If a contract is signed by A, with the addition to his signature of the word "agent" or some other word importing agency, but the language of the contract is such as to bind A personally, A is held personally liable in many jurisdictions, and the contract is not looked upon as ambiguous. Where this view prevails, A can not introduce extrinsic evidence that he was acting solely on behalf of his principal to relieve himself from liability.1 This rule applies to negotiable contracts. Thus where a note was signed, "Mattress Co., John Knapp, Pt.," and begins, "We promise";2 or where a note begins, "We promise," and is signed, "Canning Co., H. Wessel, Sec'y, Hartman, Pres.";3 or begins, "I promise," and is signed, "A, agent,"4 or "trustee";5 or begins, "We jointly and severally promise to pay to X in official capacity," and is signed by the individual names of the makers, with the addition, " Whitfield Road Committee";6 or is signed, "O. O. Prescott, Pres.," of a given corporation;7 or is signed by several, who add, "Board of Business Managers"8 or "as stockholders";9 or where a draft is drawn by "A, Treas.";10 or by "A, agent for B";11 or is indorsed, "A, agent";12 or where a draft is accepted, "H. P. Eells, treasurer";13 or by "A, agent, K. & O. C. Co.,"14 extrinsic evidence is inadmissible to relieve the party so signing from personal liability. If a bond is signed by A, B and C, "board of commissioners" of a specified public corporation, extrinsic evidence is not admissible to show that they intended to bind themselves in their representative capacity and not personally.15

4 Cooper v. Sonk, 201 Mich. 655, 167 N. W. 842.

5 Chandler v. Coe, 54 N. H. 561; Meyer v. Redmond, 205 N. Y. 478, 41 L. R. A. (N.S.) 675, 98 N. E. 906; Vaughan-Robertson Drug Co. v. Grimes-Mills Drug Co., 173 N. Car. 502, 92 S. E. 376; Roe v. Schweitzer. - Utah, - , 184 Pac. 938.

6 Meyer v. Redmond, 205 N. Y. 478, 41 L. R. A. (N.S.) 675, 98 N. E. 906: Bulwinkle v. Cramer, 27 S. Car. 376, 13 Am. St Rep. 645, 3 S. E. 776.

7 Vaughan-Robertson Drug Co. v. Grimes-Mills Drug Co., 173 N. Car. 502, 92 S. E. 376.

8 Cream City Glass Co. v. Friedlander, 84 Wis. 53, 36 Am. St. Rep. 895, 21 L. R. A. 135, 54 N. W. 28.

9 De Remer v. Brown, 165 N. Y. 410, 59 N. E. 129.

Contra, Lummus Cotton Gin Co. v. Cave, 109 S. Car. 213, 96 S. E. 94.

10 Lonnon v. Batchman, 103 Kan. 266, 173 Pac. 415.

1 Moragne v. Machine Works, 124 Ala. 537, 27 So. 240; Lawrence County Bank v. Arndt, 69 Ark. 406, 65 S. W. 1052; Collins v. Buckeye Insurance Co.. 17 O. S. 215, 93 Am. Dec. 612; Costello v. Bridges, 81 Wash. 192, L. R. A. 1915A, 853. 142 Pac. 687.

2 Matthews v. Mattress Co., 87 la 246, 19 L. R. A. 676, 54 N. W. 225.

3McCandless v. Canning Co., 78 Ia. 161, 16 Am. St. Rep. 429, 4 L. R. A. 396, 42 N. W. 635 (or is signed by the name of the company, A, "Mgr.," B, "Pres."); Albany Furniture Co. v. Bank, 17 Ind. App. 531, 60 Am. St. Rep. 178, 47 N. E. 227.

4 Collins v. Ins. Co., 17 O. S. 215, 93 Am. Dec. 612.

5 Riordan v. Thornsbury, 178 Ky. 321. 198 S. W. 920; Megowan v. Peterson. 173 N. Y. 1, 65 N. E. 738.