reasonable contingent fee for recovery for the death of decedent,12 or to pay one-third of the amount recovered of a claim against a foreign government.13

The estate is not liable for the price of property bought for the estate,14 as on a contract to buy realty ;15 nor on a contract by the executrix to refund money received by her on a sale of her decedent's realty which she could not complete ;16 nor on a warranty of property sold ;17 nor on a contract to sell realty, not made as provided by statute ;18 nor on a contract for services for the estate.19 An executor cannot create debt against the estate by accepting a deed to his decedent.20 The beneficiaries of decedent's estate cannot, however, affirm the contract of the administrator in part and avoid it in part. Thus where an administrator without order of the court lent money of the estate to a corporation, the beneficiaries could not, in the absence of fraud or collusion, hold the directors of such corporation personally liable for such money as trustees.21

Platt v. Platt, 105 N. Y. 488; 12 N. E. 22; McBride v. Brucker, 5 Ohio C. C. 12; 3 Ohio C. D. 7; Mel-len v. West, 5 Ohio C. C. 89; 3 Ohio C. D. 46; Miller v. Tracy, 86 Wis. 330; 56 N. W. 866.

9 Tucker v. Grace, 61 Ark. 410; 33 S. W. 530; Rickel v. Ry. Co., 112 Ia. 148; 83 N. W. 957; Thomas v. Moore, 52 O. S. 200; 39 N. E. 803.

10 State v. District Court, 25 Mont. 33; 63 Pac. 717. A note by brothers of the decedent to an attorney to prosecute the murderer of decedent is not a charge against the estate. Alexander v. Alexander, 120 N. C. 472; 27 S. E. 121.

11 Alexander v. Bates, 127 Ala. 328; 28 So. 415; McIntire v. Mc-Intire, 14 App. D. C. 337; Gairdner v. Tate, 110 Ga. 456; 35 S. E. 697.

12 Lee v. Van Voorhis, 78 Hun (N. Y.) 575; In re McCullough's Estate, 31 Or. 86; 49 Pac. 886.

13 Mackie v. Howland, 3 App. D. C. 461.

14 Daily v. Daily, 66 Ala. 266 (food for stock of estate) ; Yarbor-ough v. Ward, 34 Ark. 204; Wilson v. Mason, 158 111. 304; 49 Am. St. Rep. 162; 42 N. E. 134; Durkin v. Langley, 167 Mass. 577; 46 N. E. 119; West v. Dean, 15 Ohio C. C. 261.

15 Wilson v. Mason, 158 111. 304; 49 Am. St. Rep. 162; 42 N. E. 134.

16 Hall v. Wilkinson, 35 W. Va. 167; 12 S. E. 1118.

17 Bauerle v. Long, 187 111. 475; 52 L. R. A. 643; 58 N. E. 458; Huffman v. Hendry, 9 Ind. App. 324; 53 Am. St. Rep. 351; 36 N. E. 727; Dunlap v. Robinson, 12 O. S. 530; Lockwood v. Gilson, 12 O. S. 526; Arnold v. Donaldson, 46 O. S. 73; 18 N. E. 540.

18 Bauerle v. Long, 187 111. 475; 52 L. R. A. 643; 58 N. E. 458.

19 In re Page, 57 Cal. 238; Dod-son v. Nevitt, 5 Mont. 518; 6 Pac. 358; Daingerfield v. Smith, 83 Va. 81; 1S. E. 599.